It may be semantics, but the current hardware itself says "Supercharger II" on it if I recall correctly.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Superchargers in Southern California (location speculation)
- Thread starter lg_golfs
- Start date
It may be semantics, but the current hardware itself says "Supercharger II" on it if I recall correctly.
Yes, the new Supercharger map released today shows many "Coming Soon" locations that appear to simply be in the approximate center of a town or city. But it shows many other such locations fairly precisely. See the 3 SF city locations, each has a different name and a location that is consistent with the name. See the new San Mateo Hillsdale location: it is located right at the Hillsdale Mall on Hillsdale Ave. Nothing approximate about that.
Interesting. That makes sense and I would trust those pins more.
Another interesting thing I noticed is that these new locations say "Supercharger only". I imagine that means that some would have something besides a supercharger? I don't know. Looking at Hawthorne, it also says "supercharger only", yet has multiple HPWCs.
My guess, and it is only a guess, is that phrase means "Not a future service center or showroom location".
I noticed that and interestingly, I saw for example St George, which already has a Supercharger, has the new gray pin in a different location, closer to the freeway. The St George Supercharger currently is really far off the I15. It only has 6 stalls. I can see them moving the location closer to the i15 as the pin suggests and expanding it.
I was actually about to think that there was no casino located there, but I think your explanation, while less enjoyable, is more logical.
I found something interesting but not definitive in Baker when searching the San Bernardino County permits database:
B201702580 applied date 4/19/2017
The site is 72157 Baker Blvd, which is "The World's Tallest Thermometer". Do other level 3 charging systems have an equipment enclosure like superchargers? 3 concrete dispensing islands could be a 12-stall pull-through supercharger design, and the $150,000 valuation on the permit works for a supercharger. The Thermometer opens at 10 AM - if someone wants to call them maybe you can get more information.
B201702580 applied date 4/19/2017
B201702581 applied date 4/19/2017
B201702583 applied date 4/19/2017
The site is 72157 Baker Blvd, which is "The World's Tallest Thermometer". Do other level 3 charging systems have an equipment enclosure like superchargers? 3 concrete dispensing islands could be a 12-stall pull-through supercharger design, and the $150,000 valuation on the permit works for a supercharger. The Thermometer opens at 10 AM - if someone wants to call them maybe you can get more information.
That could be for the Evgo 350KW system...
EVgo Installing First 350 kW Ultra Fast Public Charging Station In The US
Evgo 350 kW 4 station charger in Baker, Ca. (June 2017)
RT
Ding Ding Ding Ding. We have a winner! Couldn't be anything else, especially given the route, the recent announcement by Tesla, and the fact that no other such animal exists, at least not on that route. Time for a dedicated Baker Supercharger thread!
Edit: Maybe not? I just saw the link to the EvGo thread.
The article says they broke ground in December, and there is only one concrete island in the picture. Could they be expanding the EVgo station?
That EVgo station is already being discussed here EVGo constructing 350kWh 8-stall charging station in Baker. Please continue your discussion there. This thread is for discussing future Supercharger locations in So. Cal. Thanks.
Speculating on some of the SC locations.
Burbank expansion: will they expand existing one or create new one? They have some space behind building, but I guess it is being used for car storage. Adjacent CVS pharmacy/Ralphs parking lot? Old Ikea location?
Glendale: Americana and Galleria both have pretty big parking structures, but they are far from freeways. Also there's big empty lot behind BestBuy on Los Feliz, which is not far off i-5.
Pasadena: downtown Pasadena Tesla showroom probably won't get SC, because there's not much space there. Other candidates: Paseo Parking structure or shopping plaza around Foothill and Rosemead.
post your suggestions...
Burbank expansion: will they expand existing one or create new one? They have some space behind building, but I guess it is being used for car storage. Adjacent CVS pharmacy/Ralphs parking lot? Old Ikea location?
Glendale: Americana and Galleria both have pretty big parking structures, but they are far from freeways. Also there's big empty lot behind BestBuy on Los Feliz, which is not far off i-5.
Pasadena: downtown Pasadena Tesla showroom probably won't get SC, because there's not much space there. Other candidates: Paseo Parking structure or shopping plaza around Foothill and Rosemead.
post your suggestions...
JonathanDandrea
Member
San Clemente - Would be shocked if it is not located at the new outlets. New infrastructure tons of parking and easy access from the 5. There are a number of food and shopping options and they are looking for a way to drive traffic.
Also <1 mile from my house
101 W Avenida Vista Hermosa, San Clemente, CA 92672
Also <1 mile from my house
101 W Avenida Vista Hermosa, San Clemente, CA 92672
Here is the permit search site for San Clemente. You can search for permit numbers starting with B17-06 (then B17-07 etc.) and narrow down to electrical non-residential. I didn't find anything just now.
Haha. I just did the same thing for San Clemente, though I have been doing this every 6 months or so. I found nothing except for residential.
I find it hard to believe that Tesla could possibly launch this many sites so quickly. Perhaps they found a way to streamline the construction of a SC? Looking at the mishaps at Buena Park, they have not yet. Though I could visualize them doing more pre-fab work off-site, such as enclosures, etc. Maybe even build something based on their temp SC stalls we have seen pop-up. Maybe they can make an off-shoot of these that could be simply dropped into the ground, instead of the current process where they frame each stall. It would just be a matter of running conduit after that. Another big hold up for many So Cal SCs has been installation of the transformers. Could they possibly build their own?
I find it hard to believe that Tesla could possibly launch this many sites so quickly. Perhaps they found a way to streamline the construction of a SC? Looking at the mishaps at Buena Park, they have not yet. Though I could visualize them doing more pre-fab work off-site, such as enclosures, etc. Maybe even build something based on their temp SC stalls we have seen pop-up. Maybe they can make an off-shoot of these that could be simply dropped into the ground, instead of the current process where they frame each stall. It would just be a matter of running conduit after that. Another big hold up for many So Cal SCs has been installation of the transformers. Could they possibly build their own?
I agree that they won't be able to launch all these sites this quickly, but I do think they have a new strategy. In the past they've partnered with malls and shopping centers to lease (I assume) 4-12 spaces for chargers, however if they are truly moving to the 24-60+ parking space amounts I find it hard to believe they will find that amount of room in existing lots. Tesla is probably going to start purchasing the land itself. Then they'll be able to build the clubhouse/bathroom building in the rendering and do as much solar/wiring as they please without having to work with property owners for approval/access/scheduling.
Considering some of the zipcodes they've targeted, like Santa Monica, the land itself is going to cost a pretty penny. Great to see that kind of commitment from Tesla to get the infrastructure out there.
cpa
Active Member
Here is a thought from out of the blue:
In those locations where real estate is pricey, I really do not think that Tesla would want to tie up a whole lot of capital for what would amount to a non-income producing asset. Instead, what might make more sense and be a whole helluva lot cheaper would be to approach the landlord with a proposal.
Tesla offers to install a fairly large PV system (100+kWh), battery storage, and canopies over much of the parking lot in exchange for X number of dedicated SC spots. The property owner would not have to pay for anything. I am sure that the contract could be written in such a way that the property owner receives the 30% federal tax credit (assuming it survives this session of Congress) while Tesla purchases the electricity generated for a fixed, below-market rate. I would think that Tesla's prices for PV materials and labor is low.
Tesla has incurred so many huge net operating loss carryforwards plus unused EVSE credits for all their SC installations, that they likely would never be able to use any part of the business solar energy credits for at least 15 years, perhaps more. And those credits can only be carried forward 20 years before they expire and become a deduction in year 21.
In those locations where real estate is pricey, I really do not think that Tesla would want to tie up a whole lot of capital for what would amount to a non-income producing asset. Instead, what might make more sense and be a whole helluva lot cheaper would be to approach the landlord with a proposal.
Tesla offers to install a fairly large PV system (100+kWh), battery storage, and canopies over much of the parking lot in exchange for X number of dedicated SC spots. The property owner would not have to pay for anything. I am sure that the contract could be written in such a way that the property owner receives the 30% federal tax credit (assuming it survives this session of Congress) while Tesla purchases the electricity generated for a fixed, below-market rate. I would think that Tesla's prices for PV materials and labor is low.
Tesla has incurred so many huge net operating loss carryforwards plus unused EVSE credits for all their SC installations, that they likely would never be able to use any part of the business solar energy credits for at least 15 years, perhaps more. And those credits can only be carried forward 20 years before they expire and become a deduction in year 21.
If that happens I will be amazed. As others have noted, land costs in places like the Los Angeles and San Francisco areas are very high. It just wouldn't make sense. Much better to lease the needed areas, or strike deals with retail/commercial businesses as Tesla has done with Fred Meyers stores.
And I don't take that idealized drawing of a future Tesla Supercharger location too literally. I'll be very surprised if Tesla builds any sort of standalone "lounge" area for a Supercharger.
Last edited:
Similar threads
