2021-06-09 Planning Board PacketC)p E 04
� O
Planning Board
Remote Zoom Meeting
Agenda
121 5th Ave. N.
Edmonds, WA 98020
www.edmondswa.gov
Michelle Martin
425-771-0220
Wednesday, June 9, 2021 7:00 PM Virtual Online Meeting
Remote Meeting Information
Join Zoom Meeting: https://zoom.us/j/98720508263?pwd=VUhBN090aWQvSkhJNOtTb3NhQytBQT09
Meeting ID: 987 2050 8263. Passcode: 155135.
Call into the meeting by dialing: 253-215-8782
Land Acknowledgement for Indigenous Peoples
We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their
successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken
care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their
sacred spiritual connection with the land and water.
1. Call to Order
Attendee Name Present Absent Late Arrived
2. Approval of Minutes
A. Generic Agenda Item (ID # 5583)
Approval of Minutes
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
N/A
3. Announcement of Agenda
4. Audience Comments
5. Administrative Reports
A. Generic Agenda Item (ID # 5592)
Planning Board Page 1 Printed 61412021
Remote Zoom Meeting Agenda June 9, 2021
Director Report
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review Director Report.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Director. Report.06.04.2021(PDF)
B. Generic Agenda Item (ID # 5589)
Legistlative Report
Background/History
The 2021 state legislative session was conducted under special procedures to reduce COVID
risks. However, a great many bills were still considered.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
6. Public Hearings
7. Unfinished Business
8. New Business
A. Generic Agenda Item (ID # 5591)
Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
Background/History
This topic is part of the Planning Board's work on sustainable development codes and
initiatives.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
• Attachment 1: EV Code Amendment Presentation (PDF)
• Attachment 2: RCC (Regional Code Collaboration committee) Background Research(PDF)
9. Planning Board Extended Agenda
A. Generic Agenda Item (ID # 5593)
Review of Extended Agenda
Background/History
The Planning Board maintains an extended agenda of future topics.
Planning Board Page 2 Printed 61412021
Remote Zoom Meeting Agenda June 9, 2021
Staff Recommendation
Review the extended agenda.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Attachment 1: Extended Agenda (PDF)
Planning Board Chair Comments
Planning Board Member Comments
Adjournment
Planning Board Page 3 Printed 61412021
2.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/9/2021
Approval of Minutes
Staff Lead: Rob Chave
Department: Development Services
Prepared By: Michelle Martin
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
The minutes from the 5/26/2021 meeting are not yet available; they are likely be provided with an
updated agenda prior to the 6/9/2021 meeting.
Packet Pg. 4
5.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/9/2021
Director Report
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Development Services
Prepared By: Michelle Martin
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review Director Report.
Narrative
Director Report attached.
Attachments:
Director. Report.06.04.2021
Packet Pg. 5
5.A.a
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 4, 2021
To
From
Subject:
Planning Board
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Director Report
0
0-
W
W
"Good fortune is what happens when opportunity meets with planning."
a�
L
Thomas Edison 6
The next Planning Board meeting is June 9 and will include discussion about:
■ A code update for requiring electric vehicle charging stations (or the infrastructure for them) to be
installed with new development;
■ An overview of recently adopted state legislation related to planning.
Regional News
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)
PSRC is seeking members for the newly relaunched Regional Transit Oriented Development Committee
RTODC . The committee is a technical working group focused on equitable transit -oriented development
(TOD), tracking progress in the region, and supporting local efforts to develop equitable communities
around major transit investments. The committee serves as an advisory committee to the Puget Sound
Regional Council's Growth Management Policy Board.
In May 2021, the Growth Management Policy Board adopted an updated charter for the Regional TOD
Committee. The updated charter restructures the committee to better implement VISION 2050, the
region's long-range plan for growth.
The committee supports the implementation of TOD-related goals in VISION 2050:
• Advance and monitor the VISION 2050 growth goals of 65% population and 75% of employment
growth in proximity to high -capacity transit.
Support equity in TOD areas and address displacement of resident and businesses.
Align affordable housing efforts with transit investments.
The 21-person committee will include representatives from government, business, and nonprofit
organizations from across the four -county region. The following seats are open:
1 1 P a g e
Packet Pg. 6
5.A.a
• Staff from PSRC Member Cities and Counties (including jurisdictions of all sizes and modes of high -
capacity transit and at least one member from a jurisdiction in each of the four counties (7 seats)
• Developers and Real Estate Professionals, which includes non -and for -profit developers, real estate
professionals, and housing trade organizations (3 seats)
• Housing Organizations, which includes organizations like county housing consortia and subregional
housing groups (3 seats)
• Community, Equity, Environment Organizations (2 seats)
Additional seats will be appointed to represent local transit agencies, Sound Transit, the Washington State
Department of Transportation, and the Growth Management Policy Board.
Interested in joining the committee? Submit a complete Interest Form by July 16, 2021.
Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies
Under the Growth Management Act, each county and the cities within them must have countywide
planning policies to guide and coordinate planning for the future. These policies are updated periodically.
Currently, updates are working through the Snohomish County Tomorrow process, with a focus on o
changes to reflect the new multicounty planning framework, VISION 2050. The key changes being
proposed are for the following: o
■ Climate change
■ Equity and inclusion
■ Transit supportiveness C
■ Mitigating risks of displacement where gentrification occurs
■ New classification for centers —namely "countywide centers"
■ Reasonable measures to meet housing needs
Local News
Development Services Department
While I have tremendously enjoyed working for the City and with you, I will be retiring as the
Development Services Director, effective July 1. A recruitment process for the position is
underway. Rob Chave, Planning Manager, will serve as the Interim Director when I depart.
Thank you for the privilege of being part of this city in the past seven years —and hopefully with
results that will be useful in the future.
Equity
Equity is a huge subject, one that has been rightfully getting more attention on many levels. For
example, the City of Edmonds administration has begun the development of an Equity Roadmap
that can be implemented going forward.
At the national level, "equity" in relationship to community planning is being discussed too. More
widespread acknowledgement is happening about the effects of discrimination in housing and
zoning practices over time. I encourage you to review any of the videos about equity that are
available from the American Planning Association. Go to: Voices of Equity in Planning.
2 1 P a g e
Packet Pg. 7
5.A.a
Housing Commission Recommendations
The City Council will take a deeper look at several of the Housing Commission's policy recommendations
at a special Council meeting on June 24. In particular, the housing recommendations to be reviewed are
for:
■ Detached accessory dwellings
■ Cluster/cottage housing
■ Multifamily design standards
■ Historic discrimination in covenants and deeds
■ Regional and community partnerships
"Review" is not the same as "approval". Rather, it is simply taking a closer look to understand the policy
recommendation a little better and to give guidance on next steps. Of the Housing Commission's 15
recommendations, nine of them relate to the Planning Board. The Council could send any of these nine to
the Planning Board for further work and public input.
COMMUNITY CALENDAR
The Community Calendar has some updates.
3 1 P a g e
Packet Pg. 8
5.6
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/9/2021
Legistlative Report
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Development Services
Prepared By: Michelle Martin
Background/History
The 2021 state legislative session was conducted under special procedures to reduce COVID risks.
However, a great many bills were still considered.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
A presentation will be given at the Planning Board meeting about key bills that were passed related to
planning. These include topics of: climate, housing, and economic vitality.
Packet Pg. 9
8.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/9/2021
Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
Staff Lead: Eric Engmann, Sr Planner
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Rob Chave
Background/History
This topic is part of the Planning Board's work on sustainable development codes and initiatives.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
The City of Edmonds is considering an amendment to the Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC) that would require parking spaces in new development to include Electric vehicle (EV) charging
infrastructure. EV charging infrastructure in new development promotes the use of EVs by making them
convenient and readily available.
Benefits to the City from increased EV usage includes decreased dependency on fossil fuels and reducing
greenhouse gas emissions from passenger vehicles. This increase in EV usage is an important component
of the City's Climate Action Plan (2010), specifically the goal for the City to become carbon neutral by
2050. The City's 2017 Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory also identifies the transportation sector as
the largest generator of local greenhouse gas emissions.
However, one of the inherent challenges for this technology to gain mainstream acceptance and
adoption is to provide sufficient locations to charge EVs. If EV charging infrastructure is not readily
available, such as at home or at work, the driving public will be hesitant to invest in these vehicles.
Another challenge is that EV charging infrastructure is significantly less expensive to install during new
construction than it is for a building retrofit. Therefore, the expansion of EV charging infrastructure is
necessary to allow this technology to flourish.
Tonight's Planning Board Item will focus on the importance of EV charging infrastructure as part of the
larger Climate Action Plan and review the components needed to create the ECDC regulations. Based on
the discussions tonight, staff plans to have a draft of the proposed regulations available for review at the
June 23rd Planning Board meeting.
Background material is attached. Attachment 1 is a discussion outline prepared by Staff.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: EV Charging Infrastructure Presentation
Packet Pg. 10
8.A
Attachment 2: RCC (Regional Code Collaboration committee) Background Research
Attachments:
Attachment 1: EV Code Amendment Presentation
Attachment 2: RCC (Regional Code Collaboration committee) Background Research
Packet Pg. 11
uric
o4W/�
11
oi
Io eo g9
0
d
8.A.a
W
Tonight's Agenda** An Introductory Look at EV Charging
� i t
s m
3� v
c.�
O
W
C
O
R
C
d
6 N
L
Infrastructure
O
U
1) The Need for EVs and EV Charging Infrastructure
E
2) Identifying EV Components needed in ECDC
E
3) Next Steps
21
6/a/2o21
Packet Pg. 13
70rbymoliT-_'
•r_I ■ m•
•l [=a•i•j l g l l l•
r
-Wk
0-
I � �
8.A.a
W
ti).— 1Packet Pg. 14
,dL W A
EV Ties to Major Sustainability Goals
Transportation Element Policy 6.22 Encourage and promote the use of EV charging
stations ... including standards for new
developments that provide parking facilities
Transportation Element Policy 6.23 Position Edmonds to respond to technical innovation,
such as EVs ...
Community Sustainability Element
Policy B.3
LmmaTeACtionTiN
Goal
TR-5
Policy Initiative Action 3C
Explore and support the use of alternative fuels and
transportation options that reduce GHG emissions
Carbon Neutral by 2050
Promote Electric Vehicles and other low -carbon vehicles
Electrification of the Transportation System. Shifting the
transportation fuel source from fossil to clean electricity
(including) charging stations ... for multifamily construction
8.A.a
6/8/2021
Packet Pg. 15
Sources of Edmond 9 s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions'
Local Sector -Based Emissions
Transportation Sector Emissions
1 2017 Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory
6/8/2021
12000
10000
_N
U
s
N
8000
O
OL
cn
6000
O
r
4000
D
Q
2000
N
6/8/2021
Washington Annual GHG Emissions by
Vehicle Type
Gasoline Hybrid
Vehicle Type
Plug-in Hybrid All Electric
Source: afdc.energy.gov State Averages for Washington—
Packet-.
16
Growth in EV Demand
Electric Vehicles Registered in Edmonds
1000
838
M
367
200
W
2017 2021
Source: data.wa.gov Electric Vehicle Population Data
6/8/2021
Growth in EV Demand
Electric Vehicle Goals In Climate Action Plan
15000
12000
•111
3000
E:1911:3
367
0
15,000
2017 2021 2035 2050
6/8/2021
: � 1
Growthin tions -
Number of options and models are increasing
• Battery technology continues to improve'`
• Many auto companies moving to all -electric vehicles
Company
Pledge
Year
Jaguar
All Electric
2025
Toyota
All Electric or Hybrid
2025
Volvo
All Electric
2030
GM
All Electric
Honda
All Electric
2040
Ford
Carbon Neutral
2050
6/8/2021
Remaining Barriers
Largest concern for people considering buying EVs is...
Finding Locations to Charge Vehicles
80% of EVs are charged at home or at work
Also require convenient locations to "top off"
Need charging stations at new development
to help meet current and future demand
EMILSource Deloitte Insi. - Global Auto Consumer Study
OW
6/8/2021
Remaining Barriers
Much cheaper and easier to install at time of construction than to rE
Additional Retrofit Costs
• Upgrading electrical service panels
• Demolition and repair of parking spaces
• Breaking and repairing walls
• Longer conduit lines (parking not near electrical panels)
• Permit Costs (separate from those in building construction)
6/8/2021
mrqWeii:r3iT•
Electrical Panel and Wiring
$300 per space
$2,500 per space
Full Circuit $1,300 per space $6,300 per space
https:llvtirvti w.sirenergy.org/transportatoin/eIectric-vehicIes/building-codes#resources
$2,200 per space
$5,000 per space
Packet Pg. 23
W
Packet Pg. 24
Understanding
the components
needed for EV
Charging
Infrastructure
Regulations
•]@@l•I•
Charging Levels I
infrastructure
Types
Needs by Use
Type
6/8/2021
Stages or "Types" of EV Charging Infrastructure I
EV Capable
• Electrical Panel Capacity &
• Conduit for future use
EV Ready
Electrical Panel Capacity, Conduit &
Circuit for Charging
EV Installed
Electrical Panel Capacity, Conduit, Circuit &
Specialized Equipment for Charging
6/8/2021
8.A.a
• 120 volt circuit (similar to household outlet)
• 8 - 20 hours for full charge
.L
V
d
W
C
O
C
d
• 240 volt circuit (similar to oven or dryer outlet)
• 4 - 8 hours for full charge
• Most common level for residential uses
MV
• 480 +volt circuit (too much for home use)
• Less than 1 hour for full charge
a
O
W
a
• Typically found at commercial sites or near highways
Packet Pg. 27
8.A.a
Ranges of EV Charging Infrastructure
Standards in Other Cities by Use Type
Lower Range 11 EMdle Range Higher Range
1 EV Capable 1 EV Ready & 1 EV 2 EV Ready Spaces
Space Capable
10 - 20 % Capable
20% Capable
10 - 20 % Ready
10 - 20 % Ready
Ranges are based on comparisons of standards for multiple cities
5 -10 % Installed
10 - 20 % Ready
40 - 80 % Capable
5 - 10 % Installed
10 - 15 % Ready
10 - 20 % Capable
6 / 8 / 2 0 21 Packet Pg. 28
Decisions for ECDC Code Amendment
Which staging levels should be required by
use type? (capable, ready, installed)
Should the different charging levels be
allowed citywide? (Levels I, II, or III)
Identifying an appropriate ratio of EV charging
stations per parking space, by use type.
(Single -Family, Multifamily, non-residential, etc.)
6/8/2021
Other Considerations
M
EVChar in Infrastructure for Accessible
Charging _
Parking Spaces
Allowing Battery Exchange Stations
Connection with Building Code Requirements
r
a
6/8/2021
v"
id
Next Steps
Analyze Draft ECDC Code Language
Discuss Appropriate Standards for Edmonds
woe
Review Comparative Standards from Other
Cities and State Requirements L
TIM
6/8/2021
Questions?
Eric Engmann, AICP
Senior Planner I City of Edmonds
eric.enaman n@edmondswa.aov
(425) 997-9541
6/8/2021
r;
¢> r
1k .
IM
I Mk
t
1�
'ell
Packet Pg. 32
A
8.A.b
Regional Code Collaboration
EV Ready Codes
Research Summary
July 2020
Prepared for: King County
Prepared by: David Fujimoto
Background
The RCC provides a forum to leverage expertise, coordinate research and organize stakeholder
engagement to produce code concepts for adoption by local jurisdictions. This memo compiles research
on leading practices and lessons learned for codes addressing light duty electric vehicle (EV)
infrastructure as a preface to the development and adoption of a model EV Ready Code.
EV Codes generally provide for the planning and design of electrical capacity, circuitry pathways and
parking coverage. Code requirements typically apply differentially based upon land uses or building
occupancies and differ in the extent of "readiness" for use as well as more specific factors such as total
capacity, parking space coverage and exemptions. In general, codes addressing readiness are in their
second generation with the vast majority adopted in 2019 and 2020. The goal of EV Ready Codes is to
reduce building -related barriers to widespread market adoption of electrified transportation.
Climate, Energy and Mobility Goals
Transportation related emissions make up almost 50% of greenhouse gas emissions in the Central Puget
Sound region with 27% from on -road gasoline vehicles making up the largest portion (PSCAA). In
addition to GHG emissions targets, a number of state, county and municipal policies and goals support
clean transportation, including:
• King County Cities Climate Collaboration Shared Commitments
• The Port of Seattle has established a strategic objective to be carbon neutral for both direct and
indirect sources of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050
• City of Seattle has set a target of 30% electric vehicle adoption, including a commitment to a
fossil -fuel free municipal fleet, by 2030
• Governor Inslee's goal of 50,000 registered EVs by 2020
• Washington is a zero emission vehicle state (ZEV) mandating automakers derive up to 8% of
sales from EVs by 2025.
The adoption of the Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA, 2019) helps to ensure that future electricity
supplies, including those to fuel transportation, will be 100% renewable or non -emitting by 2045.
Packet Pg. 33
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 2
8.A.b
It is perhaps evident, but nevertheless important to note that vehicle electrification is a subset of
approaches to decarbonize transportation and increase the market share of vehicles that are electric.
This typically resides within broader climate and sustainable transportation goals - such as non -
motorized, active transportation, high capacity transit and shared mobility modes of travel and is not
viewed as the single solution for transportation emissions or community mobility goals more broadly.
Number of EVs Currently and Projected
As of July 2020, there are more than 58,300 battery electric vehicles in Washington state, with
approximately 44,250 (76%) of those within the King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap County area. 1
Washington state's EV passenger vehicle market has continued to see considerable growth, with year to
year market share increasing 54.5% from 2017-2018, with an overall market share of 4.28%, second only
to California at 7.84%.2 The 53,307 plug-in electric vehicle (EVs) which were registered in the state as of
the end of 2019 surpassed Governor Inslee's Results Washington goal of 50,000 registered EVs by 2020.
Seattle City Light recently completed its
Transportation Electrification Strategy (2019)
and several energy utilities are currently
studying EV charging behavior. Puget Sound
Energy is anticipated to release an EV strategy in
the fall of 2020.
In its Transportation Electrification Strategy,
Seattle City Light anticipates seeing a 10-fold
increase in passenger vehicles charging within
its service territory alone, with up to 50,000
additional vehicles by 2030. More aggressive
assumptions indicate up to 140,000 vehicles over the
same duration.
Nationally, a report from the Edison Electric Institute
projected growth in EVs from 1 million in 2018 to
18.7 million by 2030.3
Barriers to Adoption
New EVs models typically have range greater than
200 miles, substantially reducing range anxiety as a
barrier to adoption. However, access to convenient
charging continues to be an important consideration
in EV purchasing decisions and has been identified as
a "key enabler" for the market. A lack of planned
Plug-in electric vehicle registrations surge upward in Washington
2015 through 2019; Number of plug-in electric vehicle registrations by vehicles type;
includes battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
Vehicle 2015 2016 2017 2DiS 2019
type
BEV
11,551
14.573
20,010
27,853
36,129
PHEV
5.028
7,424
10,015
15.025
17,178
EVtotals
16,579
21,997
30,025
42,878
53,307
Data source: Washington State Department of Licensing -
Notes: BEV = Battery electric vehicles. PHEV = Plug in hybrid electric vehicles. EV = Electric
veh icl eg.
Washington's total registered plug-in electric vehicles top 53,000
Number of plu8-in electric vehicle registratlons by mun[y, As cf December 31, 2019
oM.3nnwan F'vY one
n12
33� 278 _
] �103
11O n
�
2n5r K1295 127
612
_
e-5u
P63 Lois
2m -300
_ kr
63e 210 vakin.a �728�
235
II
acl el
�301 -900
van m ca. ie.
wale cewg eie A
�sa1-Soo
8ke 230 a
121
sat-t.00a
tam -z.dob
42nmFm
oee11 O u
■ z,am*
E
oataropr a wadin�o see paru� a spa
h otec Map Includes all plug 1n electric vehicles Roduced by major auto makers since 20]1_ H does not include cars mrnerted to EVs by th
neighbwlrootl tVs, w moborrycles_ As ar Llecemher SS 101V, San Juan �ou,dy had 32� EV,, I,Iantl County
had G3D and Kitsap Gc
had ]rH58. "Out of
state' vehicles ae registered in the state of WashingLon, but the registeretl owner's address -is
at of smote_
t Washington Department of Licensing EV Population and Title and Registration Data
2 EV Market Share by State (PHEV and BEV), see: https:Hevadoption.com/ev-market-share/ev-market-share-state/
3 Electric Vehicle Sales Forecast and the Changing Infrastructure Required Electric Vehicle Sales Forecast and the Infrastructure Required Through 20302030 (November 2018)
Packet Pg. 34
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 3
8.A.b
charging infrastructure can make the installation of EVSE prohibitively expensive.
Research conducted by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) indicates that access to
home charging is closely correlated to housing type, with drivers in detached houses much more likely
to have home charging than those in apartments or attached houses. For single family homes, home
charges are anticipated to be the primary location for charging for most EV drivers, with 90% of the
charge points and 70% of all required electricity.'
In the same study, the ICCT notes that much more charging infrastructure is needed to sustain the
transition to electric vehicles, with home charging serving as an "essential backbone of the charging
ecosystem" and public and workplace charging needing to grow considerably. Workplaces are typically
the second -most frequent parking location. However, more urban areas and areas with larger numbers
of renters and unassigned parking are anticipated to need more shared access charging (public or
private).
In addition, multifamily properties face difficult challenges to adoption, which is also an equity
consideration. In their Transportation Electrification Strategy for Seattle City Light, RMI notes that
"Unlike single-family homes, multiunit dwellings have a split incentive since a property manager would
likely need to install, own, and operate on -site charging infrastructure. Property managers are unlikely
to invest unless it puts them at a competitive advantage. This chicken -and -egg problem will perpetuate
the demographic disparity in EV ownership as lower -income individuals live disproportionately in
multiunit dwellings."
Anecdotally, to the extent that EV adoption skews towards upper income and single-family
homeowners, a focus primarily on single family home charging would tend to exacerbate equity
concerns with EV access and related operating cost and health benefits.
City of Seattle stakeholder engagement for their 2019 EV code identified:
• EV readiness is considered a marketable commodity, but is not widespread and is often in
housing marketed to higher income, environmentally conscious buyers
• Lack of access in rental vs ownership properties creates disproportionate access to EVs
• Lack of access is a barrier for TNC drivers in diverse communities
• Attention to mitigate housing cost impacts
Current experience with EVSE installation demonstrates considerably higher costs of retrofitting
buildings to accommodate EV infrastructure which is considerably less expensive to design and install
when a building is developed. More information on costs follows below.
Costs
A number of studies indicate that the cost of design and installation of EV related infrastructure at the
time of development is far less expensive than retrofits.
4 Quantifying the Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Gap Across US Markets, ICCT 2019
Packet Pg. 35
8.A.b
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 4
For single family homes and duplexes the cost for wiring a 208/240 volt circuit are estimated to be
between $50 - $300 per space. Richmond, BC estimates the cost of providing EV infrastructure in new
single-family homes and townhouses at $50-150 per space.
Studies conducted for the Cities of Oakland and San Francisco, CA evaluated the costs for providing EV
Ready infrastructure for both new construction and retrofit scenarios. The City of Oakland study'
estimates the cost of a fully wired EV space at $1,330 for surface parking and $1,380 for enclosed
parking and shows that EV retrofit costs are 2 to 8 times greater than new construction. A snapshot of
Figure 1 from the report is below:
$7,000
$6,000
$5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
940
$1.000
I$1,730
'A
In
so
Complete PEV-capable
Complete PEV-capable
Complete PEV-capable
circuits spaces
circuits spaces
circuits spaces
Two surface
Two enclosed
Six enclosed
parking spaces
parking spaces
parking Spaces
■ Additional cost
for retrofits
■ New
Complete PEV-capable
circuits spaces
12 enclosed parking
spaces
Figure 1. Retrofit costs per parking space are two to eight times higher than new construction costs
when installing PEV Charging Infrastructure, Costs are adjusted from 2016 to 2018 based on RS
Means Historical Cost Indexes. Source: Pike and Steuben, 2016
The authors attribute "breaking and repairing walls, upgrading electric service panels, breaking and
repairing parking surfaces and/or sidewalks, more expensive methods of conduit installation and
additional permitting and inspections" as factors driving increased costs with retrofits.
In a study of Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure for Multifamily Standards', the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) estimated that the cost of EV-capable parking spaces with raceway and panel
capacity in new multifamily housing averages about $280 per space in parking garages and up $760 per
space in surface lots.
In the same study, CARB considered the potential for additional costs for electrical service and
transformers when installing EV charging infrastructure in new multifamily housing:
CARB staff discovered that electrical service fees can be avoided. Developers have the option to
designate a blank space for a meter to serve EV charging energy demand. When EV Capable
5 Plug -In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Cost -Effectiveness Report prepared for City of Oakland by Energy Solutions (July 2016)
6 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure: Multifamily Building Standards, California Air Resources Board (April 2018)
Packet Pg. 36
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 5
8.A.b
spaces convert to EV Charging Spaces in the future, allowance costs (including rebates) should
cover service upgrade fees to install the EV Meter. Dedicated transformers to serve EV charging
load may be needed for new construction projects if developers select single phase power;
developers of smaller buildings with 9 units or smaller typically opt for single phase power. A
dedicated transformer may not be needed if the existing service is adequate. A study prepared
by the City of Oakland states that transformer upgrades for EV charging infrastructure are
typically not common; less than 0.2% of PEVs on California roads have required transformer
upgrades (City of Oakland, 2018). For larger buildings, developers typically require three phase
power, and in that case, one transformer can be installed to meet building and EV charging
energy demand. Therefore, there should not be any added transformer costs associated with
installation of EV charging infrastructure in most new multifamily housing.(SoCal Edison, 2018)
However, CARB staff did estimate the upfront added cost of dedicated transformers in smaller
buildings with 9 units or less. Upfront costs can vary depending on the location of the
transformer and EV Capable spaces. However, typical costs associated with dedicated
transformers would add about $2,175 to $3,450 for one to two EV Capable spaces respectively
(RS Means Data, 2017).
A recent report on Reducing EV Infrastructure Costs by RMI considered a range of hardware, capacity,
software, ADA compliance and other costs and noted that "soft costs" for things including permitting,
communication between utilities and providers, easements (for public charging) and lack of "future
proofing" were, surprisingly, large drivers of EV infrastructure costs.
Current Code Environment
According to a ACEEE paper on Driving Plug-in Electric Vehicle Adoption with Green Building Codes
2018 , more than 50 jurisdictions in Canada and the US have EV infrastructure provisions in building or
land use codes, covering more than 82 million people.
In the last couple of years, there has been
significant activity in adoption of new or
updated codes by communities —
representing a "second generation" EV
code of sorts. First generation EV Codes,
including that of the Regional Code
Collaboration in 2012, were largely focused
on planning and design for future EV —
centered on identifying or providing space
for circuits or panels, identifying pathways
and requiring calculations for electrical
capacity. More recent codes focus on
making buildings EV Ready, with electrical
capacity, panels, breakers, conduit,
communication, wiring and outlets
installed. Some jurisdictions require a
certain number or percentage of charging
stations (EVSE) to be installed.
City of North Vancouver • 4
Alaska not m Districtof North Vancouver v
Vancouver • •
Port of Coqultlam • •
Surrey
Ch District of SquamWest Van •
Cs. 0istnct at West Vancouver • K
`
Y Richmond • •
• Seattle
e Washington
• Gresham, Portland mntoSalem, Eugene New Yor4i Ci •
• •Califon Kane county 4
• Berkeley 1IFQ salt Lake City t 4 • • 4 Phikadelphia •
• • 6uningame Y Boulder .
` Montgomery •
• • gDenver • Washington, DC•
Ccntra Costa Cou
• • • Cupertino
• Emeryville
• • • Fremont
• • • Mann County
• • Menlo Park ,
• • Mountain View a
• • Oakland
• • • Palo Alto ii�aWail • •
• • San Mateo r
• • San Francisco • • • Beveny Hills
• • • San Rafael • ®• Lancaster
• • • Santa Clara County• • • Los Angeles
• • Santa Cruz • • Lang Beach
• Santa Rosa • • Pasadena
• • Sunnyvale • e Santa Monica
• 2 West Hollywood
Q Atlanta • ■
Plnecrast
Miami Beach •
Jupiter
Mulli-Family ,urrside •
Non -Residential
Single Family
—chargepain+
Figure 2 Map of PFV infrastnict.ure green I-01ding code Maption. Sriwx ChargePoint..
Packet Pg. 37
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 6
8.A.b
EV Readiness
What
canuit I
circuit station;
panel supply equipmen
transformer meter outlet a
o a
o
o M 0 0
ra tM
o a
on 0
♦ F'�rk ng
space
electric vehicle "readiness'
Image courtesy of the City of5eattle
Fully wired -circuits
The vast majority of current EV codes fall within a progression of installed EV categories and primarily
address Level 2 charging capacity, which is appropriate for most residential and workplace charging
scenarios:
EV Capable: Electrical panel capacity and space to support a minimum 40-ampere, 208/240-volt
branch circuit for each EV parking space, and the installation of raceways, both underground
and surface mounted, to support the EVSE (charging stations). Sometimes called "Conduit Only."
EV Ready: A designated parking space which is provided with one 40-ampere, 208/240-volt
dedicated branch circuit for EVSE servicing Electric Vehicles. The circuit shall terminate in a
suitable termination point such as a receptacle, junction box, or an EVSE, and be located in close
proximity to the proposed location of the EV parking spaces.
EVSE Installed: Provision of fully operational EV charging stations for a certain number or
percentage of designated spaces.
There are some nuances to the coverage of parking spaces through technologies such as load
management (discussed below), and requirements for parking space coverage vary according to land
use types or building occupancy types.
With the exception of state requirements allowing EV-related land uses such as battery exchange
stations along major highways and interstates and basic standards around signage and parking, most
jurisdictions do not have provisions currently in place to reduce barriers to EV access. The 2018 WA
State Building Code would begin to institute provisions but largely requires only EV Capable
infrastructure, and only for some residential occupancies (see Appendix A table for additional details
and a link to the code). Lessons learned from communities with EV Capable only codes indicate
challenges with compliance and limited value in terms of improving access. For example, cities indicated
that planning for capacity and running calculations was a far different exercise than actually designing
and installing circuits or a panel.
Packet Pg. 38
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 7
8.A.b
At a national level, recent modifications to the building code through the ICC included provisions for EV
Readiness and were approved through member balloting at the end of 2019 (including several K4C
members). These ICC EV Ready provisions would go into effect in 2021 and provide for a combination of
EV Ready and EV Capable provisions for single-family and multi -family homes. Despite being approved
with final action in 2019, ICC provisions were appealed in May 2020 and are pending final ruling.
A summary table of several EV Codes is attached — see Appendix A.
Leading Code Practices and Additional Considerations
As noted above, current EV codes generally seek to balance the type of infrastructure and the extent of
its coverage for a given occupancy or land use type (single family, multi -family, commercial):
• EV readiness (EV Capable, EV Ready, EVSE Installed)
• Parking space coverage (per du or % of total)
Based upon a summary of EV Codes courtesy of Southwest Energy Efficiency Project'- and augmented
through additional research, EV codes range in the level of access (or readiness) they provide, as follows
t Access
Most Access
Single Family
1 EV Capable
RCC 2012,
1 EV Ready space
Seattle, Boulder,
space per
Honolulu,
per dwelling unit
Denver, Summit
dwelling unit
Lakewood,
County, Flagstaff,
Sedona, Fort
San Jose,
Collins, Atlanta,
Vancouver,
Aspen, CalGreen
CalGreen Tier 1
base, Palo Alto
and 2, IRC 2019
Multi Family
5% EV Capable
Washington
70% EV Capable,
San Jose, CA
Building Code
20% EV Ready &
(Denver, CO is
10% EV Installed
similar)
Commercial
5% EV Capable
Sedona
40% EV Capable
San Jose, CA
10% EV Installed
(Denver and
Boulder are
similar)
For single family and individual metered residential units, there appears to be general consensus around
one EV Ready space per dwelling unit. As noted above, the relative cost of a fully -wired circuit in a single
family home is small (estimated at less than $300 for an outlet in proximity to the panel) and planning
for the panel capacity removes significant barriers for residents.
Approaches for multifamily and commercial uses vary far more significantly. Of note are the City of San
Jose, where requirements provide coverage for 100% of multifamily and 50% of commercial spaces, with
a minimum of 10% with charging stations required to be installed. Denver has similar requirements
which were adopted earlier this year.
7 Southwest Energy Efficiency Project or SWEEP provides a good overview of EV Codes online.
Packet Pg. 39
8.A.b
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 8
Vancouver, BC takes the approach of requiring 100% EV Readiness, but allows load management
technologies to meet electrical capacity requirements (load management or load sharing allows multiple
charging stations to share circuit or panel amperage without exceeding circuit, panel or transformer
capacity). The Cities of Oakland and San Francisco provide for lower levels of EV Readiness (10%) with a
slightly higher panel capacity (20%) but require planning for wiring to all parking spaces but only
installing conduit in areas where it is more economical during new construction.
Seattle has taken the approach of providing for 20% readiness for multifamily residential applications,
recognizing that load management technology may allow for extending charging capacity to up to 100%
of the parking spaces. Commercial uses are set at 10%, reflecting a lower level of importance for
charging in the overall EV charging "ecosystem."
A couple of points of consideration based upon feedback from cities and charging station
manufacturers:
• Load management: load management technology allows multiple charging stations to
dynamically share the capacity of a circuit, panel or meter. These technologies can help to use
panel capacity more efficiently to serve more EV charging spaces than panels that reserve a
fixed amount of capacity per space. Load management systems can also be integrated with
building management strategies to minimize utility demand charges and potentially avoid utility
upgrades. Their feasibility is heavily reliant on the usage patterns and requirements of individual
users. Aspects such as daily driving distances, arrival and departure times, vehicle charging
capacity and circuit capacity affect how load management affects users. Current feedback on
load management is a 4:1 or 5:1 ratio appears to be a reasonable balance between charging
times and user convenience and expectations, but could certainly change as vehicle technology
evolves and the number of EV drivers and their usage patterns change. Vancouver has
established load management performance standards which requires a minimum performance
of 12kwh per EVSE on a management system or peer networked/interconnected EVSE for load
management/load sharing capabilities over an 8 hour overnight period, assuming all parking
spaces are in use by a charging EV.
• Total number of electrified parking spaces: there does not appear to be consensus on either
the percentage of parking spaces to plan for, or whether 100% electrified parking spaces will
ultimately be needed. As battery technology has improved and become more wide -spread,
range anxiety has become less of an issue and charging frequency has decreased. Average daily
vehicle miles travelled (VMT) in the region was approximately 21.4 miles in 2018 according to
PSRC8, far within the comfortable range of EVs on the market today. However, individual user
behavior, parking turnover, assigned parking, access to workplace charging and other factors
have a significant impact on total need at a particular site.
a This takes into account total population in the region, as well as job growth. PSRC tracks both daily VMT in the region and daily
VMT per person. From 2017-2018, the region saw a slight increase in total VMT of 1.2%, while daily VMT per person declined by
0.5%. Since 2010, the daily VMT per person has decreased by 5%, with daily VMT at 21.4 miles daily, below the peak of 24 miles
per person per day in the late 1990's.
Packet Pg. 40
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 9
8.A.b
• Stranded assets and overbuilt infrastructure — on the balance it is still cheaper to install during
design and construction than to retrofit, but because understanding about EV driver behaviors
and requirements are still being studied and technologies for both EVs and charging stations are
continuing to evolve, care should be taken to avoid overbuilding infrastructure in the near term.
Additional considerations include:
• Exceptions
• Where the Code Lives
• Substantial modifications / Remodels / Existing Buildings
• Affordable Housing & MUD
• Calculation of Stalls
• Rated Power for Circuits
• Communications
• Land Use Incentives
• Permitting
• Uncertainties and Disruptive technology
Exceptions
City of Seattle — allows for reductions for certain utility upgrades. Conversations with staff indicate
primary concerns were for small townhouse projects such as townhouse conversions where previously
single family service had existed. The City estimates approximate 20-40 such exemptions per year and
minimal impact on review staff time.
Where the Code Lives
Jurisdictions have adopted EV codes in either land use or building codes and recently, there have been
some claims about the scope of building codes at the national level. This may ultimately not be of
concern, rather something of which to be aware. Depending upon the jurisdiction, more relevant may
be consideration of development review processes. Land use code review typically includes parking and
circulation and often happens before building plan review processes, which would allow the site design
to identify EV requirements earlier in the process.
• British Columbia determined EV charging as "out of scope" under the Provincial Building Act,
defining regulation at local government under the authority of other statues.
• Some 2019 ICC code changes are being appealed on the premise that EV codes (and building
electrification codes) are out of scope for the IECC.
Substantial Modifications / Remodels / Existing Buildings
Many existing code provisions govern when new permitting requirements are triggered, often based
upon building size, renovation relative to assessed valuation, structural or other changes. Major
improvements to surface parking lots or electrical systems could be relevant triggers for EV codes. Some
jurisdictions have requirements to provide additional triggers:
Packet Pg. 41
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 10
8.A.b
• Marin County: with electrical panel service is upgraded, requires 20% EV Ready; parking lot
renovations including removal of paving and curbs, requires conduit to all exposed parking
spaces and electrical capacity (up to panel capacity).
• Menlo Park: includes provisions for additions and alterations for larger projects with lower % EV
Capable and EV Installed requirements than new construction.
In addition, alternative paths could be considered for existing buildings, following an approach similar to
Seattle's Tune Up Ordinance. Property owners could be provided with specific requirements and
timelines for coming into compliance, which would allow time for capital planning and timing of
infrastructure investments.
Affordable Housing & Multifamily Development (MUD)
Stakeholders in the Seattle process identified concerns about the EV Code's impact on housing
affordability and equity. Consideration should be given for significant impacts to affordable housing and
housing costs overall. For larger affordable housing developments, cost data indicates that there will be
clear EV code related project costs, but that in the context of parking facility costs and structured
parking costs (if provided) in particular, EV code related costs are minor. Additionally, provision of EV
ready infrastructure is critical to address inequities in the EV market access. Cost data shows that the
costs for retrofit of facilities is 2 to 8 times higher than the cost during new construction. Design for
multifamily development should consider flexibility in parking requirements, encourage shared parking
and consider load management strategies. The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency is currently participating in
a nation-wide MUD study and may be useful in informing future strategies and code updates.
Multifamily Housing (also referred In California have been registered
A variety of factors —ranging from
to as Multi -Unit Dwellings [MUD]) to MUD residents." To achieve 100%
ownership structure to available power
represent a key market segment IEV penetration, this market segment
and parking —have worked against
In need of charging options_ They likely needs to be addressed through
adding charging to existing MUDS at
constitute between 39% and 67%of a combination of access to level
the necessary scale_ The following
California's housing stock (depending 2 charging, DC fastcharging, and
best practices can help address the
on the region) but fewer 9%of IEVs hydrogen Fueling.
challenge:
Best Practice Rationale
Encourage charging in rental propertiesto be shored use EVC.` -
l I
Encourage the highest rate of charging to maximize
throughput In a in ac ity, whi IQ balancing cost
Avoid treoting EV charging at MUDS as a commarclal parkins"
service
Allow/encourage) cad ma nag ernantandbatterysupported
chorgem if the service drop io o property is not adequate
For rewbuildings-adopt CALGreer voluntary measures E'VC�sp.. cr_r,. :r-- ^
or better iseGAdvancing Infrastructure through Building
Standards section)
Calculation of Stalls
• Prior versions of the RCC code rounded up or down depending upon the fraction value for stall
calculations.
• Most codes have provisions which round up stall calculations to nearest whole number.
Packet Pg. 42
8.A.b
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 11
Rated Power for Covered Circuits
• Some jurisdictions require higher (50 amp) or lower (30 amp) amperage ratings for EV circuits
Typical is a 40 amp circuit, which covers the charging rate of most EV's charging rates in the
current marketplace. Some models, such as Teslas and newer luxury models can utilize higher
capacities.
• Station manufacturers are only recently starting to provide 50 amp EVSE.
• At least one charging station manufacturer has noted that requiring higher amperage circuits
can significantly reduce the total number of ports that can effectively be provided by a given
transformer capacity.
Communications
• Some charging station manufacturers have commented on the importance of ensuring
communications infrastructure to EVSE, either through cellular signals (which may require
repeaters for enclosed structures), ethernet or distributed antenna systems (DAS). Also raised
were questions about building network security for direct connections to building systems
versus cellular.
• In their recent study on EV infrastructure costs, RMI commented on soft costs, including data
connections and connection fees and suggested wired ethernet might be cost saving measure
• Most EV Codes do not address standards for communications specifically. Ultimately, these
considerations should be taken into consideration with overall building design and operation
choices.
Land Use Incentives
• Updates to the EV Code could provide an opportunity for a jurisdiction reduce parking space
requirements. For jurisdictions with parking minimums, this may have benefits in reducing
developer costs, helping to address affordable housing impacts, reducing impervious surface
areas and pollution generating surfaces (for surface parking applications) - encouraging less
space dedicated to "car habitat" overall.
• In such a case, EV spaces count as two spaces. In several jurisdictions in California, land use
codes permit parking spaces with installed EVSE to count as two spaces, providing for an
allowed reduction in parking spaces (sometimes with a cap on the total percent reduction).
• Stockton, CA: "a reduction in required parking is permitted up to two required parking spaces
for each electric vehicle charging space provided, up to a maximum reduction of 10 percent of
the total required parking."
Permitting
• The City of Seattle determined that the costs of implementation are not anticipated to be
significant relative to overall time and expense reviewing a development overall. Seattle did not
identify additional resource requests associated with implementation the ordinance.
• A recent report on Reducing EV Infrastructure Costs by RMI considered a range of hardware,
capacity, software, ADA compliance and other costs and noted that "soft costs" for things
including permitting, communication between utilities and providers, easements (for public
charging) and "future proofing" were, surprisingly, large drivers of EV infrastructure costs.
Packet Pg. 43
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 12
8.A.b
• California has taken efforts to streamline EV permitting processes and developed an Electric
Vehicle Charging Station Permitting Guidebook (2019) as a result of legislation in 2015 (AB 1236)
requiring improvements in the permitting processes. The legislation and guidebook outline a
number of EVSE Friendly measures and best practices, including expedited permitting processes,
checklists, administrative approvals, certain exemptions and other provisions.
Table 2: Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permit Streamlining Requirements & Best Practices
Required
by AB 1236
Best
Practice
AB 1236 Compliant
(EVCS Friendly)
Ordinance creating an expedited, streamlined permitting process
for electric vehicle charging stations )EVCS) including level 2 and
direct current fast chargers (DCFC) has been adopted
Checklist of all requirements needed for expedited review posted
on Authority Having Jurisdiction (usually a city or county) website
EVCS projects that meet expedited checklist are administratively
approved through building or similar non -discretionary permit
EVCS projects reviewed with the focus on health and safety
Not AB 1236 Compliant
,challenging to Deploy
No permit streamlining ordinance; and/or ordinances
that create unreasonable barriers to EVCS Installation
No checklist for EVCS permitting requirements
Permitting process centered around getting a
discretionary use permitfirst
EVCS projects reviewed for aesthetic considerations in
addition to building and electrical review
AHJ accepts electronic signatures on permit applications*
Wet signatures required on one or more application forms
EVCS permit approval not subject to approval of an association
EVCS approval can be conditioned on the approval of a
)as defined In Section 4080 of the Civil Code)
common Interest association
AHJ commits to issuing one complete written correction notice
New issue areas Introduced by AHJ after Initial comments
detailing all deficiencies In an Incomplete application and any
are sent to the station developer
additional information needed to be eligible for expedited permit
issuance
Clear EVCS permitting process detailed on AHJ website
Permitting process not explained on AHJ website
ZEV Infrastructure permitting ombudsperson appointed to help
AHJ does not offer access to an expert who can support
applicants through the entire permitting process
station developers through the entire permitting process
Guidance documents for permitting and Inspecting charging
Limited or no information online
stations at single family home, multifamily home, workplace, public
)L2 and DCFC), and commercial medium and heavy duty posted
on AHJ website
Pre -application meetings with knowledgeable AHJ staff are offered
Full permit package needs to be submitted to gain
feedback from AHJ staff
AHJ has published an ordinance or bulletin clarifying that a plug-in
EVCS Installation projects trigger a parking count review
electric vehicle charging space counts as one or more parking
spaces for zoning purposes
Concurrent reviews are made available for building, electrical
Sequential permit reviews only
(and planning, If deemed necessary)
Planning for ZEVs and supporting Infrastructure Is Incorporated
EV charging guidelines are not incorporated into planning
and prioritized within documents such as the general plan, capital
documents
Improvement plan, climate action plan, and design guidelines
EVCS are classlfled as an accessory use to a site, not as a
AHJ considers charging stations as fueling stations, leading to
traditional fueling station
additional zoning review
AHJ has esta bushed/published timelines for EV permit application
AHJ does not have expedited permitting process for EV
review that are expedited when compared to standard building
applications —resulting In standard project permitting
permit review timellnes In that jurisdlc tlon.
timelines
AHJ's expedited EV permit review process encourages permit I AHJ does not encourage conditional approval of permits
reviewers to conditionally approve permits (aka "approved as
noted")
Packet Pg. 44
8.A.b
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 13
Uncertainties:
Looking forward, the EV marketplace and ecosystem is evolving rapidly and changes in mobility modes,
charging behavior, building energy management, urban and rural requirements, and charging
technologies (such as induction charging) will likely affect future use of EV infrastructure. Currently
there appears to be a high level of uncertainty with many of these factors. A number of utility based EV
studies are currently underway which will help to inform future investments of energy utilities and
potential regulatory approaches. As more information becomes available, codes should be reviewed and
updated to ensure that they are relevant and meaningful. Some uncertainties include:
• Autonomous vehicles and vehicle sharing
• Future total building electrical loads, total building power management
• Vehicle technology advancements
• Charging station user behavior
• Charging station use variables by location (urban in -city vs suburban vs rural commute)
• Charging technologies
Recommendations
1. Provide EV Ready spaces, not just EV Capable spaces
It is clear from research that measures to "future proof' buildings for EV infrastructure are cost effective
and are important to removing barriers for both current and future EV adoption. Costs for retrofits can
be prohibitive and measures taken now to address new construction will help to stem the number of
buildings requiring expensive retrofits in the future.
Particular attention to residential land uses is important as the majority of EV charging is expected to
take place at home. In particular, attention to multifamily development is important to address a
growing market segment in the Puget Sound region (which is consistent with LIGA, infrastructure,
mobility, environmental protection, livability, health and other regional goals and policies) and to help
ensure more equitable investment in communities with more constrained access to EVs and
infrastructure as well as higher levels of vehicle related emissions burden.
2. Provide progressive but measured requirements
Research clearly demonstrates the importance of EV Ready infrastructure in supporting access to EVs.
Given uncertainties with user behavior, vehicle technology, charging technology, autonomous vehicles
and other considerations, care should be exercised to avoid overbuilding infrastructure. On the other
hand, given that buildings constructed today have a design life of 50 or more years, it is important to
remove known barriers to growing demands wherever possible. It is currently not clear that 100%
parking space electrification will be needed either in the mid or long term.
3. Consider tiers and options for jurisdictions considering adoption
Because jurisdictions have differing community goals and expectations, development standards and a
range of other factors, consider providing a base EV Ready code which employs current leading
practices, plus one or two tiers of measures which provide increased access. More specific code options
Packet Pg. 45
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 14
8.A.b
could also be developed to address specific issues such as affordable housing, parking minimums or
other aspects.
4. Provide flexibility in meeting standards rather than outright exemptions
Given uncertainty in the marketplace and evolving experience (on the part of design professionals,
developers, contractors, land use planners, plans examiners, building officials, sustainability
professionals, utility engineers and others) an approach that considers flexibility in meeting goals to
maximize access and eliminate or reduce building and land use related barriers to EV adoption will
more likely address constraints and contribute to learning more so than specific exemptions at this point
in time. For example, allowing reductions based upon demonstrated circumstances for specific
situations will contribute more to the body of knowledge and refinement of both EV installation
strategies and code provisions.
5. Regularly assess and update code requirements
As experience is gained with new development projects, national and local studies and programs
addressing existing development, measures should be taken to regularly assemble, evaluate and
consider more current data to inform updates to code provisions. Regular monitoring and assessment
will also help to identify unintended effects of code provisions in place. As the marketplace and
technology is evolving rapidly, regular intervals for reporting, collaborative interagency review and other
measures may be planned as a part of any code adoption process.
6. Incorporate load management strategies into code approaches
Load management strategies help to increase efficiency of electric capacity and have the potential to
reduce some infrastructure related hard costs and provide flexibility for meeting future demand, while
avoiding overbuilding infrastructure and stranded assets (as through dedicated EVSE circuits). Load
management strategies could increase soft costs for EV infrastructure.
7. Consider approaches to require upgrades to existing buildings over time
Several studies, pilot projects and incentive programs address existing buildings. As charging station
utilization, existing building infrastructure requirements and integrated building management are better
understood, the requirements for upgrading existing building will be better understood. A measured
approach to set in place future markers for EV readiness in existing building will help property owners
and managers plan and organize future investments and identify cost recovery strategies, while
increasing access to EV infrastructure.
A Potential Approach
• Single family: require 1 EV Ready space per dwelling unit for single family, duplex and other
individually metered projects
• Multifamily: require 20% or more EV Ready spaces as well as planned design for 100% of stalls
and installed raceways for all inaccessible locations'. Panel capacity at 20%.
' Inaccessible locations include structural walls, concrete slabs, under asphalt and other similar circumstances
where costs for future retrofit are greater than costs for installation with new construction.
Packet Pg. 46
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 15
8.A.b
• Commercial: require 10% or more EV Ready spaces as well as planned design for 100% of stalls
and installed raceways for all inaccessible locations. Panel capacity at 10%
• Substantial Alterations and Existing Buildings: in the near term, establish incentives, technical
assistance, EVSE manufacturer partnerships and other measures to increase voluntary adoption
of EV ready measures in existing buildings. Establish mandatory future milestone requirements
to signal future requirements and allow for planned capital investments. Require substantial
alterations (as defined in code) to comply with EV Ready requirements.
• Provide advance tiers and/or options for:
• EVSE installation. Installation of EVSE immediately provides capacity and provides a visible
indication of a site's support of EV drivers. In addition, installed EVSE provides property
owners and managers with practical experience in managing and operating EVSE.
• Increased levels of EV Readiness. Provision of higher levels of EV readiness (>20%)
supports more rapid adoption of EVs.
• Parking reductions. Incentives for parking reductions supports both EV readiness and
broader mobility objectives.
• Allow for reductions in requirements based upon prepared analysis by a qualified engineer,
sustainability professional, certified energy manager, or other professionals demonstrating
constraints, benefits and impacts of code compliance for a specific parcel and development
type.
• Establish monitoring, reporting, review and update intervals at the time of adoption of
authorizing ordinances to ensure codes stay present and embody continuous improvement
principles.
Appendices
• Code Summaries and Links
• Interviews Conducted
• Resources, References and Links
Packet Pg. 47
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 18
8.A.b
Resources, References and Links
Additional Codes, Laws and Incentives
International Code Council (ICC) - International Code Council 2019 Group B Appeals
Washington State EV Charging Station Signage and Parking Penalty — RCW 46.08.185
Washington Public Fleet Electric Vehicle and Alternative Fuel Procurement (RCW 43.19.648)
US Department of Energy EERE - AFDC - Washington Laws and Incentives
Guides
Residential Electric Vehicle Charging: A Guide for Local Governments — City of Richmond, BC and BC
Hydro
City of Atlanta EV Readiness Handbook
City of Chicago Installation of Vehicle Charging Stations at Multi -unit Dwellings
Exploring the Role of Cities in Electrifying Passenger Transportation (January 2020) - UC Davis Plug-in
Hybrid & Electric Vehicle Research Center
Load Management / Power Sharing
Resources to Support Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Implementation and Requirements — City
of Richmond, BC and BC Hydro
Permitting
Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permitting Guidebook (July 2019), California Office of Business and
Economic Development
Electric Vehicle Strategic Plans
Seattle City Light Transportation Electrification Strategy (2019)
Denver EV Action Plan (2020)
Cost Studies
Plug -In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Cost -Effectiveness Report for San Francisco, prepared for the City
and County of San Francisco, November 2016
Plug-in Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Cost -Effectiveness Report prepared for the City of Oakland, CA,
November 2016
Electric Highways
West Coast Green Highway
Washington EV Data
Washington Department of Licensing EV population and title and registration data
Packet Pg. 48
8.A.b
(dwelling Unit
11 it with EV CAPABLE
glanch
GA 2017 Cade of
1 EV Capable Space per
20% EV Capable
Ordinances
dwellino Unit
CO 2015 IBC/IRC
1 EV Ready Space per dwelling
2%EV Ready
Unit
(for new construction and 50%or
5,000 SF add tions)
CA 2019 IBC/IRC
Residential Mandatory(4.106.4): EV
Mandatory(4.106.4.2): EV Capable, Same as mm-residential
Vountuy Capable, 1 sp.,,Wdu
10%of spaces
A4.106.8
Tier 1 and 2: EV Ready 1
Tier 1: EV Capable, 15%
space/du
Tie 2: EV Capable, 20%
'IL 12020 (Ordinance
Scold. CO 2020 IBC/IRC
ICO I2020 (IBC/IRC
de WA 2020 Lend use code
AZ I2019 (IBC/IRC
CO 2019 IBC/IRC
CO
1W HI
IRC 2019 -
-P2
CO
punt, ICA
chusetts MA
Pak CA
eke WA
NV
CA
OR
CA
2019 Ordinance
2020 Ordinance
Under appeal
I17-10-1011-A
I
I20%EV Ready (5+spaces)
1 EV Ready Space
per dwelling 5% EV Installed, 15% EV Ready,
Unit
40%EV Capable(25+spaces)
Goro sectlm
1 EV Ready Space
par dwelling 15% EV Installed, 15% EV Ready,
R404.2
Unit
80%EV Capable
16.60.030.85
We
EV installed: 10%, EV Capable/Ready Wa
far additional 10%
1 EV Ready Space
per dwelling 3%EV Ready
Unit
Chapter 36
1 EV Capable Space per 10% EV Capable
Sustainable
dwelling Unit
Buildino
Prec�ices
Section 3605
For projects with 15 or more spaces,
1 EV Inualled Space per 15 parking
spaces plus 15% EV Capable
IRC 2019
CE217-P2
2019
Zoning Ordinance
2019
Building Code
Ordinance 3712
2019
2018
SteH Renrt and Residential
ordinance
Handout
2011
Land use code
MLT 19.126
2013
(IBC/IRC
2018
IBC/IRC
15.04.3.11A 10
2017
918-020-
(IBC/IRC
38
2017 IBC/IRC Residentiel
16.14.420
Provid, at least one Level 2 (240-wit) electric vehicle charging receptacle cobalt
Nan-resitlential
Mantlatary(5.106.5.3): EV Capable, O
Exception.(nn-residurm):
Exceptions far residential:- no commercial power supply; utility aid. design requirmants cost to
Voluntary 9 speces(none required), 10-200 (1
- Insufficient electrical supply
homeowner are$400 or more per dwelling unit; ADUs without additional perking facilities.
AS 106.5.3 to 10), 201+ (6%)
- 'Where them is evitlence suitable to
Me local enforcing agency
CWGme also has provisions for Clean Air Vehicle Designated Parking (law writing, fuel efficient
Tie 1: EV Capable, INS spaces (none
substantiating that additional local
and cepod/vanpod vehicles. Clem air vehicle spaces dependent on number total number of
required), 10-200 (2 W 14), 201+(8%)
Why infrastructure design
parking spaces: 0-9 spaces (none required), 10-200 (1 to 16), 201+(8%of total)
Tie 2: EV Capable, 0.9 spaces (1),
requireamts, directly related to the
10-200 (2 W 17), 201+ (10%)
implementation of Section 5,106.5.3,
may adversely impact the construction
I17-10-1011-B I20%EV Ready (30+abuse)
cost of the protect."
I
5%EV Installed, 10% EV Ready,
10% EV Capable
motion EV Installed, 107 EV Ready,
C405.10 10% EV Caoable1%
Iva Iva
none
Cade provision applied W the General Commercial Zone for ell development where there is housing
and applies to the required number of housing sWlls. Height bonus in the Westgate Mixed Use
I3%EV-Reedy
District provides credits far EVSE (minimum of 4 spaces)
�An applicant must provide and install one Level 2.l . car (EV) charging sum per 15 required
perking spaces far the project and EV ready conduit for 15 percent of the total required parking
spaces m-site. This requirement shall only apply once the totasp l minimum required puking aces
far the project reaches 15, using rounding for any subsequent charging station requirements.
1 EV Capable Space per
25%EV Ready (8+ spaces)
25%EV Ready (12+ spaces)
dwellinq unit
EV Ready 1 spaceldu
EV Ready and EV Capable depending
EV Ready and EV Capable depending
IRC provision CE217-P2 was adopted by vela but was appealed in early 2020,
upon total spaces: 2 EV Ready, up to
upon tonal spaces: 2 EV Ready, up to
20% EV Capable
20% EV Capable
1 EV Capable Space per
2%EV Installed, 18%EV Capable
2%EV Installed, 13%- 18%EV
dwellinq unit
(10+spaces)
Capable (10+spaces)
1 EV Ready Space per dweling 20% EV Capable, 20% panel
10%EV Ready, remaining spaces EV
Temporary buildings, non-contlitlmed
For substantial alterations inwlving electrical panel -requires upgredero accommodate 20% EV
unit
capacity, load management showed! to
Capable, panel capacity 20 %
space, historical, wham not
Capable spaces; where puking lot o,olves removal of paving and curbs, conduit required to all
meet 1 per dwelling unit
-
merciel power supply, utility side
exposed parking spaces and designated electrical capacity m the panel up W the panel capacity (if
20% EV Ready plus 5%EV lnstalletl,
Wreased cost>$400/du,
electrical service is not being upgraded on me project).
no less than 2 EVSE, panel 20%
hardshipffeesibilily emption
ass. xe
1 EV Readv so=,05+spaces)
proo
1 EV Ready Space par dwaling 1 EV Ready per unit, 15% EV
Non-residential
15% EV Ready, 10% EV instslled
For afferdat. housing developments,
Menlo Pak also requires EV Capable and EV Installed in additions and alterations al a lower level
unit
Installed!
Handout
reductianin minimu—.10%.
thennewconstrucl-(5-10%dependinguponsize).Thecityelsohasafee-in-Iieuprogramfor EV
stations for certain districts where requirements cannot be met.
nm
EV Installed: greater than 10,000 sf, EV Installed: greater than 10,000 sf,
EV Installed: greater than 10,000 sf, 1
none
Included provision for'Design for Expansion' which added 2z the number of spaces as required for
10%; EV Cepable/Readyfor additional 3%; EV Capable/Ready for additional
3%; EV Capable/Ready for additional
charging stations!
20% 6%
2-6%, depending upon land use
I20%EV Capable I
I
I
I
10% EV Ready, 90%'Raceway
10% EV Ready, 10%'Raceway
Installed'. 20% total Panel capacity
Installed'. 20% total panel capacity
5% EV Ready for parking facilities a
We
a
Does not apply to: tmpoary parking
t
Technically not fully EV Ready- requires capacity plus conduit, but not wiring, breaker or outlet.
with 50 or more "open spaces"
(in s ce 3 years less), -not a_..
parking spaces (invenrory, awaiting
'Open parking spaces" are a'defined area that has two o more indicated marked edges and is
transport, or reserved far commercial
designetl for the parking of a single motor vehicle including spaces designatetl for accessible
vehicles, emergency vehicles, farm
parking.'
equipment, mdarcycles, etc.)
CWGmm adopted as
CelGreen adopted as mandatory, as
30%EV Capable
Nm-residential
25%EV Capable, 5%EV Installed
Multifamily with individual attached
EVSE Ready is 50 amp circuit.
mandatory, as amended
amended
16.14.430
parking (ie: MF w/ tuck -under
garages): 1 EV Capable per
1 EV Capable space par
Resident parking: l EV Reatlyspace
applicable unit
dwelling unit
par unit
Guest parking: 25 % EV Capable and
5%EV Installed
2012
2012
land use cad,
rm 1 EV Capable space par SF
10% EV Ready 3%EV Ready We 13% EV Ready depending upon land none
Also address battery exchange stations zoning. Multifamily and non-residentlal require installation
home, duplex or townhouse
a
EWctric VuncW ldhasfrucfure (EVIJ which is defnetl as "the site design must provide electrical,
�WA
associated! ventilation, accessible parking, and wiring connection to transformer to support the
additional potential future electric vehicle charging stations pursuant to National Electrical Code
(2008) Akcle 625." Spaces required are rounded up (0.5+) or down (<0.5) far fractional
calculations.
.alm Cl
UT
2019
IBC /IRC+
1 EV Installed! Space far every 25
Zmino Ordinance
parkin. spaces
ce
CA
I2017
IBC/IRC
V Ready Space per dwelling
1100°ERV Ready,Parml
u^
acar 100 oayacityfar
lose
CA
2019
Ordinance
1 EV Ready Space per dwelling
10%% EV InsWled, 20% EV Ready, 10% EV InsWled, 40%EV Capable
Packet Pg. 49
8.A.b
AZ
2019
Appendix
Caunly ICO
2020
IBC /IRC
AZ
2019
IRC
rer
BC
2019
IBC /IRC
�-1-112011
Policv Repot
am
WA
2018
State Building
Code
Ordinan I EV Ready space/du IN. IV Ready. 1-8 stalls (all), 7-25
125815 ce (6 spaces), 125 (20 %). Garages 20 %
1 EV-Capable Space per
dmilino unit
1 EV Ready Space per dwelling
5% EV Installed, l0%EV Ready,
unit
40%EV Cansole(10*spaced
1 EV Ready Space per dwelling
unit
1 EV Ready Space per dwelling
10W % EV Ready, may use load
unit
management to meet requirement.
WA Buildino
N.
For Group B, Group RA hotel and
See multi -family
Cade Ch 4
motel only, Gronp R-2 occupancies:
Section 429
5% of parking spaces shall provide
EV Charging Infrastrucure. EV
Charging Infrastructure may be EVSE
or EV Capable.
Size electrical room to serve 20%of
spaces.
For surface parking M from building,
subsurface raceways required to
future EV spaces (but sn exception).
same 10 % EV Ready
Determination that added electrical
Goals: all new residential parting is electrified; half or new non-maidntial perking is electrified. Load
load would Dotter local utility
management indicated as justification for 5:1 ratio far multifamily parking (provde 100%.—nag. b
infrastructure on utility service which
pmAding capacity and wiring for 20%). Wiring requirements?
would require n-property tmnsfomw,
a 2) require an upgrade to existing
electrical service. All —fa reduction
in required spaces to the rammum
zethatdcesn'trequire
ch nges a option reduce to Level
1 or number of covered stalls
5% EV Capable
5%EV Installed, 10%EV Ready,
40% EV Capable (25* spaced
10% EV Ready
Venccuvar has astalb, shut load menagement partomance abundance which requires a minimum
performance of 12kwh per EVSE on a mnagnrent system ofpeer nelvrakedlinterconnnled
EVSE for load managemenVlcad sharing capabilities over an 8 hour —might period, assuming all
parkin spaces are in use by a charging EV.
N. See multi -family
Group R and B occupancy w/ 120
spaces exempt.
In lieu of aurfe—m.nted raceways,
permanent markings indicating
pathways and capped sleeves through
wall assemblies maybe provided.
c,>
CO
a)
N
C
O
L
Y
ci
MR
W
m
E
E
O
0
C
O
L
O
O
U
a�
O
U
FU
C
O
aD
U
U
N
r
C
d
E
t
V
f3
r
r-+
a
r
r
a
Packet Pg. 50
8.A.b
RCC EV Ready Codes Research Summary 17
Interviews Conducted
Interviewees
• Duane Jonlin, City of Seattle DO
• Kelly O'Callahan, PSCAA
• Brad Shipley and Shane Hope, City of Edmonds
• Danielle Kievit, PSE
• Andrea Pratt, City of Seattle OSE
• Jim Blaisdell, Charge Northwest
• Matt Egan and Preston Kilman, ChargePoint
• Eric Smith, SEMA Connect
Packet Pg. 51
9.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/9/2021
Review of Extended Agenda
Staff Lead: N/A
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Rob Chave
Background/History
The Planning Board maintains an extended agenda of future topics.
Staff Recommendation
Review the extended agenda.
Narrative
The current extended agenda is attached.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Extended Agenda
Packet Pg. 52
9.A.a
Items and Dates are subject to change
pAMM BOARD
WExtended Agenda
�"`�'g9� June 09, 2021
Meeting Item
tune, LUL1
June 1. State legislative update
9 2. Possible EV Charging regulations and standards
June
23
IUIy, LUL"1
1. Climate Action Plan and Outreach update
2. (Tentative) Tree programs and regulations: update on Council
review and direction
3. Review of EV Charging regulations and standards
4. Introduction of Bicycle storage code options
July 1. (Tentative) Public Hearing: EV Charging regulations and standards
14 2. (Tentative) Housing issues and code development overview /
update
3. (Tentative) Tree programs and regulations: discussion on issues
and code options for short-term review (e.g. Heritage Trees)
July 1. (Tentative) Tree programs and regulations: discussion on issues
28 and code options for short-term review, including public outreach
efforts (e.g. Heritage Trees)
2. Review of Bicycle storage code options
August, LULi
August 1. Climate Action Plan and Outreach update
11 2. Potential public hearing date for draft Bicycle storage code
amendments
Q
Packet Pg. 53
items ana liates are subiect
9.A.a
o change
August 1. Potential public hearing on Bicycle storage code amendments
25 2. (Tentative) Tree programs and regulations: issues and code review
(including developed properties, Heritage Trees and Landmark
Trees), with public outreach schedule
5eptemper, LULL
September 1.
8 2.
September 1.
22
October, 2021
Climate Action Plan and Outreach review and update
Update on Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS Plan)
[Next update on November 1011]
October 1. TBD
13 2
October 1. Update on Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS Plan)
27 [Next update on November 1011]
a
Packet Pg. 54
9.A.a
Items and Dates are subject to change
Pending 1. Implementation / code updates concerning trees and the UFMP
2021 2. Climate Action Plan update and public outreach
3. Housing policies and implementation (incl ADU regs)
4. Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan
5. Comprehensive Plan update preparation and gap analysis
6. Subdivision code updates
7. Community Development Code Amendments / Re -Organization
8. Neighborhood Center Plans & implementation (esp. 5 Corners)
9. Low impact / stormwater code review and updates
10. Sustainable development code(s) review and updates
11. Further Highway 99 Implementation, including:
✓ Potential for "urban center" or transit -oriented
design/development strategies
✓ Parking standards
Recurring 1. Election of Officers (V meeting in December)
Topics 2. Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Department Reports & Updates
3. Joint meeting with City Council — April or as needed
4. Development Activity Report
5.
a
Packet Pg. 55