ICE-ing Superchargers

[Greshnab]

We don't allow non-handicapped "customers" to park in certain spots. If EVs parked at gas pumps while EV customer was shopping in store for 30 minutes I bet the EV customer would get hassled if not towed.

In many locations, EVs left at fast charger passed actual charge process get billed for excess time at charger but ICE should be allowed to block chargers without consequence?

we also clearly mark handicap spots.. and pickup spots etc... if Buck-EE's doesn't want non charging cars to park there.. they can mark the spots.. until they do no one really has a right to complain...

 

[Coolbreeze704]

Or just fire the mall security for not calling the tow truck. Or better, install electronically-activated bollards that block the car from leaving with a phone number ‘they’ can call to get out which goes to the tow company.

Just reassign mall cops as stall cops?

 

[Diehard]

If the Gobmint fail us on enforcement, we need an App that EV owners can use to upload a Geotagged photo of the offending vehicle with time stamp (including license plate). Repeat offenders will be on a hit list available on the app with a bounty. Let the games begin.

 

[cvalue13]

Joking aside are there anything cooking at state or federal level that can be enforced by police at some point in future? Leaving it to people’s sense of decency can only lead to violence somewhere.

it’s not necessary, nor might it be as productive as we’d think

It’s not necessary because on private property these businesses can enforce parking as they see fit (setting aside Fed ADA constraints), so long as requisite signage is posted

it’s possibly not productive, because it may take choice and accommodation away from the property owners who might not agree to lease space to eg Tesla if forced to reserve those spots

as mentioned earlier, if Buc ee’s intended to reserve these spots only for EVs they could do so by posting the required signage (and then enforcing towing)

that these spots lack signage, almost certainly isn’t an oversight - it’s most likely that this Buc ee’s would only lease to Tesla on a non-reserved space basis (because we can assume Tesla prefers/asked for that)

In which case, it comes down to only convincing Buc ee’s of its errored thinking in not making these spots reserved (signage and enforcement)

arguably easier than dealing with state/municipal governments in TN on the matter

 

[Ogre]

We don't allow non-handicapped "customers" to park in certain spots. If EVs parked at gas pumps while EV customer was shopping in store for 30 minutes I bet the EV customer would get hassled if not towed.

In many locations, EVs left at fast charger passed actual charge process get billed for excess time at charger but ICE should be allowed to block chargers without consequence?

I’m not suggesting it is ok.

Just pointing out it is inevitable and that the stores have zero motivation to enforce this.

Don’t put chargers in attractive parking areas. There is a reason Handicapped spaces are in the close up spots. There is no reason charger stalls should be close to the front door.

 

[Diehard]

it’s not necessary, nor might it be as productive as we’d think

It’s not necessary because on private property these businesses can enforce parking as they see fit (setting aside Fed ADA constraints), so long as requisite signage is posted

it’s possibly not productive, because it may take choice and accommodation away from the property owners who might not agree to lease space to eg Tesla if forced to reserve those spots

as mentioned earlier, if Buc ee’s intended to reserve these spots only for EVs they could do so by posting the required signage (and then enforcing towing)

that these spots lack signage, almost certainly isn’t an oversight - it’s most likely that this Buc ee’s would only lease to Tesla on a non-reserved space basis (because we can assume Tesla prefers/asked for that)

In which case, it comes down to only convincing Buc ee’s of its errored thinking in not making these spots reserved (signage and enforcement)

arguably easier than dealing with state/municipal governments in TN on the matter

I know almost nothing about law and am not sure how legally feasible this is if at all but the distinction that could make a difference is if the chargers are for private use not if it is on private property. I am thinking, the same way the electricians have to abide by some rules when they install something on my private property, installation of those signs at public use chargers on private property should be required. In other words the installer could be fined or their license revoked if they didn’t install the sign. Property owner would have to indicate on their application if it is for their own employees or for public use. Again not sure if there is any conflict between this and existing state or federal laws but if it could be done, the consistency of everyone knowing what the rules are for public chargers no matter where they are could reduce friction and increase usability.

Of course if the problem is statistically insignificant, making rules is unnecessary but if the problem is on the rise to become significant, the earlier the controls are in place the better. I don’t do much public charging but I have seen some obnoxious ICEing that made me want to do something and that was before I owned an EV.

 

[cvalue13]

when they install something on my private property, installation of those signs at public use chargers on private property should be required

yes this is the disconnect

Tesla has leased space from Buc ee’s

Buc ee’s can pretty much lease that space on their own terms**

So in this instance, as a base case, it is fully up to Buc ee’s whether to have Tesla chargers whatsoever - because the laws are not going to require Buc’ ee’s to do so.

So if you then impose laws that say in effect “if you do choose to have charger, you must X, Y, Z” then it could possibly cool Buc ee’s interest in agreeing to having chargers

in this instance at the Buc ee’s in TN, then, it would boil down to the option of having a Buc ee’s with no chargers, or have charger’s but that Buc ee’s doesn’t want to be marked/enforced as reserved

This decision tree for the landowners is why above I said such laws may not be productive, if they cause landowners to decide the terms of having chargers are more than they care for

and so it’s down to making the landowners care - which takes me back to our idea of EV sit-ins at the TN Buc ee’s

because I’d guess those stalls don’t have ICE-only / towing enforced signs at the gas pumps, either

**subject to federal/state laws on accessibility under ADA, building code, etc

 

[AlDente]

As I understand it, in these commercial parking lot locations Tesla has an agreement with the host landowner/facility and Tesla builds/owns the Superchargers and all associated hardware. Tesla has the ability to write use rules into their agreement but enforcement would be impossible unless local jurisdictions created laws and penalties with appropriate signage.

This was obviously an edge case but when the NACS expansion increases Supercharger use, steps will need to be taken to deal with deliberate ICEing of BEV charger stalls or to quote Robocop, "there will be trouble".

 

[AlDente]

I’m not suggesting it is ok.

Just pointing out it is inevitable and that the stores have zero motivation to enforce this.

Don’t put chargers in attractive parking areas. There is a reason Handicapped spaces are in the close up spots. There is no reason charger stalls should be close to the front door.

They wouldn't host Supercharges if they had zero motivation. Tesla owners often frequent even cheesy stores during charge time and so are good for business. Also, Tesla owners are mostly gainfully employed or financially able to buy/not steal products hence, good potential customers.

Any asshat that intentionally parks in a dedicated BEV space is probably not as good a customer as the BEV owner who, due to the necessary charging process, is held captive for 10-40 minutes.

 

[cvalue13]

As I understand it, in these commercial parking lot locations Tesla has an agreement with the host landowner/facility and Tesla builds/owns the Superchargers and all associated hardware. Tesla has the ability to write use rules into their agreement but enforcement would be impossible unless local jurisdictions created laws and penalties with appropriate signage.

Yes, Tesla has an 'agreement' of course.

And agreement terms are variable.

They enter into the agreement with the landowner, in this case Buc ee's

Tesla has 'the ability to write use rules into their agreement' only to the extent Buc ee's agrees.

I could negotiate to rent a house and 'have the ability' to right into the draft agreement anything I choose, but that doesn't mean the landlord will agree and rent me the property.

One of two things must be true of this Buc ee's parking lot:

(1) Tesla's lease with Buc ee's allows Tesla or requires Buc ee's to post "EV only parking" signs, or

(2) Tesla's lease with Buc ee's doesn't allow Tesla or require Buc ee's to do so

Given how parking lot engineering, punch lists, etc., work, I suppose (1) above is possible but is a tailing item that hasn't been completed yet given this location only opened ~10 days ago - but the existence of other signage (eg handicapped parking signage) would tend to suggest otherwise

 

[firsttruck]

As I understand it, in these commercial parking lot locations Tesla has an agreement with the host landowner/facility and Tesla builds/owns the Superchargers and all associated hardware. Tesla has the ability to write use rules into their agreement but enforcement would be impossible unless local jurisdictions created laws and penalties with appropriate signage.

This was obviously an edge case but when the NACS expansion increases Supercharger use, steps will need to be taken to deal with deliberate ICEing of BEV charger stalls or to quote Robocop, "there will be trouble".

At chargers there has already been some fights (and shootings ) between EV users so unless things are managed I would not be surprised by incidents between EV users and those that ICE ( block) chargers.

 

[firsttruck]

.....

Given how parking lot engineering, punch lists, etc., work, I suppose (1) above is possible but is a tailing item that hasn't been completed yet given this location only opened ~10 days ago - but the existence of other signage (eg handicapped parking signage) would tend to suggest otherwise

I don't think those two are equal.

Handicapped parking signage is probably legally mandated and has to be in place before goverment gives permission to open.

Right now signage for chargers is probable not government mandated and lack of signage would not prevent granting of permission to open.

So it is possible the Bucee/Tesla contract specifies that there be reserved parking signage for chargers but the signage has not been installed yet.

 

[SSonnentag]

Does a parked car exceed the tow rating of the Cybertruck? Asking for a friend.

 

[cvalue13]

I don't think those two are equal.

Handicapped parking signage is probably legally mandated and has to be in place before goverment gives permission to open.

Right now signage for chargers is probable not government mandated and lack of signage would not prevent granting of permission to open.

So it is possible the Bucee/Tesla contract specifies that there be reserved parking signage for chargers but the signage has not been installed yet.

your response suggests I’ve said things that I’ve not said

Handicapped parking signage/markings are ~mandated for opening. Signage for exclusive charging is not remotely government mandated. It is possible the latter install is trailing the former, and the exclusive charging signage simply isn’t installed yet.

feel free to probability-adjust however you see fit

 

[Diehard]

I think part of the problem is the human interface. If the charging station looks like a parking spot, people will park there. If it looks like a gas station, chances are they may connect the dots that although an EV is staying there a long time, it is juicing and not parked.