2022-05-05 Windward Exh C (Item 3 County Council Initiated PL-CCI-2022-001)

Home

each type of EV station shall be accessible. In addition, the opinion articulates design requirements for an ADA accessible EV parking stall. So, in this case Section 1. C. of Councilmember Kimball's proposed amendments addresses this by adding the requirement that at least one of the designated EV parking spaces shall be an ADA accessible EV install. The Director agrees with this proposed amendment and recommends adopting this change. Recommendation 910 under Section 25-4-54.1 (h), we asked that the bill define what is considered a"reasonable" fee. The reason for that is, if you look at the HRS section, it allows owners to charge a fee it doesn't use the qualifier"reasonable", and the Director feels like the qualifier"reasonable" is somewhat subjective and difficult to enforce. So, we suggested that the County Council consider adding a fee cap or a fee schedule based on the number of kilowatt hours charged. To address this in her proposed amendments, Councilmember Kimball proposes to delete the word"reasonable" and so it's just that they can charge a fee. The Director agrees with this proposed amendment and recommends adopting this change. Recommendation 911, under Section 25-4-54.2 (a), consider including a ratio, formula, or equivalency table to compare the charging capacity between alternating current Level 2 chargers and direct current fast chargers. Again, this section is the one that gives the Director authority to require fewer EV chargers as long as the same charging capacity is there by using direct current fast chargers. The Director feels like this tool will help the Planning Department to determine charging capacity between the different charger types. According to Section III. C., Councilmember Kimball's proposed amendments, its address by proposing a ratio allowing one (1) Direct Current fast charger to replace six (6) Level 2 plugs, as long as there is at least 1 other Level 2 plug to accommodate electric vehicles that cannot charge on Direct Current fast chargers. The Director agrees with this proposed amendment and recommends adopting this change, and then, finally, to Recommendation # 12. While Section 25-4-54.2 (b)(1) allows for an exemption to the requirements of 25-4-54.1 if the location does not have established electrical service or lacks adequate infrastructure to provide sufficient electrical current for EV charging implementation, there's no similar exemption if internet access is unavailable at that place. Other reason for this is the bill requires both the alternating current Level 2 charger and direct current fast charger to be"networked" or"network capable"respectively, but there's no requirement in the bill for an internet connection to track charger use or to be remotely accessible. So, the Director wants the County Council to consider clarifying whether an internet connection is a requirement for implementation of the proposed bill. And so those cover again the Director's 12 recommendations and again, many of them were already addressed by Councilmember Kimball's communication. There were a few more additional proposed amendments in the communication, so they are as follows . 7 EXHIBIT C