AgdaPkt 2020-01-13 Joint - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 5 of 285 Utility Infrastructure: Will PG&E provide a Service Level Agreement for electric? Has PCE or have other Community Choice Aggregation organizations broached this while advocating for Reach Codes? The concern is that PG&E is slow on electric installations and developers often absorb the costs to get them installed. Does this make the cost of development higher and slow progress? PCE reports that requests for upgrades to the distribution grid due to EV charging installations (more load than electric buildings) are rare. However, they anticipate the need to upgrade the distribution grid may rise with the increased focus on electrification, and that PG&E's responses to requests for upgrades are taking longer than they did in the past. PG&E has committed to support electrification and is openly supporting all -electric reach codes due to concern about stranded natural gas assets and rising costs of maintaining the natural gas system. PCE plans to engage the California Public Utilities Commission to both reduce costs and improve response timeframes. Goals: What are the overall goals in the adoption of the Reach Codes? The overall goals are to a) eliminate fossil fuels from buildings, and b) ensure buildings allow individuals to easily choose EVs. There are multiple models for implementation of Reach Codes. For building electrification, 3 models have emerged: Natural gas "ban": As adopted by Berkeley, San Jose and Morgan Hill, this does not permit any natural gas hook-up for specific building types. All -electric "required": As adopted by Menlo Park, Mountain View and Pacifica, this requires certain uses to be all -electric. There is some variance in approaches but the key concept is that space and water heating is all -electric because these are the most significant GHG sources. Exclusions vary between jurisdictions but include exceptions for cooking, commercial kitchens, science and research labs, ADUs and others. c. Electric "preferred": As adopted by San Mateo, this provides two tracks — electric or mixed -fuel. It provides the most flexibility but is more complex to implement and past codes in this approach have yielded only very modest outcomes (Palo Alto). For electric vehicles, approaches vary but the major distinctions are outlined in the following list. The proposed Redwood City EV model is based on 100% of dwellings having an EV Ready space: a. EV -Capable spaces: Generally, this provides for sufficient panel capacity and conduit. The property owner may then complete the circuit at some point in the future. EV drivers are not able to charge until the circuit is complete. Even assuming a resident has an EV -Capable spot, in practice this means that someone who wishes to get a vehicle cannot do so unless they or the property owner to prepare the spot. Since many rental property owners do not wish to provide the service, this is frequently insurmountable. b. EV -Ready spaces: EV spaces are ready to plug-in. No action required by the property owner and/or resident. Page 5 of 12 City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road, Redwood City, CA. 94063 Tel: 650-780-7000 www.redwoodcity.ore 257