My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 10 14
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2021 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 10 14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/11/2021 5:01:15 PM
Creation date
10/11/2021 2:40:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
10/14/2021
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />September 9, 2021 <br />Page 5 of 6 <br />Diehl stated that they always had the off -ramp of the PUD waiver. <br />Discussion of the wiring process during installation. <br />Howe stated that he wanted to recognize the stress put on utility companies and <br />wondered if a 100% rate for multi -family would have the necessary electricity. <br />Hoefner replied that that was a problem for the electric utilities to deal with and they <br />knew that EVs were coming in huge numbers. <br />Brauneis agreed with Commissioner Hoefner that it was in the utility companies' plans <br />and was their job to figure out. <br />Discussion on percentages, in which it was weighed whether waivers could be used to <br />encourage people to higher rates and the limitations of aspirational language was <br />discussed, and the commissioners discussed a 35% requirement. <br />Diehl stated that going from 0 to up to 35% required was a pretty significant jump and <br />could be revisited down the line. <br />Hoefner proposed 5%/10%/50% for multi -family to recognize changing technology and <br />that not many folks today used EVs but that was expected to go up. <br />Howe stated that multi -family should have a high percentage of "capable" with conduits <br />in and he wondered how the hotel/motel use would have to be installed incentive -wise. <br />Hoefner stated that the problem chicken and egg, problem is to get the capacity there <br />so the hotel is ready to go and put in the charging station in. <br />Hoefner stated that they were trying to get the capacity high enough for eventual high <br />demand, and that it might be cost -prohibitive to retrofit. <br />Brauneis stated that the hotels were more closely linked to the market and suggested <br />10/10/40% for discussion. <br />Hoefner confirmed that his proposed spread was for multi -family and hotel/motel, <br />though he did not feel strongly about the hotel/motel level. He stated that they should go <br />as high as they're comfortable for multi -family with parking lots because why should <br />people there have less access than people in single-family homes. <br />Discussion about separating hotel/motel and multi -family categories, in which Hoefner <br />stated that single and multi -family units should have the same amount of access and <br />that he was not as concerned with hotel/motel amount being the same. <br />Diehl stated that he was fine with the 5/10/50% spread. <br />Brauneis proposed 10/10/50%. <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.