Model S

30 Minute General Parking at some superchargers?

edited November -1 in Model S
I was at the Vacaville super charger yesterday and some of the spots are marked "30 minute general parking". I was also at the Roseville super charger today and some of the spots were marked
"60 minute general parking"

What does "general parking" mean? Does that mean that anyone can park there or that Teslas are limited
to the time limit stated? Or, do the chargers in these stalls turn off after that amount of time?



  • edited November -1
    You've got to spread the love and share.

    All Tesla Patents are shared so why not Supercharger parking space?

    No. The chargers do not turn off because of the signs.

    The chargers are on but the sign encourage ICE to take those spots so you cannot reach charging cables.

    Actually, most Supercharger spaces belong to private businesses who cater to ICE and business owners feel better if we agree to share.

    It's just business!
  • edited November -1
    Did you have to wait for a spot to charge, or was a bay available?

    East Greenwich, RI same thing. 8 chargers; 4 are 30 minute general parking.

    I see no issue with it. Every time I have been there, I've been the only one charging.

    Assume the 4 spots had ICE, and the other 4 are in use. Another Tesla comes to charge. Assuming all ICE stay for the full 30-minute limit, the typical wait would be 8 minutes.

    Also, the chargers are arranged so the 30-minute spots are the "B" bays.

    I'm also confident as there are more Teslas, and the chargers are more heavily used, Tesla and the property owners will work something out.

    In the meantime, in the dozens of times I have supercharged, I've NEVER been iced out of a supercharger, or had to wait.
  • edited November -1
    Tesla is doing this in AZ. They gently try to send a message that these SC spaces are for Teslas only but recognize the reality that a special road event of some sort might need extra parking spaces, so they don't say "EVs only". However, if you need to charge in this state and an ICE is in that spot, you can ask them to move and if they don't, you can call the police. It's a $350 ticket for ICEing someone out of a charging space. We all have to be flexible with plots of commercial real estate and I think Tesla is trying to strike an equitable balance. That said, if I need to charge and can't, I'll avail myself of the AZ Revised Stature and call the cops. I have never heard of this being necessary, but it could happen.
  • edited November -1
    @Tam | JULY 9, 2014 wrote:
    <i>You've got to spread the love and share.</i>

    <i>Actually, most Supercharger spaces belong to private businesses who cater to ICE and business owners feel better if we agree to share.</i>

    <i>It's just business!</i>

    Tesla owners paid for the right to charge at Superchargers.
    We rely on Superchargers to make road trips.
    We deserve working, available Superchargers because that's what we signed up for and paid for.

    It is absolutely unacceptable for Tesla to make a deal with another business that includes accepting ICEing of "Supercharger" spaces as a normal business practice. At best, that's bait and switch. Incompatible with Tesla's commitment to superior service for its customers.

    When hundreds of thousands of Teslas are on the road, we will need SC spaces devoted exclusively to charging owners' batteries.

    SCs aren't cheap. We need plenty of them available to charge Teslas.

    Ron :)
  • edited November -1
    Grinnin' +1 but it's best to show hardship when complaining, so let's collect cases of ICE'ing caused by these signs. I haven't yet seen it, but I expect to soon, since I have seen ICE'ing that was tending toward interference. The bigger problem so far is lack of use of EV chargers, leading to criticisms that they are interfering with general parking. Of course Tesla should be fighting that fight for us but it will help if we all get out there and charge, charge, charge!
  • edited November -1
    @Tam - Are you suggesting Tesla should install half as many SC stalls to comply with the business that allows Tesla to use their land?

    Perhaps Tesla should buy a plot of land away from any conveniences so they can have complete restricted access just for Tesla? Of course the cost might double, so Tesla could only afford to put in half as many stalls.

    I agree it's not ideal, but Tesla is working with businesses. I've yet to find it a problem, and it sounds like it's fairly rare for owners to be ICEd out in these situations.

    As more and more Teslas show up and use nearby businesses, it may show those businesses that we are valued customers and may warrant more Tesla only stalls. More likely the parking is limited and the business doesn't want to piss off other customers by have a bunch of parking spaces their non-Tesla customers can't use - especially if they are empty while the rest of the lot is full.

    One thing you can do is to promote yourself as a valued customer. Let the local businesses know you are charging by talking to them or wearing a Tesla hat. When local businesses see the value they may be more willing to have more Tesla only stalls.
  • edited November -1
    People in general will not use the 30min spot unless there is nothing else available. I think it's OK since most of those superchargers aren't that busy anyway.
  • edited November -1
    be careful about the Revised Stature. I hear it's quite a major surgical procedure.
  • edited November -1
    @Thom EM | JULY 10, 2014

    <i>Grinnin' +1 but it's best to show hardship when complaining, so let's collect cases of ICE'ing caused by these signs. I haven't yet seen it, but I expect to soon, since I have seen ICE'ing that was tending toward interference. </i>

    It sure as hell will be a hardship for me if/when I pull up to a SC with 25 miles of range left in my battery and find zero SC stalls available because some folks are treating SC stalls as 'general parking' spaces. In that situation I'd be effectively stranded.

    I don't think SC ICEing is a major problem <b>now<b/>. I hope it never is a major problem.
    However, if the rule is that anyone who wants to can occupy SC stalls whenever they find that convenient, I very definitely expect to become a major problem. I'm trying to get Tesla's attention to what I foresee as a potential problem with serious adverse implications, hoping they'll take action to control SC ICEing <b>before</b> it becomes a major problem.

    We have under 40,000 Teslas out there now in the U.S. When (not if) we have 500,000 Teslas on the road, we'll be looking at a very different situation. Managing the SC system effectively through the next 5 years will be a challenge under the best of credible assumptions -- even with zero ICEing.

    I've raised my concern with Tesla to the executive level. So far, I'm not aware of any Tesla commitment to deal with this concern. You seem to think I'm being unreasonable. If that's the case, please explain your thinking. Can you please tell me why I shouldn't be concerned?

    Ron :)
  • edited November -1
    Considering the business owner is donating the parking slots, Tesla probably gets a choice of a) 4 dedicated slots or b) 8 slots, some of which are shared.

    At the end of the day, I think "b" ends up being the better option in that it gives you potentially more charging slots.

    If you think Tesla should be buying the land, then recognize that is going to directly translate into fewer SCs out there as the company's capital and operating costs will markedly increase for the overall SC program.

    As @Thom says, give Tesla data to work with - if you get ICE'd out of an SC slot, call Tesla. If they see a trend, they can work with the business owner to rectify it.

  • edited November -1
    @grinnin - just keep grinnin, enjoy the ride, and no waiting at superchargers. When usage increases, business owners will gladly work with Tesla on changing the arrangement.

    For now, they don't want to give up 8 parking spaces when 1 or maybe 2 is in use. Seems very reasonable to me.

    There are enough current problems (lack of rear-seat cup holders) more important for Tesla to focus on than worry about what may happen with superchargers a few years down the road.
  • edited November -1
    8 slots
    4 dedicated
    4 optional public 30 minutes

    When Tesla pulls up - fill the public slots first

    Better to have 4 empty dedicated than 4 ICE'd
  • edited November -1
    +1 @hsadler. Fill the shared spaces (if available) first!
  • edited November -1
    State, county, and municipal regulations specify the precise number of total parking spaces must be available for public use in shopping centers or other business locations. There are provisions for a specific number of those to be reserved, both as a minumum and as a percentage of the total, for handicapped accessibility. No such provisions are in place for electric vehicle charging spaces. That is why some spaces at Superchargers may at times be marked for general parking. The larger the parking lot, the more likely Supercharger spaces will be exclusive to Tesla owners.
  • edited November -1
    The Newark DE supercharger has the 4 stalls clearly marked "No parking except for electric vehicle charging" with a big P with a slash through it...There's about 8 more spaces next to them for EV parking, but the language isn't as strong to say absolutely no non-EV parking, and they are always parked with ICE...I wonder if they have plans to expand that area to 12 stalls or more in the future, and if they do I would hope they would remain general "no parking", but for now I only really saw cars parked in a stall with the driver still inside to move it if necessary, and that's about the worst I've run into, nothing like the pickup truck + trailer parked sideways across numerous stalls with the driver denying it was his!
  • edited November -1
    I don't think Tesla will continue to add stations indefinitely at a pace that keeps the current ratio. More likely, it will be to increase convenience. At the same time, I think that the majority of charging will be done at night. More and more parking lots at offices and hotels will have slower chargers that work for an overnight stay or a day at the office. Supercharging will be needed for longer trips, and the current problem is stations, not spaces. It's not a question of waiting 20 minutes for somebody to finish charging, but driving more than 20 minutes to get to a station.
  • edited November -1
    Harris Ranch has two spots like this. Per a previous suggestion, with all bays free, i took one of those.

    Note, they have decommisioned the solo one by the SUBWAY? AFAIK the roadster/MS one is still active.
  • edited November -1
    Red Sage is correct about the zoning, so Tesla gets around this limitation by allowing for "general parking" aka "ICing" for 30, 60 or so minutes. For both Vacaville and Roseville, you have to go out of your way to park there, even on a busy day, so no such problem. However, other locales may experience interlopers.
  • edited November -1
    This isn't going to change for existing superchargers. As an owner of shopping centers with Superchargers, I can tell you that there are reciprocal easement agreements on all of these that cost tens of thousands of dollars per location in legal fees for execution.

    There are always specific concessions or agreements will all of the affected retailers in each location, on top of the easement agreement executed between TM and the property owner. The property owner cannot agree to put in a Supercharger without also getting the written easement amendment from each tenant on the parking field. The legals fees for these are huge and not subject to amendment just because TM wants to evolve its SC restrictions based on actual experience.

    As mentioned above, there are also municipal parking requirements in most locations around the U.S. - Most cities require that for every retail tenant you have in your center, you have one parking space per 250 square feet. This is referred to in zoning regulations as the “Required Parking Ratio” and will usually look like this, “1:250” or “1/250”. If I have a 6,000 SF space leased to a retail tenant, the parking lot has to have 24 parking spaces just for this one tenant.

    For the types of uses that the municipality considers parking-intensive, the required ratios are stricter. Examples include restaurants, gyms, arcades, movie theaters, etc. The parking ratios vary in each municipality. For example, at Santana Row, restaurants, they required us to put in one parking space for every 45 SF of sit-down seating area (dining area), and one parking space per 250 SF for the remainder of the restaurant (the kitchen, the restroom, the hallways, etc.). No property owner can willy-nilly begin removing parking spaces by restricting their use for EV charging. And one thing I can promise you - NO developer ever adds a a single parking slot that they are not required to put in by either municipal code or the tenant leases. So there are no "extra" spots sitting around for EV charging in existing parking fields.
  • edited November -1
    <b>PD:</b> Perfect explanation! It's been a long time since I had to do facility development plans of any sort. That is exactly what I remember about them though. Parking regulations can be a real stickler, for sure!
  • edited November -1
    I was at a charger today, Albert Lea I think, where several are labeled general parking from 11pm to 8 am. Makes sense for a hotel.
  • edited November -1
    @Pungoteague_Dave In the situation where Tesla has arranged with a shopping mall's management to install 4 "Tesla Only" charging stalls and an additonal 4 charging stalls that allow "General" parking for 30 minutes who is responsible for enforcing the restrictions, and in most cases, what steps can the mall take to enforce the rules?

    If it is the mall management what is the best course of action for Tesla owners to pursue should they discover abuse?
  • edited November -1
    Paul Blart
  • edited November -1
    Let's see what he does when a Harley blocks his Segway charging spot.
  • edited November -1
    @Pungoteague_Dave | AUGUST 6, 2014

    <i>"So there are no "extra" spots sitting around for EV charging in existing parking fields."

    To the extent that the SC system relies on such places for SC sites, this is a problem. Possibly Tesla should look for other places for SCs to minimize ICEing.

    Ron :)
Sign In or Register to comment.