other noise wil affect my sleep. I could also be disturbed by people waiting for their car to
charge, perhaps fil ing the time talking or listening to their car stereo with their car windows
down. Because it is only residents' parking during work hours, potentially people could be
sitting in their cars by my bedroom window for long periods of time in the evenings and
weekends. - Finding a parking space is already difficult in Stafford St and Port St. Taking
away the two proposed spaces wil make it even more difficult. Given that the proposed
residents' parking restrictions are for Mon-Fri 8am- 6pm, and that there aren't many places
to charge an EV in the city, the proposed charging station could increase current parking
problems by encouraging more people to park in the area. - The summary could have
included more information, such as how long it is estimated charging wil take per vehicle
and whether cars can continue to remain there once charging is complete. As those using
the charger have no off-street parking, wil they be inclined to move their vehicles when fully
charged? Or wil the few (currently none) EV owners in the street end up having a park
reserved just for them? -Having moved to Port St from Island Bay in part to avoid living with
the cycleway fiasco, I am appalled that yet another transport related experiment based on
environmental virtue signalling could take place right outside my house. I have little
confidence that residents' views are really listened to by the WCC when proposals such as
this are put forward. Surely wider streets with fewer houses on the road frontage are where
charging stations should be located, such as the car park in front of the Pirie St play area,
the cul-de-sac at the top of Majoribanks St, or by Waitangi Park? Council car parks such as
the one under the City Library would also be a good alternative.
Yes
16 - Martin Krafft: Stafford Street is up a steep hil , and there is little to no off-street
parking available on the street. Having a public charging infrastructure installed would make
it possible for residents to consider electric vehicles (we'd buy one right away), as otherwise
the logistics of e.g. dropping kids/groceries off at the top of Port Street, taking the car to a
charger, and then walking back (possibly with kids who cannot be left unattended) would
make this impossible.
Yes
17 -
: We support the installation of the EV charging stations in Stafford
Street. On street EV charging wil be important for our neighbourhood in the future as we
transition to electric vehicles and have limited or no off street parking.
Yes
23 -
: (This is the one we applied for). I've had informal discussions with
neighbours in Stafford St, and other neighbours in Mount Victoria more generally who are
supportive of the council doing this. We know lots of parents through our kids in kindy and
school in the suburb and there's a general feeling that a push from council, while may
encounter some initial resistance, is a good thing in our suburb as a lot of people wil want to
move to EVs in the next few years.
Yes
33 -
: As an EV owner and Wellington citizen, I am fully in support of the
WCC initiative to make EV charging stations available on-street for residents who live in
areas with no off-street parking. Forward thinking initiatives like this remove barriers to EVs
and allow us to transition to a zero carbon future.
Yes
49 -
: Dear Wellington City Council, Regarding 34 Traffic Resolutions
numbered TR69-18 through TR102-18. I support all of the above proposals by Wellington
City Council to install electric vehicle chargers and make the car parking there for electric-
vehicles only. Further, the number of electric vehicles wil continue to increase more and
more rapidly over a relatively short number of years until electric vehicles are a dominant
fraction of the vehicle fleet, after which the uptake rate wil start to fall off. So, many, many
more of these charging facilities wil be required very soon indeed. Both the council and the
public run the risk of being surprised by the demand if planning is not conducted with great
urgency over the next couple of years. There is no time to waste. The charging technology
should be chosen to support both the majority and the widest range of electric vehicles. At
the moment, Nissan Leafs (imported used from Japan) appear to heavily dominate the NZ
electric vehicle fleet and this is likely to continue for at least the near future (there are around
700 Nissan Leafs for sale on Trade Me at present). It is imperative that the charging
technology be chosen, first, to provide the best possible charging experience for Nissan Leaf
drivers and secondly to future proof the charging infrastructure. Both AC (level 2) charging
and DC rapid (level 3) charging should be planned for and provided by council initiatives, as
both are needed to best cover different types of travel situation - where a destination (such
as a home or workplace) has been reached and where the travel is to continue with only a
short delay. Al actions taken by council on behalf of citizens and visitors should not preclude
the provision of charging either by multiple commercial providers or by the direct intervention
of local, regional or central government or by other organisations. Cosy relationships that
support monopoly provision should be avoided unless it is certain the public wil benefit in
clear and identifiable ways and that support for the monopoly can be withdrawn by the
council at its discretion if the provider is leveraging the monopoly unfairly or anti-
competitively. Yours sincerely,
Yes
75 -
: I am supportive of the proposal to introduce two parks with EV
Charging Station on Stafford Street. However, I note that these wil be reserved for residents
only. Although I understand that these parks wil replace existing residents only parks, it
seems contrary to the idea of promoting the use of sustainable travel to limit access to any
EV parking space. This technology is stil in its early iterations and adopters are stil in the
minority therefore the need to recharge unexpectedly is greatest and we would never dream
of limiting access to a petrol station! Furthermore, on a fairness point, since all rate payers
are contributing to the installation of these stations, I think that every visitor to and resident of
this city should be given equal access to any charging station without restriction (in addition,
this would further signal Wellington's embrace of sustainable travel for all). Should it
transpire that due to the lack of restrictions all these stations are too popular, then great -
this would mean that there would be enough demand for more parks to be added to the
current infrastructure.
Yes
89 -
: We strongly support electric vehicle charging stations. Electric
vehicle uptake wil be key to New Zealand meeting its international greenhouse gas
commitments. We think this proposal wil encourage others to purchase electric vehicles. I
also suspect that street side charging stations wil discourage DIY charging solutions, such
as running a long chord to the house. Such solutions are unlikely to be safe or perhaps even
legal (for the record - this is something we don't do!).
No
136 -
:
In response to the notification regarding "Proposed Traffic Resolution (TR 77 - 18 Stafford Street) dated 22nd
June 2018:
I live at
. As the Wellington City Council website states
(see attached) that the decision regarding the proposed positioning of EV chargers wil depend on "where the
homeowners directly affected can agree on the location", I am surprised that this is the first notice I have had of
the council's plan to install an EV charging station
. Any communication between
neighbours thus far was about different locations and I believe Martin Krafft's application for the trial was for
elsewhere.
I do not agree to having an EV charger located
before the location was put out for wider consultation.
Based on the website information, as my agreement is not forthcoming it seems an alternate location wil be
required. Should the proposal proceed contrary to this I wil be seeking legal advice.
I would like your manager's contact details in order to discuss this lack of communication and consultation
further. Could you please provide me with these details.
Yes
153 -
: I support EV infrastructure and this proposal in general. I do not
have off-street parking, which has been a big factor in preventing our family from getting an
EV. Having a charger close to my house would eliminate that concern, making the option for
getting an EV in the future viable. I do have some thoughts about the specific restrictions
proposed in this resolution I'd like the council to consider, however: 1) Given this would be a
slow charger it wil take many hours to fully charge an EV. For residents near the charger, it
might make sense to only allow residents to park their EV overnight, to provide confidence
that their EV could be charged. 2) It might be helpful to restrict the definition of 'resident' to a
smaller area than all of the suburb. Although it does not seem too likely that another resident
of the suburb would want to park their EV many blocks away from their house, having so few
charging spots available might require this. 3) There doesn't seem to be any good way to
facilitate cooperation between EV owners and the limited number of EV spaces. Can EV
owners sign up for notifications, or visit a webpage, that tells when a charging space is
unoccupied? Or if occupied, how long before the EV is fully charged? Or a way for an EV
owner wanting to use an occupied space to notify the occupier to ask they vacate the spot? I
think this wil become more important as EV adoption increases, if the pool of available EV
charging spots remains limited. 4) Many local residents have expressed concern about the
'loss of parking spaces' that would occur if this resolution when forward. Building off #3,
could there be a way for non EV owners to use unoccupied EV spaces if they agree to sign
up for notifications (e.g. TXT messages) that an EV needs to use the space their car
occupies, and give them a window of time to vacate the spot to make room for the EV? Al
residents (EV owners and non-EV owners wishing to make use of the EV spots) could be
given a RF card/fob they would be required to scan when parking in the spot. Then EV
owners could issue a 'request to move' to the occupier of a spot if the charger is not actually
being used.
Yes
170 -
: We plan to purchase an electric vehicle if the charging station is built
and think this would be a great asset to the street as a whole.
No
183 -
: We oppose the Vehicle Charger to be in Stafford Street or Port street.
Reasons are 1. We already experience congestion due to limited number of car parks which
is compounded by the streets which are narrow and very steep. 2. Members of the public,
tradespeople, visitors, etc struggle to navigate and manoeuvre the streets. Being home with
children most of the day, I often observe parked cars needing to move onto footpaths etc so
vans, trucks need to get past. If a visitor car is parked a few centimetres out can cause
havoc for cars to get past as we have experienced recently, prompting action from the
WCC's parking enforcement team. 3. Both streets are dead end streets with limited space
and room which means only one vehicle can go up or down at any one time given the
steepness and narrowness of the street. For non Stafford or Port street residents it isn't the
most logical place to have a charge station for other Mount Victoria residents and/or the
public to use at nights or weekends. 4. We do not agree with the notion that the two car
parks wil be used for residents only during the day and open at night and weekends to
others. This seems to be contradictory to what residents should expect from paid residential
parking. 5. In your policy there is some flexibility to find a spot that works for applicants and
neighbours. We feel chargers would be better placed in Majoribanks Street where they
would be more accessible to more people, and where there is space to create more parks. In
addition, there are more car spaces on both sides of the streets (especial y from Port Street
up) relative to the number of houses, which is opposite to Port / Stafford Streets. Extending
further, there are 10 coupon parks up the top end of Majoribanks Street by the dog park that
are very rarely full during the day. 6. We see in some areas you are creating car spaces
where you can't park currently and see that is a positive. We would encourage you to
explore options that create car spaces rather than simply changing the type of vehicle that
can use the parking spaces. 7. The argument has been made that the people who have
applied for the charger don't want to be far away from their house to charge their car and get
to it. To be fair, shouldn't other residents be afforded the same consideration with no added
pressure on extra cars to park in the electric charging area? Otherwise, the residents from
Stafford Street wil need to park elsewhere thereby taking a park. This knock on effect wil
irritate residents. 8. We don't see distance between chargers and homes as an issue as the
walking distance would be less than what people at the end of Austin street wil walk to get
to the charge station there. TR 99-18.
No
199 -
: EV charging stations provided by the council should be available to all
users ie either provided in areas without residents parking or should that not be available
locally the spaces reserved for charging electric vehicles should have the residents only
restriction removed so they are available to anyone with an electric vehicle.
Yes
210 -
:
Yes
220 -
:
Yes
227 -
:
