Those things are completely worthless to me. I got one for my first Volt, but didn't bother for any of my other EV acquisitions later.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
On today's TMC Podcast, we ask the question "What is the Tesla Cybercab?". Join us on YouTube live at 1PM and participate in the chat.
Maryland Anti-ICEing Law Proposed - 2017
- Thread starter Lanny
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Mid-Atlantic USA
Those things are completely worthless to me. I got one for my first Volt, but didn't bother for any of my other EV acquisitions later.
Curt
Roadster Signature #55
To each his own - I make use of my HOV sticker almost daily.
On the other hand, Superchargers are completely worthless to me.
CHRGIT
Member
I am on Rt 50 every day. I LOVE driving pass the backups (& charging in Laurel)To each his own - I make use of my HOV sticker almost daily.
On the other hand, Superchargers are completely worthless to me.
I agree that EV tags assist in making LEO's jobs easier....except that out-of-state vehicles thereby instantly become problematic. Not in Alaska but in a minuscule, commuter-heavy state like Maryland it would be the case.
@loganss, @DiamondDave, and all other Maryland residents that would like the "green pavement markings" language removed from the "anti-ICEing" bill, HB-36 [PDF Link], please write or call the bill's sponsor, Delegate Clarence Lam at [email protected]
Please send your email tonight or early in the morning expressing your objections to the green pavement markings requirement in order for EV charging spots to be enforced for ICEing. Be sure to include your Maryland address.
Time is of the essence. Short and sweet beats long and late in this instance.
Thanks!
Lanny
Please send your email tonight or early in the morning expressing your objections to the green pavement markings requirement in order for EV charging spots to be enforced for ICEing. Be sure to include your Maryland address.
Time is of the essence. Short and sweet beats long and late in this instance.
Thanks!
Lanny
I hope the green paint language is removed. Not because it's not a good idea. It is. But red looks better and it's more noticeable.
And green isn't a universal color for EV charging.
This is Ontario.
I got a somewhat canned response back saying law enforcement prefers consistent paint - I offered my opinion that I didn't see why that law would be hard to enforce if there is variability in paint markings... whatever...
I would still rather it pass with the silly paint clause tho. In the grand scheme of things, it is still progress.
I would still rather it pass with the silly paint clause tho. In the grand scheme of things, it is still progress.
3PHASE
3PHASE
Let's say it's a green electric car logo in the center of the space at night. They would never see it. It either needs to be struck (recommended) or way more specific than markings. Markings could be text, lines, complete space, etc.
I submitted 35 copies of a letter last week. Thanks to everyone who can go or email something over. It's a big help and shows more interest in the topic.
I submitted 35 copies of a letter last week. Thanks to everyone who can go or email something over. It's a big help and shows more interest in the topic.
I testified in Annapolis today to ask that "green pavement markings" be removed as a requirement to be enforceable or to at least allow white markings in addition to green paint. A representative from the Maryland Assoc. of Counties (MACo) also testified opposing the green pavement markings.
This is from the MACo testimony:
Additionally, using green paint markings violates the U.S. Federal Highway Administration’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), adopted into Federal law under 23 C.F.R 665 and adapted into the Maryland MUTCD pursuant to Maryland Code, Transportation Article, Section 25-104. MUTCD, Section 3A.05 states, “Markings shall be yellow, white, red, blue, or purple.”
There is a Delegate on the committee who is a police officer and he insists that handicapped parking spots require pavement markings in order to be enforceable, so therefore EV charging spots must have (green) pavement markings in addition to a sign or the police won't enforce. There seemed to be no way to reason with this man. I tried. I even met with him before the meeting convened and showed him a letter from the Maryland Codes Administration stating that a sign is sufficient in order to enforce handicapped parking in Maryland and he dismissed it as false information. Sigh.
Thanks @loganss @CatB @mczajka and everyone else who wrote and called.
As @mczajka mentioned, wording on the green paint markings is very vague and that's what i pointed out in the email I sent out. It could be anything from a tiny speck of green paint to the entire charging spot being painted green.
Just like @CatB I got a canned response saying it's necessary for law enforcement.
Just like @CatB I got a canned response saying it's necessary for law enforcement.
Apparently, the bill's sponsor has agreed to a narrow change in the language in response to opposition to the green paint from the Maryland Assoc. of Counties (MACo). Press Release
The alternative, white “Electric Vehicle Charging Only” markings, will only apply on properties that receive Federal aid under Title 23CFR Part 655 Subpart F. I presume this is only some government parking facilities that this special interest group is concerned with.
The following is draft amendment language to the Maryland "anti-ICEing" bill (subject to change).
(D) A Plug-in electric drive vehicle charging station shall be indicated by:
The alternative, white “Electric Vehicle Charging Only” markings, will only apply on properties that receive Federal aid under Title 23CFR Part 655 Subpart F. I presume this is only some government parking facilities that this special interest group is concerned with.
The following is draft amendment language to the Maryland "anti-ICEing" bill (subject to change).
(D) A Plug-in electric drive vehicle charging station shall be indicated by:
(1) Green pavement markings, or;
(2) if the parking space is on a property or roadway subject to regulation under Title 23CFR Part 655 Subpart F then the pavement markings may be white and shall include “Electric Vehicle Charging Only” within the space.
(2) if the parking space is on a property or roadway subject to regulation under Title 23CFR Part 655 Subpart F then the pavement markings may be white and shall include “Electric Vehicle Charging Only” within the space.
This would be funny...but it has already happened to me since a Prius driver refused to leave an EV charging spot to allow me to charge saying "I have an electric car..."
I called Annapolis and learned that the actual amendment to HB 36 regarding the pavement markings ended up being to add the bold text shown below. They took out the specifics about white lettering and broadly exempted areas subject to Federal law in order to satisfy MACo.
SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE FEDERAL LAW A PLUG–IN ELECTRIC DRIVE VEHICLE CHARGING SPACE SHALL BE INDICATED BY GREEN PAVEMENT MARKINGS.
Well that's discouraging...
Lanny, can you please enlighten me on this bill? Were you testifying in committee? What is next step that we can influence?
Amazing how opaque and impervious to reason the legislative process is.
Lanny, can you please enlighten me on this bill? Were you testifying in committee? What is next step that we can influence?
Amazing how opaque and impervious to reason the legislative process is.
@CatB I did testify in front of the committee on the anti-ICEing bill. You can watch the recorded video at this link.
The introduction to HB 36 starts at 02:16:25. My testimony begins at 02:33:45.
Be sure to also watch the testimony of the representative from the Maryland Association of Counties who also asked for the green paint requirement to be removed. She begins at 02:43:20.
The introduction to HB 36 starts at 02:16:25. My testimony begins at 02:33:45.
Be sure to also watch the testimony of the representative from the Maryland Association of Counties who also asked for the green paint requirement to be removed. She begins at 02:43:20.
Message I received back from Seamus McNamara, Legislative Director
We have added an amendment so that the pavement markings can be in a different form on roadways and lots that must adhere to federal regulations under the MUTCD, but the pavement markings are required more broadly in order for the law to be enforceable in Maryland. Here is the explanation I have sent to others asking about this issue:
As much as we would like to have a simple bill that simply adds fines for parking in existing EV charging spaces with existing signs, that simply is not possible. We need to take certain steps in order to ensure that this is enforceable state wide. Unfortunately, we have been told by law enforcement that they need to see two things in order to enforce any parking violation: 1) a sign conforming to the standard set forth in law (we will be creating a statewide standard with this bill), and 2) some kind of pavement markings to indicate that the spot is a type of reserved space or no parking zone. Here again it seems best to try to come up with a uniform standard for that whole state. This means that lot owners will need to purchase new signs and will need to put down pavement markings in order for this law to be enforceable on their properties, there is just no way of getting around that.
Thank you for contacting us about this issue. I hope my explanation has shed some light into our thought process in crafting this legislation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Best,
We have added an amendment so that the pavement markings can be in a different form on roadways and lots that must adhere to federal regulations under the MUTCD, but the pavement markings are required more broadly in order for the law to be enforceable in Maryland. Here is the explanation I have sent to others asking about this issue:
As much as we would like to have a simple bill that simply adds fines for parking in existing EV charging spaces with existing signs, that simply is not possible. We need to take certain steps in order to ensure that this is enforceable state wide. Unfortunately, we have been told by law enforcement that they need to see two things in order to enforce any parking violation: 1) a sign conforming to the standard set forth in law (we will be creating a statewide standard with this bill), and 2) some kind of pavement markings to indicate that the spot is a type of reserved space or no parking zone. Here again it seems best to try to come up with a uniform standard for that whole state. This means that lot owners will need to purchase new signs and will need to put down pavement markings in order for this law to be enforceable on their properties, there is just no way of getting around that.
Thank you for contacting us about this issue. I hope my explanation has shed some light into our thought process in crafting this legislation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Best,
Similar threads
