TESTIMONY
Daniel Avery on Electric Vehicle Charging Legislation
2:23:28
·
128 sec
Daniel Avery, Director of Policy at the Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY), highlights challenges and offers support for electric vehicle charging legislation.
- Avery expresses REBNY's support for the bill aimed at increasing electric vehicle (EV) charging equipment availability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- He emphasizes the need for careful consideration of practical challenges, noting the bill's provisions for waivers and exemptions but suggesting further improvements.
- Avery calls for strengthened exemptions for buildings that are 100% affordable, highlighting the difficulty of managing added costs without city subsidies.
- He points out the expense and time consumption of upgrading existing electrical infrastructures and suggests excluding renovations unrelated to electric capacity from the bill's mandates.
- REBNY supports the bill's goals and is eager to collaborate with the city for its finalization.
Daniel Avery
2:23:28
Good afternoon, Mountain Chair.
2:23:29
My name is Daniel Avery.
2:23:30
I apologize in advance for not having any sound effects.
2:23:33
Just testimony.
2:23:35
I'm the a director of policy at the Real Estate Board of New York, aka Remy, and I'm testifying on 17a.
2:23:43
Having to do with electric vehicle charges.
2:23:46
Our revenue support the goal of this bill to make electric vehicle charging equipment More available, doing so will further the city state ambitious plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector sector by facilitating the transition from gas powered to electric vehicles, scaling up EV infrastructure along with intensive efforts to green the electric grid will also help to improve local air quality.
2:24:13
Remi or just to carefully consider a couple of practical challenges First, we appreciate that the bill provides a number of waivers and exemption.
2:24:26
President's legislation is either very difficult or unfeasible.
2:24:30
The bill will be improved by strengthening the exemption per garages and lots associated with buildings that are 100% affordable as these buildings are least able to manage the added cost of the project without tapping into highly limited city subsidies.
2:24:47
In addition, because existing lots and or garages must be updated to meet the bills requirements by 2035.
2:24:54
We do not think it makes sense to have a second standard for such facilities that are undertaking alterations.
2:25:00
The reality is that upgrading electronic infrastructure in existing facilities is expensive and time consuming, allowing existing facilities until 2035 to comply with the law acknowledges in response to that reality.
2:25:13
Furthermore, many alterations undertaken at a building will pertain to other aspects of the garage or lot that are unrelated to electric capacity.
2:25:21
For example, roof replacement or lobby renovation.
2:25:25
Therefore, the bill should exclude alterations of existing pictures for its mandates.
2:25:29
Again, we supported the goals of this bill and look forward to working with the city to finalize it.
2:25:35
Thank you.
← Previous Chapter
Melissa Barbour, Member of the Public from the Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association (SMACNA) Long Island, on Supporting Introduction 88 for Improved Fire Safety Outcomes
Next Chapter →
Do the University of Maryland and experts have New York City-specific statistics on smoke dampers?
