Twentynine Palms planning commission studies rules for electric vehicle charging stations

Twentynine Palms Planning Commission members on Wednesday discussed how the city should treat electric vehicle (EV) charging stations in its development code, after staff said state law and an Attorney General opinion largely preempt local land‑use approvals and leave most review at the building‑permit level.

The discussion matters because commissioners and residents said EV chargers could affect local electric grid capacity, neighborhood land use and the city’s economic appeal to visitors and businesses.

Community Development Director (name not specified) told the commission the city’s municipal code (Chapter 18.09) currently addresses only building and safety requirements and that the development code does not list EV charging stations. "Our development code is silent on it," the director said, adding staff included the state Attorney General memo and an EV checklist in the meeting packet for commissioners to review. The director said state law dating to 2015 prescribes installation of EV chargers in any zoning district subject to issuance of a building permit, which limits local zoning review.

Commissioners asked questions about practical distinctions and enforcement. Commissioner Jim (first name only in the transcript) said Level 1 chargers (household 110/120‑volt plugs) typically are used at home and suggested the city focus permitting on Level 2 and Level 3 installations intended for public use.

Commissioner Max (first name only in the transcript) raised grid‑capacity concerns and urged engineering studies for large installations, saying, "when the base was looking at having an all EV fleet of government vehicles ... we were gonna need about an extra 10 megawatts of power." Staff agreed the city relies on Southern California Edison for power and said the city could seek information from Edison on capacity and timelines for upgrades.

The director summarized five common compliance points from the Attorney General memo and noted one important limitation: localities cannot impose discretionary land‑use reviews that conflict with state streamlining laws unless the locality can make written findings supported by substantial evidence of a specific, quantifiable adverse health or safety impact and identify feasible mitigation alternatives. Staff pointed commissioners to the memo’s description of permit denial requirements (described in the packet as "page 3" of the Attorney General discussion).

Commissioner Alex and others discussed where commercial ancillary uses (for example, a convenience store or restaurant adjacent to a charging hub) would fit. Staff said ancillary commercial uses would still be subject to zone rules: a charging station could be constructed under a building permit, but adding commercial uses not allowed in the underlying zone would require a zone change or other land‑use approvals. That raised follow‑on questions about whether an operator could obtain a business license to operate a commercial charging business in a residential zone; staff said that matter would depend on local code and potential zone‑change approvals.

On practical matters, staff said the city’s EV checklist already requires an electrical load calculation as part of an application. Commissioners asked whether consequences could be included in code if a permitted charger repeatedly caused local outages; staff and commissioners said denial or conditioning of a permit would require finding a direct adverse effect and considering feasible mitigation.

Public commenters generally supported adding EV infrastructure. Caitlin Gill, a Twentynine Palms resident and owner of Joshua Tree Astronomy Adventures, said, "These are definitely economic engines and positive additions to our community," and suggested requiring or incentivizing on‑site solar so stations do not draw from the local grid. Mark Jin, who identified himself as planning a solar‑plus‑charging project, told the commission that interconnection and upgrades through the utility can be slow: "it will take minimum 20 months" in his experience dealing with Edison, and that pairing solar with chargers can make a station more resilient and financially stable.

Commissioners and members of the public also noted existing limited public charging in town: staff said two public parking spots are marked but are not full charging stations. No formal action or vote was taken; the item was a study session to gather guidance. Staff said they will return with follow‑up research, legal clarifications from the city attorney, and potential development‑code language options.

In the meantime, commissioners asked staff to explore: (1) differences in treatment for Level 1 (home) chargers versus Level 2/3 commercial chargers; (2) engineering and interconnection requirements and typical utility timelines; (3) how ancillary commercial uses would be handled under existing zoning; and (4) options to encourage on‑site generation (for example, solar canopy).