Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ev Charging topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wakefield project weighing Level‑3 fast chargers vs. code‑required EV‑ready receptacles; estimated $100,000 savings under review
Summary
Project staff and the committee discussed meeting the stretch energy code for the Wakefield project: WMLD will donate five dual Level‑2 chargers (10 spots), and an analysis suggested placing four Level‑3 fast chargers could meet the code’s exception while saving about $100,000 versus providing 40 EV‑ready receptacles; Nick will circulate a memo with pricing and model cut sheets.
Wakefield project staff told the Permanent Building Committee they are pursuing options to meet the stretch energy code’s EV‑ready requirement and will return with a memo and equipment cut sheets for committee direction.
Nick, who is assembling procurement pricing, said WMLD is donating "5, dual charger, 2 port level 2 chargers" (10 spaces) but the stretch energy code requires roughly 10% EV‑ready stalls for the campus — about 40 receptacles out of roughly 396 parking spaces. "There was an exception that says if you provide 4 level 3 charger spots, that will provide the obligation for any kind of any project," he said, and Bond’s analysis showed that installing four Level‑3 chargers would avoid the trenching and conduit costs needed for dozens of receptacles. "They found that you would save a $100,000 by putting the 4 level 3 chargers in," Nick told the committee.
Committee members pressed for clarity on what the GMP (guaranteed maximum price) and contract bid carry, who owns and will maintain chargers, and what is included in the bid price. Nick and staff said some charger models previously quoted (an ABB Terra series) were being discontinued; buying discontinued models could mean limited support in future years, so the team requested updated quotes for current models and two configuration options (single pad vs. dual head). Nick committed to providing a memo with the cost lines, cut sheets, and recommended model choices for the committee to review before a procurement decision.
One committee member favored Level‑3 chargers for cost and winter maintenance reasons, noting that many Level‑2 receptacles could be buried by snow and thus underused. The team agreed to package a recommendation with the budget line, contingency impacts and a recommended procurement approach that preserves the town’s future maintenance and point‑of‑sale control.
