News
Tesla destination charging facility, also Pittsburgh EV landmark will be demolished
Vast construction projects at Pittsburgh’s Carnegie Mellon University will soon engulf a site that became a landmark in the development of electric vehicles in western Pennsylvania. It was a pioneering facility and the largest charging site in the region for many years.
The Electric Garage’s chargers are being relocated immediately with demolition of the site to begin in July.
At its peak, the Electric Garage boasted eight J1772 Level 2 chargers offering 203V at 30 amps. In 2014, a Tesla HPWC with 40 amp charging was added. Charging and parking was free to the public for up to four hours a session– a welcome oasis in the otherwise congested and paid parking of Oakland. It was easily the largest charging site in western Pennsylvania for most of its life and was open 24 hours/7 days a week on a first-come, first-serve basis. Non-charging parking spots on the site were marked as permit only.
The original six Eaton chargers were installed in 2012, using funding provided from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s Office of Energy and Technology Deployment which had a special mandate from the Office of Acronym Abatement at the Bureau of Ridiculously Long and Expansive Government Agency Naming Commission Department.
Originally built as an Exxon gas station, the Electric Garage was the invention of CMU robotics professor Illah Nourbakhsh. The university bought the property in 2009 and Nourbakhsh transformed it soon after into the workshop for the ChargeCar program. ChargeCar worked to further and develop EV technology, converting several vehicles and working out designs for regenerative braking. The industry’s pace of development soon overran much of ChargeCar’s work as more manufacturers brought EVs into mass production.
Undaunted, ChargeCar hosted numerous community outreach events to showcase the everyday feasibility of EVs to the general public. The site then morphed into a charging station and ChargeCar moved from primarily making gas-electric conversions to educating local mechanics in how to repair EVs.
Notice of the Electric Garage’s potential demise first bubbled up in May 2014, just months after the Tesla HPWC was installed. For several years, Tesla would use the Electric Garage as their main charging facility for Pittsburgh Test Drive events. There was no official Tesla presence in the city and Superchargers were too far from downtown. The proximity of the Electric Garage to the test drive events’ hosting facilities and hotels (and its number of chargers) made it an ideal overnight parking area for a small fleet of Teslas, hungry after a day of being pummeled by curious Pittsburghers.
Taking the place of the Electric Garage will be CMU’s new Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) Building. The 40,000 square foot structure is designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and will be built by Mascaro Construction. CMU described the new mixed-use building as “a new home for the university stores, a dining facility on the ground floor, and academic or administrative office and shelled space. The stand-alone structure will house state-of-the-art facilities, providing collaborative spaces for the CMU community.” CMU expects to spend $22.5 million on the project, which should break ground late this year.
Demolition of the Electric Garage will take place in July. The university has indicated that the chargers will be relocated to other places on campus, though EV drivers will likely have limited access the parking garages that will house some of them. It is also unlikely that all of those will remain available to the general public.
Current plans are as follows: 2 chargers move to the East Campus Garage, 2 chargers to the Dithridge Garage and the CIC Garage will have 5 stations.
If any are publicly available, it would most likely be the 5 chargers at the CIC garage. The notice from CMU Parking & Transportation Services indicates that these 5 chargers “will be located on the outside prior to entering the garage.” Given the awkward placement of the garage in relation to the campus and nearby train tracks, that could be interpreted a number of different ways. The approach roads to the garage are narrow, but there could be room for creative placement and there is a more hospitable lot close by. It also seems probable that the Tesla HPWC could be reappearing at this location. CMU has not yet responded to requests for clarification.
The passing of the Electric Garage “era” is lamentable, but CMU’s commitment to relocate the chargers is to be commended. Many businesses would have simply shoved them into a warehouse (or worse). It is an unfortunate development for EV drivers who have enjoyed both free parking and charging in Oakland, but with CMU’s inherent focus on technology there is hope for more charging stations in the future.
For local Tesla owners, the chargers were more about convenience than necessity. Long distance travelers are similarly unaffected by the change for the most part (ever since the Somerset and Cranberry Superchargers went online). With the opening of Ross Park Mall’s Tesla store this summer– complete with outdoor HPWCs– and the expected opening of a Pittsburgh Service Center later this year, there is also no longer a need for test drive fleets to recharge overnight in Oakland.
Tesla executive Sendil Palani confirmed in a post on social media platform X that Full Self-Driving, despite being the most robust driver assistance program in the United States, still isn’t garnering any interest from lagging competitors.
Tesla has said on several occasions in the past that it has had discussions with a competing carmaker to license its Full Self-Driving suite. While it never confirmed which company it was, many pointed toward Ford as the one Tesla was holding dialogue with.
At the time, Ford CEO Jim Farley and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had a very cordial relationship.
Despite Tesla’s confirmation, which occurred during both the Q2 2023 and Q1 2024 Earnings Calls, no deal was ever reached. Whichever “major OEM” Tesla had talked to did not see the benefit. Even now, Tesla has not found that dance partner, despite leading every company in the U.S. in self-driving efforts by a considerable margin.
Elon Musk says Tesla Robotaxi launch will force companies to license Full Self-Driving
Palani seemed to confirm that Tesla still has not found any company that is remotely interested in licensing FSD, as he said on X that “despite our best efforts to share the technology,” the company has found that it “has not been proven to be easy.”
Licensing FSD has not proven to be easy, despite our best efforts to share the technology. https://t.co/VGYBU7Aduw
— Sendil Palani (@sendilpalani) February 3, 2026
The question came just after one Tesla fan on X asked whether Tesla would continue manufacturing vehicles.
Because Tesla continues to expand its lineup of Model Y, it has plans to build the Cybercab, and there is still an immediate need for passenger vehicles, there is no question that the company plans to continue scaling its production.
However, Palani’s response is interesting, especially considering that it was in response to the question of whether Tesla would keep building cars.
Perhaps if Tesla could license Full Self-Driving to enough companies for the right price, it could simply sell the suite to car companies that are building vehicles, eliminating the need for Tesla to build its own.
While it seems like a reach because of Tesla’s considerable fan base, which is one of the most loyal in the automotive industry, the company could eventually bail on manufacturing and gain an incredible valuation by simply unlocking self-driving for other manufacturers.
The big question regarding why Tesla can’t find another company to license FSD is simply, “Why?”
Do they think they can solve it themselves? Do they not find FSD as valuable or effective? Many of these same companies didn’t bat an eye when Tesla started developing EVs, only to find themselves years behind. This could be a continuing trend.
Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.
Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.
These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.
Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count
Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.
He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.
Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.
Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.
🚨 Tesla VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, appeared today before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to discuss the importance of outlining an efficient framework for autonomous vehicles:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 4, 2026
Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”
This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.
Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.
Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.
Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.
However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.
Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.
Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.
But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.
Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.
Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.
Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space
Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.
Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.
Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.
Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space
You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.
The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?
Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity
The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.
Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.
Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.
Tesla confirms Full Self-Driving still isn’t garnering interest from lagging competitors
Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee
