The real test of EV charging begins after handover

Installing and commissioning EV chargers may satisfy the immediate brief, but Harry Capewell, Director at EVFM, argues that the real challenge is creating infrastructure that can evolve with residents and their changing charging needs.

EV charging on new apartment developments is still too often treated as something that needs to be installed, commissioned and signed off – once the project reaches practical completion, the job is considered done.

The problem is that the charging network then has to live with the building, so, in reality, the installation is just the first piece of the jigsaw.

Part S compliance – which sets requirements around EV charge point provision and cable routes for new residential buildings with associated parking – has moved the issue further up the agenda, and developers now have to address EV charging infrastructure as part of the design and construction process.

However, compliance is really only a starting point.

A development can meet the requirements at completion and still be left with a network that becomes expensive or disruptive to expand and manage as resident demand changes over time. That is why the design question needs to be broader than, “What do we need today?” It should really ask, “What could this building need over time?”

There is no single or set answer here: a city-centre apartment block with limited parking will have a different charging profile from a larger development where most homes have allocated spaces.

EV adoption will develop at different rates too, so specifying for the future is not the same as assuming every parking bay needs a charger on day one.

Residential charging has a persistent chicken-and-egg problem. Do you build the infrastructure and assume demand will follow, or wait until residents ask for it?

Installing far more equipment than needed creates unnecessary upfront cost, while waiting can leave residents without a practical route to charging. The best approach is to make sure the underlying infrastructure can grow in line with demand.

That starts with power. Available electrical capacity and the way it is managed have a direct bearing on what can be delivered now and later. Load management can make a significant difference where capacity is constrained, but it can also help avoid over-engineering where a more intelligent design would do the job.

The same thinking should apply to distribution. If future chargers are likely to be added, cable routes, distribution equipment and the overall architecture need to allow for that.

Adding capacity to an occupied building can be far more difficult than providing for it during construction, as finished areas may need to be reopened, new cable routes installed or distribution equipment changed.

That does not mean existing developments are a lost cause. In retrofit work, there are often buildings where enough underlying infrastructure already exists to support some EV charging. The challenge is working with what is there without creating a system that becomes fragmented as more residents make the switch.

Connectivity can also be underestimated – charging networks depend on reliable communications for monitoring, billing and ongoing management.

Basement and multi-storey car parks are not always friendly environments for mobile or data connectivity, so this needs to be considered as infrastructure in its own right. It is much easier to solve at the design stage than after chargers have been installed in an area with unreliable coverage.

Then comes the issue that is often less visible during construction: what happens after handover.

Once residents move in, the charging network becomes an operational system. Electricity has to be measured and billed, chargers need monitoring and maintenance, and faults need resolving.

Residents need someone to contact when something does not work – it might sound obvious, but responsibility is so often left vague.

Situations still arise where a charging network has effectively been ignored after the construction project finishes. Power continues to be supplied, but the cost is absorbed within the wider building or service charge rather than clearly attributed to the people using the chargers.

While EV use remains relatively low, that can go unnoticed, but as uptake increases and electricity costs become more visible, residents are likely to start asking how those costs are being allocated.

This is where the whole-life cost matters more than the lowest installation price.

The development model does not always make that easy. If a developer intends to sell the building, there is an obvious temptation to focus on what is needed to reach completion. Regulation has helped bring EV charging further into the design conversation, but it cannot decide the best long-term operating model for each site.

Early involvement from both developers and managing agents can make a major difference. The people who will ultimately be responsible for the building need a voice in decisions about how the charging network will be operated, expanded and paid for.

Future-proofing should not mean filling a car park with chargers before there is demand for them. It means getting the backbone right: power, distribution, connectivity and a clear management model, with a practical route to add chargers economically as residents need them.

Apartment EV charging should be treated like other permanent building infrastructure: practical completion is an important milestone, but it is not the end point.

The better specification is the one that still works for the building, its managing agent and its residents ten or twenty years later.