Guides
Part of A multifamily EV charging roadmap: seven phases from baseline to annual review
Apartment and condo EV charging roadmap: organizing the first 90 days
A 90 day apartment and condo EV charging plan: organize records, test site and utility constraints, compare pathways, and prepare an owner decision.
The first 90 days should create decision-quality evidence, not rush into a charger purchase. By day 90, an apartment or condominium owner should know the service question, available records, major site constraints, viable pathways, and the next approval needed.
What to take away
- Days 1 to 30 define the owner question and organize property evidence.
- Days 31 to 60 test site, power, parking, and operating constraints.
- Days 61 to 90 compare pathways and prepare a gated decision.
- Keep unknowns visible rather than filling gaps with estimates that look final.
Days 1 to 30: Define and collect
Start with one service question, such as whether the property should provide assigned charging, a shared bank, or a limited first phase. Name the owner decision maker, property coordinator, operations contact, and technical reviewers.
Month One: Define and Collect
- Choose one service question
- Name owner decision maker
- Name property coordinator
- Name operations contact
- Name technical reviewers
- Collect site and parking plans
- Gather electrical records and meter details
Collect site and parking plans, electrical records, utility history, and meter details. Also gather maintenance notes, capital plans, and parking rules.
The Energy Department's multifamily charging resource lists parking, electrical service, billing, legal questions, and funding as planning considerations. Index each record by date and source, and keep that index in the working file so the day-90 handoff starts from organized evidence.
The Department of Energy's planning-project guidance lists needs assessments, feasibility analyses, site analysis, permits, pre-construction planning, engagement, and program design as valid planning work. That supports a disciplined first month: establish what needs to be learned before trying to buy a solution.
Days 31 to 60: Test the property
Schedule a site walk that follows potential power routes and resident paths. Document electrical equipment, likely routes, parking operations, stall dimensions, access paths, vehicle impact risk, drainage, lighting, communications, and future expansion areas.
The U.S. Access Board's EV charging technical assistance is a useful checklist source for access route, vehicle-space, access-aisle, control, connector, and communication subjects that need project-specific review.
Begin utility outreach with a clear site description and planning question. Name the relevant program, such as Southern California Edison's Charge Ready or Con Edison's PowerReady, and ask how it treats shared versus assigned charging. Record what you submitted, what response you receive, and whether it is an informal discussion or an engineering-level review.
The Department of Energy's permitting-process resource can help frame questions for the relevant authority, though it does not replace local requirements. Also identify local permitting and association or ownership approvals that could affect the schedule.
| Week | Main output | Question answered |
|---|---|---|
| 1 to 2 | Decision brief and project contacts | What service is under consideration? |
| 3 to 4 | Record index and missing-item list | What must be verified? |
| 5 to 6 | Site observations and route notes | What layouts are realistic? |
| 7 to 8 | Initial utility and permit status | What could block the path? |
Days 61 to 90: Compare and decide
Develop two or more pathways against the same service goal. State their active ports, access model, power limit, electrical and civil scope, cost range, utility dependence, operating responsibilities, and expansion trigger. Use one cost-year basis and make exclusions visible.
Typical installed cost for a shared Level 2 port runs from about $6,000 to $12,000 when no service upgrade is needed. A limited first phase of 2 to 4 ports often lands between $12,000 and $50,000. Exact cost depends on trenching, panel capacity, permitting, and service upgrades.
Assigned charging at every space carries that per-port range plus any panel or service work. A shared bank of 10 or more ports usually lowers the per-port figure, but raises the total budget.
Score each pathway on a 1 to 5 scale against the same criteria:
- Capital cost
- Resident access and parking fit
- Utility readiness and service capacity
- Permitting and approval risk
- Expansion fit
Weight the criteria that matter most to the owner before scoring.
Prepare a decision package, not a vendor slide deck. It should show the evidence reviewed, open risks, recommendation, alternatives, and the next gate. The owner may choose a pathway, authorize a deeper technical study, or pause until a specific uncertainty is resolved.
Finish day 90 with a clean handoff
By the end of the period, assemble one owner-facing record. It should include:
- The service question, one sentence.
- A record index with dates and sources.
- Site notes and verified constraints.
- A pathway comparison table with cost ranges and exclusions.
- Open issues with an owner and a resolution date.
- The decision requested and the next gate.
State who owns each unanswered question and when that question must be resolved. A clear handoff lets a property commission design, seek bids, or pause without losing the reasoning behind the work.
Keep the early record alive
The 90-day plan should not promise a construction date before the project has evidence for it; it should create a reliable starting point for design, utility coordination, procurement, and resident communication. The first 90-day packet is a working baseline, not a document to file away.
Update it when a utility response, site observation, ownership decision, or authority requirement changes the assumptions. Keep the earlier date visible. A later team can then distinguish a revised fact from the original planning question and avoid repeating a completed inquiry.
Common questions
Should the property select equipment in the first 90 days?
Usually not. The early work should define the service goal and site pathways first. Equipment requirements become clearer after those choices are made.
What if electrical records are missing?
Document the gap and use the site review to identify what needs field verification. Do not treat an unlabeled panel or an old drawing as current proof.
When should residents be consulted?
Early enough to understand parking practices, access needs, and demand, while keeping the inquiry proportional and focused on project decisions.
