Charging stations for electrified vehicles: the necessary involvement of condominiums


The Mobility Orientation Law (LOM) provides for a reduction in CO 2 emissions of 37.5% by 2030 and the end of vehicles running on carbonaceous fossil fuels by 2040. A deadline recently put forward by the EU within the framework of the Paris Agreements: its member states pledged, at the end of last year, to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 55% compared to 1990 levels by 2030.

To achieve these ambitious goals, the law proposes measures to simplify the adoption of electric vehicles by individuals and businesses, in particular through the generalization of access to charging stations in condominiums and non-residential buildings.

However, evangelization is more than ever necessary, in particular with the General Assemblies (GA) in joint ownership, which must place the electric mobility of residents at the heart of their concerns.

Obligations in favor of the deployment of charging stations

According to the LOM, new residential buildings with more than 10 parking spaces located inside or nearby must be fully pre-equipped to allow the future installation of charging stations for electrified vehicles, and allow the individualized metering of electricity consumption.

The Climate law currently under discussion reinforces the role of recharging infrastructure operators by specifying in particular their obligations in terms of commitment and transparency.

The main obstacle: non-decision

The technical solutions and the financial models are ready, however it is up to the co-ownerships to rule on the subject in the General Assembly (GA), which can take time and generate delays. If companies have taken the plunge and are offering more and more electrified vehicles and associated infrastructure to their employees, condominiums remain to be convinced.

In recent months, given the health crisis, 70% of projects were postponed to a later date. The GAs, often conducted remotely, have mostly focused only on short-term subjects considered to be priorities, to the detriment of substantive subjects requiring work or installations.

However, the subject is less complex than it seems and, well supported by the recharging operators, the condominiums have all the cards in hand to calmly make their transition, which is theirs whatever happens imposed by the framework. regulatory in the medium and short term.

Collective infrastructure vs. right to take

Between regulatory obligations and democratization of the use of electrified vehicles, electric mobility for residents is essential and must now be treated by condominiums as a priority. The main thing is to get involved, not to postpone the subject and to enlist the expertise of a single point of contact able to support the co-ownership throughout all stages of the project.

If drivers have the possibility of asserting their right to take, a simplified procedure which requires a period not exceeding 3 months, this temporary solution nevertheless presents technical problems and is costly for the user. On the other hand, by relying on a collective infrastructure, the user will be able to benefit from a higher charging power., a lasting and scalable quality of service and an installation time reduced to a few weeks against a few months.

Note that the law already simplifies the process of adopting a project in GA by allowing a simple majority vote (present during the vote) and not unanimously. If it imposes deadlines, the law must at the same time be able to give the main parties concerned the means to tackle the issue and accelerate their compliance with the regulatory framework and the realities of the market today and tomorrow.

Stop preconceived ideas

The decision to install a collective infrastructure requires collective decision-making, therefore in AG. Si co-owners who are not concerned in the short term may lose interest in the subject or fear a cost that they do not deem necessary, some recharging operators offer to take charge of collective work and to bill a monthly recharging service adapted to its consumption.

This evangelization should be continued to reassure on the non-complexity of the procedures, but also on the costs: the charging stations do not represent an increase in expenditure related to housing, but indeed an added value on the value of housing as well as savings on fuels compared to thermal vehicles.

Compliance with regulatory deadlines, reduction of CO emissions 2 , transparency and cost reduction, real estate capital gain, etc. : by installing charging stations for electrified vehicles via charging infrastructure operators, co-owners have everything to gain. A decision to be made today, or at the next GA.