Some parts of the bay area require new construction of homes and apartments to put in chargers, some apartment complexes have them, and there are a few chargers on the street and in public garages. It's all headed in the right direction.
Requiring new apartments to have chargers is the wrong direction if you consider that it just increases costs for people who don't own automobiles (in my building of seven apartments one person owns a vehicle).
Electric cars have a lot of advantages but they still have enormous negative externalities on cities.
I'd be happy to pay a premium in cities if it meant all the cars were electric so the air was that much cleaner, even though I don't have a car of my own.
Sure, but is that a reason to force everyone else to do the same? The easier you make it to use a car in a dense place, the more people will do so, and the more people who walk and cycle will die.
The charger rule doesn't change the minimum number of parking spaces, and adding chargers for a small fraction of spaces is a tiny expense compared to the overall cost of parking spaces.
You might want to spend your effort on the parking space rule instead of the extremely minor issue of electric chargers.
I do - I just dislike the idea that the building should be forced to have any parking. My current building has none (as did my last one) and was more affordable for it.
