Installing an electric vehicle charging station might seem straightforward, but across Canada, getting permission to build one is becoming a significant obstacle. New findings from the Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council reveal that developers abandoned 54 planned fast-charging locations over a two-year period after securing agreements with property owners.
Municipal approval delays or denials were the primary reason behind 10 abandoned sites, while utility connection delays or costs accounted for another 17. The findings expose a complicated problem involving inconsistent local regulations, lengthy approval timelines, electrical infrastructure requirements, and rising development costs.
With Canada investing heavily in expanding its charging network, these obstacles raise concerns about how quickly new stations can reach communities. For businesses investing in charging infrastructure and drivers depending on reliable access, delays can mean the difference between a functioning charger and a project that never opens.
A Small Industry Study Reveals a Significant Infrastructure Problem
The Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council gathered responses from nine organizations involved in building public EV fast-charging infrastructure, including seven charging networks or operators and two engineering and construction contractors. Together, these organizations reported experience across eight Canadian provinces. Their activities were substantial: respondents reported commissioning 217 public fast-charging sites during the preceding 24 months and energizing 602 charging ports during the preceding year. These figures demonstrate that the findings come from organizations directly involved in deploying infrastructure, rather than observers unfamiliar with the challenges of installation.
However, the results also require context. The 54 abandoned locations were reported by seven participating organizations, and one respondent accounted for 25 of those cancellations. The information was self-reported, independently unverified, and collected from a small voluntary sample between August 13 and September 3, 2026. Consequently, the findings should not be interpreted as a complete national accounting of cancelled projects. They nevertheless provide an important picture of how experienced charging developers are encountering obstacles even after identifying suitable properties and securing agreements with their owners.
Municipal Parking Rules Are Becoming a Major Roadblock
One of the most surprising findings concerns something seemingly unrelated to electric vehicles: municipal parking requirements. According to the council, 78% of respondents identified minimum parking requirements as a source of delays on at least one project. Many municipalities require commercial properties to maintain a specific number of parking spaces. Installing fast-charging equipment can occupy space previously used for conventional parking, creating questions about whether a property still satisfies local regulations. Even when the charging equipment benefits customers, a development may encounter additional approvals because its existing parking layout changes.
Other property requirements create similar complications. Approximately 67% of respondents identified landscaping or green-space requirements as obstacles, while the same percentage reported delays involving site-plan amendments or minor variances. For example, a business hoping to install chargers near its existing parking lot could face additional design work over equipment placement, landscaping, or setbacks. Municipalities have legitimate responsibilities involving safety, accessibility, and land use. However, the industry council argues that relatively straightforward charging retrofits should not automatically face the extensive planning processes associated with entirely new commercial developments.
Different Municipal Rules Make Expansion Difficult to Predict
Building charging infrastructure across Canada involves navigating a patchwork of municipal regulations. The council found that 88% of respondents answering the relevant question experienced moderate to extreme differences in approval requirements between municipalities within the same province. Additionally, 67% identified insufficient EV-specific municipal guidance as a source of project delays. These inconsistencies mean that a charging operator familiar with installing equipment in one community may encounter an entirely different approval process when working in a neighbouring municipality. Requirements involving zoning, equipment placement, building permits, and land-use classifications can create additional administrative work.
The differences also appeared in how developers assessed individual provinces. Ontario and Quebec were each identified as having the slowest approval processes by 38% of respondents to that question. British Columbia was identified as the fastest by 38%, although an equal share said they lacked enough experience to judge. These findings represent the experiences of a small group of organizations rather than a definitive provincial ranking. Nevertheless, they expose a challenge for companies developing regional charging networks. Without consistent guidelines, operators cannot confidently predict whether an installation that was approved elsewhere will receive similar treatment at another location.
Approval Timelines Can Stretch From Months to More Than a Year
Lengthy approval processes are another major source of frustration. The council found that the most commonly reported median timeline between signing a site-host agreement and receiving municipal approval was three to six months. Other respondents reported typical timelines of six to nine months or nine to twelve months, while one reported twelve to eighteen months. These figures measure the period from the host agreement to approval, rather than municipal processing time alone. Still, they illustrate how long projects can remain in development before construction and commissioning are completed.
The contrast between existing timelines and industry expectations is significant. Approximately 89% of respondents believed that obtaining a municipal permit for a parking-lot charging retrofit should take less than three months. For operators, predictable scheduling is essential because electrical contractors, equipment suppliers, property managers, and utilities must coordinate their work. A delayed permit can force adjustments to construction schedules and leave expensive infrastructure waiting to be installed. The council recommends that municipalities establish a three-month decision standard for complete retrofit applications, alongside clearer guidance that would help developers understand requirements before submitting their proposals.
Utility Connection Problems Account for More Abandoned Sites Than Municipal Delays
Municipal regulations are only part of the challenge. The council found that 17 of the 54 abandoned sites were primarily attributed to utility interconnection delays or costs, compared with 10 linked to municipal approvals. Fast-charging equipment often requires substantially more electrical capacity than conventional building services, making access to suitable grid infrastructure essential. Among respondents identifying reasons for utility-related cancellations, 75% cited excessively long connection timelines, while approximately 62% identified high utility upgrade costs. These problems can make an otherwise attractive location financially or technically impractical, particularly when existing electrical infrastructure cannot accommodate additional demand without expensive improvements.
The challenge does not necessarily disappear after construction. When respondents were asked to identify their single biggest utility-side obstacle, 38% selected the time required to complete the final electrical connection. Ontario already has standardized procedures requiring distributors to meet certain connection milestones, including a 60-day deadline for eligible offers to connect. However, electrical upgrades, transformer availability, and coordination between companies can still complicate deployment. The council recommends better coordination, dedicated utility specialists, standardized electrical designs, and improved access to suitable transformers. These measures could help reduce situations where charging equipment is installed or planned but cannot begin serving drivers.
Delays Can Increase Project Costs by 10% to 25%
The financial consequences of delays can be substantial, even when a charging development eventually proceeds. Among seven respondents estimating cost increases on significantly delayed projects, 71% reported that expenses rose between 10% and 25% above their original budgets. Another 14% reported increases of between 25% and 50%. For perspective, a hypothetical charging installation initially budgeted at $1 million could experience an additional $100,000 to $250,000 in expenses if costs increased by 10% to 25%. While the council did not publish average project budgets, the reported increases demonstrate how prolonged development can place additional financial pressure on operators.
Extended schedules create another challenge. Among eight respondents describing projects that experienced significant delays without being abandoned, 38% reported delays of three to six months, while another 38% identified delays of twelve to eighteen months. Waiting longer to begin operations can postpone potential charging revenue and tie up investment capital. Developers also reported missing funding deadlines or facing design changes that made projects too expensive. For smaller charging companies, these pressures can make expansion particularly difficult because money committed to an unfinished location cannot easily support additional installations. The result is a development environment where uncertainty itself becomes an important financial risk.
Canada’s Growing Charging Network Still Has Important Gaps
Canada’s public charging infrastructure has expanded considerably, but abandoned developments highlight why the location and availability of equipment matter as much as national totals. According to Transport Canada’s EV dashboard, the country had 40,119 public light-duty charging ports as of June 2026, including 31,293 Level 2 ports and 8,826 faster Level 3 ports. The national average stood at approximately 27 electric vehicles per public charger. However, that figure does not reflect differences in regional availability, charging speeds, or the number of functioning ports at individual locations. A cancelled site could have accommodated several chargers, although the industry study did not establish exactly how many ports the 54 abandoned locations would have provided.
For Canadian drivers, these infrastructure gaps have practical consequences. Someone living in an apartment without dedicated charging might depend on public equipment for routine transportation, while families travelling between communities need dependable fast-charging stops along their routes. A federal Transport Canada evaluation cited research showing that 74% of surveyed EV owners considered public charging availability a significant factor in their purchase decisions. Delayed infrastructure could therefore affect consumers who are considering switching to an electric vehicle but remain uncertain about convenient charging. Although Canada’s network continues expanding, the challenge is ensuring that new installations reach communities where additional capacity and dependable access are genuinely needed.
Municipalities Could Remove Several Barriers Without Major New Spending
The Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council argues that many permitting obstacles can be addressed through relatively straightforward administrative changes. Its recommendations include recognizing EV charging spaces within municipal parking requirements, creating simplified approval pathways for routine retrofits, publishing clearer application guidelines, and designating municipal contacts who understand charging infrastructure. The organization also recommends predictable decisions within three months of receiving complete applications. In its research, 71% of respondents who answered the relevant question associated faster approvals with fewer or no permit requirements, while 57% identified having a single municipal contact as beneficial. Such changes could make the development process easier to navigate without eliminating necessary safety or accessibility requirements.
Some Canadian municipalities were already identified by participating organizations as examples of more effective approval practices. Respondents mentioned Vancouver, Victoria, Surrey, Langley, Regina, and Laval among communities they considered strong performers, although these assessments were not based on a comprehensive municipal ranking. The findings suggest that improvement does not necessarily require an entirely new regulatory framework. Better communication, consistent interpretation of existing requirements, and coordination with electricity distributors may help developers progress more efficiently. Ultimately, the abandoned sites illustrate that Canada’s EV charging expansion depends on more than government funding and private investment. Predictable local approvals and reliable utility connections will also determine how quickly proposed stations become operational infrastructure.
