Home   Stamford   News   Article

Subscribe Now

Osprey Charging Limited’s plans for electric charging points in Stamford near A1 turned down by South Kesteven District Council

Plans for ultra-fast electric vehicle charging points have been turned down amid concerns about ruining open countryside and anti-social behaviour.

Osprey Charging Limited applied to South Kesteven District Council to create a charging site on greenfield land south of Tinwell Road in Stamford, close to the A1.

Plans included 16 high powered chargers with an average re-charge time of 35 minutes, which is ‘significantly faster than the majority of chargers found in public car parks’.

The site in Tinwell Road which could be an electric vehicle charging station. Photo: Google
The site in Tinwell Road which could be an electric vehicle charging station. Photo: Google

More stories like this delivered straight to your inbox every morning - sign up to The Briefing here

While planning officers recommended the application for approval a number of objections were made, including from councillors Harrish Bisnauthsing (Lib Dem) and Richard Cleaver (Ind), who represent the area on South Kesteven District Council and spoke at a meeting on Thursday (December 7).

Coun Cleaver said for this application he’s received more objections than any other and ‘can understand why’.

Coun Cleaver, who is the leader of the council, said: “The fact it’s discreetly tucked away close to the A1 fuels concerns it will be a magnet for anti-social behaviour with people driving in and doing things they shouldn’t be.”

An example electric vehicle charging point
An example electric vehicle charging point

It was suggested by Coun Bisnauthsing the location is wrong, being too far from the A1, and Empingham Road would be more suitable.

As well as the 16 rapid chargers there would be seating and a toilet block, which would be unmanned.

Access to the new site would be from the A6121 Tinwell Road via the existing road down to South View Business Centre and Tinwell Pumping Station, which would be widened to six metres to allow for two-way traffic.

Speaking at the meeting a resident, who told the committee he was speaking on behalf of 20 people living in Tinwell Road, said: “It is an ill-thought out commercially driven proposal.”

Another neighbour of the site told the committee ‘we should not be concreting over open countryside when other suitable brownfield sites exist’, adding that it will attract ‘undesirable behaviour after dark’.

“Residents will have to live with the consequences long after the developer has moved on,” they said.

Under the plans the site would be accessible 24/7 and monitored by CCTV and sporadic checks from a security team, however this did not allay concerns.

Coun Charmaine Morgan said ‘it will be an ideal site for god knows what to happen’ and there would be ‘potential misuse of the toilet’, adding that, as a woman, she would be scared to be there alone at night.

“It is not just the fear of crime, it is the very likelihood there could be gatherings and a negative effect to residents,” Coun Pam Byrd (Ind) added.

Other concerns included increases in traffic and the cost of recharging.

Speaker Adam Brookes from Market Deeping voiced his support and urged the committee to approve the plans arguing they are in the public interest.

“We should not simply have the bare minimum, we need a degree of overprovision to ensure healthy competition between charging operators,” he said.

“EV is not the solution for everything but it is part of the solution for some things.”

Sav Patel from agent Strutt and Parker also sought to reassure the committee that the plans will have ‘no adverse impact’.

“The site is a logical location to serve both passing traffic to the A1 and the needs of the existing community,” he said.

As well as suggestions for a site closer to the A1, developers were also told putting chargers at an existing petrol station would be better.

Coun Tim Harrison (Ind) put forward the plans for refusal which gained the support of the majority of the committee.

Do you agree with the refusal, or should electric charging points be approved? Share your views in the comments below.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More