Warrington West 132kV Reinforcementmyplanning.warrington.gov.uk/Planning/StreamDocPage/obj...e 132...

New 132kV electricity switching substation - Marsh Lane, Cuerdley, Warrington: Addendum to Planning Report 1

Warrington West 132kV ReinforcementNew 132kV electricity switching substation - Marsh Lane, Cuerdley, Warrington

Addendum to Planning Report

October 2012


Contents 1.0 Background

2.0 Additional Information

3.0 Conclusions

FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Revised Proposed Sub Station Layout & Associated Landscaping

Figure 2.1: Non Green Belt Options

Figure 2.2: Widnes Land Company Ltd Option

Figure 2.3: SSE Option

Warrington West 132kV Reinforcement4

1.0 Background

SUPPORTING REPORTS 1.1. The supporting reports submitted with the planning application in May 2012 included a

Strategic Optioneering Report October 2011 (SOR), a Planning Report October 2011 and an Environmental Appraisal of Alternative Sites Report October 2011. The SOR outlined the background to the assessment carried out in 2008 and identified that the Fiddlers Ferry/Carrington circuits are below the required Ofgem standard for security of supply which presents a risk to 190,000 customers and 78,000 households in the Warrington/East Cheshire area. Reference was made to the wider options considered. The SOR concluded that the studies carried out supported the need for reinforcement of the electricity 132kV network in the west Warrington area by building a switching substation to enable electricity to switch between the Sankey Bridges/ Warrington / Fiddlers Ferry circuits.

1.2. The Project Note January 2012 prepared as part of the pre-application consultation made reference to the SP Energy Networks decision to approve the investment in 2010 of around £15m with an anticipated completion date of 2013. The 2012 Project Note also outlined how SP Energy Networks reviewed options within the power station site which were discounted and presented two of these options.

1.3. The Planning Report reviewed options for the proposed substation in the Fiddlers Ferry area within both the power station site and the Green Belt, having regard to statutory requirements as set out in the Electricity Act 1989. Section 9 requires SP Energy Networks to provide an efficient, coordinated and economical system of electricity distribution and section 38, requires environmental impacts are minimised.

PLANNING REPORT OCTOBER 20111.4. The Planning Report noted the relevance of securing SSE’s agreement, as major land

owner in the area to the development proposals in order to bring forward a deliverable scheme. Section 2.0 in the Planning Report referred to SSE supporting the scheme on the basis that the existing overhead line to the east of the power station is removed.

1.5. Section 3.0 set out that SP Energy Networks in the first instance reviewed two site options within the Power Station site and being mindful of the need to locate the proposed substation close to the existing overhead lines, identified an option to the north east of the power station (the Operational Storage Option) and an option to the south west of the power station (the Coal Storage Option).

1.6. Having discounted these options, the Planning Report explained how SP Energy Networks subsequently looked to the east for alternative site options in the context of green belt policy. The planning report then outlined the exceptional circumstances for developing a Green Belt site.

ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL OF ALTERNATIVE SITES OCTOBER 20111.7. The Environmental Appraisal of Alternative Sites Report outlined the assessment of three

sites to the immediate east of the Fiddlers Ferry Power Station site and concluded that the site close to Marsh Lane to the south east of this area was the preferred siting location.

PLANNING APPLICATION MAY 20121.8. Having reviewed system design and site options, SP Energy Networks proceeded to

design the substation layout as indicated in the submitted drawings and illustrated in the Design and Access Statement April 2012. The scheme included a layout over an area of approximately 2ha with landscaping and new access arrangements.

ADDENDUM TO PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT AUGUST 20121.9. Further to the planning application in May 2012, SP Energy Networks reviewed its proposals

Extract from project briefing note January 2012

Existing 132 kV overhead line to be retained

Existing 400 kV overhead line to be retained

Substation location option

Key:

Liverpoolemail

New Stamp

Section A-A

Section illustrating proposed new substation elevation with planting

A

A

New 132kV electricity switching substation - Marsh Lane, Cuerdley, Warrington: Addendum to Planning Report

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map with the permission of Ordnance Survey® on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown copyright Licence No. EL273112

KEY:

NTS

5

FIGURE 1.1

REVISED PROPOSED SUB STATION LAYOUT & ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING

Liverpoolemail

New Stamp


in the light of comments received from local people. The revised proposals are set out in the Addendum to Planning Application Report August 2012. The main changes included placing overhead lines underground, phasing development to maintain where possible the openness of the area, increased landscaping around the substation compound and in the wider area, including the golf course, and repositioning the building. This amended scheme was subsequently approved by the SP Energy Networks Board in August 2012 with a revised updated total scheme cost of around £17m. This increased cost was accounted for by inflation over the 3 year intervening period and increased undergrounding cabling to remove the previously shown proposed overhead lines.

1.10. A further amendment to minimise to compound footprint was submitted in October 2012. The scheme as currently proposed is illustrated in Figure 1.1.

2.0 Additional Information

ALTERNATIVE SITE OPTIONS2.1. In October 2012, SP Energy Networks was advised by the Warrington Borough Council’s

Director of Planning that insufficient information of other non-Green Belt sites had been submitted, that the employment land designation which includes the power station site was applied for energy related uses and the derelict site to the west of the power station should be considered as an alternative.

2.2. In response to the above advice, SP Energy Networks considers it should be noted that the non-Green Belt option, the Coal Storage Option referred to in the Planning Report October 2012, emerged from an initial assessment of 6 non-Green Belt site options, as indicated in Figure 2.1.

2.3. The table below sets out these sites considered prior to identifying the Coal Storage Option. These sites were discounted for reasons stated in the table below, which mostly include the distance from the existing overhead line network and current day to day use as part of the power station operations.

Site Number Reasons site discounted

1 Remote from 132kV NetworkClose to properties.Close to pondsClose to Widnes Road (A562)

2 Remote from 132kV NetworkToo close to existing NG OHL (approx 35m)Close to pondsWould impact directly on block of woodland

3 Remote from 132kV NetworkLocated on land currently used for storage.Too close to cooling towers.

4 Remote from 132kV NetworkToo close to both the NG OHL and the cooling towers.

5 Remote from 132kV NetworkLocated on land currently used for storage and vehicle parking.

6 Remote from 132kV NetworkTo close to coal storages

2.4. From this initial assessment, SP Energy Networks identified the site to the south west of the power station which was partly a non-Green Belt/Green Belt site, as the main option. The Coal Storage Option indicated in the Project Note was based on the footprint of the initial proposed substation layout and positioned this area as close as possible to the Power Station site. This resulted in the required site area straddling the SSE and Widnes Land Company Ltd land ownerships. In seeking to minimise land take from the Green Belt and avoid existing site constraints in the interests of not disrupting landowners requirements, the development option was positioned south of the SSE coal storage site. This area was then discounted based on the dust and particles being deposited onto electrical equipment which would mean additional maintenance would be required to clean the apparatus and because of the distance from the existing 132kV network.

2.5. SP Energy Networks considered this to be a valid concern given the Fiddlers Ferry 400/132kV Substation is an indoor substation.

2.6. In response to the advice provided by the Director of Planning, this site has been further reviewed and SP Energy Networks has subsequently identified two sub options:

§ the Widnes Land Company Ltd Option (WLC), which is the area outside the SSE land ownership.

§ the SSE land option, which is an option wholly within the SSE land ownership;

2.7. In both cases, the network design is affected by existing site constraints that include;

§ need to cross the existing 400kV overhead line§ need to cross SSE operational access roads, railway and operational sites§ need to cross the Vyrnwy Aqueduct § need to cross SSE silt drainage channels



KEY:

NTS

7

FIGURE 2.1

NON GREEN BELT OPTIONS

Liverpoolemail

New Stamp


2.8. The main engineering design requirements, which apply to both sites, include:

§ Use of existing 300m overhead line incoming from 400kV/132kV indoor substation.

§ 4 incoming underground cables (2 cables per circuit) across the SSE part of the site to cross the existing 400kV overhead lines, railway lines and access roads

§ An additional duct alongside each circuit over the same length for future network upgrades to meet demand generated from major sites such os Omega, as it would be more economical to provide these when the drilling equipment is on site.

2.9. The WLC option, which is further to the south-west of the coal storage is based on an outdoor equipped substation. The SSE Option is based on an indoor equipped substation given its proximity to the coal storage. Furthermore, as a result of maintaining the SSE access road which is used to service and drain the silt from the drainage channels around the edge of this site, the site is further restricted in size and a Gas Insulated Substation is proposed.

2.10. The outgoing circuits would comprise 2 circuits from the new 132kV switching substation; the FH (Warrington) circuit which runs south of the power station operational land and then northwards and the EZ (Sankey Bridges) circuit which runs east west along the southern edge of the power station site and would join the existing tower circuit. The detail of the design would vary in each site option. As with the incoming circuits additional ducts would be installed to accommodate future network requirements when the drilling equipment is on site.

2.11. These two sites have been reviewed having had regard to their availability, suitability and viability, relevant considerations in terms of bringing forward a scheme compliant with statutory requirements as set out in Section 9 and Section 38 of the Electricity Act 1989.

Widnes Land Company Ltd Option (WLC)2.12. The WLC site option is placed further from the coal storage to limit the coal dust problem.

Based on the same footprint as the current scheme, the area excluding landscaping occupies approximately one half of the total site area. This is indicated in Figure 2.2.

2.13. The review of this site is as follows.

AVAILABILITY2.14. The site is not immediately available on the property market. SP Energy Networks has

made contact with the landowners and offered an equivalent price to the Marsh Lane site and no interest has been shown by the landowners. Were interest to be shown, SP Energy Networks would anticipate negotiations taking several months and in this context, the site is considered to be available in the medium term.

2.15. In the event of these negotiations not succeeding, the site could become available as a result of SP Energy Networks progressing site acquisition through compulsory purchase powers, and in this regard, the site could be considered to be available in the long term, if the CPO was successful.

2.16. The same considerations relate to acquiring the access rights along Johnson’s Lane to the site i.e. possibly acquire in medium term however more likely to be negotiated over longer term and require multiple CPOs. In addition, SP Energy Networks would need to acquire easements to cross the Vyrnwy Aqueduct from United Utilities, which might be agreed in the long term.

2.17. The availability excludes any time required for dealing with contamination.

SUITABILITY

Policy2.18. The site is within the Green Belt and outside the Policy EMP9 Employment Development

Opportunity Area.

Location2.19. This option is located 500m from existing network and positioned on the western half

of the WLC site so as to be furthest from the coal storage and limit dust deposition. This location would also be closer to the access road and Johnson’s Lane to the west, which would be the main access into the site.

2.20. The site requires substantial earth moving and tree clearance works. Furthermore the site is likely to be subject to contamination.

Siting2.21. The site has been placed in the corner of WLC site to limit impacts and is as a result, some

distance from any land uses (housing, power station operational land, agriculture and recreation) which might present a constraint.

2.22. Being located to the west of existing 132kV network would require cables to be installed across the Vyrnwy Aqueduct the 400kV lines, railway lines, access road and silt drainage channels.



NTS

9

FIGURE 2.2

WIDNES LAND COMPANY LTD OPTION

25mm

400m

260m

200m

100m

360m

260m

300m

200m

200m

220m

50m

50m

AIS

Existing Overhead line

Proposed Underground Cable

Proposed Tenchless duct route

New Overhead line tower

Existing Overhead line tower

Proposed access road

Site boundary

25mm

400m

260m

200m

100m

360m

260m

300m

200m

200m

220m

50m

50m

AIS







Site boundary

Liverpoolemail

New Stamp


Access2.23. Construction and maintenance access would be via Johnson’s Lane. This is an unmade

track and would require upgrading. It is in private ownership and SSE only have a right of access over the final third section.

Ground Conditions2.24. The site has been used for tipping spoil waste from railway cuttings and is made up

unstable ground. The site would need to be levelled. The costs of this work have been estimated up to £1m.

Environmental2.25. No significant adverse impacts are likely to arise.

Network Design2.26. As indicated above, placing the site to the west of the existing 132kV network results

in the need to extend the incoming circuits by about 470m, which with the 4no. cables required totals around 2,000m. The underground cables would be extended to run to the substation as it would not be economical to go from underground to overhead for such a short distance.

2.27. The 2no. outgoing circuits would also be placed underground in order to cross the same constraints in the SSE site. Whilst these do not extend to the WLC site, the underground cable would exit the substation as, with the incoming circuits, it would not be economical to go from overhead to underground in such a short distance.

2.28. As with the incoming circuits, additional ducts through the more constrained SSE part alongside the outgoing cables would be installed for the same reasons i.e. more economical when the drilling equipment is on site.

2.29. In the case of the FH circuit, the underground cable would be installed over a distance of 860m, which with 2no. circuits totals 1720m. A further 720m would be installed underground in order to remove the existing overhead lines across the SSE land which has always been a condition of any agreement with SSE. The undergrounding of the EZ circuit would be over a shorter distance of 500m where the circuit could then join the existing overhead line. The total cable section installed in this section would be around 3,000m. The use of cable sections introduces the need for cable sealing ends at each end of the cable length.

2.30. The substation layout is based on an outdoor compound (AIS) and would have the same footprint as that in the Marsh Lane option

VIABILITY2.31. SP Energy Networks would anticipate purchasing the entire area due to claims that the

proposals would otherwise sterilise the remaining site area, thereby increasing the overall acquisition cost. In addition, there is the added cost of acquiring rights of access. The total acquisition cost estimated is in the region of £1.5m.

2.32. The cost of constructing the access road to the required standard would add a cost of about £0.25m.

2.33. The cable installation cost is based on approximately £1m per cable km such that with around 2km, the incoming circuit costs are estimated at approximately £2m. The outgoing circuit costs amount to around £3m.

2.34. In addition, the installation costs for both incoming and outgoing are higher than normal as a result of the need for trenchless installation (directional drilling) to avoid the existing Vyrnwy Aqueduct, coal storage silt channel, railway tracks, roads and plant. The installation of underground cables also require cable sealing ends. Taking these additional requirements into account, the overall cost of the underground cabling for this option is estimated at around £12.5m.

2.35. With additional items such as the switchgear (£7m), the main component of the substation, and construction and ancillary costs such as building, roads, landscaping, fencing, ground preparation etc, overall, the costs amount to approximately £25m.

SSE Option2.36. This site is entirely within the SSE landownership. Given the proximity of this site to the

coal storage and the concerns regarding coal dust and particles, it is proposed that the substation compound would be an indoor design, as is the existing 400kV/132kV National Grid substation nearby. The proposed site is indicated in Figure 2.3

AVAILABILITY2.37. SSE have advised SP Energy Networks that it is not willing to negotiate on land within

its development area, any part of which it would prefer to safeguard for its own future requirements. The site is in this respect, considered not immediately available. Furthermore as with WLC Option SP Energy Networks would need to acquire rights of access and easements from third parties.

2.38. As SSE is also an electricity licensed operator, SP Energy Networks is unable to use its compulsory purchase powers so this would rule out the need for a CPO. Any acquisition would need to be agreed on commercial terms. To date, SSE has rejected any offer relating to land within the power station operational land on the basis that it considers this area invaluable to its own future requirements.



NTS

11

FIGURE 2.3

SSE OPTION

25mm

280m

260m

100m

360m

260m

180m50

m

GIS

100m

370m







Site boundary

Reactor Bay

25mm

280m

260m

100m

360m

260m

180m

50m

GIS

100m

370m







Site boundary

Reactor Bay

Liverpoolemail

New Stamp


2.39. On this basis, SP Energy Networks considers this site to be possibly unavailable. If the sites can be made available then this would be likely only in the longer term.

SUITABILITYPolicy

2.40. The site is wholly within the Policy EMP9 Employment Development Opportunity area which would support the proposed development.

Location2.41. This site is closer to existing network (150m) and also closer to the coal storage. Given

the proximity to the coal storage and the more restricted space between the coal storage and the railway lines, SP would at this location construct an indoor substation, known as a Gas Insulated Substation (GIS).

Siting2.42. The substation would be sited within a smaller site of around 0.75ha (1.8 acres) to fit the

land available.

Access 2.43. As with the WLC option, access would be via Johnson’s Lane, and would depend on

acquiring access rights from SSE and others, which would result in increased acquisition costs.

Ground conditions2.44. It is assumed that no ground stability constraints would arise, however the site might be

contaminated given the past uses.

Environmental2.45. No significant adverse impacts are likely to arise.

Network Design2.46. As with the WLC option, the incoming circuits comprise 4no. cables and given the same SSE

land constraints which require the need for directional drilling to install the cables, additional ducts would be fitted. The incoming cabling results in around 600m of underground cable.

2.47. The outgoing cable (x2 circuits) would require cabling over a distance of about 540m, a total of 1080m, added to which would be the 750m of underground cable on the section across the SSE land to the east of the power station on the FH circuit. In relation to the EZ circuit, the distance would be 180m for each cable length 360m), totalling in all around 2.2km of cable and ducting. As in the case of the WLC option, the use of cabling requires additional works such as the drilling and the installation of cable sealing ends, and the need to cross the viaduct, existing overhead lines, the railway tracks and roads.

2.48. The use of a GIS design would increase the building costs to house the plant and equipment.

VIABILITY2.49. SP Energy Networks would anticipate purchasing the site at a higher market rate given its

non Green Belt designation and with legal fees estimates this to be in the region of £0.75m.

2.50. The costs of the access road would be higher given the need to extend the access from Johnson’s Lane further into the SSE site.

2.51. The cable installation cost is based on the incoming and outgoing cable sections as described above, and the required ducting and cable sealing ends as also previously mentioned amount to around £8.75m.

2.52. The biggest difference in terms of the GIS substation would be in the cost of the building to house the equipment which doubles the building costs.

2.53. Overall costs would be in the region of £22.5m.

Summary of Site Options2.54. Having assessed both sites in terms of availability, suitability and viability, SP Energy

Networks would summarise as follows:

§ Both sites are not immediately available. § In addition there are third party easement and access rights to acquire.§ The WLC site is in the green belt.§ Both sites are constrained in terms of siting§ Both sites are difficult to access§ Both sites are likely to be contaminated and require substantial ground works§ Both sites do not give rise to any adverse environmental impacts§ Both sites present challenging network design issues§ Both sites involve additional implementation costs due to the network design

requirements.


3.0 Conclusion

ALTERNATIVE SITES3.1 SP Energy Networks previously reviewed alternative non-Green Belt sites prior to

preparing the Planning Report October 2011. Table 1 above indicates the site options and the main reasons why all bar one of these sites were rejected in 2011. This earlier exercise led to the inclusion of the Coal Storage option, which straddled the SSE land and the derelict site to the west of the power station.

3.2 It is explained above that this earlier option was dismissed because of its location close to the coal storage which led to concerns about dust and particles being deposited on the electrical apparatus which would require more maintenance and its location further from existing network. SP Energy Networks concluded that in balancing its statutory technical and environmental duties, it was justified in not pursuing this option and subsequently looked to site options east of the power station.

3.3 In reviewing the Coal Storage Option, SP Energy Networks has reconsidered these issues and identified two alternatives, the WLC option which is wholly within the Green Belt and could accommodate an open air substation and the SSE option which is wholly within the power station site and could accommodate an indoor GIS substation similar to the existing 400kV/132kV Fiddlers Ferry Substation.

3.4 The above assessment considers these two options in terms of their availability, suitability and viability, factors which inform SP Energy Networks’ appraisal of site options in terms of its statutory duties as set out in the Electricity Act 1989 which require it to develop and maintain efficient, coordinated and economical system of electricity distribution and minimise impacts on the environment.

OUTCOME OF ASSESSMENT3.5 Having compared these options, the WLC option is available in the longer term but has

a significantly higher implementation cost at £25m due to being located away from existing network and the constraints on the SSE site. The availability of both options is also undermined by likely problems of securing third party agreements. The SSE option is also not available and high in terms of cost at £22.5m.

3.6 Both sites are also heavily constrained which makes them unsuitable. In summary, neither site enables SP Energy Networks to meet its statutory duties.

Warrington West 132kV Reinforcementmyplanning.warrington.gov.uk/Planning/StreamDocPage/obj...e 132...

Documents

Transcript of Warrington West 132kV Reinforcementmyplanning.warrington.gov.uk/Planning/StreamDocPage/obj...e 132...