Power providers have argued people will have to go without electricity if they are made to bury an overhead transmission line on the outskirts of Perth to suit a developer intent on building over a thousand new homes.
Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission (SHET) made the claim in a submission to the Scottish Government as it considers whether to grant the company a “necessary wayleave” agreement to access private land west of Broxden to upgrade the 275kV line crossing it.
SHET had to apply to the government for the suggested agreement to be signed off by officials after landowners The John Dewar Lamberkin Trust (JDLT) declined to sign a voluntary agreement with the company which would have allowed workers the same access.
The JDLT, otherwise known as the Dupplin Trust, has previously argued allowing SHET to retain the existing overhead line on their land and upgrade it under the company’s preferred agreement will prevent them from building anything within 70 metres of the line.
Planning documents show the Trust hopes to build up to 1500 new homes west of Broxden and lawyers acting on their behalf have previously argued SHET ought to run any new upgraded line underground in order to free up more space for potential development.
However SHET has now told the government’s Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (DPEA) putting the line underground to suit the Trust would require people to go without power for unspecified periods while the work was done.
The company has previously said supplies would be maintained if workers were simply allowed to upgrade the existing overhead line.
Their submission to the DPEA said: “Any proposals to underground or deviate the equipment will, during the course of the works, incur major disruption and will require outages.
“Any proposed outages will need to be agreed with the National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc (NETSO) in accordance with the System Operator-Transmission Owners Code (STC) Procedure.
“In addition to the direct cost of any potential works (which would be ultimately recovered from GB electricity customers), it is likely that the National Grid Electricity System Operator (NGESO) would have to manage the resulting congestion on the depleted network.
“This would likely incur significant additional costs due to constraining of renewable and other generation output during the overhead line outage duration whilst the works were being undertaken.”
SHET has also argued in its submission the Trust does not have specific consent to build anything within the vicinity of the line in any case.
Councillors approved an “in principle” planning application from the Trust to create a “mixed-use” development west of Broxden at a meeting in June last year.
“As at the date of this submission, the primary application has not been formally determined and the current masterplan plans have not been approved,” SHET has told the DPEA.
“As such, whilst the principle of mixed-use development has been accepted, there is no planning permission identifying that the overhead line corridor can be developed for residential development.”
SHET has further argued putting the line underground will require the creation of two compounds they claim will be far more visually intrusive than the three towers holding the line in the air at the moment.
Their submission to the DPEA said: “Should the section of overhead line be undergrounded there would be a requirement to replace towers 136 and 139 with new 400kV Cable Sealing End Compounds (CSE).
“These sealing end compounds generally have a footprint of around 30m x 80m for a 400kV circuit. As the forces acting on a terminal tower are not balanced they need to be heavy in design and construction. Although screening in the form of trees/earth mounds can be beneficial, it is thought that the visual impact of the two new CSE would be much more significant than what is currently in place.”
The DPEA has arranged a hearing to consider SHET’s application for necessary wayleave and the Trust’s case for burying the line underground in January next year, after which it will decide whether the application ought to be granted or refused.
