10.2.64 es annex b19.c abnormal indivisible loads access study

8/10/2019 10.2.64 ES Annex B19.C Abnormal Indivisible Loads Access Study

1/89

Volume 2

Environmental Statement Annexes

Walney ExtensionOffshore WindFarm

Annex

B19

.C


2/89

Prepared for

DONG Energy

33 Grosvenor Place

London

SW1X 7HY

Walney Offshore Wind Farm Extension.Abnormal Indivisible Loads Access Study


3/89

Copyright and Non-Disclosure Notice

The contents and layout of this report are subject to copyright owned by WynnsLtd save to the extent that copyright has been legally assigned by us to anotherparty or is used by Wynns Ltd under licence. To the extent that we own thecopyright in this report, it may not be copied or used without our prior writtenagreement for any purpose other than the purpose indicated in this report.

The methodology (if any) contained in this report is provided to you in confidenceand must not be disclosed or copied to third parties without the prior written

agreement of Wynns Ltd. Disclosure of that information may constitute anactionable breach of confidence or may otherwise prejudice our commercialinterests. Any third party who obtains access to this report by any means will, inany event, be subject to the Third Party Disclaimer set out below.

Third Party Disclaimer

Name Signature Date

Prepared by: Andy Pearce 22.05.13

Checked by: Martin Cleary 24.05.13

Approved by: Martin Cleary 24.05.13

Disclaimer

This report has been prepared in a working draft form and has not beenfinalised or formally reviewed. As such it should be taken as an indication onlyof the material and conclusions that will form the final report. Any calculationsor findings presented here may be changed or altered and should not be takento reflect Wynns Ltd opinions or conclusions.

Any disclosure of this report to a third party is subject to this disclaimer. Thereport was prepared by Wynns Ltd at the instruction of, and for use by, our clientnamed on the front of the report. It does not in any way constitute advice to anythird party who is able to access it by any means. Wynns Ltd excludes to thefullest extent lawfully permitted all liability whatsoever for any loss or damagehowsoever arising from reliance on the contents of this report. We do not howeverexclude our liability (if any) for personal injury or death resulting from ournegligence, for fraud or any other matter in relation to which we cannot legally

l d li bilit


4/89

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2

Contents & Executive Summary IPage i of iii

Contents

Executive Summary iii

1. Introduction 1

2. Highways Agency and Vehicle Legislative Requirements 3

2.1. Definition of Abnormal Indivisible Load (AIL) 3

2.2.

Legislation 3

2.3. Water Preferred Policy Requirements 4

3. Abnormal indivisible load movements - Highways Act 1980 4

3.1. Planning Permission 4

3.2. Recovery of excessive maintenance costs - Section 59 agreements 5

3.3.

The removal and replacement of street furniture 5

4.

Physical Restrictions affecting a Road Movement 5

4.1.

General 5

4.2. Headroom 5

4.3. Negotiability 7

4.4.

Structural Capability and Highway Capacity 8

4.5. Road Crust 8

4.6. Bridges 9

4.7. Underground Services 10

4.8. Speed 11

4.9. Road Works 11

5. Loads Considered for Delivery as part of the Walney Extension Project 12

6. High Level Review of Existing Information 13

6.2. Structural Information Historical Review of Access from Heysham Port to New Substation 16

6 3 Structural Information Historical Review of Access from Relevant to Cable Drum Access via


5/89


6/89

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2

Contents & Executive Summary IPage iii of iii

Executive Summary

DONG Energy (DONG) are preparing a Development Consent Order Application for the offshore

Walney Extension Wind Farm including an Environmental Impact Assessment for the up to 750MW

scheme. The onshore elements of the project, including the substation and cable route are located in

the vicinity of Heysham, Lancashire. An onshore cable route has been selected from Potts Corner to a

site selected for the proposed construction of a substation adjacent to a new National Grid Electricity

Transmission (NGET) site on the A683.

The Project will require the delivery of Abnormal Indivisible Loads (AILs) for the substation, including

transformers, and the cable will be delivered on drums also considered to be AILs. This report

considers the availability of a suitable AIL route to the proposed substation location and also the

primary route into the core of the alignment proposed for the buried power cables, from landfall to the

substation site, for a vehicle carrying an optimum drum specification.

Notwithstanding government policy and guidance the transformer height of 6000mm most probably

precludes the possibility of delivery of the transformer from the motorway network. It is therefore

most probable that the transformer will be shipped to Heysham Port. Although a 20 axle frame trailer

vehicle has been considered within this review it should be noted that without a formal approach to

the highway structural authorities there remains some doubt over the final arrangements that will be

acceptable to and structural restrictions en route.

It has been recognised that a variety of trailer configurations are possible candidates for the delivery

of the 30te cable drum. We have therefore considered both a worst case scenario and other less

rapacious vehicle arrangements in our assessment. It has been demonstrated that the plant and the

other vehicle arrangements presented by DONG Energy associated with the project can be embraced

by the envelope of the 30te cable drum vehicle configurations.

Access for 30te cable drums becomes difficult in Carr Lane beyond OS Reference SD 41597 57704 and

may necessitate temporary land acquisition which is also a high probability requirement for

construction plant vehicles considered within the report. Access onto the construction alignment at

this location can easily be achieved but will necessitate enabling works beyond track construction.

Detailed assessment of the route beyond this location would necessitate topographical survey to


7/89

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2.Contents & Executive Summary IPage i of iii

Contents

Executive Summary iii

1. Introduction 1

2. Highways Agency and Vehicle Legislative Requirements 3

2.1. Definition of Abnormal Indivisible Load (AIL) 3

2.2.

Legislation 3

2.3. Water Preferred Policy Requirements 4

3. Abnormal indivisible load movements - Highways Act 1980 4

3.1. Planning Permission 4

3.2. Recovery of excessive maintenance costs - Section 59 agreements 5

3.3.

The removal and replacement of street furniture 5

4. Physical Restrictions affecting a Road Movement 5

4.1. General 5

4.2. Headroom 5

4.3. Negotiability 7

4.4.

Structural Capability and Highway Capacity 8

4.5. Road Crust 8

4.6. Bridges 9

4.7. Underground Services 10

4.8. Speed 11

4.9. Road Works 11

5. Loads Considered for Delivery as part of the Walney Extension Project 12

6. High Level Review of Existing Information 13

6.2. Structural Information Historical Review of Access from Heysham Port to New Substation 16

6 3 Structural Information Historical Review of Access from Relevant to Cable Drum Access via


8/89

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2.Contents & Executive Summary IPage ii of iii

8.2. Structural Information 27

8.3.

Negotiability Information 29

8.4. On site engineering requirements for haul road 36

8.5. Additional Access Requirements to Beach Area for Other Plant 36

9. Swept Path Assessment of Carr Lane for Cable Drum Access 41

10. Site Access off Highway 43

11.

Hedgerows (permitted work), Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) and Bird Nests 43

11.1. Hedgerows 43

11.2. Permitted work 44

11.3. Tree Preservation Orders 44

11.4. Bird Nests 45

12. Transport General 45

13. Summary and Conclusions 46

Maps

Drawings


9/89

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2.Contents & Executive Summary IPage iii of iii

Executive Summary

DONG Energy (DONG) are preparing a Development Consent Order Application for the offshore

Walney Extension Wind Farm including an Environmental Impact Assessment for the up to 750MW

scheme. The onshore elements of the project, including the substation and cable route are located in

the vicinity of Heysham, Lancashire. An onshore cable route has been selected from Potts Corner to a

site selected for the proposed construction of a substation adjacent to a new National Grid Electricity

Transmission (NGET) site on the A683.

The Project will require the delivery of Abnormal Indivisible Loads (AILs) for the substation, including

transformers, and the cable will be delivered on drums also considered to be AILs. This report

considers the availability of a suitable AIL route to the proposed substation location and also the

primary route into the core of the alignment proposed for the buried power cables, from landfall to the

substation site, for a vehicle carrying an optimum drum specification.

Notwithstanding government policy and guidance the transformer height of 6000mm most probably

precludes the possibility of delivery of the transformer from the motorway network. It is therefore

most probable that the transformer will be shipped to Heysham Port. Although a 20 axle frame trailer

vehicle has been considered within this review it should be noted that without a formal approach to

the highway structural authorities there remains some doubt over the final arrangements that will be

acceptable to and structural restrictions en route.

It has been recognised that a variety of trailer configurations are possible candidates for the delivery

of the 30te cable drum. We have therefore considered both a worst case scenario and other less

rapacious vehicle arrangements in our assessment. It has been demonstrated that the plant and the

other vehicle arrangements presented by DONG Energy associated with the project can be embraced

by the envelope of the 30te cable drum vehicle configurations.

Access for 30te cable drums becomes difficult in Carr Lane beyond OS Reference SD 41597 57704 and

may necessitate temporary land acquisition which is also a high probability requirement for

construction plant vehicles considered within the report. Access onto the construction alignment at

this location can easily be achieved but will necessitate enabling works beyond track construction.

Detailed assessment of the route beyond this location would necessitate topographical survey to


10/89

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2.Page 1 of 46

1. Introduction

1.1. The contents of this report include land transport feasibility investigations into achieving

access for the future delivery of transformers and cable drums as planning in preparation for

future Abnormal Indivisible Load (AIL) movement delivery requirements to potential

development areas within the corridor of works that is being considered for construction of a

new connection to the Walney Offshore Wind Farm Onshore Substation.

1.2.

DONG Energy (DONG) are preparing a Development Consent Order Application for theoffshore Walney Extension Wind Farm including an Environmental Impact Assessment for the

up to 750MW scheme. The onshore elements of the project, including the substation and cable

route are located in the vicinity of Heysham, Lancashire. An onshore cable route has been

selected from Potts Corner to a site selected for the proposed construction of a substation

adjacent to a new National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) site on the A683.

1.3.

The Project will require the delivery of AILs for the substation, including transformers, and thecable will be delivered on drums also considered to be AILs.

1.4. DONG requires an indication as to the availability of a suitable AIL route to the proposed

substation location and also to the numerous sites that have been identified as potential

delivery locations for cable carrying vehicles. The potential locations where cable drum access

could be required is considered and the purpose of this report is to identify potential AIL

routes worthy of more detailed examination.

1.5. Each site is discussed in terms of AIL access within this report in terms of physical

negotiability requirements only. Structural investigations have not been carried out and, if

required, will follow consultation with the relevant stakeholders. It will be necessary as the

project proceeds to undertake structural investigations on the preferred routes to site in order

to confirm the structural capacity of the preferred routes identified to the selected sites. In

addition to the cable transporters it will also be necessary to consider other AILs such as plant

vehicles and heavy lift cranes.

1.6. The report aims to provide a preferred route to the proposed substation access point from the

public highway and also to each location being considered for cable drum deliveries with

details on remedial actions required to enable access to be achieved.


11/89


1.9. The report considers a conceptual load based on cable drum dimensions advised to Wynns Ltd.

by DONG at the commencement of the investigations. This is discussed further within Sections5.2 and 8.1.

1.10. No specific consideration has been given to an onsite cable carrying vehicle that is often

deployed during onsite movement of cables from storage to installation point.. Wynns Ltd. are

aware from other similar projects that on occasions the site installation vehicles will also need

to be road routed to the site as it is not built up on site. This vehicle could, based on previous

experience, also be an AIL due to its excessive width (>3.0m).

1.11. This document identifies a preferred route to the various locations detailed but does not

constitute a formal agreement for movement. Any future movement to the substation at

Special Order category or for the cable drums within Special Types General Order (STGO)

Regulations will require the appointed haulage contractor to notify the relevant statutory

authorities in the statutory manner. The legislative requirements for movement of the

transformers and cable drums are discussed in detail within Section 2.

1.12. The status of the entire road route proposed from and UK port of access or manufacturing

facility would need to be notified by the appointed haulage contractor prior to movement. For

the purposes of these investigations it is assumed that the proposed loads will be delivered by

sea to Heysham Port, although an additional high level review of the route to the general area

from the M6 motorway is also included in respect to STGO loads. No restrictions are

anticipated with STGO loads via the national motorway and trunk road network and this

report concentrates on access to the proposed site access locations from the Port of Heysham.

1.13. No specific on site movement requirements at the substation or within the areas being

considered for cable handling within the development corridor have been considered and the

access investigations conclude at the proposed site access locations where they exit the public

highway, although generic information in terms of the likely turning and loading requirements

necessary for the delivery of circa cable drums and transformers for consideration during

future design of the site entrances and access roads.

1.14. Specific on site access issues can be considered under separate work instructions if requested.

1.15. Potential transport configurations considerate of the delivery requirements from Heysham

Docks have been constructed and are discussed in detail within the report.


12/89


2. Highways Agency and Vehicle Legislative Requirements

2.1.

Definition of Abnormal Indivisible Load (AIL)

2.1.1. The Department for Transport, of which the Highways Agency (HA) is an executive agency,

state that the strict definition of an AIL refers to a load which cannot, without undue expense

or risk of damage, be divided into two or more loads for the purpose of carriage on roads and

which, owing to its dimensions or weight, cannot be carried on a vehicle which complies in all

respects with the standard vehicle regulations these are:

The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (as amended)

The Road Vehicles (Authorised Weight) Regulations 1998 (as amended)

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended).

2.1.2. All equipment should be stripped of their ancillaries before they are transported. The HA will

only accept that further dismantling is not required where it cannot be economically achieved

due to the requirement for its construction within specific factory environments or where

extremely high tolerances have to be maintained.

2.2. Legislation

2.2.1. Conventional heavy goods vehicles have an operating weight limit of 44 tonnes. The category

known as abnormal indivisible loads (AIL) covers those vehicles where the gross weight

exceeds 44 tonnes. An Abnormal Load is defined as that which cannot be carried under

Construction and Use (C&U) Regulations. Items which, when loaded on the load carryingvehicle exceed the weights encompassed by the C&U Regulations, but do not exceed Special

Order Permission Limits, are governed by Special Types General Order (STGO) categories 1 to

3 depending on size.

2.2.2. Where dimensions exceed 6100mm in width, 30000mm in rigid length or 150 tonnes gross

weight, Special Order from the Highway Agency (HA), is required.

2.2.3. Special Order category AIL movements are authorised by the Highways Agency (HA) Abnormal

Loads team, an executive agency of the Department for Transport (DfT), based in Birmingham.

2.2.4. STGO loads orders grant consent for loads that satisfy the following criteria:


13/89


clear working weekdays notice together with an indemnity to the highway and bridge

authorities on the route.

2.2.6. Any increase in the weight (or width) of cable drums into Special Order Category by adding

cable would need discussion with the appropriate permitting authorities such as the Highways

Agency. It should be noted that, as per point 2.1.1, increasing the length of cable may meet with

resistance as it would not be Indivisible and the load could be moved within STGO

regulations if required at smaller dimensions.

2.3.

Water Preferred Policy Requirements

2.3.1. The Department for Transport has adopted a water-preferred policy for the transport of AILs.

This means that, where an application is sought for the movement of a Special Order or VR1

category load (more than 5.0m width) by road, the Department, via its executive agency, the

HA, will turn down the application where it is feasible for a coastal or inland waterway route to

be used instead of road. The HA advise that this decision is based on a number of factors

including whether the load is divisible, the availability of a suitable route, the amount of trafficcongestion that is likely to be caused and the justification for the load to be moved. The

Highway Agency Abnormal Loads Team is the department responsible for the authorisation of

Special Order AILs and government policy is that the closest available port of access should be

used for the delivery of such oversize items.

2.3.2. In consideration of the water preferred policy to maximise the use of water for the movement

of Special Order (Above 150te gross) AILs wherever practicable, Wynns Ltd. are aware that inthe past transformers delivered to Heysham Substation have been required to utilise the

nearest available marine delivery location at the Port of Heysham.

2.3.3. It will be necessary to obtain an Agreement in Principle (AIP) from the HA but it is expected

that the HA will direct any Special Order loads to the Port of Heysham.

3. Abnormal indivisible load movements - Highways Act 1980

3.1. Planning Permission

3 1 1 Where a project is subject to Planning Permission (PP) and the development effects the


14/89


3.2. Recovery of excessive maintenance costs - Section 59 agreements

3.2.1.

Section 59 of the Highways Act 1980 allows the highways authority to raise a charge against a

user of the highway to cover repair works necessitated by excessively heavy or unusual loads

being carried on the road by that user. This provision is typically used where the passage of

heavy lorries to and from industrial premises or building sites causes excessive damage to the

road, requiring expensive remedial works by the Council. Under Section 59, the Council may

charge on such costs to the organisation responsible for the damage, the amount payable being

calculated as the excess cost of repair compared to normal maintenance costs for the road.

Rather than wait to be charged such excessive repair costs, the Council and the third party may

enter into an agreement under Section 59 whereby the third party accepts liability and makes

payment of an agreed sum to the Council to cover the excessive repair costs.

3.3. The removal and replacement of street furniture

3.3.1. The removal and replacement of street furniture required for the mobilisation of out of gauge

vehicles into existing sites then these are generally managed under Temporary TrafficRegulation Orders (TTRO) and Street Works Legislation. These are normally, but not

necessarily, organised by the haulage contractor. These requirements are generally to ensure

that the supervisors and operatives are competent and that the works will be carried out to a

prescribe standard with the appropriate traffic management in place. In some circumstance

the Highway Authority or LA will insist that their preferred contractors will carry out such

work.

4. Physical Restrictions affecting a Road Movement

4.1. General

4.1.1. Construction will entail the movement of many AILs to site during the period of its

construction. Not only the cable drums, but also construction plant.

4.1.2. As previously stated an abnormal load is one that is incapable of division into two or more

loads by reason of expense or risk of damage and which cannot be carried by a trailer

complying in all with the Road Traffic; Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986

(SI N 1078) (C12) (S38) d d (th C t ti d U R l ti ) h th


15/89


guaranteed and the actual height is posted on structures, such as bridges and gantries, which

are below this figure. The UK electricity supply industry and plant manufacturers generally

work to a travelling height of 4.95 metres (163) to allow for a safe margin.

4.2.2. Nationally, a system of High Load Routes exists in principle which provides for the movement

of high loads with travelling heights in excess of 4.95 metres and up to 6.0 metres (200).

These routes are normally off motorways and their load carrying capability varies as high

loads are not always exceptionally heavy loads. They have to be assessed carefully for each

individual high load.

4.2.3. The height of the load will be increased by the height of the trailer and any packing that may be

utilised to give a gross travelling height.

4.2.4. Where restrictions are caused by overhead services such as telephone lines and local power

distribution lines, it is feasible to raise or underground these along relatively short routes.

Arrangements are made with the responsible undertakers. This is, however, not usually

feasible over longer routes or where there are a large number of lines involved. It is usuallyimpossible to do anything to raise low bridges, but steel gantries with bolted connections can

sometimes be temporarily lifted.

Photograph 1

Overhead services being lifted to accommodate the transit of a vehicle height in excess of 6.0m en-

route between London Thamesport and Grain Power Station, Kent. Source: Abnormal Load Engineering.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/abloadescort/3534636100/in/photostream/


16/89


Photograph 2

Transformer being carried on a girder frame trailer under an unmarked bridge. Unmarked overhead

structures provide a minimum height clearance of 5.03m. Below this height obstructions are clearly

marked.

4.2.5.

Although there is no legal limit on the travelling height of a vehicle and its load, the

Department for Transport does advise hauliers to inform the Regional Electricity Companys

(REC), British Telecom and any other company with overhead service lines, of the route of the

proposed movements with a travelling height in excess of 5.0 metres. This enables

arrangements to be made for temporary or permanent re-arrangement of facilities.

4.2.6. It should be noted that the Electricity Supply Regulations 1988 refer to the minimum height

for overhead lines. Part IV, Section 13 of these regulations states that the height above groundof any overhead line or wire shall not be less than a specific height at any point where the line

is over a road depending on the voltages outlined below.

Not Exceeding 33000 Volts 5.8m

Exceeding 33000 Volts but Not Exceeding 66000 6.0m




4.2.7. It is recommended that overhead line authorities are approached to confirm recorded and safe

height clearances for all wires above the often referred to high load cut of point of 166

(5.03m). Just because a line is of a given height it does not mean that high loads will


17/89


large number of axles are needed in order to support the required load on the road and bridge

decks, this may result in a configuration that is unable to negotiate the particular route.

4.3.2. Where negotiability is restricted by the width or the curvature of the route, it can be increased

by the temporary removal of street furniture such as lamp posts, traffic signs etc., but

normally little can be done if passage is restricted by more permanent objects such as

buildings. These works are done with the agreement of the relevant local and highway

authorities. The negotiability of the route for transformer delivery is further discussed in

Section 7.1.

4.4. Structural Capability and Highway Capacity

4.4.1. The load carrying capability of roads depends to a great extent on axle loading rather than total

weight of the load being transported. There are three main limiting factors on the capability of

roads to bear heavy loads.

4.4.2.

The load carrying capability of the route has to be assessed in relation to the loadings thatwould be imposed by the total gross weight of the load plus transporter for each item to be

transported. The factors to be considered are the axle and wheel pair loadings; the road crust;

the effect of such loadings on bridges; underground services and speed. The tractor unit is

normally considered as a separate unit in terms of imposed axle and wheel loadings provided

that the tractor unit us not supporting any load through a fifth wheel. Indemnities are given to

highway and bridge authorities for any damage caused, usually by the appointed haulage

contractor.


18/89


Photograph 4

Carr Lane at OS Ref SD 4160 5760. Load moves away from camera. Damage to current carriageway

condition. Failure of the road surface due to sub-base movement towards soft verges. Pre and postinspection of the highway is advisable.

4.6.

Bridges

4.6.1. Bridges in Great Britain are designed and constructed in accordance with the loading standard

set down in British Standard BS 5400-2:2006 Steel, concrete and composite bridges.

Specification for loads, which in 2006 replaced the British Standard BS 5400: Part 2: 1978. This

Part of BS 5400 specifies nominal loads and their application, together with the partial factors,

to be used in deriving design loads. The loads and load combinations specified are for highway,

railway and foot/cycle track bridges in the UK.

4.6.2. This standard provides for two types of loading: Type HA and Type HB. Older bridges may not

have necessarily been designed to these standards but that does not prevent them from being

assessed for abnormal load carrying capability.

4.6.3. Type HA is the normal design loading in Great Britain suitable for normal vehicles permitted

under the Construction and Use Regulations rather than for those used for the carriage of

abnormal loads.

4.6.4. Type HB loading is a rating for exceptional industrial loads, e.g. electrical transformers,

generators, pressure vessels, machine presses etc., likely to use the roads in the area. It takes

account of the loading that would be imposed on to the highway by a standard 4 axle, 16


19/89


4.6.7. For example, 45 units of HB therefore correspond to a 180te vehicle on four axles at the worst

case spacing of those given above and with the vehicle fully aligned with the structure. None of

this is precisely duplicated within any of the transport configurations or in the track geometry

during transit of structures hence the variations indicated.

4.7. Underground Services

4.7.1. When assessing the effect of weight on underground services, such as water pipes, sewers and

service ducts, the loading imposed by individual wheels is normally considered.

4.7.2. The weight that can be safely borne by underground services varies depending on their age

and condition; the depth to which they are buried; and the strength of the road crust covering.

All these factors have to be considered when assessing the suitability of a road for the passage

of abnormal loads and assessment is usually carried out by the relevant authority or statutory

body concerned.

4.7.3.

Risk to services can be considered in relation to the weight to which they could be exposed bythe passage of normal vehicles permitted by the Construction and Use Regulations. This can

then be compared with that which would be imposed by the passage of the proposed abnormal

load movements, and with the pressure to which they may have been subjected by previous

movements of abnormal loads.

4.7.4. Experience gained by the heavy haulage industry generally is that underground services are

not damaged providing that road crust strength is to a reasonable standard and that the depth

of cover and condition of services are normal. The haulage contractor would be required to

provide indemnities against possible damage as a result of the movements. Where there are

known problems of particular concern, it is quite often the case that the consignor has to

provide the indemnity, or insurance cover.

4.7.5. On narrow or single track roads there is an increased probability that vehicles will transgress

onto the verges. This should be avoided as it can threaten services as well as open drainage

systems. The provision of laybys and traffic management systems is strongly advised.


20/89


Photograph 5

Carr Lane at approximate OS Reference SD 4150 5750. The road width has been overrun by vehicles.

Generally the condition of the road is good although C&U traffic is likely to lead to deterioration.Passing points will need to be constructed.

Photograph 6

Evidience of underground services on Carr Lane at approximate OS Reference SD 4151 5823.

Consultation as to the presence of underground infrastructure should be made.

4.8. Speed

4.8.1. STGO Category 3 loads have a 30 kph (20 mph) speed restriction when exceeding 4.3m wide

on non-motorway or dual carriageway roads.


21/89


Photograph 7

Carr Lane. Load moves away from camera. Example of widening works in progress with associated

traffic management at the time of route inspection.

5. Loads Considered for Delivery as part of the Walney Extension Project

5.1. Transformers

5.1.1. The transformer transport dimensions advised by DONG on 19.04.13 for consideration within

the report are as detailed below.

Length 13m

Width 5mHeight 6m

Weight 325te

5.1.2. The height of the transformer is larger than those typically transported in the UK but for the

purposes of these investigations it is assumed the 6m height is the worst case transport height.

5.1.3.

Despite the above, some observations which need to be accounted for during the planning of

transformer delivery to the proposed site including the potential trailer arrangements are

included within Section 7.1.

5.2. Cable Drums


22/89


5.3. Other Plant

5.3.1.

The vehicles detailed in Table 1 will also be required to access the beach from the bottom of

Carr Lane to complete the works.

Table 1. Other Plant Requiring Access via Carr Lane

Item Length (m) Width (m) Weight (te)

Flatbed Lorry 18 3 44

Excavators 10 3 25

Mobile Crane 11 2.6 40

5.3.2. It has been demonstrated that the plant dimensions above are within the envelope of the 30te

cable drum vehicle configurations (see Drawing Ref. Dong-WE-Comp01) considered during the

swept path assessment process and discussed further within Sections 8.4 and 9.. However, a

specific transport drawings, for these items, have been produced which detail conceptual

delivery arrangements for the additional items of plant and there access requirements.

5.3.3.

It should be noted that due to the concentrated wheel loadings of mobile cranes it is possible

that these transport arrangements will be considered more onerous to the structural

authorities than the vehicles carrying the cable drums.

6. High Level Review of Existing Information

6.1. Port of Heysham Historical Review

6.1.1. No specific review of the current status of Heysham Port for the delivery of transformers and

cable drum components has been undertaken within this report and the following information

is based on existing information known to Wynns Ltd. The report was last investigated in

detail during 2010 and information obtained at that time is discussed below. A plan of the port

environment in terms of the opportunities for offloading AILs is attached as D-WDS HP01

(consrtructed during the West Duddon Sands Investigations and reviewed).

6.1.2. Heysham Port is part of the Peel Ports Group. The harbour comprises several alongside berths

and Ro/Ro ferry terminals connected to Heysham Lake by a 91m wide channel. The harbour is

subject to a Spring tidal range of 8.3m and a Neap tidal range of 4.5m.

DONG E I 13 760 W l E t i Off h Wi d F I AIL A I 31 05 13 I V2


23/89


6.1.6. There are various available sites for offloading of transformers. These are the North Quay and

the South Quay within Heysham Port and the Ro/Ro berth situated on the quay at Heysham

Power station, known as the West Wall. In addition there is also a 200te capacity link span

within the port.

6.1.7. The Power Station/West Quay is situated close inside the Southern side of the port entrance

and is 170m long. It is considered suitable principally for Roll on/Roll off (Ro/Ro) operations.

Use of a floating crane would be feasible. However the use of geared vessels and coasters and

mobile heavy lift cranes is restricted by the limited depth of water alongside the quay wall and

the very limited rigging area adjacent to the quay and there is a probability that the use of amobile crane would require significant temporary works to provide a sufficient crane pad and

mobilisation area. The Power Station/West Quay would not be expected to be an option for

loads for the Walney Extension project and is primarily used for deliveries to the adjacent

power station.

6.1.8. The South Quay is 460m long and whilst it could possibly be considered for offloading by way

of Lift on/Lift off (Lo/Lo) operations with a mobile crane but in 2010 this was not a preferredlocation of the port to deliver transformers. It is understood that due to concerns about the

crane rails it would be necessary for mobile cranes to sit at least 11-16m from the quay edge.

Heysham Port advised in 2010 that at present they have no specific guidance as to which parts

of the quay are able to accommodate the use of a mobile crane and which are not. The port

indicated that this is to be addressed in the future internally and further information may be

available in the future. Geared vessels would however be able to work at the quay and offload

directly to waiting road transport vehicles. The suitability of the South Quay for Lo/Lo wouldneed to be confirmed.

6.1.9. Historically Heysham Port Ltd, have advised that the area most suitable for the handling of

heavy cargoes within the harbour was the North Quay (notwithstanding the Ro/Ro berth on

the West Wall at the Power Station).

6.1.10. The North Quay is situated along the North side of the Harbour. It is 290m long, the outer

140m of which form part of a marine supply base for the South Morecambe Gas Field and is

frequently used by supply vessels. The inner section (Eastern end) of the quay is a general-

purpose berth.

DONG Energy I 13 760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm I AIL Access I 31 05 13 I V2


24/89


Photograph 8

Heysham Port North Quay looking west.

6.1.11. The Westward section of the quay is regularly dredged to a depth of 4.5m at LAT, however the

Eastern end of the quay is not included in the dredging regime and the berth is likely to be dry

at low water during spring tides.

6.1.12. Height above CD is 12.04m for all quays at Heysham (-4.9m OD), this results in a water to quay

height of 2.64m @ MHWS and 4.64m @ MHWN.

6.1.13. To avoid grounding at the eastern end of the quay, unloading operations would have to be

performed within a window either side of high water. The duration of this window will be

dependent on whether the tide is spring or neap and the draft of the vessel utilised and issubject to determination of the exact berth bottom depth.

6.1.14. Although technically it is expected the North Quay would be suitable, it is necessary to

maintain a sterile area for the period of time needed for the erection of the crane, unloading of

the unit and decommissioning. The availability of sufficient space for the erection and

operation of a mobile crane suitable to unload the transformers under consideration would be

dependent on operations within the port at the time of requirement and would need to beconfirmed with the port authority.

6.1.15. It would be necessary to also consider the timings of ferry services that operate to Ireland and

the Isle of Man to ensure that they are not affected by operations within the port.

DONG Energy I 13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm I AIL Access I 31 05 13 I V2


25/89


6.1.18. Egress through the port complex to the public highway was advised in 2010 as being feasible

by the port authority. All roads are marked by temporary barriers and can be changed to

enable access as required. Specific access requirements will need to be confirmed at the time

of movement in terms of how they impact on existing operations but are expected to be able to

be accommodated.

6.1.19. Egress from the port is achievable from the North Quay via the port gates onto Shore Road and

Port Way.

6.1.20.

An alternative egress via Princess Alexandra Way exists but it is not recommended that this isconsidered for transformer access. This is due to the need to cross the port level crossing,

which is understood to be under the ownership of EDF Energy (formally British Energy), which

has negotiability limitations as well as third party access to be confirmed. In addition access

would require to travel over the Princess Alexandra Road Railway Bridge which has been

subject to ownership disputes in the past. Although at present it is understood that Network

Rail are responsible for the bridge, long term assessment regimes need to be confirmed with

the highway authority (Lancashire County Council) and principle inspection and assessmentprograms have not resulted in recent routine assessments being completed to our knowledge.

6.1.21. From the Power Station Quay there are two possible options to access the public highway.

Firstly access through the power station to the port complex, at which point it would be

necessary to removing fencing to enter the port. This would then require egress from the port

via the methods already discussed above. Such access would require agreement from EDF

Energy as operators of the Heysham Power Stations.

6.1.22. In summary there are various options for offloading and storage of transformers within the

port and no problems are expected with the need to deliver transformers of circa 200te nett

weight to Heysham. Heavier transformers would require further investigative works to

confirm access.

6.1.23. No specific consideration has been given to the access requirements for cable drums but no

technical limitations are expected with the main issue to overcome expected to be the

negotiation of commercial agreements with the port for offloading and storage.

6.2. Structural Information Historical Review of Access from Heysham Port to New Substation

DONG Energy I 13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm I AIL Access I 31.05.13 I V2.


26/89

DONG EnergyI13 760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2.Page 17 of 46

6.2.3. Available information indicates that in 2010 Lancashire County Council advised that 14 and 20

axle girder frame trailers and 14 axle flattop trailers were able to cross this structure when

loaded with 200te nett transformers. The current suitability would need to be clarified,

especially as the size of transformer now being considered is understood to be 325te.

6.2.4. There are no other significant structures on the route from Heysham to the proposed

substation access gate.

6.3. Structural Information Historical Review of Access from Relevant to Cable Drum Access via

Middleton

6.3.1. Wynns Ltd are aware from other works in the area that transformers of approximately 190te

nett transport weight have been delivered to the National Grid Heysham Substation in the past

and the access to this site has traditionally been via Middleton Road and Borras Lane from the

A683 and A589 roundabout.

6.3.2. The Middleton Road Railway Bridge is owned by Network Rail (Reference MHH/B/6) and it

would be necessary to confirm the bridge is able to accommodate the proposed cable drum

carrying vehicles but no problems are expected for this size of load. Publically available

information from Network Rail indicates that the bridge is able to accommodate loads of at

least 66te gross weight without the need for any specific assessment checks by Network Rail

engineers. Loads in excess of this weight would need to be considered by Network Rail in

more detail.

6.3.3.

Previous work undertaken for DONG in respect to the West of Duddon Sands project

considered this route for transformers of up to 200te transport weight. Network Rail advised

in 2010 that the Middleton Road Railway Bridge was able to accommodate the 14 and 20 axle

girder frame trailers for 200te nett loads but they did not approve access over the bridge for

flattop configurations.

6.3.4. We are not aware of the final as built weight for the West of Duddon Sands Substation

transformers at the substation that is presently under construction.

6.3.5. This route from Heysham via Middleton Road was according to available records used to

deliver a 151te nett transformer to the existing National Grid Substation in 2005.

6 3 6 Th i ti f thi t id f H h P t t b th th b t ti d

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2.


27/89

gy yPage 18 of 46

6.4. Structural Information Historical Review of Access from M6 Motorway

6.4.1.

The route from M6 junction 34 via Lancaster City Centre has traditionally been limited interms of the weight of loads able to cross over the Rive Lune Bridges (Greyhound Bridge) in

Lancaster. In the past this route has been limited to loads with axle weights of no more than

12te. Physically there is not expected to be a restriction to the cable drums currently expected

to be required when routing from junction 24 through Lancaster although caution will be

required on the one way system through the city where the loads would be taking up the full

width of the road. Detailed discussions with Lancashire County Council will be necessary to

confirm which loads could be structurally approved by Lancashire County Council on thebridges over the River Lune.

6.4.2. An alternative to access through Lancaster is to travel via the A589, A5105 and A6 coastal

route via Hest Bank and Carnforth to and from M6 junction 35. This requires consideration of

a low bridge at Carnforth. Our records suggest that the marked height is 139 (4.119m) but

that the centre clearance recorded by Lancashire County Council is 4.8m. Should any of the

loads be approaching the maximum height permitted by Lancashire County Council then itwould be appropriate for a more detailed survey of the bridge to be undertaken if this route is

considered further. Measurements taken in 2005 showed that the centre of the arch has a

height of 4.995m although these measurements would need to be confirmed but it is expected

that access could be achieved for cable drum components subject to clarification.



28/89

Page 19 of 46

indications from Network Rail and Lancashire County Council that the structure would be

filled in or propped in the future. Publically available information from Network Rail indicates

that the bridge is able to accommodate loads of at least 105te gross weight without the need

for any specific assessment checks by Network Rail engineers. Loads in excess of this weight

would need to be considered by Network Rail in more detail.

6.4.5. The new Heysham link Lancaster Bypass was awarded planning consent during March 2013

and it is understood to be being planned for construction at 45HB units and therefore is

expected to offer potential for AIL access from the M6 to Heysham but the exact timescales and

suitability for loads associated with the Walney Extension project would need to be confirmedwith Lancashire County Council. This would potentially offer a more appropriate route from

the M6 to the development area as it will rejoin the A683 to the west of Lancaster City centre.

6.4.6. The route from the M6 motorway would not be expected to be technically feasible for the

delivery of transformers of the size considered in this report, irrespective of the Water

Preferred Police previously discussed. This is due to both structural and negotiability

limitations on potential routes from and including the M6.

7. Transformer Access to Proposed Walney Offshore Wind Farm Onshore Substation

7.1. Transport Configurations

7.1.1.

The current proposals for transformer transport heights of 6m will increase the difficultiesassociated with the delivery from Heysham Port to the proposed Substation. The issues on the

route are discussed in Section 7.2 and 7.3 and although there are no overhead bridges on the

route, there are overhead power lines and telephone lines where it may be difficult to secure

access. The height of 6m would make delivery of flattop and SPMT trailers difficult to achieve

due to the presence of overhead power lines and the use of girder frame trailers would be

expected to be necessary to reduce the impact on overhead wires, although at 6m height, even

when loaded in a girder frame the load would be regarded as high.

7.1.2. Girder frame trailers are presently operated in the UK by Abnormal Load Engineering (ALE) up

to 400te capacity, Allelys Heavy Haulage Ltd. up to 370te capacity and J B Rawcliffe/GCS

Johnson up to approximately 180te capacity.



29/89

Page 20 of 46

to move the transformer from Heysham Port. There is a high probability that following

presentation of these transport proposals to the highway authorities that the vehicle could

increase in size.

There is a remote possibility that a 6000mm high transformer could be transported ion a flat

top trailer arrangement as depicted in Dong-WE-TC02.

7.1.5. There are numerous haulage contractors within the UK who are currently operating flat top

trailers of the capacity required:

Abnormal Load Engineering

Allelys Heavy Haulage

Mammoet

J B Rawcliffe and Sons

R Collett & Sons Ltd

Sarens

7.1.6.

The omni-direction manoeuvrability of the SPMT vehicle provides for the most effectiveinstallation process to be developed on site. The turning radii and vertical curve requirements

of the vehicle should be considered during the site design process if these arrangements are to

be utilised.

7.1.7. The limitation to flattop and SPMT trailers is the fact that they increase the overall transport

height of the load by approximately 1m plus of minor ground clearance levels specific to each

equipment provider. Typically girder frame trailers are used to reduce the transport height tothe minimum feasible to achieve access underneath structures and overhead wires etc as

previously discussed. However, girder frame trailers are also sometimes required due to their

load spreading characteristics and increased axles which reduce the axle loads imparted by the

vehicle on to structures which are crossed.

7.1.8. It is possible that, irrespective of the preference for access on a flattop of SPMT trailer for

general negotiability requirements that the structural authorities may require that a largergirder frame trailer is necessary to obtain structural approval for the 325te transformers when

crossing the A683 Railway Bridge.

7.1.9. Ultimately the site access delivery vehicle will be determined by the final transport dimensions

of the transformer and the loaded trailer arrangement required to secure structural clearance

DONG EnergyI13-760 Walney Extension Offshore Wind FarmIAIL Access I31.05.13 I V2.P 21 f 46


30/89

Page 21 of 46

Exit Port on North Quay and Shore Road

Turn right u/c Port Way

Turn left A589 Rothesay Road

Continue A589 Trumacar Lane

Continue on A683

Turn left at roundabout and into new access road to be constructed.

7.2.3. The above access from the port would need to be confirmed with the port authority and other

egress points may be preferred but in general access is expected to be feasible.

7.2.4. As previously stated the railway bridge on the A683 to the east of the Middleton Road

roundabout is understood to be within the ownership of Lancashire County Council and the

suitability of the bridge to accommodate heavy AILs associated with the delivery of

transformers to the new substation location would need to be confirmed.

7.2.5. There are no other significant structures on the route from Heysham to the proposed

substation access gate.

7.2.6. No specific enquires have been made to the structural authorities who need to be approached

to confirm the route is structurally acceptable and it is recommended that this is undertaken to

confirm the route is acceptable and what size of trailer would be required to obtain structural

clearance.

7.3. Negotiability Information

7.3.1. The negotiability of the proposed route from the Port of Heysham to the substation entrance

point on the A683 is discussed in the following notes and photographs.



31/89

Page 22 of 46

Photograph 11

Port Way exit from Heysham Port. Load approaches camera from left of photograph. Girder frame

trailers in excess of 20 axles may require removal of street furniture on the inside of the bend. Theexact requirements should be confirmed when the final transport weight of the transformers is

confirmed.

Photograph 12

Port Way/A589 Rothesay Road junction. Load moves away from camera and turns left. Street

furniture removal will be required for girder frame trailers of 20 axles or more. The exactnegotiability requirements should be clarified once the final transport weight of the transformer, and

therefore associated carrying arrangement, has been confirmed.



32/89

Page 23 of 46

Photograph 13

A589 looking west. Load approaches camera. Note overhead wires (telephone). This is an example of

one of four areas on the A589 Rothsay Road/Trumacar Lane where telephone wires cross the A589.Any load in excess of 5m will need to consult with British Telecom to confirm access requirements

including possible temporary lifting of wires.

Photograph 14

A589/Middleton Road Roundabout looking east. Load moves away from camera.



33/89

Page 24 of 46

Photograph 16

A683 looking west. Load approaches camera. Note overhead wires (power). Confirmation of

acceptable height clearances for any loads in excess of 5m transport height will be required.

Photograph 17

A683 looking east at the approach to the roundabout where proposed site access is to be developed.



34/89

g

overall transportation dimensions, minimum turning radii, vertical curve axle, wheel and

ground loadings. These conditions should be considered during the design phase. However, as

previously stated the exact requirements for access will be determined by the trailer required

to obtain structural clearance over the A683 railway bridge owned by Lancashire County

Council.

7.3.3. It should be noted that no specific work has been undertaken in terms of on-site access and

movement of the transformer, where very high ground loadings should be anticipated, have

been considered within this report.

8. Cable Drum Access to Proposed Cable Trench Access Points

8.1. Transport Configurations

8.1.1. Based on information available at commencement of these investigations and with regard to

the issues detailed in Section 5 in terms of generally available load heights, it is assumed thatroad transport configuration would utilise a bed trailer or cylinder bridge type configuration

similar to that shown in the photographs below. Specific transport configurations are

discussed further within Paragraph 8.1.7.

Photograph 19

General arrangements of Low Loader, Goose Neck Semi Trailer.Source: ZizEgineering



35/89

Photograph 20General arrangements of Vessel Bridge.Source: Mar-Train

8.1.2. There are numerous haulage contractors with equipment able to carry the cable drums within

STGO Category 2 and these have been used to inform and produce the conceptual transport

drawings considered within this report. As various haulage contractors are available,

competitive tendering for the transport of cable drums is viable. For the general purposes ofthis investigative work we have produced transport arrangements considerate of a maximum

30te nett cable drums as initially requested by DONG at the commencement of these

investigations.

8.1.3. Varying incremental size of drums up to say 100te (to remain within STGO categories) can be

determined too if necessary for specific sites but loads particular to these variations have not

been produced at this moment in time.

8.1.4. Due to the expected size of the components it is proposed to transport within the Special Types

General Order (STGO) regulations as a Category 2 or 3 as the gross load will be less than 150te.

It will therefore not be necessary to comply with legislation regarding Special Order

movements, unless structural limitations on any route identified in the future require larger

trailer arrangements (for example to reduce axle loadings) to deliver to site. These loads,

although still AILs, are not in need of Special Order permissions and therefore are not directed

by the HA to be delivered via the nearest port of delivery. These loads are expected to be

delivered by road from the UK port of delivery or manufacturing facility.

8.1.5. To maximise expediency during emergency mobilisation we suggest that the most appropriate

way forward is to avoid the abnormal load Special Order (SO) process (8 to 12 weeks



36/89

8.1.7. Dong Energy has advised that the cable drum dimensions being considered for the project are

400mm diameter, 3000mm deep and 30te. The manufacture has not been advised and it has

therefore been assumed that the drums could be delivered from the continent possibly using

scheduled ferry crossings to anywhere within the UK using the manufacturers preferred

transport contractor. In these circumstances it is possible that varying trailer arrangements

could be presented; we have therefore considered a number of transport configurations within

this study. Because they have a small area of contact, large cable drums cause high point loads.

This means that the demands on the support arrangements and transport are very high. In

order to avoid point loads, load distribution frames must be used with heavy cable drums.

These load distribution frames must be chosen to match the weight of the cable and thepackaging and the expected load-bearing capacity of the loading area. The transport of 30te

drums requires the use of heavy duty trailers specially designed for abnormal loads. A series of

drawings have been constructed and are discussed below:

Drawing Reference Dong-WE-CD02 shows the 30te carried within a vessel bridge. This is often

a preferred transport arrangement as it affords some side protection to the cable drum and

minimises the height of the transport arrangements. The disadvantage of this arrangement isthat it increases the overall width of the transport arrangements and the likely-hood of conflict

in narrow lanes with tight bends such as is the case with Carr Lane. Underside protection is

also required with this arrangement. The 4 axle arrangements shown in this drawing is what

we believe is likely to be a worst case scenario for the 30 tonne cable drum manufactured

anywhere within the European Union.

Commonly 30te drums are carried on the bed of a low loaders. In this arrangement it ispossible to narrow the vehicle to the same width of the cable drum therefore minimising the

impact of negotiability. It does have an increased transport height although the transportation

of a 4000mm drum on such a trailer does not exceed the standard height of unmarked

structures within the UK. Drawing Reference Dong- WE-CD04 shows the drum carried in a

similar fashion to that of 2) above but on a bed rather than within a vessel bridge the overall

transport height will be circa 4790mm reducible to about 4540mm.

Drawing Reference Dong-WE-CD04 is the same arrangement as 3) but with a 3 axle

arrangement rather than 4 this has a slight impact on ground loadings of approximately 12%.

Drawing Reference Dong-WE-CD05 is also a regularly available cable drum transporter but


37/89



38/89

Continue Middleton Road and continue as per original route detailed in 8.2.2

8.2.9.

As discussed in Section 6.4 this would involve access through the low railway bridge atCarnforth and over the Network Rail Bridge at Hest Bank on the Coastal Road (A5105).

8.3. Negotiability Information

8.3.1. The route from the A683/Middleton Road roundabout is shown in the following notes and

photographs:

Photograph 21

Middleton Road Railway Bridge looking south. Load moves away from camera. Structural status to be

confirmed with Network Rail.



39/89

Photograph 23

Middleton Road/Carr Lane. Load moves away from camera and turns right into Carr Lane for sites

accessed on Carr Lane. For access to the site to the east of Middleton village (DONG Work Areas 14, 15and 16) the load bears left, remaining on Middleton Road.

Photograph 24

Middleton Road/Carr Lane. Reverse angle.



40/89

Photograph 26

Carr Lane, exiting Middelton. Load moves away from camera.

Photograph 27

Carr Lane, Middelton. Load moves away from camera. Site compound presently on right associated

with the West of Duddon Sands project.



41/89

Photograph 29

Carr Lane at OS Ref SD 4206 5850. Load approaches camera.

Photograph 30

Carr Lane. Load moves away from camera.


42/89



43/89

Photograph 35

Carr Lane. Load moves away from camera. Construction compound for West of Duddon Sands

Offshore Wind Farm cable works is shown on the right. Cable laying in progress. A temporary accesspoint for cable drum vehicles has been provided.

Photograph 36

Carr Lane. Load moves away from camera.



44/89

Photograph 38

Carr Lane at OS Ref SD 4160 5760. Load moves away from camera. Damage to current carriageway

condition. Potential alternative access to land would be to avoid turning right and create and accessstraight ahead into land shown on the landowners and work area maps provided by DONG Work Area

10 refers.

8.3.2. The location shown above is understood to be the most southern of the proposed site access

points for cable drums and is located at approximate OS Reference SD 4160 5760. Access

beyond this location for 30te cable drums becomes difficult and may necessitate land

acquisition which is also high probability for construction plant vehicles. Detailed assessment

of this would necessitate topographical survey to confirm access. It is proposed that a new

access road is constructed to continue straight ahead away from the camera.

8.3.3.

The remainder of the route via Carr Lane to the beach is discussed in Section 8.5 in terms of

potential access requirements for other items of construction plant.

8.3.4. In addition to Carr Lane and the possible access points for cable drum vehicles discussed above

as far as DONG Work Area 9, it is understood that access could also be considered for cable

drum access from Middleton Road to the east of Middleton village providing access to the

proposed DONG Work Areas 14, 15 and 16. No restrictions are anticipated with obtaining

access to these locations from Middleton Road as long as site access off the public highway isdesigned to accommodate cable drum vehicles.

8.3.5. A further location where access may be needed for cable drums is to the north of the cable

trench area opposite the substation location on the A683 which is shown in plans provided by



45/89

Photograph 39

Road to waste transfer facility. Possible site access for cables to the left (east) of this road at

approximate OS Ref SD 4231 5989. DONG Work Area 19 refers.

8.4. On site engineering requirements for haul road

8.4.1. As outlined in Section 5.3 DONG Energy have requested consideration of other plant and

Construction and Use vehicles auxiliary. The vehicle profiles of the templates constructed for

consideration during swept path assessment are listed below:

DONG Energy have advised that the excavation equipment will include 21te excavators. A

typical transport arrangement for this of plant has been portrayed within Drawing Reference

Dong-WE-EX01

Drawing Reference Dong-WE-Aux01 shows the negotiability characteristics of a typical heavy

lift crane auxiliary Construction and Use Vehicles that are likely to require access to the site

and have therefore been considered within this study.

Drawing Reference Dong-WE-Comp01 is a composite of all the above drawings and shows that

the worst case transport arrangement is the 30te cable drum carried within a 4 axle bridge

trailer.

The swept path assessment has therefore been primarily based on the 30te cable drum

configuration; impact of this vehicle and the aforementioned vehicles upon Carr Lane is further



46/89

8.5.2. It is understood that DONG Energy requires general advice as to the suitability of this final

section of road for general construction traffic, but not specifically for the cable drum loads

previously discussed.

8.5.3. It has been demonstrated that delivery of the 30te cable drum is achievable without

disturbance to third party ownership to Carr Lane at OS Ref SD 4160 5760. After this location

there is a high probability of conflict with third party ownership. Indications are that conflict

may extend into the transport arrangements necessary for the delivery to site of a 21te

excavator. An assessment of this vehicle (Drawing Ref. Dong-WE-Ex01) is discussed within

Section 9 which considers swept path implications. Discharge of excavation plant for selftravelling is sometimes carried out but remains subject to highway and police authority

notification.

Photograph 40

Carr Lane at Middle Brows Farm. Load moves away from camera. Use of the outside of the corner on

potentially private land would assist access. However the swept path assessment indicates that thereis a high probability of oversail of the land to the inside of the bend (see Drawing Ref. Dong-WE-

SPA01-Sheets 18-21).



47/89

Photograph 42

Carr Lane at OS Reference SD 415 714. Load moves away from camera.

Photograph 43

Carr Lane at OS Ref SD 4140 5740. Load moves away from camera.



48/89

Photograph 45

View from beach access road adjacent to caravan park which has had access for caravans of approx.

10m x 3.6m dimensions. Road width measured at 4.1m. Load approaches camera.

Photograph 46

Carr Lane. Load moves away from camera. This is the beach access.



49/89

Photograph 48

View of beach access road from the beach.

Photograph 49

View looking south from end of beach access road towards Landfall sites and DONG Work Area 4. New

access road would need to be developed.



50/89

Photograph 51

View looking east at approximate location of Landfall sites and DONG Work Area 6. Note flood

defences.

9. Swept Path Assessment of Carr Lane for Cable Drum Access

9.1. The swept path assessment has been carried out using OS Mastermap information. It should be

noted that this information is reliably representative the information shown is not necessarily

absolute in its detail and accuracy. The assessment has been carried out primarily considerate

of the worst case 30te cable drum vehicle. We have also indicated where we believe the

delivery of a heavier drum may be feasible. From the termination location of viable 30te drum

deliveries we have continued our assessment using the typical vehicle arrangements for

highway movement of a 21tonne Excavator. The drawings compiled forming the swept path

assessment are discussed in the following paragraphs.

9.2. Drawing Ref. Dong-WE-SPA01, Sheets 1 and 2 show the whole of Carr Lane in two sections,

North and South. And identifies the location at the specific pinch points.

9.3. Sheets 3, 4 and 5 show:

The 30te drum transport configuration can negotiate the left hand turn near Westmoor

Farm (3),

the extent of over-sail and vehicle track requirements (4) and



51/89

The 30te drum transport configuration can negotiate the left hand turn at Melbreak

(8),

the extent of over-sail and vehicle track requirements (9) and

9.6. Sheets 11 and 12 show:

The 30te drum transport configuration can negotiate the left hand turn at Greendales

(11) and ,

the extent of over-sail and vehicle track requirements. Some cut back of the hedgerow

would be advisable able (12.

9.7. Sheets 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 show:

The 30te drum transport configuration can negotiate the right hand turn before Middle

Brows Farm but would require ground strengthening within the verge to the outside of

the turn.(13),

the extent of over-sail, vehicle track and ground strengthening requirements needed to

negotiate the turn (14),

that with the ground strengthening in place then a 21te Excavator transport

configuration can negotiate the right hand turn (15),

the 30te drum transport configuration could continue straight on at this location to

access the cable trench. There would be a requirement to construct a culvert to protect

a watercourse as the new access left the highway (16) and

the extent ground strengthening necessary to leave the highway (17).

9.8. Sheets 18, 19, 20 and 21 show:

The 30te drum transport configuration is most likely to conflict with the hedgerow and

field boundary to the inside of the bend at the left hand turn at Middle Brows

Farm(18),



52/89

The 21te Excavator transport configuration can most probably negotiate the right hand

bend after Middle Brows Farm but is likely to require ground strengthening, within the

verge, to the outside of the bend (22) and

the over-sail, vehicle track and ground strengthening requirements (23).

9.10. Sheet 24 shows:

The 21te Excavator transport configuration cannot negotiate the left hand turn to exit

Carr Lane at Potts Corner where there exists a ramp onto the foreshore (24).

10. Site Access off Highway

10.1. Any site entrances proposed off the highway at the proposed access points will require

consideration during design to provide adequate opportunity to leave the principal highway

with expediency. The turning circles identified within the transport configuration drawingsshould be applied within the design phase

10.2. Much of the access design criteria on which the planning authorities relies upon is contained in

Places Streets and Movement, a national document published in 1998. In particular this sets

out the visibility standards at access onto the road network. The sight line information, shown

in Table 3, should be considered in conjunction with the turning radii information detailed

within the transport configuration drawings.

10.3. To enable drivers emerging from the access to see and be seen by drivers proceeding along the

carriageway unobstructed visibility is needed within the proximity of the junction. The

distance along the centreline of the new access from the carriageway edge to the point where

the emerging driver should be able to see a specified distance in each direction of the principal

carriageway can be derived from the aforementioned documentation.

Table 2 Junction Visibility SplaysMeasured Major Road Speed - Mph/kph 70/120 60/100 50/85 40/70 35/60 30/50

Major Road Distances (m) 295 215 160 120 90 70


53/89



54/89

Council should be contacted. If a tree(s) is/are protected then written permission to remove

them, or to do any tree surgery is required. Mitigation in the form of plant replacements of the

same species and in the same location are often required.

11.3.3. A TPO is made by the local planning authority (usually a local council) to protect specific trees

or particular woodland from deliberate damage and destruction. TPOs prevent the felling,

lopping, topping, uprooting or otherwise wilful damaging of trees without the permission of

the local planning authority. Details of Orders, applications for work and decisions are kept by

the local authority and should be available for public inspection. A landowner is also served

notice if a new order is made on their land.

11.4. Bird Nests

11.4.1. All wilds birds are protected under the Wildlife and Country side Act 1981 (as amended),

whilst they are actively nesting or roosting. Section 1 of this Act, makes it an offence to kill,

injure or take any wild bird, and to intentionally take damage or destroy the nest of any wild

bird while that nest is in use or being built. It is also an offence to take or destroy any wild bird

eggs.

11.4.2. It is an offence to disturb a birds nest which is in use with eggs, chicks or birds using it, even if

they are not actually in it at the time. There are no set timescales for this in law, and obviously

this varies from region to region. If work has to be carried out on hedges trees, or bushes,

including undergrowth it is still possible to carry out the work providing an inspection of the

area is carried out to ensure there are no bird nests. Where nests are identified then delays are

likely to occur until such time that the nest(s) becomes redundant.

11.4.3. In addition it should be noted that specific bird species listed under Schedule 1 of the Act

receive extra protection. The Act states that it is an offence to intentionally or recklessly disturb

any wild bird listed in Schedule 1 while it is nest building, or at (or near) a nest containing eggs or

young, or disturb the dependent young of such a bird.

12. Transport General

12.1. Transport contractors should carry indemnity that allows the highway authorities to recover



55/89

13. Summary and Conclusions

13.1.

Notwithstanding government policy and guidance the transformer height of 6000mm mostprobably precludes the possibility of delivery of the transformer from the motorway network.

It is therefore most probable that the transformer will be shipped to Heysham Port. Although a

20 axle frame trailer vehicle has been considered within this review it should be noted that

without a formal approach to the highway structural authorities there remains some doubt

over the final arrangements that will be acceptable to and structural restrictions en route.

There is a possibility that following presentation of these transport proposals to the highway

authorities that the vehicle could increase in size.

13.2. Dong Energy has advised that the cable drum dimensions being considered for the project are

400mm diameter, 3000mm deep and 30te. A variety of trailer configurations are possible we

have therefore considered both a worst case scenario and other less rapacious vehicle

arrangements in our assessment.

13.3. It has been demonstrated that the plant and the other vehicle arrangements presented by

DONG and associated with the project can be embraced by the envelope of the 30te cable drumvehicle configurations.

13.4. The swept path assessment has been carried out using OS Matermap information. It should be

noted that this information is generally reliably representative for this type of assessment

although, it should be noted, that the information shown is not necessarily absolute in its

detail and accuracy. Where infringement remains a doubt then verification using captured

topographical information should be considered.

13.5. Access for 30te cable drums becomes difficult in Carr Lane beyond OS Reference SD 4160 5760

and may necessitate temporary land acquisition which is also a high probability requirement

for construction plant vehicles considered within the report.

13.6. Access onto the construction alignment at this location (13.5) can easily be achieved but will

necessitate enabling works beyond track construction.

13.7. Detailed assessment of the route beyond this location would necessitate topographical survey

to confirm access.

13 8 Th 21t E t t t fi ti t ti t th l ft h d t t it C



56/89

Maps

Map 1. Overview of AIL Routes

Map 2. Heysham and Carr Lane Study Area

Key

New Substation Location

Potential Cable Drum Access Location

Point of Interest

Route 1 from Heysham to Substation for

Transformers

Route 2 from Heysham to various cabledrum locations

Route 3 from M6 Jct 34 to various cable

Carnforth low

Railway Bridge


57/89

Route 3 from M6 Jct 34 to various cabledrum locations

Route 4 from M6 Jct 35 to various cable

drum locations

Other Plant Access from Carr Lane toBeach

B

A

0 25.04.13

Rev Date Amendments:

Revisions

Client:

Project:

Title:

Drawing Status:

Scale (A4): Drawn by: Checked by:

Ref No.: Sheet: Rev.:

Wynns Ltd. This drawing is not to be reproduced in whole orin part, in any form or by any means, without prior written

consent.

Crown Copyright.

All rights reserved. Licence No AL100035894

Overview of AIL Routes

Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm AIL

Access

Wynns Ltd,

Shaftesbury House,

2 High Street,

Eccleshall,

Stafford,

ST21 6BZ

DONG Energy

33 Grosvenor Place,Belgravia

SW1X 7HY London

1DONG-WE-Map 1

NTS ARP MJC

Hest Bank

Railway Bridge

Lancaster one way

loop and River Lune

Bridges

Approx location of

new Lancaster

bypass

Port of

Heysham

A683 Rail

Bridge

See Map 2 for

Carr Lane

10.2.64 es annex b19.c abnormal indivisible loads access study

Documents