Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Power company questions underground cable rule

The snail's pace at which the Environment Court is handling the council's district plan has put local power company King Country Energy and their new customers in no-man's-land. KCE has appealed part of the Ruapehu District Council's draft district plan that refers to placing power cables underground in urban areas. But while the rest of the plan is now in place, any clauses that are subject to appeal are in limbo. The power company wants to know where they stand with the public, so they can deal with the situation. They want to know if people want all

power cables put underground in semi-rural low density zones and, if so, are they prepared to pay more for that service. It may not be until late next year before KCE's appeal is heard and until then, KCE has to apply for a resource consent — at a cost of at least $337.50 — every time they want to put up a power pole to supply a new urban customer . And there is no guarantee that it won ' t cost more, or that they will even get it. KCE engineer Colin Martin told the Bulletin the basic cost of a power Turn to Page 2

Underground cable rule questioned

FROM PAGE 1 pole to supply a new customer was about $ 1 500, and to supply a cable underground was $2500. The company generally carries the first $2000 for providing a supply to a new customer, so if the cable has to go underground, the customer pays $500 extra and KCE $500 extra. This would mean the company 's extra costs would have. to be spread across the network, as an increase in line charges for every customer. Desirable Mr Martin said KCE accepts that undergrounding is desirable in high and medium density urban areas and commercial zones. Their beef is with the- definition of urban areas taking in the low density, semirural zones such as Tainui — Ruapehu — Tahwero streets in Ohakune, where the extra distances make undergrounding expensive; He said there may be some eases where many more than one pole would be required, citing a worstcase example, where a customer could be 500 metres from an existing supply. This would cost $10;000 to supply one customer, yet only half the cost if they were able to use overhead wires. There are some maintenance cost savings with undergrounding. But Mr Martin said while there are

less faults, they are generally very expensive to fix. Mr Martin said the Environment Court has told councils to try to settle differences with appellants before going to a hearing, but that approaches by KCE to the RDC have been ignored. Democratic process Ruapehu District Council planner Ian McDonald said the district plan went through a democratic process and that there were many submissions in favour of placing cables underground in low density rural zones. He said the council was required by law to require a resource consent to put up a pole in an urban zone, unless and until the plan is changed. He said he was not aware of any approaches by KCE, but that with only one planner on the staff at present (he replaces' one of two who recently resigned) it was "a matter of getting the staff resources" to deal with the 13 appeals. "It' s a fairly big job," he explained, saying there was a lot of information to be gathered to take to a hearing. He said the council would be willing to negotiate on the matter and agreed that it would be very useful to know what the public wanted. The reason the hearings committee rejected the sub-

missions regarding overhead lines are given as: • Lines erected above ground in an urban area can produce adverse effects, including in terms of the visual character and ,the amenity of the surrounding

area; • The effects, including on visual character and amenity, can be significant and adverse in nature. If the lines are provided for underground, this avoids, remedies or mitigates the ad-

verse effects occurring, thereby promoting the sustainable management of the natural and physical resources; and • The adverse effects of overgrounding lines in urban areas are cumulative."

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RUBUL19970527.2.3

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 14, Issue 688, 27 May 1997, Page 1

Word count
Tapeke kupu
701

Power company questions underground cable rule Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 14, Issue 688, 27 May 1997, Page 1

Power company questions underground cable rule Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 14, Issue 688, 27 May 1997, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert