OBJECTIONS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT 

1. PLANNING CONCERNS

1. Planning precedent elsewhere in Europe and globally- governments in other countries and utility providers abroad have ceased erecting overhead pylons due to health, environmental, economic and social costs.  Overhead pylons are not in the “public interest” but instead are non-respectful of the landscape, visually obtrusive, economically unviable and pose serious risks to human, animal and ecological welfare.

 

2. Existing planning permissions- outline and full planning permission exists on numerous sites along the proximity of this proposed route.  NIE are not even aware of this fact and have not consulted with all land-owners/site owners.  The potential to build existing planning permissions and future permissions will be totally stopped as NIE (if they obtain permission) will be able to legitimately object to any future applications submitted in the vicinity of this proposed pylon route.

 

3. The proposed pylons are contrary to planning policy.

 

Current relevant documents:

   1)  Draft PPS21- Sustainable Development in the Countryside;

2. Regional Development Strategy (available online at   www.drdni.gov.uk/shapingourfuture)
3. Rural Development Strategy (available online at www.dardni.gov.uk/nirdp_2007-2013

 

The following is a sample extract from the policy document draft PPS21 (which is the most applicable strategy to all rural planning applications available online or from your local Divisional Planning Office:

“  3.1 The aim of DRAFT PPS 21 is to manage development in the countryside:

• in a manner consistent with achieving the strategic objectives of the Regional Development Strategy for Northern Ireland 2025; and

• in a manner which strikes a balance between the need to protect the  countryside from unnecessary or inappropriate development, while supporting rural communities. 

Objectives

3.2 The objectives of PPS 21 are:

I)  to manage growth in the countryside to achieve appropriate and sustainable patterns of development that meet the essential needs of a vibrant rural community;

II) to conserve the landscape and natural resources of the rural area and to protect it from excessive, inappropriate or obtrusive development and from the actual or potential effects of pollution;

III) to facilitate development necessary to achieve a sustainable rural economy; including appropriate farm diversification and other economic activity; and

IV) to promote high standards in the design, siting and landscaping of development in the countryside”  (extract from Page 7 of draft PPS21).

The above list I-V of draft PPS21 are applicable planning objectives which all planning applications are assessed against.  Incorporating the above into our objections will validate and further strengthen our objections. 

CONTRARY TO ARMAGH AREA PLAN 

1) Objectives of the Armagh Area Plan being used.  For example, paragraph 3.1 of this document states “The aim of the Armagh Area Plan is to provide a framework of land use proposals and policies which will allow the area to maximise its full development potential in an efficient, economic and orderly manner whilst maintaining a high standard of physical environment and safeguarding it’s landscape quality and natural resources”.

The last line of the above policy statement is an example of a legitimate planning objection- “maintain a high standard of physical environment and safeguarding its landscape quality and natural resources”.

However, if households are to use this policy objective as a refusal reason what is needed is for each household to make an argument in relation to how the scheme affects their local landscape quality.  For example, within the immediate locality surrounding your home what are the local features – this may be a local river, marshland, group of trees. 

2) Another separate policy objective of the Armagh Area Plan is “to enhance the quality of life for the rural community”.  The pylon scheme clearly does not comply with this policy objective as all households will be severely affected by the proposed scheme. 

3) Objectives contained in the over-arching Planning Framework for Northern Ireland as set out in the policy document entitled “Regional Development Strategy- Shaping Our Future”.  (this document is available on www.drdni.gov.uk  ). 

4. HEALTH  CONCERNS 

• Given that my two children will be sleeping within 100 metres of this power line every night I am concerned about the findings of Schuz (2001) which suggest that the impact of EMF’s is especially detrimental to young children during the night – even more so than in daylight hours.  This is backed up by the findings of Ahlbom et al (2000) who state that children under five years old are most vulnerable to night time exposure of EMF.  It is their belief that if this exposure is averaged out over 24 hours it appears inconsequential but if it is concentrated between 10 pm and 6 am then a very pronounced correlation between childhood leukaemia and magnetic fields becomes obvious.

 

• Sir Richard Doll – notoriously sceptical about EMF exposure – states that in the UK only 4 in 1000 children are subjected to prolonged and intense EMF exposure.  The suggested route places my children within the minority group that is subjected to prolonged exposure.  Doll himself feels that further evidence is needed in this area.

 

• I remain unconvinced that a non-biased and informed examination of the issues regarding EMF exposure has been carried out by NIE.  I am not satisfied with the standard quotes from SAGE and WHO in the face of such an abundance of conflicting evidence.  It is my understanding that the WHO EMF project is partially funded with money provided by the utility companies.  Also the SAGE recommended exposure limits only protect against established effects and not recognised possible effects.

 

• WHO and HPA (Health Protection Agency) both agree that there is a consistent statistical association in studies into the links between unusually high EMF fields and increased incidence of childhood cancers.

 

• This is an issue causing myself and my family considerable stress and anxiety.  The risk – or perceived risk to the health of my children is considerable and appears to be a situation over which I have no control and am being given no choice.  I believe NIE to be reliant on selective quotation from scientific research in order to minimise what is a considerable risk factor.

 

• The largest study into this area – Draper et all (2005) establishes a link with a doubling of incidence of childhood leukaemia for those children living within 600 metres of the high voltage power line.
• Greenland and Sheppard (2000) state there is an elevated incidence of childhood cancers with proximity to power lines.

 

• I feel that the main motivating factor in this proposed overhead route is an economic one and I object to a price being put on safeguarding the health of my children.  NIE stated in Dungannon Council (11^th Feb 2008) that undergrounding this would cost Northern Ireland £217 million.  The life expectancy of an underground line is 40 –50 years.  Given the annual profit of NIE this amount over 45 years is negligible.  In any case potential health risks should surely be deemed as important as financial considerations.

 

• On Monday 11^th Feb 2007 in his address to Dungannon Council, Mr. Clem Harvey of NIE claimed that the proposed overhead route could be “achieved at a cost we can all afford”.  I disagree with this statement as I feel that a huge gamble is being taken with the health of my children and others in the area.  A significant body of scientific research would suggest that my young children would be at least twice as likely to develop childhood leukaemia if the overhead line goes ahead.  I consider this to be a risk that I cannot afford to take.

 

• Children have a 500% increased chance of developing cancer in later life if they are raised for the first five years of life within 300 metres of a high voltage power line. (Lowenthal, Tuck and Bray 2007)

 

• The Draper Report 2005 states that living within 200 metres of a high power line will increase your child’s chances of developing leukaemia by 69%.  Living within 600 metres this chance is increased by 20%.

 

• The recent Cross-Party Inquiry into Childhood Leukaemia and EMF (July 2007 www.epolitix.com)  recommended that governments consider extending the 60 metre exclusion zone to 200 metres for high voltage power lines in line with the policy of precaution.

 

• Health and welfare of employees within place of work- employers are responsible for employee’s health and safety.  The pylons directly create issues for employers in this respect.  Liability issues for owners of fixed places of work, liability issues for building sites throughout the countryside, farm yards, farm land etc

 

• Health risks - refer to Askon report and other relevant material.

 

• Human Health- cancer risks, persons fitted with heart monitor/pacemakers and similar devices are susceptible to electric pulses from pylons affecting the performance of their needed medical equipment.  Lives may be put at danger.  Also, hearing aids are susceptible to electrical impulses.  Migraine issues resulting from electric fields, nausea, depression etc.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

5. AGRICULTURAL CONCERNS 

• Sterile corridor (60m either side at present though UK government advised to increase this to 200m either side) through farm - massive restrictions on agricultural activity and future planning permissions.
• The possibility of litigation from employees or neighbours experiencing the ill effects of exposure to high voltage power lines is a worry to many farmers.
• Potential "relayed toxicity" through animals exposed to high voltage powerlines through beef and dairy entering food chain.
• Buchard et al (McGill University Quebec) carried out experiments on dairy cows exposing them to 73kV (note ours is 400kV) - milk production decreased by 5% compared to control group and milk fat decreased by 16%.
• No spray irrigation or slurry spraying can take place near the line - this is especially worrying in orchards.  If a jet from spraying makes contact with the line currents would pass down the line and through the body of anyone in contact with the equipment.  Note that slurry is an even better conductor of electricity than water.  Note also that this line is heavier and lower than any others in NI therefore will be closer to the ground and agricultural activity.
• Research (Rogers and Hinds 1983 and Warren et al 1981) show that proximity to powerlines has a negative effect on bees.  Adverse effects include increased propolis, reduced growth, increased irritability and increased mortality.
• About 5 people a year are killed in the UK in agricultural accidents involving powerlines.  Note that electricity can "jump" so it is not even necessary to touch the line to cause serious injury.
• During construction overhead lines on pylons will cause lengthy disruption to affected farms. There will be months when whole areas of farms will be out of action. Imagine how long it will take the concrete base to set - it will involve 30-40 lorry loads. This is only one factor involved.  On the other hand laying underground cables will only take weeks if not days.
• Future expansion plans of farms will be hindered due to a restriction corridor being placed on both sides of the proposed line.

 

• Safety of farmers and all workers is a concern as consequences of long term exposure to EMF/ELF are unknown. Health and welfare of employees within place of work- employers are responsible for employee’s health and safety.  The pylons directly create issues for employers in this respect.  Liability issues for owners of fixed places of work, liability issues for building sites throughout the countryside, farm yards, farm land etc.
• As a landowner I am extremely concerned about the likelihood of being sued by employees or neighbours suffering injury or loss resulting from the 400kV powerline being placed over my land?
• Will I be compensated in the event of loss or damage to livestock in the vicinity resulting from the powerline crossing over my land and the resulting EMF emissions?
• Will I be compensated in the event of any produce from my farm being degraded or deemed unfit for sale as a result of contamination from EMF emissions?
• I feel it is unlikely I will be able to use my land under and adjacent to the 400kV powerline in the normal way (including slurry spreading and apple spraying within the safe parameters of normal agricultural machinery) without risk of injury to me or my employees?
• Can I have a confirmation of the distance from the line that I can build a typical one storey bungalow?  Will they guarantee that this distance will not be extended in the future?
• Can NIE guarantee that they will not mount any telecommunication masts on the pylons or within the area included in the permanent easement that will accommodate this 400kV powerline?
• Can NIE guarantee that they will not increase the electrical capacity of this 400kV powerline in the future?
• Can NIE guarantee that this 400kV powerline will be on sufficiently high pylons that sagging of the line does not pose a risk to agricultural activity on my land?
• Can NIE confirm the exact safety clearance needed underneath a 400kV powerline?
• I am concerned at the high levels of agricultural incidents involving powerlines that have caused damage to farm workers or machinery in the last 15 years in Northern Ireland?
• Can NIE explain in detail the process of placing pylons and powerlines on my land?  Will temporary roads be needed?  How long will the disruption last for?

 
 
 

• How will this effect the future potential of the land- a pylon traversing our countryside obliterates potential of our countryside for in excess of 100 years; Farm land- A pylon scheme crossing over farm land essentially sterilises use of the farm land in the vicinity.  Also, it has become apparent that farm produce such as poultry, milk and meat produced in the vicinity of pylons is not allowed to enter the food chain.  This vast and important range of issues clearly affects each farmer along the line in a different manner and each farming issue needs to be clearly detailed in a ‘site specific’ manner.  For example, a chicken or livestock unit may be within 500 metres of the proposed pylon route.
• Animal Health- 28^th October 2008 French Civil Court ordered French company RTE (electricity distributor) to pay almost 400 000euros to cattle farmers.  This means that the courts have established for the first time that there is a link between the effects of EMF from a very high voltage powerline and symptoms of disease among animals.  The powerline in this case was 400kV.  The farm is in Correze and is crossed by a 400kV line.  It specialises in raising cows and pigs.  The Marcouyoux family – who run the farm- noticed breathing problems and weakened immune systems. Other problems included abnormally low birth rates and high incidence of infant mortality.  Heifers were recorded as undersize and suffered from genital and digestive diseases. The local farming authority and the county veterinary services eliminated any source of infection causing harm to the animals.

 
 

6.      ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS 

1. The Environment

• The government of Northern Ireland is committed to conserving and protecting both the built and natural environment.    http://www.doeni.gov.uk/index/protect_the_environment
• A strategic objective of ‘First Steps Towards Sustainability: A Sustainable Development Strategy for Northern Ireland’ (May 2006) DOE, is ‘to create an attractive/high quality environment where people feel safe and which provides the conditions for health and social well-being’.(page 73)    http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/sustain-develop.pdf

 

• One of the principal objectives of the Armagh Area Plan (2004) is ‘to conserve and enhance the natural and man-made environment.’ (Paragraph 3.2)
• The construction of a North-South Interconnector would have an extremely negative effect on both our built and natural environment. (local examples)

 
 

2. Landscape

• A strategic objective of ‘First Steps Towards Sustainability: A Sustainable Development Strategy for Northern Ireland’ (May 2006) DOE, is ‘to conserve our landscape and manage it in a more sustainable way’. (page 42) According to the Strategy, one important step is to ‘ensure the review of the Northern Ireland Regional Development Strategy and other relevant planning policies, reinforce sustainable development and provide for appropriate protection of the landscape’.
• According to the EHS/Planning Service survey of landscape character areas within N. Ireland, the land affected by the proposed line falls within the ‘Armagh Drumlin’ area and the ‘Loughgall Orchard Belt’. http://www.ehsni.gov.uk/landscape.htm
• The mosaic of prehistoric monuments, traditional farms and buildings, forest plantations and wildlife habitats all contribute to these special landscapes that are part of our culture and heritage. The construction of a North-South Interconnector would have a significant detrimental impact on the appearance of our landscape. (local examples)
• Within the ‘Armagh Drumlin’ area, there is an almost complete mantle of drumlins forming an internationally acknowledged type example of a 'drumlin swarm'. The area is renowned for this particular type of topography and the proposed line would cut right through it,
• According to the EHS/Planning Service survey of landscape character areas within N. Ireland, new development can be ‘integrated into the landscape’ if it is sited on the mid-slopes of drumlins, or close to the break of slope. How can pylons between 22m – 37m high be integrated into the landscape, when they are an eyesore threading their way through our beautiful drumlin landscape?
• The EHS/Planning Service survey also states that within the Armagh Drumlin area ‘scattered development in the countryside can be accommodated if located sympathetically between trees and hills and if constructed of traditional materials’. Pylons hardly fit into the category of ‘traditional materials’!
• The Armagh Area Plan (2004) is concerned with ‘maintaining a high standard of physical environment and safeguarding its landscape quality and natural resources’. (Paragraph 3.1) The quality of the landscape would be degraded. (local examples)
• One main objective of The Dungannon & South Tyrone Area Plan (2010) is ‘the protection and enhancement of landscape features, natural habitats, and man-made features which are of conservation importance and contribute to the overall character of individual settlements and the wider countryside’. (page 15) (local examples)

http://www.planningni.gov.uk/AreaPlans_Policy/Plans/Dungannon/adopted_plan/00Cover.htm

3. Armagh Countryside  According to the Armagh Area Plan (2004) ‘almost 22,000 or 43% of the District’s population live in the countryside outside the main towns, villages and hamlets’ and the countryside requires to be protected.  (Paragraph 79.1)

4. Dungannon Countryside - The Dungannon & South Tyrone Area Plan (2010) strategy is to ‘sustain a living and working countryside whilst protecting from inappropriate development those areas that are vulnerable to development pressure or that are visually or environmentally sensitive’

• I am concerned at the proximity of some very mature oak/ horse chestnut trees that will be in close proximity to the high voltage powerline.  Many of the trees in the area have a girth of over 15 cm and can therefore be deemed worthy of a Tree Preservation Order. (For details contact the Divisional Planning Office.)
• I have observed badgers/buzzards/barn owls/pheasants/grouse etc in the area and am concerned at how their habitat will be affected by this high voltage overhead line.  (Contact Environment and Heritage Service for details – proof required) The Ulster Wildlife Trust will also be interested to hear of sightings of barn owls in your area.
• As a member of the rural community I feel that my rights are being infringed. There is no way this line would go overhead through an urban area.  I would suggest that the forthcoming Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland be equally as applicable to rural dwellers as it will be for urban communities.
• There is a plethora of archaeological sites and buildings of significance in the area (raths, wells, forts etc) and it is my belief that NIE have not researched the proposed route thoroughly enough and have failed in their attempts to avoid such valuable historical features which add a unique character to this area.
• I feel that this proposed high voltage overhead powerline will interfere permanently with the “natural features and the archaeological and built heritage, which form part of the local identity.” (Dungannon and South Tyrone Area Plan)
• These pylons are visually offensive – it is irrelevant whether they are 30 metres or 60metres – they will still be a blight on the landscape.  This is a area of beautiful scenery and immense character and these pylons cannot fit into the rural landscape of Armagh and Tyrone without taking away from the unspoilt nature of the land that has evolved and been protected over centuries.
• I enjoy a view of the historical city of Armagh and in particular the Roman Catholic Cathedral from my elevated site and this view was a key reason in choosing this site to build on. This view will be completely spoiled if the powerline goes overhead.
• The Mourne mountains can be seen from my elevated site and this view will be blighted by the erection of this high voltage overhead power line.
• I am concerned that over the course of the next few years planning restrictions in the proximity to power lines will become even more restrictive by law and that an increasingly wide swathe of “sterile” land will stretch from Derrynoose to Moy.
• The Armagh Area Plan states that its aim is to “allow the area to maximise its full development potential ….whilst maintaining  a high standard of physical environment and safeguarding it’s landscape quality and natural resources.”  It is my concern that this proposed overhead high voltage powerline contravenes this objective. (Need specifics of individual homes)
• The Armagh Area Plan states that it aims to “enhance the quality of life for the rural community.”  This proposed overhead powerline is clearly at odds with this objective. Even now – in the initial planning stages this is an issue causing undue stress and anxiety in my own household and in others along the line.  The perceived threat- and indeed the actual threat- to our homes are having a negative impact on health already.
• The Dungannon and South Tyrone Area Plan state that one of its primary objectives is the “maintenance and enhancement of Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough and its distinctive urban and rural environs as an attractive and pleasant place to live, work and visit.”  I personally feel that if the proposed overhead high voltage cable goes ahead I will be fearful of the threat to the health of my young children – therefore denying my family the right to live in an attractive and pleasant environment. This plan also aims to “sustain a living and working countryside whilst protecting from inappropriate development those areas that are vulnerable to development pressure or that are visually or environmentally sensitive.”  Whilst I am in favour of strengthening the electricity supply of this island by undergrounding of high voltage cables, I believe that this proposed overhead route is a form of “inappropriate development.”

5. The Historic Built Environment

• Some of the most sensitive areas of the landscape along the proposed line are the settings of numerous important archaeological sites. These are concentrated to the south and west of Armagh and include Navan Fort, Northern Ireland’s most important ancient monument.. Local skylines and drumlin summits are also sensitive, particularly when they are the sites of ancient raths.
• One of the principal objectives of the Armagh Area Plan (2004) is ‘to preserve and enhance the archaeological and historical heritage of the District’. (Paragraph 3.2)
• 14 raths, 2 enclosures, 2 burial mounds, 2 ancient churches with graveyards, 2 standing stones, 1 holy well, 1 megalithic tomb and 1 cross have been identified within a 1km radius of the proposed Line route. (Ref: Appendix 1)
• The landscape setting of these archaeological sites must be a priority for conservation. According to the Armagh Area Plan (2004) ‘development will not normally be permitted which would be likely to damage or prejudice the essential character of areas of historic landscapes, archaeological sites and monuments or their settings.’ (Paragraph 7.0)
• The proposed line passes close to a group of important archaeological sites north of the Armagh – Killylea Road including  Haughey’s Fort (Grid Ref: H8351 4529) and  The King’s Stables (Grid Ref: H 8388 4546). These sites are protected under the Historic Monuments & Archaeological Objects NI Order (1995)
• In particular, the view west from Navan Fort, one of the most important archaeological sites in Ireland, would be compromised.
• Lisglynn Fort (Grid Ref: H 106 3915) is an Early Christian rath and souterrain. It’s one of the few square forts in Ireland and the views both towards & from it would be ruined.

 
 

ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE SERVICE (DOE)

Historic Monuments of Northern Ireland to 31 March 2007

Sites and monuments protected under the Historic Monuments & Archaeological Objects (NI) Order (1995) within 1 km radius of the Proposed Line route 

For more information about these sites and monuments, please refer to ‘The Northern Ireland Sites and Monuments Record’ (NISMR) Database on the Environment & Heritage Service website:

http://www.ehsni.gov.uk/built/mbr/monuments_database/mons.asp 
 

6.  Natural Environment 

A. Woodlands

• Woodlands occupy c.2% of the Armagh Drumlin area and less than 4% of the Loughgall Orchard Belt compared with c 5.6% for Northern Ireland as a whole.
• According to the EHS/Planning Service survey of landscape character areas within N. Ireland, ‘the management and ongoing planting of woodlands is essential to conserve the special landscape character’.
• The Ancient Woodland Inventory, carried out by the Woodland Trust, identified 3 areas of ancient woodland potentially affected by the proposed North/South Interconnector. These are:
• Artasooley (Grid Ref: 8249) in the Loughgall Orchard Belt (ID:1823)
• Norton’s Crossroads (Grid Ref: 7938) in the Armagh Drumlin Area (ID:1388)
• Norton’s Crossroads (Grid Ref: 8038) in the Armagh Drumlin Area (ID:1389)
• The proposed line would pass very close to these areas of ancient woodland which form part of our precious natural heritage and provide a unique habitat for many of our endangered species.

 

B. Grassland and Arable

• The diversity of habitats, even within the farmland dominated landscape of the Armagh Drumlin Area, which includes damp grasslands, hedges, woods, arable and fens, gives rise to diversity not only of plant species but also of mammals, insects and birds. Thus several of the bird Priority Species are recorded - bullfinch, song thrush, linnet, yellowhammer, reed bunting and curlew; indeed curlew, snipe and lapwing are specifically recorded from damp grasslands.
• Within the Loughgall Orchard Belt, in the farmland generally, bird Priority Species recorded include song thrush, spotted flycatcher, tree sparrow, skylark, reed bunting and linnet.

 

C. Wetlands and Lakes

• Within the Armagh Drumlin Area, there are numerous small fens, which are seen as not only of local importance for biodiversity, but also as of national importance
• Within the Loughgall Orchard Belt, fens form a mosaic with reedbeds around loughs, as for example at Edenderry Lough which has the most extensive complex.
• The River Blackwater has river water-crowfoot as well as the white-clawed crayfish, salmon, trout and dollaghan. The otter is widespread.
• Loughs and river valleys, including the network of small streams that characterise the area to be dissected by the North South Interconnector are important components of the landscape which should be conserved, avoiding damage through changing land uses.
• The Blackwater River Valley is a rural, peaceful, undisturbed and unspoilt valley with outstanding scenic qualities. The small-scale enclosed character of the valley ensures that large scale or extensive development would be intrusive.

 
 
 

7. RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES

A. Cycling

National Route 91 of the National Cycle Network follows the Navan Fort Road between Armagh and Killylea. The proposed North South Interconnector would pass over this road (Grid Ref: 81,45)

B. Road Bowling

A traditional Irish sport played once played all over Ireland but now played mainly in Cork and Armagh. This is a world-famous and traditionally unique sport which continues to attract a strong following over local country roads in the Armagh area. Pylons will inhibit this sporting tradition and create health risks if practiced and undermine the enjoyment of this sport via the perceived threat.

 C. Canoeing

The Blackwater Canoe Trail, which is 20 km long, commences at Maydown Bridge and meanders east through the beautiful Armagh/Tyrone countryside to Blackwatertown and the Moy. The proposed North South Interconnector would pass over this trail (Grid Ref: 83,51)                                                                               http://www.countrysiderecreation.com

D. Fishing

River Blackwater and Edenderry Lough (Edenderry Rod and Gun Club)

E. Local Gun Clubs and Hunting Associations

Annual hunt day in Killylea, Madden Gun  Club, Derrynoose Gun Club, Benburb Gun Club, Tullysaryan Gun Club  

F. Football

Use and enjoyment of football fields is severely hindered by the visual intrusion of pylons 
 

G. Walking

The ability to walk our country roads and lanes will be destroyed to the visual eyesore of pylons-  health risks also associated with walking in the vicinity of the pylons 

8. TOURISM

• Paragraph 3.2 of the Armagh Area Plan states as an objective to “To encourage the development of the District’s potential”.  Clearly with a pylon dissecting our unique landscape there will be a significant negative impact on the appearance of our landscape and ultimately tourism activity and opportunity now and in future years.  For the purposes of an objection this may include the views from a Bed and Breakfast or the ability of a local farmer/landowner to use his lands as a golf course.
• Existing tourism of the area will be adversely affected- visitor numbers will decline, potential tourists will be discouraged from visiting due to pylons,

motorists travelling through our landscape will not advertise our area but instead will report back to others of the unsightly appearance of pylons in our area.

• Local features include Navan Fort, Blackwater Valley, Ringforts, Golf courses, Pubs, Hotels, Restaurants
• Benburb Valley Park – One feature of note is the Benburb Valley Ecotrail which commences in the grounds of Benburb Priory.http://www.ecotrails.co.uk

                                                                                                                                                     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

9. SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, COMMUNITY CENTRES

A. Schools and Community Centres

Impacts on our children, teachers and all in any way associated with our schools;  this also will affect future children, teachers- health issues, outdoor pursuits are hindered, nature walks. Also sports grounds and local facilities in the vicinity of the line.

B. Churches

People attending services and activities in church halls will be under undue threat of pylons, health issues, enjoyment of church services curtailed due to perceived threat,

Assembly in graveyards and the right of assembly without undue threat of pylons 

10.  OTHER EXAMPLES OF CONCERNS 

• Visual impact

   i)  Visual impact of the proposal- a blight in our landscape;

ii) The established field pattern of our countryside being obliterated- our farming landscape has taken hundred’s of years to mature to it’s current appearance- placing pylons through this landscape is totally inappropriate for a rural landscape.  The pylons are totally out-of-keeping with the established land use of our countryside.

iii) Visual intrusion of the proposal to your home- the proposal will be overbearing and adversely affecting the residential amenity of your dwelling curtilage (i.e it affects how you can relax within your house and your garden as there is a perceived/real threat of adverse health effects);  this is a legitimate planning consideration and has been the reason for many proposed mobile phone masts being refused permission due to their proximity to residential dwellings.

iv)  Visual intrusion to public roads and assembly points- the sensitivity of our landscape to adverse visual impact (ie too much or inappropriate development) is exacerbated by the density of public roads which cross our countryside; for example, between the counties of Armagh and Monaghan we have the highest density of road network per sq. kilometre of land in rural Western Europe.  This road network will result in the pylons being directly visible daily to 10’000’s of motorists travelling through this landscape.  This figure will increase as traffic volumes continue to increase.  This is wholly unacceptable in modern day planning and environmental assessment. 

• Archaeological

   i) The proposal will adversely affect the setting of a nearby Rath/hillfort; 

ii)  The proposal will be in the foreground of Navan Fort/Armagh Cathedrals etc.  (views of these monuments can include distances up to circa 10 miles or whatever distance the human eye can see)

iii) Another example would be the setting of a standing stone or rath- views of these features can extend for several miles and a pylon in the visual foreground detrimentally affects the setting of these features. 

• Agricultural issues

i)  Farming activities- sterilisation of land;

ii)  animal health issues;

iii) crop reductions;

iv) farm quality assurance issues;

v) future expansion plans of farms being hindered due to a restriction corridor being placed on both sides of the proposed line.

vi) Safety of farmers and all workers;

vii) Restrictions on slurry spreading. 

• Economic development

Expansion of existing businesses will be hindered;  new businesses seeking to locate in vicinity of proposed pylon scheme will not obtain planning permission; farm diversification schemes will not be viable; foreign investment to our area will not be forthcoming 
 
 
 

• Our population structure 

The number of single houses in proximity to the pylon route- there is no other rural area in western Europe which has as many rural dwellers as our localities- circa 50 % of the population in Northern Ireland (and 60% in southern Ireland) reside in the rural area (ie. Outside defined settlement limits).  At a local level this equates to every single metre of this pylon being visible from public  view continuously by existing residents.

• Devaluation of property
• Future potential of land- a pylon traversing our countryside obliterates potential of our countryside for in excess of 100 years;
• Adverse activity during construction stage- can take up to 9 months to complete each pylon; no. of concrete lorries required (circa 26 loads per pylon), crane/digger manoeuvring, laneways being created to facilitate machine access.
• Right of way issues- permanent easements required- this is in total opposition to land-owners and property owners rights;
• Sustainable development- the pylons are contrary to the underlying planning policy test of requiring all development to be sustainable.  Sustainable development is the core policy test of relevant planning policy; in particular draft PPS21 “Sustainable development in the countryside”.
• Wildlife- can include migrating birds, nesting sites, Natural Heritage Areas, watercourse damage during and post construction
• Loss of trees and hedgerows; trees and hedgerows up to 250 hundred years old are required to be removed, topped and obliterated to facilitate pylons and access roads;
• Flora and fauna- For example, a marshland or Heritage Area may be affected by the proposal.  Removal of hedgerows and mature trees along the line of the proposed pylon is also an unacceptable scarring of the landscape.  This can be extended to include mature trees which offer a degree of character to the local area and are perhaps worthy of a tree preservation order- (N.b.  A Tree Preservation Order can be obtained by notifying Planning Service of the tree’s existence and then requesting that a Tree Preservation Order be made on the tree/or group of trees.  This is an effective means of ensuring no development takes place in the area).