Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation

Appendix A: Overview of the questions set out in the Issues and Options document

Q1: Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?

Q2: Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?

Q3: Are the strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?

Q4: Do you think the average 10 year sales figure the most suitable methodology for forecasting future aggregate demand in Nottinghamshire. If not please identify any alternatives you feel are realistic and deliverable and the evidence to support this approach.

Q5: Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 years sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?

Q6: Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?

Q7: Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?

Q8: How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (ie Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?

Q9: Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?

Q10: Is it economical to transport mineral by river barge and if so should proposed quarries with the potential for moving sand and gravel by river barge be prioritised over other proposals?

Q11: Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q12: Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand n Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.

Q13: Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q14: Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q15: Should the Plan identify a specific replacement quarry (remote extension/ new site) to Dorket Head clay pit or should a criteria based policy be developed to ensure that an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the Plan period?

Q16: Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?

Q17: Should the plan seek to identify specific site allocations for Gypsum provision or should a criteria based policy be developed to ensure an adequate supply of Gypsum can be maintained over the Plan period?

Q18: Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of Gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q19: Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of silica sand that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q20: Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of industrial dolomite that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan Review?

Q21: Is there evidence to suggest that additional building stone reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence

Q22: Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q23: Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q24: Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?

Q25: Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?

Q26: Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?