Draft Site Selection Methodology

5. Stage 3: Site assessment

5.1After identifying a range of sites in stage 2, these then need to be categorised and assessed to understand their suitability, availability and achievability. These assessments are all part of stage 3 of the draft site selection methodology.

Categorising sites

5.2Before we can begin to assess sites, we need to categorise sites to understand what type and amount of development is available in Nottinghamshire and Nottingham. This will also help shape the spatial strategy for the Plan to ensure that mineral need can be met.

5.3As we need to meet the need for each mineral type found in Nottinghamshire and Nottingham, the first step will be to categorise sites by mineral type.

5.4 Once categorised by mineral type, the following categories are proposed to be applied:

• Permitted sites
• Extension to existing site
• Greenfield/ new site
• Sustainable transport available (river, rail or pipeline)
• Scale of extraction based on reserves available
  • Small: Less than 500,000 tonnes
  • Medium: Between 500,000 tonnes and 3 million tonnes
  • Large: Over 3 million tonnes
• Lead in time to extraction
  • Beginning of Plan period – 2029 – 2034
  • Middle of Plan period – 2034 – 2039
  • End of Plan period – 2039 – 2045
  • Beyond Plan period – Beyond 2045

5.5Sites will likely fall into multiple categories, and these may be revised based upon your feedback and further information and evidence as the Plan develops. Once categorised, the sites can then be sifted through to filter out unsuitable sites.

Initial sift

5.6 At this stage, sites will be initially sifted to discard any obvious sites which would be unsuitable due to significant constraints. Such significant constraints in Nottingham and Nottinghamshire would include:

• The South Muskham Archaeological Resource Area
• Potentially the Holbeck/ Creswell Archaeological Resource Area, depending on feedback gained from the scoping consultation
• Site of Special Scientific Interest, National Nature Reserve or Special Area of Nature Conservation
• The possible potential Special Protection Area (ppSPA) for Sherwood Forest. This is a site of European importance which is being considered for such designation by Natural England.

5.7It may be that some sites, whilst constrained, could be made suitable through mitigations. Where this is the case, this will be noted and sites taken forward into the detailed assessment stage.

Detailed assessment

5.8Following the initial sift of sites, the remaining sites will then be subjected to a detailed assessment, which will assess:

• Suitability;
• Availability; and
• Achievability

5.9Sites will then be compared and given a score in terms of suitability, availability and achievability. As per the guidance for site selection, the scoring method  will not be a quantitative but a red, amber, green (RAG) approach. The score will reflect the constraints and issues identified as well if these can be mitigated.

5.10Below details each assessment stage and the proposed RAG scoring for each assessment criteria. For each assessment, we will be relying upon information provided by:

• The operator/ proposer for the site
• Overall assessment work for sites, including:
  • SEA
  • Strategic Flood Risk Assessment
  • Transport Assessment
  • Habitats Regulation Assessment
  • Landscape Impact and Visual Assessment

Assessment of suitability

5.11This assessment seeks to determine whether the site is an appropriate location for mineral development when considered against relevant constraints. We have identified the following constraints below after reviewing the NPPF (2026) and local baseline information.

5.12 As noted earlier, whether adequate mitigations can be applied to make the site suitable will form part of the assessment as shown in the proposed red, amber, green scoring matrix in Table 1.

5.13Considering the constraints outlined above, sites will then be graded using the RAG system detailed in Table 1 to assess the impact the constraints may have on the sites suitability.

Table 1: RAG grading system for assessment of suitability

Assessmentof availability

5.14 Sites will also be assessed in terms of their availability, ensuring there is a reasonable prospect, based on current information, that the site will be available for development at a particular point in time.

5.15Issues that will be considered include:

• Lead in times for planning permission to be obtained
• Land ownership
• Securing appropriate mineral rights
• Production rates

5.16 We will request this information as part of the call for sites exercise. Table 2 shows the RAG grading system that will be used to score the assessment of availability.

Table 2: RAG grading system for assessment of availability

Grade	Description
Red	Site is not available for mineral development during the Plan period due to issues identified
Amber	Site should be available for mineral development during the Plan period but there are issues which can be resolved.
Green	Site is available for mineral development during the Plan period, with no issues identified in terms of availability

Assessmentof achievability

5.17This part of the detailed assessment will seek to ensure, based on information available, that there is a reasonable prospect that a site is capable of being developed at a particular point in time. This will include whether the site is likely
to be viable and so achievable of delivering to meet mineral need.

5.18Within this part of the assessment, we will consider the site reserves, production capacity which will inform us of how much mineral the site could deliver each year over the Plan period.

5.19We will use information collected from operators but also our local knowledge of sites to understand whether the site will be able to contribute to mineralproduction.

5.20Table 3 below shows the RAG grading system that will be used to score sites on their achievability.

Table 3: RAG grading system for assessment of achievability

Grade	Description
Red	Mineral development at the site seems unlikely based upon viability or known issues with extracting mineral.
Amber	Mineral development at the site may be achievable, though there is some uncertainty whether it is viable and/ or achievable
Green	Mineral development at the site has shown or can show that extraction is achievable and viable

Final scoring

5.21Once each site has been assessed and given a RAG status for each criterion, an overall RAG score will be given to the sites. This will be done through comparing sites and so that it is clear which sites scored better at the time of assessment.

Table 4: Final RAG grading system for detailed assessment

Grade	Description
Red	Due to constraints and assessment findings, the site is not currently a candidate for allocation
Amber	Site is a potential candidate for allocation but has constraints which will need to be mitigated or further assessment on availability and achievability is required
Green	Site is a strong candidate for allocation with few or no constraints that need mitigating and is available and achievable at a particular point in time