Object

Representation ID: 173

Received: 10/10/2019

Respondent: Mick George

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Policy SP1 Mineral Provision
1. MGL opposes Policy SP1 – Mineral Provision and in particular part b) of the strategy which is to give priority to the extension of existing sites. Not only is this contrary to national guidance, but it also entrenches an uncompetitive market by preferring incumbent operators and raising barriers to entry to the local aggregates market to new firms, and it has not been shown to be justified by evidence.
2. PPG paragraph 27-010 specifically states in answer to the question, “Under what circumstances would it be preferable to focus on extensions to existing sites rather than plan for new sites?” that “The suitability of each proposed site, whether an extension to an existing site or a new site, must be considered on its individual merits…” There is therefore no allowance for a policy preference as the Plan seeks to have; all sites must be treated on their merits, and the evidence should be presented to be able to judge whether the comparative merits in each case have been examined. We suggest that the policy preference set out in this policy and explained in paragraph 3.10 is contrary to national guidance and should be removed.