Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Search representations
Results for Coddington Parish Council search
New searchComment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
Representation ID: 30601
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
Representation ID: 30602
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent
Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in "Fixing our broken housing market"
The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1/A46/A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
Representation ID: 30603
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is the most suitable methodology for forecasting future demand in Nottinghamshire? If not please identify any alternatives
Representation ID: 30604
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
Representation ID: 30605
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries
Representation ID: 30606
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
Representation ID: 30607
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County to minimise transport distances
Representation ID: 30608
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
Representation ID: 30609
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Comment
Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation
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?
Representation ID: 30610
Received: 12/01/2018
Respondent: Coddington Parish Council
The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Setting the overall context for the Plan
- An explanation of why the plan covers 19 years, compared to the current plan which covered 9 years and the previous draft which covered 15 years? This exaggerates the need for new sites to be included in the plan.
Q1 Do you think any further information should be included in the overview of the area?
- Nottinghamshire's Spatial Portrait (Plan 1, Page 10) is out of date. For example, the extent of the greenbelt needs updating to include new developments, such as those South of West Bridgford either side of Melton Road up to the Ring Road.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft vision? Are there other things we should include?
- Plan 2 (page 12) incorrectly shows an active mineral development East of Newark on Trent - there is no active mineral site at Coddington.
- Less sand and gravel will be required in the future as the construction industry continues to develop modular buildings replacing traditional bricks and mortar. The UK Government supports the use of modern modular construction methods in the White Paper "Fixing our broken housing market" (Department for Communities and Local Government, February 2017).
- The CPC supports the environmental principles of the vision, but with grave concerns about sustainable transport due to inadequate road infrastructure in the Newark area, particularly in the vicinity of the A1 / A46 / A17 junctions which already suffers from significant congestion, leading to accidents and increased transport costs for businesses.
Q3 Are the above strategic issues appropriate? Are there others we should consider?
- CPC strongly supports points 3 and 4, to minimise the adverse impacts on Nottinghamshire's communities and to ensure that all worked out quarries are restored to the highest standard.
Q4 Do you think the average 10 year sales figure is 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.
- There is an arithmetical error in the figures shown in table 2 (page 17). The predicted shortfall of sand and gravel should be 14.8 million tonnes, not 17.8.
- CPC does not accept that this is the most suitable methodology, bearing in mind the fluctuations in sand and gravel production over the last 10 years, indicating a continuing demand of around 1.5 million tonnes - Figure 1, Page 16.
- The use of recycled and secondary aggregates is likely to increase in the future, given the trend shown in Figure 1, Page 16.
Q5 Do you think the same methodology (most recent average 10 year sales) should be used for each aggregate or is there merit in using different methodologies for different aggregates?
- The methodology should vary between mineral types where changes in future demand patterns can be forecast, for example due to changes in technology or methods of construction that are specific to different aggregates.
Q6 Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
- Yes, existing quarries should be extended first, with restoration work a condition of planning.
- Extensions to existing quarries are supported where practicable and there is no adverse environmental impact.
Q7 Should different approaches (new sites/extensions to existing permitted quarries) be adopted for individual mineral types?
- No. CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool.
Q8 How important is it to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County (i.e. Idle Valley, near Newark and near Nottingham) to minimise the distance minerals are transported to markets?
- Plan 3 (page 22) of the geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries needs clarification as the grey cross-hatch shaded areas have not been included in the key.
- It is more important to consider (on a criteria basis) the impact on infrastructure and congestion.
Q9 Would it be more appropriate to prioritise specific areas above others?
- No, this should be based on the sustainability assessment of proposed sites.
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?
- The priority is for adequate infrastructure and sustainable transport. Distance from markets is less important than the local impact on traffic congestion.
Q11 Are you aware of any other issues relating to Sherwood Sandstone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q12 Is there evidence to suggest that additional crushed rock reserves are required to meet demand in Nottinghamshire over the Plan period? If so please provide this evidence.
- Less gypsum will be available on the closure of coal-fired power stations and will also contribute to further falls in the demand for crushed limestone - Page 25..
Q13 Are you aware of any other issues relating to crushed rock provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Development of the process of recycling plastic to tarmac may reduce future demand for crushed rock. (For example: https://www.curbed.com/2017/4/26/15428382/road-potholes- repair-plastic-recycled-macrebur).
Q14 Are you aware of any issues relating to alternative aggregates that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- CPC would welcome a policy on the use of alternative aggregates and a plan for monitoring their success.
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 an adequate supply of clay can be maintained over the plan period?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q16 Is a criteria based policy the most suitable approach to cover the potential for new brick works and associated clay pits?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
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?
- CPC agrees with a criteria-based policy as a standard reference tool. However, site specific considerations should also be identified.
Q18 Are you aware of any issues regarding the provision of gypsum that should be considered as part of the Minerals Local Plan review?
- Site specific factors should be considered to ensure sustainability objectives are met.
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?
- No
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?
- No
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.
- No
Q22 Are you aware of any other issues relating to building stone provision that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q23 Are you aware of any issues relating to coal extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q24 Are you aware of any issues relating to hydrocarbon extraction that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No
Q25 Do you agree with the proposed development management policy areas? Are there any others that should be covered?
- Must include consideration of the adequacy of immediate and wider infrastructure to cope with existing and future traffic levels. Newark area already has major congestion issues, the slightest increase in traffic will have a major impact.
- Development in the use of recycled construction materials should be encouraged through appropriate policies.
Q26 Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
- No