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 aggregate demand in Nottinghamshire? If not, please identify any alternatives you feel are realistic and deliverable and the evidence to support this approach.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.

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.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.

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.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.

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.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.

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.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.

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.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.

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.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.

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.

The methodology used in the consultation document and the supporting Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA) appears to be an objective approach that satisfies the requirements of the NPPF. Concerns expressed by the District Council about the methodology used in the withdrawn Minerals Local Plan (MLP) appear to have been addressed. The District Council is therefore supportive at this stage.

Q6 - Do you think extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries?
The District Council considers that extensions to existing permitted quarries should be prioritised over new greenfield quarries. It is the long held view of the District Council that an approach based around the extension of existing sites remains the most sustainable and the one which is likely to have least impact on the District's residents, highway network and local environment.

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?

The District Council believes that it is very important to maintain a geographical spread of sand and gravel quarries across the County. This is the more sustainable approach, as it means that the large quantities of heavy material extracted do not need to be transported long distances by road, contributing to congestion and generating unnecessary pollution. It is also the more equitable approach, as it avoids the negative consequences of sand and gravel extraction such as noise, dust and extra traffic being concentrated in one area.

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

As set out above, the District Council view is that prioritising specific areas is less sustainable and equitable than maintaining a geographical spread. The District Council would strongly oppose the concentration of sand and gravel quarrying around Newark, especially because most development in the County will occur around Nottingham. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Newark area already and it is important that this is not exacerbated.

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?
While any proposal should be considered on its own merits, the potential benefits of transporting minerals by river should be explored. Clearly the use of river barges could significantly reduce reliance on road transport which could increase the sustainability of a mineral development. It is important to avoid placing greater pressure on the local road network.

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

If a criteria based policy is used, residential amenity should be a key consideration. It is also important to consider the impact on residents of any expansion of Kirton clay pit, especially towards the village.

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?
As the District Council considers the extension of existing sites a more sustainable option than the development of new sites, the allocation of land to the south of Bantycock Quarry may be preferable to exploiting previously undeveloped sites elsewhere in the District. This approach would be likely to minimise impacts on District residents.

Q26 -Are you aware of any issues relating to minerals safeguarding that should be considered through the Minerals Local Plan review?
Plan 7 appears to indicate that Minerals Safeguarding Areas include urban areas within Newark, Nottingham City, Mansfield and Ashfield. National guidance advises that urban areas should be included in safeguarding areas where necessary - the District Council does not believe that it is necessary in this case. It seems very unlikely that these urban areas will be used for minerals development in preference to other areas of Nottinghamshire.