Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation

Search representations

Results for Tarmac Ltd search

New search New search

Comment

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: 30650

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

Yes. Cross-boundary relationship with neighbouring authorities should be identified considering:

-cross-boundary mineral supply from Nottinghamshire

-Lack of available crushed rock/limestone within County

-Availability of infrastructure link

-Overlap housing/business/infrastructure/employment links with Derbyshire/Leicestershire

-Duty to co-operate in plan preparation should be referenced

-Anticipated development needs for housing/employment/infrastructure

Attachments:

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: 30651

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

Generally support Draft Vision. However, 2 main issues. Firstly, as well as the identification of sites/resources to maintain landbanks and support the objectively assessed development needs/demand, the Plan should ensure that there is sufficient operational capacity to maintain the demand in accordance with paragraph 145 of the NPPF. This should include the assessed needs of adjacent Authority areas which may place added pressure on Nottinghamshire resources. Secondly, as well as safeguarding mineral resource, in accordance with the NPPF the Plan should safeguard mineral associated infrastructure.

Attachments:

Comment

Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation

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

Representation ID: 30652

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

SI1 and a locational strategy to securing mineral supply is supported. Maintains spread of operations across the County. Maintains security in supply to markets that these serve.

SI2 is supported. However, Plan should identify anticipated demand from adjoining Authorities.

Disagree with SI4 Not always appropriate when balancing needs of

landowner and value of land post restoration. Biodiversity improvements should be sought 'where possible'. Council should adopt more balanced stance regarding restoration of sites considering the three elements of sustainability.

Tarmac support vision for creating landscape-scale biodiversity resources.

SI4- consider opportunities mineral extraction creates for the deposit of inert infill.

Attachments:

Comment

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: 30658

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Representation Summary:

Yes. It is considered that the cross boundary relationship with neighbouring authorities should be identified taking into account:
-Cross-boundary mineral supply
-Lack of crushed rock/limestone within County
-Availability of infrastructure links
-Overlap of housing,business,infrastructure,employment links
-Relationship with other minerals authorities&Duty to Cooperate
-Anticipated development needs for housing,employment,infrastructure provision

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: 30659

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Representation Summary:

Generally support.

Two important issues missing:

Firstly, as well as the identification of sites/resources to maintain landbanks and support the objectively assessed development needs/demand, the Plan should ensure that there is sufficient operational capacity to maintain the demand in accordance with paragraph 145 of the NPPF. This should include the assessed needs of adjacent Authority areas which may place added pressure on Nottinghamshire resources.


Secondly, as well as safeguarding mineral resource, in accordance with the NPPF the Plan should safeguard mineral associated infrastructure.

Comment

Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation

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

Representation ID: 30660

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Representation Summary:

KSI1&locational strategy to securing mineral supply is supported. This approach maintains the spread of operations across the County and maintains a security in supply to the specific markets that these serve.

The principle of Key Strategic Issue 2 is supported. The Plan should identify anticipated demand from adjoining Authority areas.

Don't with SI4 and a 'Biodiversity led restoration' approach to all mineral operations.

SI4 should consider opportunities which mineral extraction creates for the deposit of inert infill.

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: 30661

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Representation Summary:

10 year average figure is not considered suitable as the figures are heavily influenced by the recession and movement of production at Finningley.
This is particularly apparent given increasing sales across the East Midlands. Worth noting that a decline in sales is not necessarily an indication of a decline in demand.
The 9 years of public consultation resulting in the withdrawal of the MLP has not created a positive or stable platform for industry investment.

Recycled and secondary aggregate has a role to play in meeting demand in some circumstances it cannot be relied upon for ensuring continuity in supply.

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: 30662

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Representation Summary:

The use of 10 years average does not accurately represent the 'local circumstance'. A decline in sales is not necessarily an indication of decline in demand. Whilst it is one consideration, the fact that the sales/supply picture within Nottinghamshire is so different from the rest of the East Midlands and the national picture indicates that the sales data alone is not a true reflection of current circumstances.

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: 30663

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Representation Summary:

There needs to be allowance in the Plan for both extensions and new greenfield sites. However, as we have previously stated, the Plan should provide flexibility and policy should be supportive in securing extensions to existing operations, this ensures a continuation in supply without sterilising mineral reserves. However, operational capacity constraints still apply which can limit the amount of resource available to meet demand. A more sustainable strategy would be a locational strategy which shows allocations and preferred areas of working for new sites in each of the three main areas for sand and gravel working to ensure there are sufficient operations in place to meet demand.

Comment

Minerals Local Plan Issues and Options consultation

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

Representation ID: 30664

Received: 10/01/2018

Respondent: Tarmac Ltd

Representation Summary:

The Locational strategy should be heavily influenced/focussed on known markets and by access to market and ease of access to the local highway network to transport mineral within and where necessary outside of the County.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.