Minerals Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report

Comment

Representation ID: 30596

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

As a general comment on the scoping report, it is considered that there is not sufficient emphasis on the economic importance of minerals which would be in accordance with national policy that minerals are essential to support sustainable economic growth and our quality of life, and that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should give great weight to the benefits of the mineral extraction, including to the economy. There is also not sufficient reference to specific implications of mineral extraction for the community's growth aspirations.

Comment

Representation ID: 30597

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

Q3. Have all the relevant documents been listed in Appendix 1? If not, what others should be included?

Under the heading of Economy and Employment Sources of information, these should be expanded to include
* The Mineral Products Industry at a Glance 2015 & 2016 Editions
* The Foundations for a Strong Economy - Initial assessment of the contribution of the mineral products industry to the UK economy - October 2012 Capital Economics
* Derby & Derbyshire Nottingham & Nottinghamshire LEP (D2N2) Economic Strategy

Comment

Representation ID: 30598

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

Q4. Have the key messages from the documents review been correctly identified in Table 1? If not, what should be added, amended or deleted?

Under the heading Minerals Key Messages the order and emphasis should be changed (see full representation for detail).

Under the heading of Economy and Employment Key messages the order and emphasis should be changed (see full representation for detail).

Comment

Representation ID: 30599

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

Q5. Have the implications for the SA framework been accurately assessed in Table 1. If not, what should be added, amended or deleted?

Please see response to Question 4.

Comment

Representation ID: 30600

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

Q6. Has all the relevant baseline data been included in Appendix 2? If not, what else should be included?


Under the heading Economy and Employment - replace last sentence (see full representation for suggested amendments).

Comment

Representation ID: 30626

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

Q9.

Population Sustainability Issue Identified: add that it's intended to provide 90,000+ houses in Nottinghamshire during the plan.

Economy and Employment: restate MGL's comments under question 6 and change to High Significance.

Climate Change Sustainability Issue Identified: add amendment (see full representation for suggested amendment)

Significance to Plan: Unlikely mineral development would take place in the worst affected greenhouse gas areas. Essential to reduce transportation distances by making local supplies available. Change significance to high.


How can the Plan influence this issue?: mention the need to reduce unnecessary imports.

Transport: all columns repeat analysis as for climate change.

Comment

Representation ID: 30627

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

Q12 Do the SA objectives adequately cover the sustainability issues which are relevant to the Minerals Local Plan? If not, what amendments are required?

Amend (and change text for ) SA Objectives 1, 3, 7, 8 and 13 (see full representation for detail).

Comment

Representation ID: 30628

Received: 11/01/2018

Respondent: Mick George Ltd

Q13. Are the decision-making criteria and proposed indicators appropriate? If not, what amendments are required?

Change and amend Objectives 1, 3, 7, 8 and 13 (see full representation for detail).