Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan Publication Version

Gotham Parish Council feel that the Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan is UNSOUND AND UNJUSTIFIED.
The new MLPPV replaces a previous Mineral Local Plan which was approved by full council but which was then later withdrawn due to a change in Local council leadership in 2017.
We feel that it was no coincidence that the decision necessitating a second plan was essentially due to the initial Site being located at Shelford which just happened to be in the ward of the newly elected leader for the Council, both plans had identical Vision and Strategic Objectives, but have reached significantly different conclusions in terms of sites identified for the extraction of sand and gravel.
The new MLPPV includes a site at Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill which was previously rejected because of the huge environmental damage and low sustainability score according to the County Council’s own Sustainability Appraisal. This site has replaced a site at Shelford which has a higher sustainability score.
The new MLPPV now includes ‘geographical spread’ of sites across the County which gives the ability to ignore key strategic objectives such as S05 SO5 ‘Minimising impacts on communities’ and S06 ‘Protecting and enhancing natural assets. In addition, the ‘Site Selection Methodology and Assessment’ now infers that the Shelford site would be too large and the pattern of supply impacting the geographical spread of sites. It has also ignored that there are already gravel extractions in the near vicinity of Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill at both Redhill and East Leake.
SO1: Improving the sustainability of minerals development’ is UNSOUND and UNJUSTIFIED
- No meaningful analysis of the pattern of demand for sand and gravel across market areas has been produced to justify the proposed “spatial pattern of mineral development” or geographical spread of sites. It has also ignored current Sand and Gravel Extraction sites in close proximity to new proposed sites.
- Impact on communities and the natural environment are now being ignored in favour of only taking into consideration how far minerals are transported. They have also ignored how many miles can be conducted using more sustainable forms of transport such as barge.
MP2: Sand and Gravel Provision’ is UNSOUND and UNJUSTIFIED
- The addition of Mill Hill near Barton in Fabis, a site which by NCC’s own analysis shows it to be one of the most damaging sites for sand and gravel of those considered, and the removal of Shelford, the previously favoured site by NCC’s own analysis on the same criteria is unsound and unjustified.
- The County Council has ignored the favoured forms of Sustainable Transport such as Barge when considering sites including Shelford which would make it much closer to major markets in respect of “Road Miles” by using Colwick Wharf.

Statement of Community Involvement
- Non-compliance with paras 3.14 / and 3.15 of Statement of Community Involvement and responsibility to provide information on specific proposals to local communities, they have ignored engaging with other communities in close proximity to the proposed Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill site who are in the Nottingham City catchment area.
- Classifying a large number of responses to the Draft Minerals Local Plan from residents as “pro-forma” and thus ignoring them is unacceptable.

Gotham Parish Council feel that the Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan is UNSOUND AND UNJUSTIFIED.
The new MLPPV replaces a previous Mineral Local Plan which was approved by full council but which was then later withdrawn due to a change in Local council leadership in 2017.
We feel that it was no coincidence that the decision necessitating a second plan was essentially due to the initial Site being located at Shelford which just happened to be in the ward of the newly elected leader for the Council, both plans had identical Vision and Strategic Objectives, but have reached significantly different conclusions in terms of sites identified for the extraction of sand and gravel.
The new MLPPV includes a site at Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill which was previously rejected because of the huge environmental damage and low sustainability score according to the County Council’s own Sustainability Appraisal. This site has replaced a site at Shelford which has a higher sustainability score.
The new MLPPV now includes ‘geographical spread’ of sites across the County which gives the ability to ignore key strategic objectives such as S05 SO5 ‘Minimising impacts on communities’ and S06 ‘Protecting and enhancing natural assets. In addition, the ‘Site Selection Methodology and Assessment’ now infers that the Shelford site would be too large and the pattern of supply impacting the geographical spread of sites. It has also ignored that there are already gravel extractions in the near vicinity of Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill at both Redhill and East Leake.
SO1: Improving the sustainability of minerals development’ is UNSOUND and UNJUSTIFIED
- No meaningful analysis of the pattern of demand for sand and gravel across market areas has been produced to justify the proposed “spatial pattern of mineral development” or geographical spread of sites. It has also ignored current Sand and Gravel Extraction sites in close proximity to new proposed sites.
- Impact on communities and the natural environment are now being ignored in favour of only taking into consideration how far minerals are transported. They have also ignored how many miles can be conducted using more sustainable forms of transport such as barge.
MP2: Sand and Gravel Provision’ is UNSOUND and UNJUSTIFIED
- The addition of Mill Hill near Barton in Fabis, a site which by NCC’s own analysis shows it to be one of the most damaging sites for sand and gravel of those considered, and the removal of Shelford, the previously favoured site by NCC’s own analysis on the same criteria is unsound and unjustified.
- The County Council has ignored the favoured forms of Sustainable Transport such as Barge when considering sites including Shelford which would make it much closer to major markets in respect of “Road Miles” by using Colwick Wharf.

Statement of Community Involvement
- Non-compliance with paras 3.14 / and 3.15 of Statement of Community Involvement and responsibility to provide information on specific proposals to local communities, they have ignored engaging with other communities in close proximity to the proposed Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill site who are in the Nottingham City catchment area.
- Classifying a large number of responses to the Draft Minerals Local Plan from residents as “pro-forma” and thus ignoring them is unacceptable.

Gotham Parish Council feel that the Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan is UNSOUND AND UNJUSTIFIED.
The new MLPPV replaces a previous Mineral Local Plan which was approved by full council but which was then later withdrawn due to a change in Local council leadership in 2017.
We feel that it was no coincidence that the decision necessitating a second plan was essentially due to the initial Site being located at Shelford which just happened to be in the ward of the newly elected leader for the Council, both plans had identical Vision and Strategic Objectives, but have reached significantly different conclusions in terms of sites identified for the extraction of sand and gravel.
The new MLPPV includes a site at Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill which was previously rejected because of the huge environmental damage and low sustainability score according to the County Council’s own Sustainability Appraisal. This site has replaced a site at Shelford which has a higher sustainability score.
The new MLPPV now includes ‘geographical spread’ of sites across the County which gives the ability to ignore key strategic objectives such as S05 SO5 ‘Minimising impacts on communities’ and S06 ‘Protecting and enhancing natural assets. In addition, the ‘Site Selection Methodology and Assessment’ now infers that the Shelford site would be too large and the pattern of supply impacting the geographical spread of sites. It has also ignored that there are already gravel extractions in the near vicinity of Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill at both Redhill and East Leake.
SO1: Improving the sustainability of minerals development’ is UNSOUND and UNJUSTIFIED
- No meaningful analysis of the pattern of demand for sand and gravel across market areas has been produced to justify the proposed “spatial pattern of mineral development” or geographical spread of sites. It has also ignored current Sand and Gravel Extraction sites in close proximity to new proposed sites.
- Impact on communities and the natural environment are now being ignored in favour of only taking into consideration how far minerals are transported. They have also ignored how many miles can be conducted using more sustainable forms of transport such as barge.
MP2: Sand and Gravel Provision’ is UNSOUND and UNJUSTIFIED
- The addition of Mill Hill near Barton in Fabis, a site which by NCC’s own analysis shows it to be one of the most damaging sites for sand and gravel of those considered, and the removal of Shelford, the previously favoured site by NCC’s own analysis on the same criteria is unsound and unjustified.
- The County Council has ignored the favoured forms of Sustainable Transport such as Barge when considering sites including Shelford which would make it much closer to major markets in respect of “Road Miles” by using Colwick Wharf.

Statement of Community Involvement
- Non-compliance with paras 3.14 / and 3.15 of Statement of Community Involvement and responsibility to provide information on specific proposals to local communities, they have ignored engaging with other communities in close proximity to the proposed Barton in Fabis / Mill Hill site who are in the Nottingham City catchment area.
- Classifying a large number of responses to the Draft Minerals Local Plan from residents as “pro-forma” and thus ignoring them is unacceptable.