Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan Publication Version

Object

Representation ID: 263

Received: 11/10/2019

Respondent: Tarmac

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

It is considered that Policy MP2 is not positively prepared or an effective strategy and is therefore unsound. Insufficient sand and gravel reserves are being allocated to ensure a steady and adequate supply of sand and gravel.
Tarmac are supportive of the approach to work permitted reserves as well as allocating extensions to existing operations and through the provision of new greenfield sites. There needs to be allowance in the Plan for both extensions and new greenfield sites. However,
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. The Plan needs to build in an element of flexibility to address the issue of long
term longevity of mineral operations in Nottinghamshire – only 4 sand and gravel sites identified in Policy MP2 have long term and significant production capacity. There should not be a reliance on a Review of the Plan to fill any identified need gaps during the Plan
period. These should be addressed from the start to provide security/assurances to operators to secure investment. Potential ‘Preferred Areas’ or Areas of Search’ may assist in the process.
We support the Council in adopting a locational approach to mineral development sites to ensure there is a spread in sites to meet anticipated demand. However, operational capacity constraints still apply (imposed by plant capacity, planning conditions or HGV routing
agreements) which can limit production / distribution to meet demand in some market areas. These are all important considerations in locating new sites for mineral development.
There should not be a sole reliance on their physical location in the County. Besthorpe Quarry and Girton Quarry (currently mothballed) for example have vehicle movement restrictions through S106 planning agreements which forces HGV routing northward. As a
result, those sites are generally more aligned to the North Nottinghamshire / Doncaster / Humberside market areas as opposed to Newark.
Tarmac are very disappointed and surprised that the Botany Bay Quarry site has not been included as an allocation in the Plan. The permitted resource and proposed allocations do not at any time over the Plan period meet the proposed annual requirement for sand and gravel (1.7mt). The Tarmac revised Delivery Schedule (appendix 1a and 1b) clearly illustrates
this point. Reference is made in the most recent LAA that sand and gravel reserves from the Idle Valley are depleting whilst recognising the important role they play in maintaining sand and gravel supply within and outside the County (paragraph 4.15 of the Draft MLP). Further
commentary is provided in regard to the sustainability appraisal and site assessment document at the end of these representations. It is not clear what the justification is for removing Botany Bay as a suitable and deliverable allocation when the site has been included for allocation in previous Plan drafts. The MPA’s Duty to Cooperate is stating that supply from Nottinghamshire to the South Yorkshire market will continue in the mid-long
term. However, the delivery schedule is clear that there are insufficient reserves being allocated to meet this historic (411,000 tonnes pe annum) supply. An assumption that Sturton will produce 500,000 tonnes per annum is not realistic and Tarmac have confirmed
that tonnages from this site are unlikely to exceed much beyond 100,000 tonnes per annum.
There is a clear case for additional sand and gravel sites to be allocated in the north of the County.
There is also a clear case for additional allocation of green field sand and gravel sites to be allocated to come into production during the Plan period. The serious decline in sand and gravel reserves and projected production capacity in Leicestershire is clearly evidenced
through the Leicestershire Mineral & Waste Local Plan review and sites have been promoted into the Nottinghamshire Local Mineral Plan review to meet that identified shortfall and the consequential need for alternative supply from adjoining authority areas. Tarmac’s promoted site ‘Great North Road (North)’, near Kelham meets that objective and would deliver a long term sand and gravel production site with a sustainable output of 250,000 tonnes per annum to serve the Nottingham (potentially as a replacement to Cromwell) and North East Leicestershire market over the plan period to 2036. The Great North Road (North) site should therefore be allocated in the Plan. Again, Preferred Areas or Areas of Search may be a more effective strategy in regards to long term supply.
The Great North Road (South) site has a proven significant future sand and gravel resource
which would provide a natural long term extension to the Great North Road (North) site.
The combined sand and gravel resources at the “North” and “South” sites would provide a
stable long term supply facility to meet the likely strong demand for construction materials
in the Nottingham / NE Leicestershire markets throughout and beyond the 2036 Plan period.
In addition, Tarmac’s proposed new green field extraction site at Burridge Farm, which is
proposed to use river barge transportation to feed sand and gravel to a proposed new
processing plant at the former Cromwell Quarry site previously operated by Lafarge, would
also provide some additional support production capacity in the second part of the Plan
period. The Cromwell plant site is well situated with good access onto the A1 interchange at
Cromwell. The Burridge Farm site would not have capacity to operate at high output levels
due to likely physical constraints on barge transportation along the River Trent through
Cromwell Lock.

Object

Representation ID: 264

Received: 11/10/2019

Respondent: Tarmac

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The LAA recognises the high level of export to markets outside the County due to limited
resources elsewhere. As per comments on sand and gravel, there is a need where resource
15
exists to maintain production and operating capacity to meet demand. The Plan should
identify appropriate extensions to existing operations or new sites to meet demand.
Identified demand based on sales is a minimum requirement of the Plan and there should be
flexibility built into the Plan to allow sites to come forward. The plan should address
anticipated demand from outside of the County. As per comments on Policy MP2 an
additional criteria regarding modest extensions should be included to ensure flexibility in the
Plan and to allow the continued supply of Sherwood Sandstone which is not just important
within Nottinghamshire.
The Plan should recognise the unique properties of the sand as well as markets. Colour
variances as well as properties of the sand are also important factors and therefore
additional reserves (as allocations or new sites) should not solely be based upon estimated
demand based on sales figures.

Object

Representation ID: 265

Received: 11/10/2019

Respondent: Tarmac

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

As with the case for sand and gravel there should not be a reliance/assumption that supply
chains will continue. As worded the policy is not positively prepared and is therefore
unsound.
It is likely that there is a wider demand for crushed rock within the County than that met by
Nether Langwith. Crushed rock requirements are met from imports (Leicestershire 70% and
Derbyshire). Policy should be flexible and supportive to increase indigenous crushed rock
supply. The Plan should also be clear that Nottinghamshire is not self sufficient in crushed
rock supply and is reliant on neighbouring East Midlands Authority areas to maintain supply.
The crushed rock supply situation within the East Midlands should also be monitored closely
as there are substantial reserves constrained in mothballed sites and those sites that benefit
from rail link have limited production capacity to meet current demand levels. Any significant upturn in demand may result in crushed rock demand not being able to be met – particularly when competing with markets in the south east.

Support

Representation ID: 266

Received: 11/10/2019

Respondent: Tarmac

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Tarmac support the MPA in seeking the use of alternative aggregates and the appreciation
that there are limits on how far alternatives can substitute primary aggregate. Whilst
support for alternative aggregate should be encouraged in the Plan, the contribution should
be viewed as a ‘bonus’ over and above the required amount of primary aggregate. This is
reflective of the NPPF (para 204 (b)) which states that local Plans should take account of the,
‘contribution that substitute or secondary and recycled materials and minerals waste would make’. The reduction in ash materials from coal fired power stations is also likely to increase the demand for primary aggregate over the Plan period to address this specific resource shortfall. The approach to recycled aggregates reflects the Mineral Products Association Long Term Aggregates Demand and Supply Scenarios Paper which indicates that the
potential for recycling has reached an optimum level (approximately 28-30% volume).

Object

Representation ID: 267

Received: 11/10/2019

Respondent: Tarmac

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Policy MP9 is not considered positively prepared and is therefore unsound. Reserves of industrial dolomite are of international importance and the resource itself is scarce with only a small number of sites within the UK. As such there will always be a need for the resource,
therefore the policy should be reworded to state that:
‘Proposals for industrial dolomite extraction will be supported providing that development does not give rise to any unacceptable levels of environmental impact’.
Whilst additional resource areas do not need to be identified as an allocation, the resource within Nottinghamshire should be identified within the Plan and recognised as a proven resource to be safeguarded.

Object

Representation ID: 269

Received: 11/10/2019

Respondent: Tarmac

Agent: Heaton Planning Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Policy DM4 – Protection and Enhancement of Biodiversity and Geodiversity
Policy DM4 is not an effective strategy and not in compliance with the NPPF, particularly in
regard to the approach on local wildlife sites. It is therefore considered unsound. Paragraph
175 of the NPPF advises that ‘if significant harm to biodiversity cannot be avoided…’ then
planning permission should be refused. Policy DM4 should be amended to reflect the
significance of harm test to allow a judgement to be made as opposed to a blanket approach
to all impacts and rating all ecological/biodiversity interests at the same level. The NPPF
does not advocate a loss of local wildlife site to be unacceptable if the avoidance, mitigation
and compensation tests have been met. In addition, there is no requirement in the NPPF for
public benefit to justify an effect on ecological/biodiversity habitat except in the case of
irreplaceable habitat.
Impacts on populations of priority species or areas of priority habitat needing to be ‘wholly
exceptional’ is not in accordance with the NPPF.
Part 3 of the policy should be reworded to maximise opportunities for securing net gains in
biodiversity in accordance with paragraph 174 (part b) of the NPPF.