Pre- Submission Draft Waste Local Plan

As such, we recommend that Draft Policy SP4 be re-worded to include direct reference to future mineral workings at point e) of section 1, as well as permitted mineral workings.

Secondly, we recommend that “or” be added between each sub-point of Draft Policy SP4. At present, the Draft Policy reads as though all of Point 1 sub-points a) to e) need to be satisfied, which we don’t believe is the intention of the Policy.

This letter has been prepared by Heatons on behalf of Tarmac Trading Limited (‘Tarmac’) with regard to the content and draft Policies set out within the Nottinghamshire and Nottingham Pre-Submission Draft Waste Local Plan (‘WLP’).
Tarmac is primarily a minerals operator, but has several operational sites located within Nottinghamshire. These representations seek to ensure that the draft waste development management policies of the WLP align with national policy and guidance. In particular, we seek to comment on the need to provide policy support for restoration of mineral sites using inert waste materials, where appropriate, and to consider the locational requirements of waste management facilities with regard to their co-location alongside minerals development.
We are concerned that the practice of successfully restoring quarries using imported waste materials will be prejudiced in the future, should the draft wording of policies within the Pre-Submission Draft WLP be adopted.
This letter seeks to provide recommendations for how the WLP can be brought into accordance with the objectives of national policy and guidance that support the recovery of waste through the restoration of mineral sites.
Recovery of Waste Through Restoration of Mineral Sites
The relationship between minerals and waste development is set out in paragraph 45 of the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) on ‘Minerals’ which states that there are many possible uses of land post mineral extraction, inter alia, “waste management, including waste storage”. Furthermore, paragraph 45 goes on to state that “some former mineral sites may also be restored as a landfill facility using suitable imported waste materials as an intermediate stage in restoration prior to an appropriate after use”.
The proactive utilisation of inert wastes materials as a resource in the backfilling of quarries is long-established industry practice across the UK. It constitutes a waste recovery process, rather than disposal. Using inert waste rather than higher-grade material, such as recycled aggregates or virgin material which could be put to more sustainable uses, is considered to be a more sustainable option which supports the waste hierarchy as set out in National Planning Policy for Waste (2014).
With specific regard to draft policies of the WLP, Draft Policy SP4 ‘Managing Residual Waste’ refers to waste recovery in restoration of minerals sites. The Draft Policy states that:
“Proposals for the recovery of inert waste to land will be permitted where it can be demonstrated that:
… e) This will not prejudice the restoration of permitted mineral workings and landfill sites where applicable.”
At present, the wording of the Draft Policy sets a high bar of acceptability for recovery of inert waste to land, and does not expressly refer to the recovery of inert waste to land to achieve appropriate restoration at new mineral sites or at existing mineral sites with currently-unpermitted potential future extensions. This is inconsistent with the national policy and guidance already highlighted in this letter. We consider that flexibility should be added to the policy to reflect that inert waste recovery is frequently the most appropriate means to achieve high quality quarry restoration as required by NPPF paragraph 211(h). It is sometimes the only way that approved restoration schemes at existing mineral sites can be delivered as approved. It is not envisaged that a better alternative to use of inert waste will become viable over the WLP plan period to 2038.
It is notoriously unpredictable to accurately determine the volumes of overburden and soils that will become usable fill material in the restoration of mineral sites. Consequently, it is not uncommon for mineral sites to require imported inert waste due to shortfalls of material available from within the site.
The need to maximise biodiversity net gain is directly related to the need to provide flexibility to allow for the development of bespoke restoration schemes that are most appropriate for each quarry’s location and ecological objectives. Without policy flexibility that allows for inert waste recovery at mineral sites (permitted and as-yet-unpermitted), operators are likely to either struggle to deliver permitted approved restoration schemes or will struggle to offer the high-quality restoration required by NPPF. In many cases, it is preferable to deliver restoration landforms including shallow water to maximise biodiversity net gain and support protected species. Creation of optimum restoration landforms at both existing and future mineral sites is likely to require a degree of imported material, which could be difficult to achieve should the wording of Draft Policy SP4 be adopted.
As such, we recommend that Draft Policy SP4 be re-worded to include direct reference to future mineral workings at point e) of section 1, as well as permitted mineral workings.
3
Secondly, we recommend that “or” be added between each sub-point of Draft Policy SP4. At present, the Draft Policy reads as though all of Point 1 sub-points a) to e) need to be satisfied, which we don’t believe is the intention of the Policy.
It is important to note that ultimately the restoration schemes for mineral sites will continue to be determined on a case-by-case basis with due consideration of the merits of each bespoke restoration scheme. Our concern is that a lack of flexibility in the policies of the WLP will effectively result in a lack of policy support for new mineral operations with restoration schemes that require the importation of off-site waste materials in order to deliver final landforms that are most appropriate for the site’s ecology, landscape, and/or topography. Our suggested amendment to Draft Policy SP4 would not result in a presumption in favour of importing inert waste for restoration purposes at every quarry but would provide sufficient flexibility for operators that aim to deliver high-quality restoration schemes that cannot be achieved without imported fill material.
Conclusion
This letter of representation has set out the long-standing and valuable relationship between waste management and minerals development, and the national policy support for inert waste recovery.
We would like to recommend that WLP Draft Policy SP4 be re-worded in order to achieve greater consistency with NPPW in relation to the waste hierarchy. We consider that the current wording of the Draft Policy does not offer due support to inert waste recovery at minerals sites.
We trust that these representations are of benefit to the Authority in refining the emerging WLP. Should any matters require clarification we would be delighted to assist.
Yours faithfully,