Minerals Plan: Key Issues & Options

Derby & Derbyshire Minerals Core Strategy: Key Issues & Options Questionnaire

Responses

List of answers to the specified question
NameOptionTextDate
Stephen Woods - Cemex Yes, this approach should be considered through the core strategy. 02 Aug 2010 13:32
Roger Caisley - Suon Ltd The summary of the existing policy MP17 is not very accurate and rather confusing but the existing policy would seem to be a reasonable approach to take for the reasoning set out the existing MLP. 12 Aug 2010 14:06
Nigel Weedon - Longcliffe Quarries Limited Confidential 14 Jun 2010 16:41
John Bradshaw - Tarmac The Core Strategy should continue with the approach of existing MLP Policy MP17 but should state "Proposals for development which would sterilise the future working of economically workable mineral deposits will be resisted, except where there is an overriding need for the development and prior extraction cannot be undertaken. Only in such exceptional circumstances and where the development is considered essential and proven mineral deposits would be sterilised, permission will be granted provided it would not lead to adverse environmental impacts". 13 Aug 2010 14:46
Jenna Conway - Tarmac We agree with a continuation of the approach in existing MLP Policy MP17, this is in line with Government guidance and protects mineral reserves from unnecessary sterilisation. 02 Aug 2010 14:59
Helen Fairfax - North East Derbyshire District Council The existing policy within the Minerals Local Plan has operated effectively and there is no reason to change the policy approach.
This also presents the most realistic policy option for North East Derbyshire, where all but the south western corner of the District is identified as a resource for surface coal. The use of this policy will negate the need to identify safeguarding areas for surface coal around urban areas. This could also mean that Mineral Consultation areas will not be required (for surface coal) which would reduce the likely burden on the local Planning Authority of consulting the County on all planning applications
11 Aug 2010 11:04
Alan Morey - Chesterfield Borough Council There may be areas in Chesterfield Borough where development or remediation is proposed on ground containing workable surface coal deposits. If a site is not located within a Mineral Safeguarding Area or it is not part of a Surface Mining Constraint Area then a policy will be required to guide decisions on proposals. Existing Minerals Local Plan Policy MP17 appears to cover this requirement.

CBC notes that according to this policy, development which sterilises mineral deposits will be resisted, except where:

1. There is an overriding need for the development and
2. Where prior extraction of the mineral cannot be reasonably be undertaken, or is unlikely to be practicable or environmentally acceptable.

The latter two caveats should remain in any new policy as this ensures that overriding regeneration needs can be met and unacceptable damage to the environment will not be allowed.
02 Aug 2010 14:29
Adam Reddish - Erewash Borough Council EBC agree with the continuation of the approach established in the existing MLP Policy MP17 providing the caveat is maintained regarding exception being made 'where there is an overriding need for the development and prior extraction can not be undertaken'.



b) In explaining this view, we entirely support the approach to protect areas which are subject to mineral deposits from development. However, we are aware of coal reserves around Ilkeston which provides an important spatial planning issue relating to the future development of the Borough.



Through our own Core Strategy Issues and Options consultation, we invited community views on 2 large developments sites (Sustainable Urban Extension - SUE's) adjoining Ilkeston. These very large sites would incorporate a mix of new homes, employment opportunities, infrastructure and community facilities. For information, one of the SUE's represented the former Stanton Ironworks site and the other site was land to the north of Pewit Golf course to the West of Ilkeston.



Through the consultation we received comments from the Coal Authority explaining how the SUE sites to the south and west of Ilkeston 'would extend over the surface coal resource'. As such, they stated it would 'be necessary to take into account any possible sterilisation impacts and assess the potential for the prior extraction of coal when considering any urban extensions within these areas'.



You should note that in the next stage of Consultation 'Option for Consultation' which represented Erewash Borough Council's preferred approaches, only the Stanton Ironworks site is being taken forward as a SUE. Indeed, the development of this under used Brownfield and degraded site provides numerous benefits to Erewash. Not only will it help meet housing needs through the creation of c. 4000 new homes inc. affordable homes but the development will create new employment opportunities which will all assist the ongoing regeneration of Ilkeston town centre. Due to timescales and the need to effectively decontaminate the site and provide a new appropriate road access, the viability of the scheme may be jeopardised if prior extraction was attempted.



This said, MLP Policy MP17 allows for exceptions being made 'where there is an overriding need for the development and prior extraction can not be undertaken. To EBC's judgement, the regeneration of Stanton Ironworks clearly falls within this category. In conclusion. the continuation of a similar approach as the one inherent in MLP Policy MP17 would be supported.
30 Jul 2010 10:59
Miss Plackett - English Heritage - East Midlands Region English Heritage considers that the policy should apply to building and roofing stone, as set out in Section 3a) of MPS1 Annex 3. The strategic stone study for Derbyshire should provide justification for this. There may be an issue regarding the use of the term 'economically workable mineral deposits' for the reasons give above (Issue 6). 02 Aug 2010 13:59
Andrew Threlfall Lifespan of any developments must be taken into account. 21 Jun 2010 12:54