Minerals Plan: Key Issues & Options

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


List of answers to the specified question
Andrew Threlfall It doesn't seem really viable to seperate out the Peak Park as it has such an impact on Derbyshire. 21 Jun 2010 12:54
Karen Miller - National Trust It makes sense to tie this approach into that dealt with under Issue 12. 10 Aug 2010 16:10
Miss Plackett - English Heritage - East Midlands Region Option 2 clearly relates to Issue 12 and, as implied in paragraph 7.85, would need to be subject to a detailed assessment of the relative environmental and social impacts. However, there is also another consideration. We propose that the supply of aggregates from crushed stone sources should also be linked to the landbank for riverine gravels. Would there be environmental and social benefits in allowing the substitution of crushed stone for part of the sand and gravel apportionment if this resulted in preventing the extraction in sensitive riverine locations in the Trent and Derwent valleys? It is also desirable that the supply of secondary and recycled materials is properly monitored so that its contribution to the overall supply of aggregates is understood. 02 Aug 2010 13:59
Andrew Barton - Peak District National Park Authority The PDNPA would support any proactive action undertaken by Derbyshire County Council that included the potential giving-up of permissions within the National Park in return for new aggregates proposals in Derbyshire. As you indicate this would help to achieve the desired reduction in the amount and proportion of aggregates production within the National Park, the objective of Policy 37 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and enshrined in the emerging PDNPA Core Strategy. As indicated under our Representation No.1 above on the vision however, any proposal to reduce the aggregates landbank within Derbyshire itself will need to be carefully considered and managed to ensure that no unintended adverse consequences arise from the displacement of market pressure then into neighbouring areas which could undermine the overall Core Strategy approach. 02 Aug 2010 11:57
Henry Folkard - British Mountaineering Council Unique circumstances prevail on individual sites. These may be geological, community based or relate to after use and the same considerations will be relevant in assessing value of any trade off in sites where permission may be surrendered. There needs to be a clear principle, robust policies to safeguard the principle but retain the opportunity to balance all factors on a site by site basis. 18 Aug 2010 14:24
Jenna Conway - Tarmac The issues faced by Derbyshire with a high permitted reserve of crushed rock are not unique. The approach to seek operators to relinquish reserves tied up in old permissions in favour of new sites that are more favourable in terms of environmental and amenity impacts is appropriate provided it is undertaken with proper appraisal and in a transparent manner. 02 Aug 2010 14:59
John Bradshaw - Tarmac a) & b) Existing permitted reserves, whether in Derbyshire or the Peak Park represent strategic opportunities for the future sustainable supply of crushed rock demand. Both are well located to serve the needs both of themselves and neighbouring Regions. Each case should be treated on its merits and should not lead to a reduction of crushed rock reserves that might otherwise provide a sustainable supply to meet future demands. 13 Aug 2010 14:46
Mark North - Mineral Products Association No justification has been given for reducing the landbank. 10 Aug 2010 14:03
Nigel Weedon - Longcliffe Quarries Limited Confidential 14 Jun 2010 16:41
Phil Jones Only problem is what is in it for the operators? 16 May 2010 23:04
Stephen Woods - Cemex There should be no policy to reduce the landbank. The landbank will natural decrease as reserves deplete. New permissions which provide a nationally significant resource should not be refused on a landbank policy only. If the MPA feel sufficiently strongly that certain planning permissions should be revoked to reduce an inappropriately large landbank then it should use the appropriate mechanism provided by the legislation - the Revocation Notice. Whilst the approach of relinquishing permissions is valid this isn't something that should be enshrined in policy, certainly not at a site specific level. Relinquishing permissions is an issue to be determined between applicant and MPA at the application stage. To attempt to develop a site specific policy could be interpreted as stifling competition as it would favour those operators with more extensive interests within the County. 02 Aug 2010 13:32