Third Stage Consultation on the Minerals Local Plan

Third Stage Consultation on the Minerals Local Plan

Consultation Questionnaire

CHAPTER 1: Introduction

Q1.1 Are there any wording changes which you would suggest to Chapter 1 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

CHAPTER 2: Portrait of Worcestershire

Q2.1 Does the Portrait of Worcestershire identify the locally relevant key issues for the Minerals Local Plan?

Q2.2 Are there any wording changes which you would suggest to Chapter 2 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

CHAPTER 3: Vision and Objectives

Q3.1 Do the vision and objectives set the appropriate priorities to address the key issues for mineral planning in Worcestershire?

Q3.2 Do the objectives set the appropriate priorities to ensure that the vision will be achieved?

Q3.3 Do the vision and objectives together address the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework by:

Q3.4 Are there any wording changes which you would suggest to Chapter 3 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

CHAPTER 4: Key Diagram

Q4.1 Is the key diagram effective in indicating broad locations for strategic

development?

Q4.2 Are there any changes which you would suggest to the key diagram to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

Q4.3 Are there any changes which you would suggest to the interactive minerals mapping tool to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

CHAPTER 5: Spatial Strategy

Q5.1 Do you agree with the approach to defining the strategic corridors?

Q5.2 Do you agree with the specific boundaries for each strategic corridor?

Q5.3 Do you agree that corridors containing crushed rock resources (see Annex 1) should not be designated as Strategic Corridors?

Q5.4 Do you think that there are any other coherent corridors containing locally or nationally significant mineral resources which should be designated as strategic corridors?

Q5.5 Do you agree with method used to identify specific sites and preferred areas (see Appendix 2 and the Deliverability Assessment for further details)?

Q5.6 Do you have any further information about ANY of the sites submitted which might alter their Deliverability Assessment outcome? Please use the site reference given in the Deliverability Assessment and provide appropriate evidence to support this.

Q5.7 THIRD CALL FOR SITES: Do you have any further sites for mineral working or supporting infrastructure to put forward for consideration against the Deliverability Assessment?

Please provide the following information to assess whether the sites you propose should be included in the Minerals Local Plan (you may find the interactive minerals mapping tool useful), clearly marked with the site name/references given above:

• A location plan, preferably on an OS map base.
• An estimate of the quantity of mineral resource. Borehole or other survey results would be helpful.
• Details of minerals operator(s) interested in working the site (an estimate of when they might expect to bring the site forward would help us to plan delivery through the plan period).
• Details of landowner(s) and confirmation that they would support mineral working. Landowners should be aware from the start of the process that sites may not be fully restored to agricultural use following extraction.
• Details of any landowner or community aspirations for the land which might influence site restoration and after-use options.
• Potential site access options (water, rail, conveyor and/or road).
• Processing options – would you expect processing plant to be provided on site, or would material be transported to another site for processing?

Please note, any information you submit will be in the public domain. We will consider any sites put forward and consult on them as part of the plan we intend to submit to the Secretary of State for Examination.

Q5.8 Do the policies and the reasoned justification contribute towards the achievement of the vision, objectives and spatial strategy and the character and distinctiveness of the strategic corridor?

Q5.9 Are there any wording changes which you would suggest to Chapter 5 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

Q5.10Would you support the development ofSupplementary Planning Documents that “masterplan” the green infrastructure components ofspecific sitesandpreferred areas?

Please indicate whether yourepresent an organisation,are a minerals operator, or are a member of a local community who could assist with providing the level of information required.

CHAPTER 6: Steady and adequate supply of mineral resources

Q6.1 Contribution of substitute, secondary and recycled materials and mineral wastes to overall minerals supply

a)Does Policy MLP 7 provide an appropriate and justified approach to the contribution of substitute, secondary and recycled materials and mineral wastes to overall minerals supply?

b)Does Policy MLP 7 and the reasoned justification contribute towards the achievement of the Vision, Objectives and Spatial Strategy?

c)Does Policy MLP 7 and the reasoned justification provide sufficient clarity as to how the policy would be applied?

Q6.2 Aggregate supply

a)Do Policies MLP 8 and MLP 9 provide an appropriate and justified approach to the steady and adequate supply of aggregates?

b)Do you agree with the proposed phasing for increasing and maintaining the sand and gravel landbank?

c)Do Policies MLP 8 and MLP 9 and the reasoned justification contribute towards the achievement of the vision, objectives and spatial strategy?

d)Do Policies MLP 8 and MLP 9 and the reasoned justification provide sufficient clarity as to how the policies would be applied?

Q6.3 Industrial minerals supply

a)Do Policies MLP 10, 11, 12 and 13 provide an appropriate and justified approach to the steady and adequate supply of industrial minerals?

b)Do Policies MLP 10, 11, 12 and 13 and the reasoned justification contribute towards the achievement of the vision, objectives and spatial strategy?

c)Do Policies MLP 10, 11, 12 and 13 and the reasoned justification provide sufficient clarity as to how the policies would be applied?

Q 6.4 Energy minerals supply

a)Does Policy MLP 14 provide an appropriate and justified approach to the sustainable supply of energy minerals?

b)Does Policy MLP 14 and the reasoned justification contribute towards the achievement of the vision, objectives and spatial strategy?

c)Does Policy MLP 14 and the reasoned justification provide sufficient clarity as to how the policy would be applied?

Q6.5 Are there any wording changes which you would suggest to Chapter 5 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

CHAPTER 7: Development Management

Q7.1 Do the policies and the reasoned justification contribute towards the achievement of the vision, objectives and spatial strategy?

Q7.2 Do the policies and the reasoned justification provide sufficient clarity as to how the policy would be applied?

Q7.3 Are there any wording changes which you would suggest to Chapter 7 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

CHAPTER 8: Safeguarding minerals and supporting infrastructure

Q 8.1 Exempt Development

Paragraph 8.4 lists types of development as being exempt from safeguarding requirements of Policy MLP 27 and Policy MLP 28.

a)Do you support the principle of certain types of development being exempt from the requirements of Policy MLP 27 and Policy MLP 28?

b)Do you agree that the types of development listed as being exempt from the requirements of Policy MLP 27 and Policy MLP 28 are appropriate?

c)Are there any other types of development which you think should be included in the list of exempt development?

Q 8.2Safeguarding process:

National policy requires nationally and locally important mineral resources to be safeguarded through the identification of Mineral Safeguarding Areas and Mineral Consultation Areas. Policy MLP 27 and Policy MLP 28 set out the requirements developers will need to address in relation to these.

Policy MLP 27 Safeguarding locally and nationally important mineral resources

a)Is the 250m distance around the Mineral Resource Safeguarding Areas an appropriate and justified means of identifying the Mineral Resource Consultation Areas?

b)Is the balance between safeguarding finite mineral resources and placing reasonable expectations on non-minerals development appropriate and justified?

c)Does Policy MLP 27 provide sufficient clarity as to how the safeguarding process would be applied?

Policy MLP 28 Safeguarding permitted mineral sites and supporting infrastructure

d)Is the 250m distance around the Mineral Infrastructure Safeguarding Areas an appropriate and justified means of identifying the Mineral Infrastructure Consultation Areas?

e)Is the balance between safeguarding mineral sites and supporting infrastructure and placing reasonable expectations on non-minerals development appropriate and justified?

f)Does Policy MLP 28 provide sufficient clarity as to how the safeguarding process would be applied?

Q 8.3Are there any wording changes you would suggest to Chapter 8 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?

CHAPTER 9: Implementation and Monitoring Framework

Q9.1 Does the risk assessment in Chapter 9 adequately assess the issues that may impact on the delivery of the objectives of the Worcestershire Minerals Local Plan?

Q9.2 Does Chapter 9 set out appropriate indicators to monitor the delivery of the objectives of the Worcestershire Minerals Local Plan?

Q9.3 Are there any wording changes which you would suggest to Chapter 9 to improve clarity or any other issues which you think should be considered?