Policy MIN5 - Site-specific allocations for the extraction of building stone

Object

Representation ID: 6510

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Hughes Craven Ltd.

The scale of the proposed allocation is excessive and extraction is likely to extend well beyond the Plan period.
There is uncertainty around its delivery/the extinguishment of the extant Thistleton permission.
The inclusion of such a large scale allocation undermines the spatial strategy set out in MIN1 and may prejudice other mineral applications within the Plan period. This may have a detrimental effect on minerals supply and stifle competition.
An alternative site has been proposed at Hooby Lane North which would replace the proposed allocation - and detailed comments have been made about the Mineral and Waste Site Assessment Report conclusions on the both sites.
In light of the above it is considered that the allocation should not be taken forward and instead replaced by the alternative site at Hooby Lane North.

Object

Representation ID: 6520

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: BCH UK Ltd.

Agent: Hughes Craven Ltd.

The scale of the proposed allocation is excessive and extraction is likely to extend well beyond the Plan period. There is uncertainty around its delivery/the extinguishment of the extant Thistleton permission. The inclusion of such a large scale allocation undermines the spatial strategy set out in MIN1 and may prejudice other mineral applications within the Plan period. This may have a detrimental effect on minerals supply and stifle competition. No information on the assessment of the site and other submitted sites has been published. In light of the above it is considered that the allocation should not be taken forward.

Support

Representation ID: 7151

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: The Heritage Quarry Group

Agent: Wardell Armstong

The approach taken to the provision of minerals in the LP is supported and considered a robust and suitable strategy to meet quantified need over the plan period.

The inclusion of Hooby Lane as a site for the extraction of building stone under Policy MIN5 and the rationale behind it is further supported. It is re-emphasised that the circumstances necessitating the exchange of Thistleton for Hooby Lane remain fully applicable, and that the site at Hooby Lane remains fully suitable, available, and deliverable. There are no policy or technical considerations which would prevent the delivery of the site, or its allocation in the eLP, or the subsequent much needed mineral provision to meet identified need.

Support

Representation ID: 7961

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: Ryhall Parish Council

MIN5 Generally Support

Object

Representation ID: 7994

Received: 07/01/2024

Respondent: Mr Harold Dermott

Ketton Cement works has detrimental impacts on pollution, creation of dangerous gases and carbon generation in Rutland. This cannot be ignored. Options for management include sequestration and offsetting. Please read accompanying report.