Background documents
Search representations
Results for Campaigners Against Two Silica Sites search
New searchComment
Background documents
Sustainability Appraisal (Part A) - Scoping
Representation ID: 98916
Received: 21/10/2019
Respondent: Campaigners Against Two Silica Sites
* Comment on Sustainability Appraisal Report (SAR) Part A - Scoping (2015). Specifically included here section 2.2 Approach to the SA/SEA Process
o In applying SA/SEA to the Silica Sand Review of the Minerals Site Specific Allocations DPD and the Minerals and Waste Core Strategy Review, Norfolk County Council aims to:
* Identify alternative options for delivering sustainable minerals development in Norfolk;
* Identify alternative options for delivering sustainable waste management facilities in Norfolk;
* Further enhance positive environmental, social and economic effects of the plan; and
* Reduce and minimise the negative environmental, social and economic effects that may result from the implementation of the plan.
Nothing in the NCC Silica Sand Review addresses the aims stated in section 2.2 with respect to 'alternative options for delivering sustainable minerals development in Norfolk, or 'further enhance .... economic effects'. Only an up to date, efficient glass recycling programme for Norfolk will address the aims stated in the SAR section 2.2. At this moment the M&WLP fails this section.
Comment on Sustainability Appraisal Report (SAR) Part A - Scoping (2015). Specifically included here section 2.2 Approach to the SA/SEA Process
o In applying SA/SEA to the Silica Sand Review of the Minerals Site Specific Allocations DPD and the Minerals and Waste Core Strategy Review, Norfolk County Council aims to:
* Identify alternative options for delivering sustainable minerals development in Norfolk;
* Identify alternative options for delivering sustainable waste management facilities in Norfolk;
* Further enhance positive environmental, social and economic effects of the plan; and
* Reduce and minimise the negative environmental, social and economic effects that may result from the implementation of the plan.
Nothing in the NCC Silica Sand Review addresses the aims stated in section 2.2 with respect to 'alternative options for delivering sustainable minerals development in Norfolk, or 'further enhance .... economic effects'. Only an up to date, efficient glass recycling programme for Norfolk will address the aims stated in the SAR section 2.2. At this moment the M&WLP fails this section.
