Proposed Main Modifications

Remove all reference to examples of potential overriding planning reasons to allow extraction on unallocated sites where all other policy requirements are met or alternatively, amend to include an additional overriding planning reason, i.e. a shortfall of aggregate supply in a sub-area such as the Great Yarmouth and Gorleston-on-Sea which has no identified allocated mineral.

As a preference the respondent would request removal of all reference to examples of potential overriding planning reasons and for the draft Plan to be amended to simply allow extraction on unallocated sites where all other policy requirements are met.

Alternatively, the respondent would request the draft Plan is amended to include an additional overriding planning reason, i.e. a shortfall of aggregate supply in a sub-area and specifically the sub-area in the east of the County containing the urban areas of Great Yarmouth and Gorleston-on-Sea which has no identified allocated mineral and only a single existing source of sand and gravel.

Either of the above would enable the mineral planning authority to react to a landbank shortfall in a sub-area and thus avoid the need for lengthy transportation of mineral from one sub-area to another to make up for the shortfall, with its associated carbon emissions. As such the amendment would bring the Plan more into line with national climate change policy including the environmental objective of the NPPF; the goal of reducing greenhouse emissions in the Climate Change Act; local policies MW3, MP2 and spatial strategy for mineral extraction contained in the draft NM&WLP, together with the reality of the global climate emergency.