Technical and Strategic Assessment of Aggregate Supply Options in ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Technical & Strategic Assessment of Aggregate Supply Options in the South West Region5.19 Individually, the percentages should be regarded as no more than approximations, and theydo not result in exactly the same proportional breakdown between different sources beingmaintained (though this is also true of the SWRAWP’s own figures for Scenario 1).Together, however, they generate total requirements for crushed rock and sand & gravelwhich equate to those identified in Table 4.6, above.5.20 The expectations for secondary and recycled materials reflect the assumptions made in theODPM’s Regional Apportionment figures (i.e. an average total of 7.57 Mt per year), brokendown in the same proportions as the latest available production figures. The ODPMexpectations for this group as a whole would entail a 9.25% increase on the ‘current’ figures(in this case from 2003). For the purposes of describing Scenario 1, this has beenachieved by applying a 9% increase to the production rate for recycled materials and a9.5% increase for secondary materials, though in practice the balance may well bedifferent.5.21 Similarly, the expectations for marine aggregate landings in the South West reflect ODPM’sguidelines which, in this case, anticipate an 11% reduction compared with 2001 figures.For the purposes of describing Scenario 1, this has been applied equally to the BristolChannel and South Coast areas.5.22 As noted in the previous chapter, the requirements for sand & gravel production in allareas, and the required production of crushed rock in Gloucestershire (specifically theForest of Dean), cannot be sustained by the current stock of permitted reserves in theseareas. This is confirmed by Table 5.2, below, which compares the permitted reserves fromTable 4.1 with the total apportionment requirements for each group of primary aggregatesources over the period 2001-2016 (derived from Table 5.1 by multiplying the annualaverages by 16) and identifies the specific surpluses and shortfalls for each group.5.23 Achieving the Scenario 1 supply pattern would necessitate the release of additionalpermitted reserves in each of the shortfall areas shown in Table 5.2, many of which arecovered by environmental designations. This is one of the key factors to be taken intoaccount in the sustainability analysis, which follows in Chapter 6.Capita Symonds Limited page 33 June 2005
Technical & Strategic Assessment of Aggregate Supply Options in the South West RegionTable 5.2: Detailed Comparison of Permitted Reserves and “Scenario 1” Sub-RegionalApportionment Figures for Primary Aggregates in the South West, 2001-2016Groups of SourcesAM 2001 Data(as amended by SWRAWP)Permitted Reservesat 31/12/2001Scenario 1 ‘Expectations’Total Required2001-2016Surplus(or Shortfall)(see Figures 4.1 to 4.3 for locations) (Mt) (Mt) (Mt)HARD ROCK AGGREGATE SOURCES: 0 0 0A: Carboniferous Limestone, Mendips, Somerset 638.75 213.50 425.25B: Carboniferous & Devonian Limestone, Somerset & Devon 124.96 39.73 85.23C: Carboniferous Limestone, North Somerset 61.00 41.94 19.06D: Carboniferous Limestone, Gloucestershire (Forest of Dean) 16.90 26.08 -9.18E: Carboniferous Limestone, South Gloucestershire 183.00 51.70 131.30F: Granite & Gabbro, SW Cornwall 124.03 15.84 108.19G: Granite, N Cornwall & Dartmoor 50.74 8.83 41.91H: Dolerite, Devon & Cornwall, plus Andesite, Somerset 87.79 22.58 65.21I: Carboniferous and Devonian Sandstone, Devon & Cornwall 21.20 10.80 10.40J: Carboniferous & Devonian Sandstone, Somerset and South Gloucestershire 3.60 0.96 2.64‘WEAK’ ROCK AGGREGATE SOURCES: 0 0.00 .00K: Jurassic Portland Limestone, Dorset 46.32 6.86 39.45L: Jurassic Limestone & Cretaceous Chalk, excluding Groups K and M 2.10 1.14 0.96M: Jurassic Limestone, Gloucestershire 14.37 13.02 1.35Sub-Total: All Crushed Rock 1375 453 922LAND-BASED SAND & GRAVEL AGGREGATE SOURCES: 0 0 0N: Permian & Triassic Sand & Gravel, Devon 12.053 18.34 -6.287O: Cretaceous to Quaternary Sand & Gravel, Devon & Cornwall 3.047 3.46 -0.413P: Cretaceous to Quaternary Sand & Gravel, Wiltshire 11.66 29.66 -18.000Q: Quaternary and Triassic Sand & Gravel, Gloucestershire 11.77 18.18 -6.41R: Tertiary & Quaternary Sand & Gravel, Dorset 26.892 36.35 -9.458Sub-Total: Land-Won Sand & Gravel 65 106 -40.6Alternative Scenarios5.24 Clause 6 of the new ODPM Guidelines (as quoted in para 2.5, above),highlights the needfor the environmental impacts of future aggregate extraction to be considered in relation tothe ability or ‘capacity’ of the producing areas to absorb them, and for this concept to formthe basis of developing alternative scenarios of sub-regional apportionment.5.25 In view of the sensitivity of designated landscapes within the shortfall areas identifiedabove, as indicated by the SWRAWP b , avoiding the need for new permissions to begranted within these areas forms one of the main drivers for the consideration of alternativescenarios within the South West. This would represent a clear move towards a Planled(rather than demand-led) approach to minerals planning.b This study has not independently considered the particular sensitivities of these areas in comparison to anyother areas within the South West: this statement merely reflects the concerns noted in a letter regarding theScenario 1 proposal from the SWRAWP chairman to the SWRA dated 27 October 2003. For the purposes ofundertaking a full sustainability appraisal of the various scenarios now available for consideration, thesignificance of these potential environmental issues will need to be fully assessed.Capita Symonds Limited page 34 June 2005
Page 1 and 2: Technical and StrategicAssessment o
Page 3 and 4: Technical & Strategic Assessment of
Page 82: Technical & Strategic Assessment of

Technical and Strategic Assessment of Aggregate Supply Options in ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?