Archived decisions

7. Introduction

7.1 On 11 May 2004 the Executive Members for Environment and Spatial Strategy decided:

"(i) That the South East England Regional Assembly be informed of the County Council's views on the final draft Regional Minerals Strategy, that:

(a) Hampshire objects that the regional reduction in the apportionment has not been allocated more equitably and sustainably throughout the region, as set out in paragraphs 9.2 to 9.5;

(b) Hampshire objects that no policy revision has been made to take into account that the proposed New Forest National Park apportionment will not be met after 2006; and

(c) the strategic sustainability appraisal that was carried out is flawed, in that it does not take into account the impact of the proposed New Forest National Park and does not consider alternatives for apportionment of the regional target; the appraisal should be carried out again, with opportunities for input from Mineral Planning Authorities.

(ii) That Hampshire should maintain its objection to the aspects of the Regional Minerals Strategy noted above, and should seek representation at the Inquiry later this year if these comments are not taken into account.

(iii) That Southampton City Council, Portsmouth City Council, the New Forest Committee, the South East England Development Agency, the South West Regional Assembly, Dorset County Council and Wiltshire County Council be informed of the County Council's response."

7.2 Since that date the Government has announced its decision on the proposed New Forest National Park and its boundary. The area of the Park has been significantly reduced from that proposed by the Countryside Agency and the part of the Avon Valley which contains a major gravel production unit and potential reserve has been excluded. This has caused a reappraisal of the County Council's approach to the Regional Minerals Strategy which is the subject of an Examination in Public in October.

8. Aggregate Planning and the New Forest

8.1 A fundamental approach to planning for aggregates (sand, gravel and other construction minerals) in England is based on a long established national and regional forecasting system. The current guidelines consider the need for aggregates until 2016 and the South East England Regional Assembly has proposed that the sub-regional apportionments for the provision of aggregates from land-won sources is split thus:

Hampshire (including Southampton and Portsmouth but excluding the area of the National Park) - 1.80 million tonnes per annum (mtpa); and

New Forest National Park - 0.72 mtpa.

8.2 The whole basis for establishing an apportionment for the New Forest National Park was that the rich mineral resource of the Avon Valley was proposed for inclusion in the New Forest National Park. In recognition of the need to maintain the sub-regional apportionment and at the same time not to put unreasonable pressure on the rest of Hampshire, the separate apportionment was proposed for the proposed New Forest National Park area.

8.3 Now that the revised New Forest National Park boundary has excluded most of the Avon Valley, the logic for a separate apportionment has disappeared. Gravel production in the finalised National Park area has been, in recent years, at a level that the current permitted reserve at the one remaining site could last the period up to and beyond 2016.

8.4 The New Forest National Park apportionment of 0.72 mtpa, therefore, could be returned to the `rest of Hampshire', giving an overall apportionment of 2.52 mtpa for Hampshire, excluding the New Forest National Park area. The New Forest National Park would have no apportionment of its own. However, there should be a commitment to working out the existing permitted reserve within the Park boundary. There should also be an understanding that `windfall' mineral sites' opportunities arising from permissions for other developments within the Park would be treated on their merits. Both these latter points could be addressed either in the final Regional Mineral Strategy or the Local Development Documents produced as part of the Hampshire Material Resources Strategy.

9. Conclusions

9.1 The issue of a separate apportionment for the New Forest National Park has always been controversial as it militates against the general national policy presumption against mineral extraction in National Parks. Because the original proposed New Forest National Park area encompassed such important current and potential gravel production sites the device of separate apportionments was resorted to, to highlight this dilemma.

9.2 However, the reduced National Park area does not include major gravel production sites or potential ones so the matter of future gravel production within the Park is no longer a planning issue. There is sense, therefore, in the principle of removing the aggregate apportionment from the National Park and including it within Hampshire, giving an overall apportionment

of 2.52 mtpa. This does still leave the concerns about the methodology for the sub-regional apportionment process, which were identified in the original 11 May report. These matters will still be pursued at the Examination in Public.

8874/RR