The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

THE REVIEW OF NPPG4 LAND FOR MINERAL WORKING

CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY

2.1. The research has comprised the following tasks:

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.2. A targeted review of relevant literature was undertaken prior to commencing the consultation exercise. This included:

• professional journals (e.g. Mineral Planning);
• conference papers (e.g. QPA/RTPI Joint Seminars, Institute of Quarrying Annual Conferences and Mineral Planning/Waste Planning Annual Seminars);
• any studies commissioned by 'users' of NPPG4 including government agencies and local authority associations;
• parallel and related work (including progress with the DETR's consultation on MPG6); and
• a review of additional information held by The Planning Exchange.

2.3. A list of identified references is included as Appendix 1.

2.4. The literature covered a range of issues of relevance to NPPG4, and the potential need for its review. However, many of the recent articles have been 'triggered' by the consultation process associated with the review of English planning policy guidance in relation to the planning for the supply of aggregates (Minerals Planning Guidance Note (MPG)6, 1994) or by the recent policy and legislation discussed below. Whilst MPG6 relates specifically to aggregates, much of the policy content is relevant to wider minerals planning, and the intention is to follow MPG6 with a revised version of MPG1 (General Considerations and the Development Plan System, 1996) as soon as is practical. This will provide an updated central source document for English minerals planning policy.

POLICY CHECKLIST

2.5. A 'checklist' of post-1994 policy and legislation with the potential to influence minerals planning in Scotland has been compiled, and this is included as Appendix2. The checklist includes European Directives, and UK/Scottish legislation, policy and guidance, both specific to land use planning and with wider application (e.g. sustainable development, waste management and human rights).

2.6. For each reference, we have identified:

2.7. The completed checklist shows that, to a significant extent, the current version of NPPG4 already covers the majority of the identified topics. Consequently, a revision of the existing wording would enable the updated policy/legislation to be properly reflected.

CONSULTATION

2.8. NPPGs are targeted primarily at local planning authorities and a meeting was held with the Scottish Minerals Officers Forum (SMOF) to seek their views on the strengths and weaknesses of NPPG4 and its continued relevance. This included:

• views on the overall clarity of policy intentions and ease of use;
• interpretation of the term 'sustainability' in relation to minerals planning; and
• views on the continued relevance of the policy statements.

2.9. The meeting also provided a useful opportunity to 'test out' the study's emerging recommendations.

2.10. As there is a wide range of organisations with an interest in the minerals planning process, the research also included two consultation seminars to gauge the views of other 'user groups':

The attendees are listed in Appendix 3.

2.11. In addition to the points highlighted in 2.7 above, each seminar also included discussion of the following:

2.12. A draft note of each seminar was circulated to confirm that the views of the attendees had been recorded accurately. Each attendee received a copy of the finalised notes for both seminars.

2.13. The original intention was to hold a third seminar with relevant government departments and statutory advisory bodies. However, this was not progressed as a number of the invitees were unable to attend on the identified date (Historic Scotland and Scottish Natural Heritage therefore attended the NGOs seminar).

2.14 Following a meeting with the Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit (SEIRU), it was agreed that it would be useful to further canvas the views of Reporters involved in minerals issues through a questionnaire. This was based upon the local authority questionnaire (see below).

QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY

2.15. A questionnaire survey was undertaken to canvas the views of local planning authorities (LPAs) in relation to the strengths and weaknesses of the present guidance. Given the increased emphasis on the use of recycled and secondary aggregates, this was sent to all planning authorities, and not simply those with significant mineral resources. The final version of the questionnaire is included as Appendix 4 and reflects the comments of the research advisory group and the piloting exercise.

2.16. In total, 20 completed questionnaires were received (a response rate of 63%). Whilst the level of information provided was variable, encouragingly, the responses from LPAs with significant mineral resources were generally fairly detailed. As a number of local authorities had difficulties completing the sections on Structure Plan preparation, the questionnaires were also forwarded to the Glasgow and Clyde Valley and Ayrshire Joint Structure Planning Teams.

REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DECISIONS

2.17. The literature review, questionnaire survey and the consultation seminars raised a range of issues relating to mineral planning in Scotland. These issues were reviewed in more detail by examining a hierarchy of development plans and development control decisions so that the relationship between the NPPG, structure and Local Plans and decisions could be considered. In particular, this exercise took account of the role of Structure Plans in setting the context for Local Plan policies, and the role of Local Plans in providing the context within which proposals come forward and are evaluated.

2.18. The case studies were chosen to ensure coverage of a range of minerals and development plans at varying stages of completion/adoption. The selection was also informed by the issues raised in the questionnaire responses (e.g. cross-boundary co-ordination and the use of non-statutory guidance) and the pattern of appeal decisions. The final selection of case study authorities is identified in Table 2.1 below.

Table 2.1: Selected case study authorities

2.19. A summary of the review of the development plans is included in Appendix 5. In some cases, to track the influence and relevance of NPPG4 in development plan preparation, it was necessary to look at draft versions of the plans and, where relevant, objections at Public Local Inquiry and feedback from the Scottish Executive Reporter.

2.20. To obtain a 'complete picture' of the use of NPPG4, the development control decisions were selected from the same authorities. As Public Inquiries tend to be regarded as the battleground where NPPGs can be used as justification both in support of, and objection to, a proposal, it was important to include examples that had progressed to the Public Inquiry stage.

2.21. The material relevant to each example included decision notices, committee reports, public hearing reports, and other correspondence between the planning authority and applicant. As the majority of the decisions should have been made in the context of the current development plan, explicit references to NPPG4 were not necessarily sought.

2.22. In addition to providing a measure of the influence of NPPG4 'on the ground', the discussions with forward planners and development control staff provided a further opportunity to test out conclusions about the need to review the guidance. The findings from the case studies are integrated into sections 4 to 11 of the report, particularly section 10 (development plans) and section 11 (development control).

« Previous | Contents | Next »