000			01548cab a2200241 4500
001			ABS48268
008			090401t1993 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u65816
041			_aeng
245			_aMid-Essex Gravel Pits v SoS for the Environment and Essex CC
260			_c1993
350			_a0
490			_aJournal of Planning and Environment Law _v1993 JPL 229-236(5)
520			_aQBD 6 February 1992. The council failed to determine two planning applications for the winning and working of sand and gravel sites. The central issue was whether the county needed to maintain an adequate provision for future working of minerals. The argument centred on the proper approach to MPG6 paragraph 34 which deals with the need to maintain a `landbank`. The appellant, M, asserted that `as the purpose of the landbank policy was to maintain permitted reserves sufficient for at least 10 years` extraction, in assessing the adequacy or otherwise of reserves, material which would not be worked until the next century should be discounted`. However the council argued that all permitted reserves should count towards the landbank. The structure plan contained a proposal that reserves with planning permission should be maintained. The appeal was allowed.
650			_aMINERAL PLANNING GUIDANCE NOTE 6
650			_aMINERAL RESERVES
650			_aMINERAL WORKINGS
650			_aMINERALS PLANNING GUIDANCE NOTE SIX
650			_aPLANNING APPLICATIONS
690			_aMINING AND MINERALS-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c41093 _d41093