Preferred Options 2025
Search representations
Results for (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth search
New searchOther
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Introduction? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
Representation ID: 98782
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
*Land at Station Lane, Kingswood on behalf of (1) AG Family Trust 2024 (Site Ref: 514), and (2) Nigel Holdsworth (Site Ref: 622).
*The land is Grey Belt as it does not strongly contribute to any of the purposes (a), (b), or (d) in paragraph 143 of the NPPF 2024
*Serious concerns on the robustness of the process: too many options; virtually no indication which sites might feature in the plan; introduction of new settlement locations including poor performing option to the south of Kingswood. All lead to uncertainty.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the How to Have Your Say chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
Representation ID: 98813
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
* A single local plan should be produced, rather than a 2-part plan, to provide certainty.
* There is no timescale for Part 2.
* Support for the 25 year time horizon but, given the lengthy timescale for new settlements to come forward.
* It is highly unlikely that any significant contribution will be forthcoming from a new settlement for at least 10 years.
* Our clients’ land could contribute to the Districts’ housing requirements in the short term.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Vision and Strategic Objectives: South Warwickshire 2050 chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
Representation ID: 98828
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
The plan sets out five overarching principles. Our concern on these principles is that they could apply anywhere and imply there is nothing distinctly ‘South Warwickshire’ about them. A major omission is that the vision does not seem to give sufficient emphasis to economic growth.
Drawing on examples it is suggested that the vision, the over-arching principles and strategic objectives require a re-think. South Warwickshire is characterised by tight urban areas and numerous rural settlements and the policies of the development plan should better reflect that character.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 1 - Meeting South Warwickshire's Sustainable Development Requirements?
Representation ID: 98832
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Generally no as it is considered the primary purpose of the Plan should be to meet the growth requirements expected of South Warwickshire in a sustainable way. The emerging plan appears to be focused on strategic scale developments and ‘big players’ whereas a more balanced approach is necessary. There also appears to be a strong ‘urban-focussed’ agenda when a more balanced approach is required, given the prevailing rural character of the plan area. Development of our clients' land at Kingswood for housing would be fully compatible with the 20-minute neighbourhood concept.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
Do you have any comments on a specific site proposal or the HELAA results?
Representation ID: 98887
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
*Our clients' land (Site Refs: 514 and 622) abuts the existing settlement boundary and would be seen as a natural extension of Kingswood. The existing watercourse and Grand Union Canal would provide a well-defined and natural limit to the physical extent of potential development. The land is within a highly sustainable location.
*Site Ref 622 has unreasonably been ‘sifted out’ in the HELAA Part A because of flood risk as it would be developed alongside adjoining property.
*Our clients are willing and prepared to work alongside other landowners of adjoining land through appropriate collaboration arrangements.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Potential Settlement Question C1
Representation ID: 98911
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
A number of observations are made including:
• No submissions to bring forward land within the identified new settlement were made into Stages 1 and 2 of the Call for Sites.
• It would clearly be possible to expand Kingswood in a way that would be higher performing through those sites submitted into the Call for Sites including the land to the east of Station Lane.
• Expansion at a scale commensurate with the existing settlement could be achieved much faster , and more sustainably, than through the new settlement designation.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Potential Settlement Question F1
Representation ID: 98915
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
No Call for Sites submissions. Why is it included?
No
Preferred Options 2025
Potential Settlement Question F2
Representation ID: 98917
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
No Call for Sites submissions. Why is it included?
No
Preferred Options 2025
Potential Settlement Question F3
Representation ID: 98918
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
No Call for Sites submissions. Why is it included?
No
Preferred Options 2025
Potential Settlement Question G1
Representation ID: 98920
Received: 06/03/2025
Respondent: (1) AG Family Trust 2024 & (2) N. Holdsworth
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
No Call for Sites submissions. Why is it included?
