Preferred Options 2025
Search representations
Results for Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family 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: 100958
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Our client has proposed land for employment that is available for development, but the consultation draft has ruled out these prospective development opportunities based on the incorrect sifting of the site. At the same time that the evidence suggests a significant shortfall of development opportunities for non-strategic employment sites. In short, the sifting out of site 517 at this stage is without robust justification. We contend that our client’s site, for the reasons given in this consultation response, forms a logical and appropriate allocation to help accommodate the Districts’ identified employment land requirements.
Other
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: 100964
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
The process envisages a Part 1 and Part 2 plan. Even if the decision to sift out the site at Claybank Farm is reversed it would still mean that our client might not find out whether their sites would form part of the plan for many years beyond the current 2027 adoption date proposed. This sort of delay is unjustifiable in the urgent context for growth not just of the local but also the national economy.
The distinction between Parts 1 and 2 of the local plan is unclear. What is the timescale for Part 2 likely to be?
Other
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: 100975
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
There is nothing distinctly ‘South Warwickshire’ about them. A major omission is that the vision does not give sufficient emphasis to economic growth. The vision, the over-arching principles and strategic objectives require a re-think. The vision received a relatively low level of support in the previous consultation.
South Warwickshire is characterised by tight urban areas and numerous rural settlements and the policies should better reflect that character. A significant number of strategic allocations are on the inner edge of the West Midlands Green Belt, in locations that broadly are most important for purposes a), b) and d) of Green Belt.
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: 100992
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
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 focus is on strategic scale developments and ‘big players’. A more balanced approach is necessary.
The plan should take views on the balance of economic growth between urban and edge of urban locations with the scale of growth that might be reasonably accommodated in more rural parts of the plan area. Smaller scale developments can be more easily accommodated without the need for strategic improvements to infrastructure, as is the case at Claybank Farm.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
Do you have any comments on a specific site proposal or the HELAA results?
Representation ID: 101020
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Our client's site ref 517 has been 'sifted out' at Part A purely on the basis of the site location, with no consideration of the fact that development already exists in this location, and its sustainable repurposing for employment use would support rural employment and businesses.
A minimum requirement for 48ha of (non strategic) industrial land up to 2041 has been identified in Warwick District alone (rising to 78ha by 2050). The plan considers the shortfall in the context of strategic site provision with no recognition of the role that could be played by smaller sites, such as Claybank Farm.
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: 101043
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
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 approach appears to be focused on strategic scale developments and ‘big players’. A more balanced approach is necessary. There also appears to be a strong ‘urban-focussed’ agenda. A more balanced approach is required, given the prevailing character of the area. The plan should take views on the balance of economic growth. Smaller scale developments can be more easily accommodated without the need for strategic improvements to infrastructure as would be the case at Claybank Farm.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Potential Settlement Question F1
Representation ID: 101066
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
No call for sites submission. Why is it included?
No
Preferred Options 2025
Potential Settlement Question F2
Representation ID: 101073
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
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: 101082
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
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: 101085
Received: 07/03/2025
Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family
Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
No call for sites submissions. why is it included?
