Full text:
To whom it may concern,
As a resident of St Austell Avenue, I am writing to strongly object to the proposed housing development around our estate in Cheshire.
I feel deeply saddened and frustrated that yet more of our precious green countryside is being considered for development. We live in an area that is beautiful because of its open fields, trees, hedgerows and green spaces. Once these are built over, they are gone forever. No amount of planting afterwards can truly replace established countryside that has taken decades, or even centuries, to develop.
I want my children to grow up enjoying green space, not seeing it steadily disappear. It is part of their wellbeing, their childhood, and the character of where we live.
I understand that people need homes. I am not opposed to providing housing where it is genuinely needed. But I strongly question why so much pressure appears to be falling on areas such as Cheshire, and whether sufficient consideration is being given to the cumulative impact of continually building on our remaining green land.
This particular proposal is especially concerning because of its proximity to a small primary school that is already oversubscribed. Adding a substantial number of new homes will inevitably put further pressure on the school, local roads, traffic, parking and other already stretched services. Where are the additional school places, infrastructure and services going to come from? Building houses without ensuring that the infrastructure can cope is not sustainable planning.
The traffic situation locally is already extremely difficult. Whitley Road is often congested and, with the recent and ongoing developments on Chelford Road, the road network is already struggling to cope. Macclesfield simply does not feel set up for this level of continued expansion. The roads are already chaotic at peak times, and further development will only make this worse.
There are also serious questions about local services. What about school places more widely across the area? What about GP surgeries that are already difficult to access? What about our hospitals, which are under constant pressure? It feels as though housing is being approved without equal investment in the essential services that make a community function.
There is also the question of what we are losing.
Our countryside is not simply empty land waiting to be built upon. It provides habitats for wildlife, absorbs water, supports biodiversity, helps reduce flooding and contributes to the character and wellbeing of the communities who live here. These green spaces are part of what makes Cheshire special.
We are constantly told about the climate crisis, the importance of protecting nature, reducing flooding, planting trees and improving the environment. Yet at the same time, we continue to see green fields and countryside being sacrificed for development. It feels completely contradictory.
If we are serious about tackling climate change and protecting the environment for our children and grandchildren, we should not treat every remaining green field as a potential building site.
I would also add that Macclesfield, in particular, has seen a significant number of new housing developments in recent years. It is hard to understand how so much continued expansion is sustainable for a town of this size without serious long-term consequences for infrastructure, services and the environment.
I would ask the council to consider whether this development could be located on previously developed or brownfield land instead, rather than destroying valuable countryside.
I also ask that the council fully consider:
● The existing pressure on the local primary school and the lack of available places.
● The additional traffic and road-safety implications, particularly on already congested routes such as Whitley Road.
● The capacity of local infrastructure and services, including GP surgeries and hospitals.
● The impact on drainage and the risk of flooding.
● The loss of established trees, hedgerows, habitats and biodiversity.
● The permanent loss of valuable agricultural and green land.
● The cumulative effect of multiple developments across Cheshire and Macclesfield.
● The impact on the character, appearance and identity of our local community.
● Whether suitable brownfield or previously developed sites have been properly considered as alternatives.
This is not simply about residents objecting because they do not want houses near them. It is about asking what kind of place we want Cheshire to be in ten, twenty and fifty years’ time.
Once these fields have been covered in concrete and tarmac, we cannot simply change our minds and bring them back.
Please do not allow short-term housing targets to come at the expense of the countryside, wildlife, infrastructure and the quality of life of the people who already live here.
We need homes, but we also need to protect the places that make those homes worth living in.
I sincerely ask you to reject this proposal and protect our precious green countryside for future generations.
Yours faithfully,
Ellie Martin,
