Local plan scoping consultation
Search representations
Results for Ms Natalie Jones search
New search
New search
Local plan scoping consultation
Respondent: Ms Natalie Jones
Representation Summary:
I completely oppose the proposal to treat Sutton and Langley as extensions of Macclesfield. These are distinct rural villages with their own identities, communities and character, and they should not be absorbed into the urban area simply to facilitate further housing growth. This approach risks eroding the separation between Macclesfield and the surrounding countryside and could lead to significant development that would fundamentally change the character of these villages. The Council should protect the individuality of Sutton and Langley and ensure that housing growth does not come at the expense of established communities, countryside and local infrastructure.
Full text:
I completely oppose the proposal to treat Sutton and Langley as an extension of Macclesfield.
Sutton and Langley are established rural villages with their own distinct identities, communities and character. They should not simply be absorbed into the urban area of Macclesfield to facilitate further expansion and housing development.
I am particularly concerned about the potential loss of the separation between Macclesfield and these villages. Once the villages are effectively regarded as part of Macclesfield, there is a very real risk that the surrounding countryside will increasingly be viewed as land available for development, resulting in the gradual erosion of the character and identity of these communities.
Any decision to expand Macclesfield should not automatically come at the expense of neighbouring rural villages and the countryside that separates them. Development needs to be appropriate to the scale and character of existing settlements, rather than allowing small villages to be transformed into urban extensions simply to accommodate housing targets.
There also needs to be proper consideration of the capacity of local infrastructure, including roads, public transport, schools, healthcare, drainage and other essential services. Increasing the scale of these communities without ensuring that infrastructure can support that growth would place additional pressure on existing residents and services.
I strongly believe Sutton and Langley should remain distinct settlements and that their individual identities, village character and surrounding countryside should be protected. Growth should be directed towards genuinely sustainable locations and should not be achieved by effectively incorporating rural villages into Macclesfield.
I therefore strongly object to any strategy that would result in Sutton and Langley being treated as extensions of Macclesfield or that would facilitate significant development between these villages and Macclesfield.
The Council should listen to the residents of these communities and recognise that maintaining the separation and individual character of Sutton and Langley is an important planning consideration in its own right.
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.