The response to the household survey in late 2007 was fantastic! We
received 847 replies from 1,494
occupied households, a 57% response
rate that far exceeded our expectations,
and an indication of the very high level of
interest that local residents have in the
community. Most voluntary surveys get a
fraction of this, and even recent election
turnouts have been below these levels!
We can now move ahead with the
confidence that we know what issues are
of most concern to you.
This report is a summary that aims to
communicate the essence of the results.
A more detailed report and response
rates by area is available on-line at
www.plan4prestbury.org.uk and at
Prestbury Library.
We are still analysing the 10,000 plus
verbatim comments that we received
and these will be passed to the working
groups to assist their analysis. 116 people
returned volunteer cards and most have
already attended an introductory
meeting at which we set up the working
groups.
The Community
The biggest attraction of Prestbury to
residents is its “village feel”. Residents’
next most frequent description of the
parish is “picturesque”, “peaceful and
quiet”, “semi-rural” and “safe”, and
“well-kept”, and they also comment
positively on “community spirit” and
“trees and hedging”. A quarter of you
mention Prestbury’s location in terms of
transport links, proximity to Manchester
and beautiful countryside, and 20% of
comments mention specific facilities,
particularly restaurants and pubs, but
also clubs, sports and medical facilities.
Some people commented on the
importance of local shops, good housing
and good local schools, and 7% of
respondents mentioned the friendliness
of the parish.
Given these views, it is not surprising
that questions dealing with perceived
threats to the village atmosphere,
appearance and rural character
registered high concerns - we like our
uniquely situated, pretty village and want
to keep it that way. For example, almost
everybody thinks “the current appearance
of the village centre should be
protected” and is concerned about any
change of use or change of appearance
of the distinctive older buildings in the
village centre.
Strong concerns were expressed about
the closure of Ford House, particularly
the loss of community facilities, including
centrally located parking spaces. 77%
of respondents believe the remaining
community facilities require some level
of improvement or expansion to meet
the needs of residents. Many comments
were received suggesting refurbishing
or rebuilding Ford House with some
proposing that the community helps
raise the funds for this. We have
established a working group to look at
community facilities and how we can
ensure the needs of the parish are met as
fully as possible.
Regarding the possibility of an extension
onto St Peter’s Church, 10% have no
concerns at all whilst 24% object to any
kind of extension. The other 65% were
almost equally divided between those
happy to leave a sympathetic design up
to the Church and planning authorities
versus those wanting to be consulted
about any specific proposals before
giving their support. With regard to both
Ford House and the church extension,
the Plan for Prestbury has passed the
responses to the Parochial Church
Council and Prestbury Parish Council for
them to consider the implications of
these community opinions.
There is general agreement that we
need to develop stronger community
spirit and some support for more
community events. A convincing majority
would like better community information,
and residents were very strongly in
favour of a village green. We plan to set
up two working groups in this area, one to
look at the provision of community
information and the other to investigate
additional community events and the
possibility of a village green.
Managed Development
Residents feel very protective of our
Green Belt land: 83% want it protected;
only 14% believe there should be some
relaxation of the rules for housing; and a
meagre 3% are in favour of a complete
re-appraisal of the Green Belt. Although
454 comments were made about the
prospect of Prestbury having to
accommodate more houses, most
suggested putting them outside or on
the edge of the parish.
85% have concerns about the rebuilding
of houses within the parish, and 69%
believe planning controls are too lenient.
Although 66% of people think “some of
the houses need demolishing and
others need preserving”, 23% believe
the old houses as a whole “add
character and should be preserved”.
49% hold “mixed opinions” on whether
the new houses are good for Prestbury,
while 28% think the new houses are
generally “good”, and 22% think they
are “bad”. On the surface the results
present a slightly confusing picture,
but one possible conclusion is that we
feel the redevelopments are out of our
control and they are changing the
character of the community, physically
and/or socially. We will set up a working
group to look at managed development
and planning issues, including how to
interpret these results.
We love our trees! Almost everyone said
they are important, and the vast majority
would like tree protection orders along
roads and on public land; more than half
also wanted more trees protected on
private land. Not surprisingly given
these figures, most people would
support a managed tree replanting
programme. Half of respondents also
think more maintenance of trees and
hedges is needed and the other half
don’t - further analysis of the results by
area to identify any localised issues may
help us understand this better.
Finally in this section, 2 out of 3
residents think the number of traffic
signs and road markings in the village
centre and the roads leading to it are
about right.
Facilities
We asked about the quality and range of activities
available in the parish for children and adults of different ages.
Only 1 in 4 households in Prestbury have children (although 43%
of the population live in these households), and 60-70% of replies
to questions about children were “don’t know”. If you take out the
“don’t knows”, the vast majority of respondents rate the quality
and range of activities for both the 0-4 year olds and the 5-11
year olds as “average” to “good”, and this is also the case for
working age or retired adults. However, applying the same approach
to activities for 12-18 years olds, a majority of respondents rated
the quality and range as “poor”, and a very small minority said
that they are “good”. Households are clearly telling us that both
the quality and range of activities for older children in Prestbury
are below par, and that is why we have decided to set up a working
group to look at the provision of activities for teenagers.
Looking at sports activities and facilities, the community
overall does not think there is a need for a wider range of activities
or better facilities because people are satisfied with the current
situation. However, a slight majority of households with children
say there is a need for improving both the range of activities and
facilities. For households with people 65 and older (and there are
more of these households in Prestbury) only 30% would like more
sporting activities and 34% more facilities. So, households with
children want a wider range of sporting activities and better facilities
and the older generation think what we have is adequate. Another
working group will be assigned to this topic.
Commercial Activity
Almost everyone believes that shops, banks, restaurants
and pubs are important to the future of the village. This suggests
we feel our commercial centre is important in maintaining “village
life”, something that is central to what we like about Prestbury.
Most of us say we use the shops and banks in the village several
times a week (which might surprise the merchants) and use the restaurants
and pubs at least once or twice a month. When asked what would encourage
us to use the businesses in the village more, the responses were
(in order of greatest frequency): quality, choice, parking, range
of shops and finally (with significantly fewer mentions) price.
The clear winner of new shops we would like to see in the village
was a bakery/coffee shop with greengrocers second and a deli in
third place. The working group looking at commercial activity
will analyse the wide range of answers we received about how to
ensure the survival of our shops.
90% feel that parking is either “very important” or
“somewhat important” to them, and this came out as an important
factor in using village shops. Although 38% are “very satisfied”
with the current parking situation, 51% think “some improvements
could be made” and 9% were “very dissatisfied”. One of the working
groups will include parking issues within the scope of their work.
Traffic
Almost everyone is either somewhat or
very concerned about HGV’s, traffic
volumes and congestion in the parish,
and the vast majority are also either
somewhat or very concerned traffic
speed, noise and pollution.
Opinion about improvements to roads is
affected to some extent by ages within a
household. For example, most households
with children think changes to road
layouts would help safety significantly
or somewhat, with a minority saying it
would not help “at all”. Households with
people over the age of 65 were divided
almost equally on whether it would help,
with very slightly more saying it would
not. This may be linked to the fact that
households with children tend to be
driving more frequently into or through
the village: 44% said they do this several
times a day compared with only 16% of
older residents; whereas around half of
older residents said they drive through
just several times per week.
We suggested some actions that could be taken to reduce
traffic speeds and increase pedestrian safety. All sections of the
population rejected speed cameras and traffic calming measures,
but 48% of households favour more flashing speed signs, compared
to 47% who do not (5% are undecided). Households with children were
also in favour of extending the 20 mph zone, improving junction
design and restricting traffic on Bollin Grove at school drop off
and pick up times (probably reflecting their concerns about the
safety of children getting around the village, especially to and
from school). However, support is much weaker for these measures
from residents who do not have children. There was strong support
for the increased provision of school buses. The two working
groups looking at traffic and footpaths/pavements will need to explore
these issues in more detail.
Paths, pavements & crossings
We asked questions about pavements,
road crossings, cycle paths, footpaths
and a riverside park, and the majority
who expressed a preference wanted
everything that was proposed. The
highest “agreed” scores were for more
information on the Parish’s footpaths
and for a riverside park in the Bollin
Valley.
Households with children tended to be
the most strongly in favour of all these
options; older residents divided equally
between those who wanted cycle paths
and those who did not. Residents of all
ages were also almost equally divided
on the issue of increased street lighting,
with a slight majority in favour.
The hundreds of verbatim answers attached to these
questions will clarify the locations in which residents would like
lighting, extended pavements, wider pavements, road crossings, cycle
paths and footpaths; a task which the working group assigned to
this topic will undertake.
Public Services
Most of us think the school, post office,
doctor, dentist and Village Hall are very
important to the parish.
11% of households use the bus, and they say it is
very important to them. Bus users are satisfied with the current
service, although the verbatim comments suggest that some would
like an airport/Wilmslow route and that a more direct route to Macclesfield
would be popular. 61% of respondents use the trains and again it
is an important service to those users and the satisfaction rate
quite high. The verbatim responses suggest that more people would
use the train if the frequency was improved (especially at weekends)
and if people felt safer after dark at the station. A working
group looking at transportation issues will explore suggestions
made by bus and train users.
Although one key reason we like
Prestbury is that it is “safe”, 23% are
“very concerned” and 56% “somewhat
concerned” about becoming a victim of
crime here, with only 16% “not at all
concerned”. Households with children
are more likely than older residents to be
“very concerned” about crime. Once we
have completed our analysis of the
verbatim comments about why people
feel this way, we will discuss the
concerns with local police and the Parish
Council’s police liaison sub-committee.
By a majority of almost 2 to 1, residents
want weekly black bins collection; every
two weeks is acceptable for green bins
and paper/cardboard/glass. Most
people “agree” or “strongly agree” that
Macclesfield Borough Council should
recycle plastic, and the majority have
some level of concern about litter in the
parish. We will pass this information to
Prestbury Parish Council for them to
discuss with the Borough.
The last question was “what else would
you like to tell us?” and around half of
respondents took the opportunity to tell
us a lot! We are working through these
comments to make sure that your ideas
and views are taken into account.
Working Groups
We have now assigned volunteers to the
following working groups which will be
looking for ways to solve the issues
raised in the survey:
