Democracy in order

I AM writing with regard to the article in the Observer (‘Planning decision was ‘undemocratic’, September 8) ; I am the owner of the property in question and wish to set the record straight with regard to one or two points raised.

My new roof repitch was created as a result of pre-planning discussions with CDC planning officials (anyone can do this if they pay the appropriate fee in order to not waste time and money on useless plans that would not even be considered).

These meetings resulted in five different sets of drawings being created, the last as a direct result of objections by residents and comment from my parish council, which obviously have satisfied the planning authority by reducing the height and width of the dormers.

The gabled ends are evident in several other properties in Westside, hence there was no objection to them.

A council planning officer visited Westside prior to the committee meeting, but he was not allowed to discuss the application with myself or any other residents in order to maintain impartiality: this surely is a prime example of a ‘democratic process’?

Perhaps you would care to visit Westside and judge for yourself the sight lines of properties with roof extensions?

Finally, it seems strange that Mrs Marilyn Walker’s house is the tallest and overlooks the most of Westside.

My roof when repitched will still be two metres lower than her property.

Mike Etherington.

via email