NICK STATHAM
ACOUNCILLOR branded ‘deplorable’ for making a retrospective planning application for alterations to his home has hit back at his town hall critics.
Work at Coun Mark Weldon’s home in Stockport
- undertaken to make it suitable for three children he was in the process of adopting - was not carried out in line with the original permission that had been granted.
A replacement dormer bedroom at the front of the property, in Romiley, was built to a different size, while the window to one at the back used clear rather than obscure glazing.
Coun Weldon says the discrepancy arose due to a ‘mix-up’ between himself and his architect and builder while his focus was on the adoption.
The fact Coun Weldon had modified his home for the children he was in the process of adopting was not raised at the meeting.
The Lib Dem member had previously apologised for the mistake at a Werneth area forum meeting - where a resident also withdrew his objection.
But two Labour members of the council’s planning committee - whom
Coun Weldon believes would have been aware of his circumstances strongly criticised him for needing retrospective permission.
Coun John Taylor told a meeting of the committee: “It’s very disappointing.
“It’s not hard for councillors to seek timely officer advice about planning applications.”
Coun Taylor, who said the application went against ‘sound principles’, added: “The appearance of this structure as built detracts significantly from what otherwise would be quite an attractive dwelling . I find it impossible to support this application because of those defects.”
And Coun Philip Harding told the meeting he had similar concerns.
He said: “We don’t like retrospective planning applications at this committee and we certainly don’t expect them from an elected member.
“It’s deplorable really, we are supposed to set an example.”
Coun Weldon was not at the meeting, as applicants make their representations at an earlier stage.
But speaking the following day, he said he was furious about the comments from the two Labour men, over what he described as ‘minor alterations’.
“It’s cowardly having a go at someone in a quasijudicial setting to make a political point. I think that’s disgraceful.
“I had nothing to apologise for, it was to make my house bigger for three adopted children, it was as this was going through that’s how the mix up happened. It’s despicable for them to have a go at me.”
The 57-year-old councillor said the application was ‘perfectly within policy’ - but new plans had not been submitted before the work began due to a genuine oversight.
The application was ultimately passed by the committee by nine votes to one.