I WOULD like to express my concern at the blatant double standards emanating from Trafford Council, highlighted in the article in SAM (Row looms at flats move).

Every right-minded person would surely agree that the maintenance of an appropriate architectural, social and environmental fabric in South Trafford is vital.

However, my understanding is that the current planning system already allows for consultation to ensure that a proposed scheme fits in with its surroundings as set against guidelines determined and regulated by the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions.

In the usual attempt to jump on the bandwagon of public opinion, Councillor Baugh complains about the loss of open spaces and increased traffic caused by the redevelopment of large properties.

Strangely, Cllr Baugh seems to be missing the point that the impact of the redevelopment of one property or small site on one street pales into insignificance when compared to the construction of whole new housing estates on public amenity land, such as those constructed on land sold off by Trafford Council at Timperley Green, Sale Boys Grammar School or Grange Road, Bowdon (amongst others) despite strong and widespread objections from the local community.

It appears that Trafford Council find it acceptable to see playing fields lost or traffic increased when they stand to make millions from such developments, to sell off their own buildings for redevelopment, or to allow construction on land on the edge of Green Belt, but it is not acceptable for private individuals to sell their own property or land ("Brow Field" sites) for similar schemes where the impact on the community is negligible by comparison.

On the subject of the closure of private care homes for the elderly, Trafford have quite clearly created a situation where those businesses cannot survive.

I understand from recent press articles that private homes are paid just £1.55 per hour, whilst-again on the double standards theme - the Council charge residents in Trafford Council- run homes significantly more than this.

Is this really all our elderly are worth - less than half the price of a packet of 20 cigarettes?

It is no wonder that care homes are closing when such low amounts are paid to look after the most vulnerable and dependent people in our community.

Most other care homes which I have seen closed have been sympathically converted, retaining their architectural status, and not entirely re-built as Trafford consistently seem to suggest.

Trafford Council would surely be better served paying a reasonable price to look after our senior citizens, and allowing care homes to stay in business, rather than trying to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut and implement changes to planning guidelines.

Name and address supplied