I write regarding the Carlos Close development.

Following the presentation by the BE Group in the Guild Hall on Tuesday, October 13 the people of Cheadle are totally confused.

Discussions revealed variances between different consultants.

One version says yes to demolition, but only for one of nine possible alternatives, two of which were presented, the other seven were not.

Another version, from BE director Peter Crompton, also says yes to demolition, but only for one of two alternatives, both of which were presented at the Guild Hall.

It would appear that while BE consultants are quite to happy use the spoken d-word, demolition, they are unhappy to put it into writing.

They should have contacted their client steering committee group on October 27, to seek clarification.

We believed clarification was the original objective of the Guild Hall presentation.

Such is the level of confusion that occupants of two Carlos Close bungalows have inadvertently submitted preferences for option two – to have their own dwellings demolished – believing this to be the only alternative to refurbishment (the addition of a second bedroom).

The resulting level of confusion simply cannot be tolerated.

Alan Raffety

Bassett Close

Cheadle