Sir – Paul Glenister’s letter (Gazette, October 29) about his perception of inconsistent planning decisions by West Oxfordshire District Council, warrants a response.

The site he refers to, in which he states he has “a vested interest”, has been the subject of planning applications and appeals, including his, since the 1980s.

The field was considered as a site for a new Memorial Hall. A referendum was held in 2000 when the village voted against developing the site, even for a significant community building, as they recognised the site’s importance within the wider landscape. An application for a bungalow was submitted some time later.

Recently, an application for a single dwelling was refused by the council. The decision was upheld at an appeal in June. The inspector gave clear reasons for the dismissal.

There were 136 objections to the most recent application for 20 properties, which was refused. The officer presenting the case at the planning meeting had a balanced approach, clearly considering both sides of the argument. This application, which is currently at appeal, is not infilling, it is backland development.

The flashing beacon used for Mr Glenister’s test was positioned too close to existing properties. It was not on the brow of the hill and did not show the full extent of the proposed dwellings, which would be visible from the distance.

The proposed site, with the popular footpath leading to St Mary’s Church, is an important community asset. It provides rare direct access to beautiful open countryside, with views hardly changed since medieval times. It is enjoyed by residents, people from other villages and Witney.

Other developments have been permitted throughout the village.

Surely this destroys the myth of inconsistency on the part of West Oxfordshire District Council.

Donna Smith, North Leigh