Yet again, I understand WDDC claim to have considered and rejected the Stratton House option in favour of new-build council offices on the Charles Street south car park in Dorchester. That discarded option would have entailed a major revamp of Stratton House itself. But I feel the council’s oft-repeated claim appears to give a potentially misleading impression and needs closer examination.

I think that by constantly alluding to that revamp option, WDDC appear to be studiously avoiding reference to a different option altogether: the option of new-build offices immediately behind Stratton House.

I understand this would have involved the demolition of old annexes and servants’ quarters and the erection of new offices on their footprint. Stratton House itself would have needed only some refurbishment and connecting up with the new-build behind. I believe detailed plans for this option were approved in principle more than 20 years ago and would probably have gone ahead, but for lack of money at the time.

This discreet and attractive design had several merits. The building would have been on council land and, even at six storeys high, would have remained invisible from High West St. It would not have crassly dominated a historic and sensitive conservation area. Crucially, it would not have nullified 226 town centre car parking spaces, thus inflicting immediate and lasting damage on the economic health of the county town.

If there is a genuine need for brand new council offices – and many still dispute this – we could do far worse than to consider this option.

Alas, I think WDDC is already doing far worse.

Mysteriously, I understand, this option was neither presented to councillors nor debated in council for at least the last eight years.

We need to know why.

John Smith, Dorchester