We met today to discuss this one planning application that had been called in.  I was glad the St. Clements car park planning application had not been called in as I considered that the decision had been made properly and thoroughly at the West Area Planning Committee.

The application was to demolish an already half-derelict club, the Grove Street Club, and replace it with four terraced houses (one with four bedrooms and three with three).  The West Area Planning Committee had voted approve the application but I was willing to agree with my North Oxford colleagues that a reconsideration was warranted as there were some serious concerns around sizes of gardens and lack of parking.

There was a presentation from the Planning Officer, two speeches against the application and one in favour from the applicant’s agent.  After some discussion the committee voted 4 in favour of the application and 3 against.  I realised that as chair I could either abstain or vote against and use my casting vote to cause a refusal.  I didn’t consider that the grounds for refusal were strong enough not to be quashed at appeal so I reluctantly abstained thus allowing the application to be approved.  Losing an appeal against an unreasonable refusal can result in costs being awarded to the applicant against the council and that does nobody any favours.

I had held the meeting in the council chamber as I believe it is better for smaller matters and makes the public feel more included.  Apart from the sound system being not put out at all for the planning officers and then set too loud I thought things proceeded well.  I was sorry the planning officers didn’t enjoy presenting in the council chamber.  Personally I think it makes for better democracy for small planning applications.