I WAS surprised to learn that Oxford City Council planning officer Andrew Murdoch had recommended a change of use for the Chester Arms.

He acknowledges that the first criterion for change of use – evidence of adequate marketing of the premises – has not been met.

He is somehow persuaded on the second criterion – substantial evidence of non-viability – due to the ‘expert witness’ statement from Fleurets. But surely this statement says precisely what Woodchester Estates commissioned Fleurets to say, that the Chester is not a viable concern?

Indeed, as many of the 70 objections to the change of use proposal have pointed out, The Eagle Tavern (now the Rusty Bicycle) was conspicuously unviable until new management offered a much-improved environment, decent food and friendly service, none of which has been the case at the Chester under Woodchester’s ownership.

The same can be said of the Magdalen Arms, struggling a few years ago but now thriving.

Mr Murdoch is on firmer ground with the third criterion – the availability of alternative venues – but only if it is accepted that the alternatives are broadly comparable and not everyone would agree.

The Magdalen Arms is excellent but it’s a venue where I might treat myself to a meal once every week or so, not a local. The Rusty Bike is very good too but the clientele is a bit young, a bit loud, for my ageing tastes. As for the Conservative Club and the OU Rugby Club, well, least said, soonest mended.

So on my reckoning, Woodchester Estate’s application fails to meet the first and second criteria and does not convince on the third.

It therefore fails to comply with both local and national policy and I would urge the councillors on the West Area Planning Committee to reject it at tonight’s meeting.

Ted Colman, Warwick Street, Oxford