The article, Chairman votes for homes plan (Oxford Mail, December 6), highlights a number of problems in a very controversial planning application.

The proposal was to demolish one house at 29 West Way, Botley, and build a three-storey block with nine two-bedroom flats, and no parking for residents, and little amenity space. The site is opposite 'Botley Tower'. All vehicles are accelerating from the traffic lights by McDonalds and from the link road from the A34 interchange.

There is only one lane for vehicles, and if any vehicle is stopped outside the site, traffic must queue, or if any try to go round the parked vehicle, they must go into the lane of vehicles going into Oxford.

In fact, there are double yellow lines along West Way here and stopping is forbidden between 7.30-9.30am and 4-6.30pm.

It is inconceivable that nine flats would have no visitors or deliveries, apart from creating problems for service vehicles.

The one small space proposed for emergency vehicles is almost certainly inadequate. It is also highly likely that some of the residents will own cars.

Parking around the site is extremely limited. Is it any wonder that members of North Hinksey Parish planning committee, who all live in the parish, voted unanimously against this proposal? There could hardly be a worse place for a 'car-free' experiment.

The Vale of White Horse Parking Standards would have required 18 parking spaces for nine two-bedroom flats.

This is considered a maximum, but to drop from 18 to none is a flagrant disregard for their standards. If the standards were applied, there would be room for only about three flats.

The chairman at the meeting is quoted as saying: "I shared concerns about parking, but there is a need for more homes."

We already have a proposal for 130 homes off Lime Road. Land off Tilbury Lane is allocated for 150 homes, part in Cumnor parish and part in North Hinksey parish.

Why, in this most controversial case, is it wise to discount highway safety and parking problems in favour of nine flats?

It is only four years ago that the parish council wanted to retain housing in North Hinksey Lane, less than 100 yards from the site, but the Vale of White Horse planning committee granted permission for offices. How things change.

At the meeting, councillor Terry Cox spoke of his worries about parking and the problem the flats might cause.

He proposed an independent survey of the traffic and parking situation - very sensible in view of the conflict -but the chairman, Terry Quinlan, gave his casting vote against.

The vote on the main motion was 7-7 and the chairman gave his casting vote in favour of the development.

We are left with a permission which could provide a most unfortunate precedent.

ERIC BATTS, Chairman, North Hinksey Parish Council PHILIP STEVENS, Chairman, North Hinksey Parish planning committee