Sir – There has been some criticism of councillors for rejecting Oxford Brookes University’s planning application for a large new building on the Gipsy Lane site.

In fact, councillors have a good track record with respect to major planning applications in conservation areas.

This is the third recent occasion on which the good judgement of councillors has prevailed over the advice of the city council’s planning officers.

Councillors rejected the University of Oxford’s plan for a book depository at Osney Mead. In 2008, a planning inspector rejected the university’s appeal and upheld the councillors’ decision.

Councillors on the East Area Committee rejected Oriel College’s plan for student housing development in the Bartlemas Conservation Area.

In July 2009, a planning inspector rejected Oriel’s appeal and also the claim that the councillors had acted in order to please their constituents. The city’s planning officers, including the conservation officer, had supported Oriel’s plan against the advice of English Heritage.

Perhaps the planning officers could now start planning to bring their recommendations more into line with national and local policies as understood by the councillors and the planning inspectors.

These include taking more account of what one planning inspector called “the historic constraint of Oxford” (Report on the book depository).

University buildings are important, but they need to be balanced with the historic traditions of Oxford, and the lives of the people who live here.

We are fortunate to have councillors who are committed to supporting balanced communities and to protecting our natural and historic environment.

Ivon Asquith, Oxford