CONSERVATIVE city councillors have rubber-stamped their decision to throw out proposals for a new stadium for Worcester City
Tory members of the planning committee stuck to their initial decision made in June to reject the plans for a 4,400 stadium
Council planning officers again recommended the scheme be approved after considering the reasons for possible refusal put forward at June’s meeting.
In their report, officers branded the reasons for refusal as not ‘robust’ enough to be defended at a public inquiry.
But despite Labour members supporting the scheme, a vote on the plans ended 5-5 with committee chairman Coun Chris Mitchell again using his casting vote to rubber stamp the refusal.
The refusal is likely to provoke an appeal to the planning inspector.
Speaking during the meeting, Coun Pat Agar said: “It would be a tremendous waste of public money to refuse this as I’m pretty sure a planning inspector would overturn the refusal.”
Her comments were echoed by Coun Adrian Gregson who criticised the Conservatives for their stance.
“The stadium is smaller and lower than the existing leisure centre which won unanimous approval from this committee,” he said.
“There is no substantial reason for refusal. The consequences for the city and its taxpayers will be substations like costs against this council at appeal.
But local ward councillor Gareth Jones blasted the officers report which recommended approval and branded it ‘biased’.
“Once it’s built on it will be lost forever. I think it’s a crafty move to say this is a community stadium.
“It’s not, I can’t see anyone signed up for this as a community stadium,” he added.
Coun Alan Amos called for the debate to be short and said ‘nothing had changed’ since the meeting in June
Former cabinet member for leisure Coun Mike Johnson questioned why Perdiswell was the only option put forward.
Coun Mitchell spoke against the development: “In my opinion the report focuses overwhelmingly on the positives of the development.
“No weighting has been given to the risk of the club’s viability.”
* What do you think? E-mail [email protected] with your views