Protocol suggests that no decision should be revisited within six months unless material new information becomes available which might, had it being available, have lead to a different initial decision.
By referring to the absence of three members, the implication is that they voted with the majority initially. that doesn't look good irrespective of legality, although notice of the item would need to have been posted before a (second) decision could be made at all< so the absent members would know that the decision was up for review>
Any council of course can quite legitimately resolve to setaside its own procedures where circumstances make it expedient to do so.