Monday, 23 July 2012

Petition Against Mosque Proposal




The Worcester Park Residents' Association is urging local residents to sign its petition against the proposed establishment of a mosque in Worcester Park.

The Residents' Association is objecting to the mosque, arguing that traffic in Worcester Park is 'already horrendous'.

Copies of the petition can be found until 1st August 2012 at:

  • Pet's Place
  • Woodward Bros butchers
  • Centrals Bar
  • Ross' Fruiterers
Residents can also register their formal objection to the planning application to Sutton Council via this online form.

131 COMMENTS (Add Yours Now!):

1829 said...

Lets face it, most of the people commenting on here do not care about the traffic issue even close to as much as they have made out. They care because it is to be a Mosque. Why else would the poster above have the word 'MOSQUE' in letters twice the size of all the text on rest on the page? (and about 5 times bigger than the bit about the traffic actually). Why does the poster not say STOP THE EXTRA TRAFFIC in big letters, which is the bit im concerned with! The real issue is the traffic, which as everyone knows is a nightmare - lets not try and pretend everyone cares about the traffic though!

P.S - As an atheist, I view all religions as equally rediculous and stupid. Id have the same views if the poster above brought such attention to a !!!!CHURCH!!!!, as anything else.

Obviously a lot of you have no idea how the planning system works. Putting up posters which clearly descriminate against the plans because its a Mosque will get you no where! They will NOT consider it a contentious issue just because some people dont like the idea of it. The traffic will have a direct detrimental effect on the area and the planners WOULD consider it.

Stop campaigning against the Mosque and start campaigning against the stress on the roads if you actually want someone with the power to stop it to listen!

David said...

Details of the Planning Application can be found at
http://213.122.180.105/FASTWEB/fulldetail.asp?AltRef=A2012/66050
Note the links at the bottom of the page for downloading the relevant pdfs.
A large number of "neighbours" are listed. It is to be hoped that all will make their views known to LBS.
Consultation ends on 10th August.

Concerned WP Resident said...

This is the response (and a very very swift one too!) from the lawandfreedomfoundation . org  following a speculative email for assistance.

I for one would be more than willing to contribute towards expenses to stop planning permission being granted - it is going to be a traffic/congestion nightmare -  I am sure there are many others.

Who is coordinating this centrally at the Residents Association and is there going to be a meeting held with residents?


Dear WP resident,
 
Thank you for your email, and for enclosing the link.
 
Forgive
me for being direct, but the first thing will be to decide whether you
can raise the money to cover the expenses of the campaign. I’m afraid
these will be about £500 for printing and distribution, plus about £100
for my travel costs should I need to visit for the Planning Committee
meeting. None of this money goes to me. My work is pro-bono, but the expenses have to be met.
 
You
will need pay these expenses pretty soon – within about 7 days.  Once
you have done so I can start work. Otherwise, there won’t be much I can
do.
 
Decision
makers tend to be sceptical of petitions. I don’t think they will be
influenced by them as much as people think. So I agree with you that a
petition won’t be enough.
 
My advice is to get people to write individual letters and emails to the authority, and certainly not pro-forma ones.
 
Please let me know what you intend to do.
 
Thank you.
 
Kind regards,
 
Gavin

Resident said...

Is the one in Morden not big enough..also one in Sutton/mitcham etc. These empty shops need to be filled with something that the whole community can use whether it be more privatley owned shops to a vets or doctors.
Traffic yes most drive cars so will of course cause more congestion. I work beside a small mosque and its hectic! Day and especially night.

Marcus said...

Currently people have to leave WP to go to a Mosque so having one here would decrease traffic. 

All the gossip round the petition sheets I've heard in those shops has been about "them", and how they're not welcome, and want to "take over". It makes me feel like moving, to be honest. I was happier not knowing how racist my fellow shoppers were. 

No one seems to care that supporting the Muslims already in our community is neighbourly, may lead to vacant shops becoming used (clothing, specialist food) or that Muslim households don't raise drunk teenagers.

People would object to any use that increases traffic? The building is empty so ANY new owner and ANY use could be an increase in traffic. 

Personally I wouldn't drive to somewhere with no parking next door to a perfectly good train station, either. But I guess I'm not the "them" we're having leaflets through our doors telling us to reject (and how do you think a Muslim family feel reading that?) I'm a different "them" so maybe I should try to set up an LGBT centre and see if people are just as worried about pink cars?

qwerty said...

At last. Someone speaking sense. You should all be ashamed.

FRM said...

 I do not like the racist implication that non-Muslim families raise drunk teenagers. There are problems in many communities and religious groups, and playing the unwarrented racecard to defeat a valid concern on road congestion in an already problematical traffic area, demeans your arguement, and does no favours for minority communities.
A meeting place will cause congestion. I think there would be similar objections to a Christian Church, school or scout hut at that junction, as there would be assembly times that would create severe problems that shops, or offices, with a spread time of visitors would not.
Pink shirts OK, but I am not a fan of pink cars, but would fight for your right to like them, especially if they do not stop a lot at the junction of Green Lane and Central Road!

Tjmreds said...

I hate animals so will start a petition if they even think of opening a Vets in that building.....also think of the traffic, everyone who owns a pet always uses a car!!!!

Tom said...

Agree with Marcus. I'm entirely suspect about the motivations of those behind this petition and think this has little to do with traffic. I would rather this vacant plot is occupied first and foremost. From the planning applications they've done a study based on real traffic data and the impact will be minimal compared to the buildings previous occupied usage.

Kam said...

Its a shame to see these posters and leaflets urging residents to stop a mosque being build at thsi location. I have been living in the area for years now but with this issue I feel being dicriminated and feel how racist some of my neighbours are. As Marcus says its better than opening up another offlicence shop and offer our youngsters more alcohol and give rise to crime in the area. I believe if a mosque is opened it would bring harmony and understanding of different religions and cultures.
Is saddning to see these leaflets and they hurt.. would the people opposing would also have opposed a church or a temple coming up as well. Well if you are true to your Lord I bet NO just because it related to a muslim or Islam its being opposed.
Every other major street or road has got a church on it, imagine for some one to travel to Morden or sutton who doesnt have a car or a bus route to offer prayers, this site would help a lot of worshiping muslim.
Remember every act of ours is seen by Allah, God, Jesus etc and no religion promotes hatred.

MrJones said...

 Not a fan of pink cars; they seem pretty at first but you just don't get the resale value :-)

Dr Who ?????? said...

Marcus.....you are a typical lefty numpty that does no good for this country at all. You are determined to turn any debate you don't like into a racist one. You have obviously not driven your wind powered car down green lane recently , you must live in the country part of Worcester Park beyond the Avenue. THIS IS ABOUT TRAFFIC..Green Lane/Central RD IS THE BUSIEST JUNCTION IN TOWN so ANY people who want to change the building i.e more people more cars should be stopped. This was an office block with 4 people in it now there will be at least 144 so that means....DERRRRR MORE TRAFFIC. If you leave your address here we will have a word with the new owners to tell them they can all park outside your house. Marcus.....grow up, the days of calling everybody a racist because you don't like thier views are over now move on and hug a tree or build a wind farm in your garden. PEACE...........XXXX

a. said...

Yeah, it's xenophobia pure and simple...

Nikko said...

Kam, you say: “I believe if a mosque is opened it would bring
harmony and understanding of different religions and cultures.”



How? Will non-Muslims be invited to functions at the mosque? Do
Churches bring “harmony and understanding of different religions and cultures.”?
And will visiting Muslims attending the mosque join in with any local activities
outside of the mosque? Visit the local pubs or churches to mix with the locals
for example?



You
also say: “…would the people opposing would also
have opposed a church or a temple coming up as well.”



Yes, they would. And I’m
sure that people would protest if the building was to be converted to a scout
hut, a meeting hall for the Women’s Institute or a concert venue. In fact, I
think that most people would protest against any function of the building that
creates more traffic and parking problems.

4PS said...

If all faiths can live in harmony as the so called fairy tail believers tell us...why dont they all share the same building and pray at different times?!

Bit like McDonalds where you can go for a McMuffin and then at 11.30 with a quick swivel of the menu you get burgers! So in this case pre 11.30 you will get bread and wine and then after the swivel you will get Burkhas! Bingo!!!

TommyTrinder said...

I live in Beverley Gardens, the first little turning in Green Lane - the crescent with a green in the middle.
If this goes through, anyone who would be attending the premises - where do you think they are going to look for a place to park or turn round, or drop off people? - my little road! (They can't drop outside Bank Chambers as there are double yellow lines outside the premises).
We already have to put up with people picking up and dropping off commuters, parcels from the Post Office, people visiting shops in the High Street, etc. Fair enough they were already here when I moved here many years ago, though traffic has increased considerably in that time.
Services at at 4am  through to 11pm - nice -car doors engines, people talking - lovely! (or do you really think public transport would be used at these times).
No its not just about traffic it is also about the detremental effect on the environment I live in.
And it is not because its a Mosque, I'd be feel the same if it was any other church, a MacDonalds or a vets. The building is simply not suitable for public use - it was built as an office and needs to be kept as such.
The size of the wording on the leaflets 'say no to the Mosque' could quite easily have been say no to MacDonalds - it is what it is and I don't see why the leaflets should be 'Say no to the building we can't mention'.
I am not racist - I was in a mix-race marriage for 17 years.
I am just a normal person fed up with the increased traffic and parking problems in my home town of 47 years.

Tom said...

Anyone who tries to change the use of the building (currently unoccupied) will be, by definition, introducing more traffic....therefore the building must remain unoccupied. I think you're stretching it to say there will be 'at least 144' people using it - where do you get this figure?

Dr Who, grow up the days of calling everyone who disagrees with you a 'lefty numpty' are over, now move on go and get drunk and shout abuse at some 'Johnny foreigner'.

qwerty said...

I will no longer be reading the blog as am ashamed and appalled to read the comments by racist bigots. I thought WP was a tolerant, friendly place to live. I am now beginning to see that it is just like everywhere else.

John Evers said...

No religion promotes hatred? Are for real? Never heard of Northern Ireland then or the Sunni V Shi'te football match in the middle east?

It is all about the parking said...

It is the fact that Worcester Park is a tolerant place to live in that we live here and it would appear that we have been living side by side in harmony but this is a very emotive subject.  There is no doubt that the parking/traffic issue is upper most in creating most responses but under British Law we have the rights to free speech and if people feel the need to vent their opinions, in a peaceable manner they should be permitted to do so.  Where is this everywhere else you talk about?  

AyeCap'n said...

Playing Devil's Advocate here...the 'studies' and not to mention the money given by the developers of the Hamptons (to the council as part of the planning application) to prevent the Hamptons affecting traffic in the local area doesn't really seem to have amounted to much does it...

AyeCap'n said...

And whatever made you think WPark was any different to anywhere else in the first place?

Bye bye.

Old Blackshirt said...

So, what conclusions can we draw from all this?

First - any use of that building that would bring even more traffic to the top of Green Lane is insane, regardless of the race or religion of the people visiting it. This is an undeniable truth.

Second, perhaps more important, the 100+ angry postings show that different cultures will never live side by side peacefully in large numbers - and the fact that we all know and like someone from another culture doesn't change that.

It's nobody's fault, it's just the way it is.

Richardblythe said...

Please please "qwerty" sorry don't know if you are male or female, don't start saying as someone else tried to claim on another post "everyone is being racist". Take the time to actually read the posts and you will see the concern is traffic, parking, opening hours, noise, and the number of people visiting the site which is nearby houses. Quite frankly I am the one who is appalled by your comments calling people you do not even know racist bigots. It is YOUR kind of attitude that inflames people and YOU who should be ashamed of yourself! Sadly if it were to be ignorant people like you visiting the proposed mosque then people have a right to be even more concerned. Hopefully sense will prevail and this site will not get approval to be used as a mosque in a totally totally unsuitable venue

Nick said...

Mosques are not only places of worship, from todays paper
 "An unknown number of Muslim couples take their family disputes to sharia tribunals, usually run under the umbrella of local mosques"Sharia law coming to WP.

SexTRex said...

To all those playing the race card when individuals have a problem with a mosque.  Get it right, some are anti-theists!  Not racists.  Well I am.  Or are you saying only dark skinned people can be muslim?  (I speak for those critical of more than just parking)But as we've all learned playing the race card usually gets a win within our tolerant society. So I'm sure racist criers will continue their misguided efforts.  Just please, everyone, don't feel embarassed if someone accuses you, or the collective 'us' of being racist.  Realise their arguments are weak, and the only strategy they have is to play us on our legacy imperial guilt.As an aetheist, I have a problem with a mosque not only because of traffic congestion and that's reason enough.  But because I have a problem with the proliferation of magical fairy tales involving non-existent imaginary friends.  And sorry, that's my right to believe that.  Unlike the social pariah status one might get for admitting they don't like certain races. 
I'm not a militant aetheist.  Quite happy to carry on quietly letting people pray to their imaginary friends.  But DON'T call me a racist because I disagree with your god and don't want his word proliferated.I'd have equal vehemence against a church or temple opening there. 

The sooner all religions stop indoctrinating their children, the less of a difference there will be between all of us, less likely you'd call us anti-theists racist when we're clearly not. My opinions are my own and are not meant to represent others who only have beef with the parking.

Fedup said...

Bet you don't live in Green Lane......

Tom said...

So, you have a problem with the building because it is going to be used by people of faith (as well as the traffic)? 

Well I have a problem with people without faith (like you) so insist they not be allowed to open any buildings as well! (Which like you, is my right to believe.)

See the problem here?

Tom said...

And a number of people go to a whole host of other religious and non-religious mediation services all the time, do you have a problem with these? 

As long as they're minor issues that don't cross over the boundaries of the law (i.e. an act was committed that should go through the courts) then I don't see a problem.

Tom said...

So, because one planning application (completed by another agent/company/individual) was flawed this one must be?

Realism said...

I’ve read the entire, surreal planning application through and it looks extremely poorly conceived to me. If I were Sutton Council’s planning officer, I’d have returned it with the response, “Are you trying to insult our intelligence?”
 
Even a casual glance reveals all kinds of obvious issues:
 
For starters, of the 225 or so supporters of the proposal, around 60% provide an address in New Malden and or KT3 and only around 35% provide an address in KT4 or Worcester Park - so why on earth choose a location in Worcester Park/KT4?
 
The application is based on the premise that a mosque in the proposed location will be convenient enough for walking and cycling. Clearly it isn’t for most of its subscribers – particularly in rain, in winter.
 
And of the minority supporting the application who provide an address in KT4, (under 80 – about a third), only a tertiary glance reveals that exactly the same names and addresses appear on different pages of the application! …And not necessarily in the same handwriting!
 
In contrast, there are whole blocks of names at the same address, in exactly the same handwriting, quoting addresses outside KT4 and outside the London Borough Sutton.
 
Other mosque capacities and visitor numbers are stated and claim to show one with a capacity of 280 had 573 visitors in a day. Another has a capacity of 350 and had 480 visitors in a day. This proposal has a capacity of 140 but claims an ultra low expectation of just 60 visitors will attend each day [10-15 visitors at any of the five daily prayers] On what basis?
 
For no more than 10-15 visitors to attend at any prayer to hold true, it would mean that of the 230 or so supporters, on average, none would visit more than once every four days. [And that assumes absolutely nobody beyond the original 230 attends subsequently, although the plan suggests the reverse].
 
It is claimed that there is an excess of car parking available throughout the day, even at the busiest times, at Waitrose and in Central Road. Is that your experience?
 
The statistics for the method of transport for visitors show that across the 5 daily prayers, private car use is 76%, 55%, 52%, 76% and 76% - and that means a lot of cars. Yet it’s also claimed that car parking requirements will be unchanged. If a local mosque opens and up to 76% of its visitors travel by car, how the hell will existing car parking requirements remain unchanged?
 
The proposal’s ‘Travel Plan’ scores almost full marks. Impressive …until you look at the specific questions on which points are awarded, and realise it’s difficult not to pass with flying colours!
 
The application states that this proposal will not result in more journeys, but redistributing existing journeys to existing mosques (where there are car parking facilities), and concentrating them on Green Lane (where there are absolutely no car parking facilities!)
 
The reality is that should this application be successful, an unknown number of extra visitors will be descending on Green Lane, the vast majority by car, with absolutely nowhere but existing car parking facilities to park up – every day, five times a day!
 
This ham-fisted joke of an application is obviously absolutely ludicrous on many levels, but unfortunately we can’t rely on our Council to have the common sense to reject a plan that will patently cause travel and parking chaos and is predominantly favoured by supporters who are outside the locality and Borough.
 
So if you’re happy to be gridlocked in traffic approaching Green Lane and are happy with the thought of being unable to find a parking place anywhere in town, do absolutely nothing!

Realism said...

What previous planning application? The controversy was due to the covert appearance, disappearance and denial of any such intention, which was pursued without any planning application.

How do you know the same agent/company/individual isn't responsible for both badly botched attempts?

Realism said...

Planning Design and Access Statement: Paragraph 5.2, "Occasionally, the building can accommodate up to its maximum capacity of 140 persons".

However, there is no indication of the definition of 'occasionally'.

SexTRex said...

No. I'm not in opposition because the Bank chambers will be used by people of faith.  I oppose it because it will be used by people of faith as a place of worship, there's a distinction.  Somewhere to further indoctrinate the young to their beliefs.And I'm not trying to open any buildings, Tom.  You'll find atheists confident in our belief without having daily/weekly brain washing sessions.  "Well I have a problem with people without faith (like you)"  That's a shame, and eye opening.  You see, I have no personal angst with someone choosing to believe in thin air.  It's organised religion that's evil.  I don't stand in judgement of your soul as you would of mine.  I don't believe you have a soul.  Just a brain.  Please use it.  Blind faith as a measuring stick is a very dangerous tool, to you and your neighbours.If you want to pray to a god of any persuasion, that's between you and your god. Why faith has to be a public affair utilising much needed local space is beyond me. The difference between us is, I have a rational, understandable distaste for all of the organised religions, their history and actions (except a few that I admire, but don't believe in).  You were indoctrinated from birth to believe something because someone in power (your parents/iman/priest) told you to.  You're on the inside of a gilded cage, looking out.  I stand in the real world looking in.  And, sorry. I don't like what I see and will oppose it with every fibre of my being.
I have a lack of faith.  There is nothing for you to oppose.  It's like light opposing shadow.  The burden of proof for faith is in your churches hands.  Not mine to disprove something that clearly was never there to begin with.  There's so many religions.  Which one's right?  Yours I'd wager.What is faith, exactly?  The right to choose to deny or believe based solely on a feeling.  How very sane and rational. 

guest said...

err Tom ...i don't think SexTrex wants to open a building to disrupt the lives of WP residents.......so what's your point ???

guest said...

You don't see a problem ?.........but you are dividing comunitys, i thought we were all supposed to get on together under the same law. Sharia is not some little mediation service, it is a law HENCE sharia law. Surely if people come here from around the globe they must respect the law, our law. They must want to intergrate with the people of that land if they are joining our communities, not come here and then change everything they don't like. I don't care if they come from America, Australia, India Japan, Poland etc.etc. they come here to join our society not change it. 

Dr Who ?????? said...

TUT TUT Tom MY FRIEND....i don't drink and i AM a Johnny foreigner and under your rules you are being racist to me. But in my part of the world people would laugh at you.....then you would be shot.....PEACE XXXXXX
 OH the figure [144] was on the original building aplication that has now been taken down. It said something about 144 cycle racks would be built in the building behind for the worshipers. It was in black & white [see i am no racist] as i chuckled to myself.....there is no way you will get 144 worshipers cycling around WP.....THIS IS WHAT I SAW. 

SexTRex said...

So why is it not called Sharia mediation service?  People rarely see the problem for things they want or support.  Try seeing it from the point of view of the countrymen that invented personal freedom and despises seeing it curtailed for some, wether they subscribe to the law or not.

Abdel said...

I'm off with friends to build a mosque in Saudi.....will you all come to our stoning!

anon said...

Why don't they buy the worcester park pub at least then the building will stay and they have parking on site

4PS said...

mmm....councils, intelligence, political correctness....now there's a tale or two to be told!

Nikko said...

An excellent analysis Realism, many thanks. When are you applying for the job of planning officer? Soon, I hope.

Littlenicky61 said...

I think all the points you have raised are the valid points that we should all be sending to the council . I know many people will sign the petition and think thats enough but I have a feeling the petition will not be given proper consideration . I think the only thing that may make a difference ( amd I have not much faith in the council ) is if everyone who has commented on here takes the time to go onto the council website and lodge an official objection . I have objected to planning permission before and think this sort of balanced response will be much more effective than  a petition that may give some people incorrect ammunition that its only a  mosque we are all against and not the fact that WP residents dont want this office building changed into anything thats going to make our daily traffice /parking misery worse. 

Guest said...

That's a far more realistic suggestion than this planning application!

Perhaps they chose the wrong agent?

AyeCap'n said...

 Ha, so you assume a full and detailed application, with significant time and money spent on supporting analysis of impact on local traffic, etc, has been delivered on this occasion?

Wow, you are quite the optimist aren't you? And also mind-numbingly naive.

Keithjones said...

I do think we need o get a meeting together with possibly a councillor and get to the bottom of this and try and stop it

Michael said...

The Bank Chambers building in its current condition contains a single parking place in the form of an integral garage at the rear of the property. The planning application shows that this parking space is to be converted into an office/rest room requiring this parking facilty be aquired in the public vacinity.

Due to the inconsiderate and unsympathetic removal of this parking facility and that there would also be an increase in inconsiderate and illegal on-street parking which would significantly increase the risk to all road users in the area, particularly the local residents the planning should be rejected.

Bogus_data_joke_application said...

It seems someone posting under the name 'Tom' would easily win an Olympic Gold in naivety, being pretty much alone in believing this planning application and associated traffic data has any credibility. Maybe 'Tom' can answer the following?...

Do you genuinely believe that up to 140 extra people at a time, driving largely from KT3 or other local mosques and parking locally, 5 times a day, would be minimal impact on current vehicle numbers and parking requirements?

How do you calculate that up to 140 extra people at a time, driving and parking in and around Green Lane, 5 times a day would be minimal impact compared to the building's previous occupied use?

Come to that, perhaps you can tell us how anybody can claim to have any meaningful data and knowledge, relating to the long gone previous occupier, their visitors and their visitors' form of transport/parking arrangements?

Can you show us where the traffic data in the application takes account of the latest expansion of the Hamptons (184 extra dwellings) and their future use of Green Lane?

Are you ideologically opposed to rational objectivity or just one the application’s supporters, who signed up multiple times?

And are you, (just by chance) one of those who previously read the adverts for a mosque in Worcester Park and wrote on this blog that there was no such plan for a mosque in Worcester Park?

Guest said...

Does anyone really think there would be this much vitriol against a church applying for planning permission?
The question to ask is, if traffic wasn't an issue would you still object? Unfortunatly too many people are using the very real traffic issue as cover for bigotry.
I say bigotry because these people probably aren't racist, just small minded, illinformed, easily scared bigots.
Let people worship whatever sky fairy they like, if it bringsore trade in to WP all the better.

Dr Who ?????? said...

YES....Bdja, i think Tom just sees good in everything and is quite unaware of his naivety........bless him. Of course i am a racist because i agree with you and you are a racist because you don't agree with him. He was one of the ''what mosque, there is no mosque'' brigade and according to him i should get drunk and hate johnny foriegner even if i am one myself ha ha ha. What a wet blanket, definatly a lib/dem wishy washy tree hugger.....sorry Tom i could not help it, my lefty friend [i'm only joking please lighten up]. If he bothers to read [maybe he can't? another little joke mate] either the planning application or some of the other posts he will see that there is over a 140+ people who will be using this building where as Perriman the solicitor's had four. But according to Tom that is not true, please Tom, sober up i think you have had enough and stop your nonsence and you will see the true picture. I do believe Tom most kindly is going to offer these nice considerate worshipers his drive to park on so it wont impact to much on the horrible racist WP folk who use Green Lane to get to and from work....nice one TOM , COME on everybody three cheers for Tom.  PEACE Tom my lovely friend xxxxxx 

Dr Who ?????? said...

oh dear poor Tom he's been down the North End Tavern again.......bless xxxx

Bogus_data_joke_application said...

I'd say Worcester Park is tolerant and friendly. For example, we've been enthusaistically supporting women participating in the Olympics for as long as I can remember (especially the volleyball).

... unlike everywhere else.

Bogus_data_joke_application said...

Yes, I'd suggest almost all car owning pet owners would indeed take their animal to a vet by car, since it's quicker and less distressing for the animal to be in the relative peace quiet car than manhandled along the public highway. And also more practical for the owner to give their pet a lift in a car than carry the sick pet in their arms or over their shoulder!

I'm sure you similarly thought the situation through logically, to reach the same conclusion.

Bogus_data_joke_application said...

From what I've read of Tom's skilled powers of analysis and
resulting rubber stamp approval of the planning application, I suspect he'd
endorse it if the evidence consisted of just a blank sheet of A4!



Actually, according to this planning application, a blank
sheet of A4 appears to be exactly the impact of 140 people driving from New
Malden to Green Lane, finding nowhere to park and driving back - 5 times a day!

Michael said...

The Bank Chambers building as it is today has a single garage located at the rear of the building.

The planning application removes this car parking space to convert it into an office/rest room. Thus a public parking space will have to be sought to accomodate the loss of this only on site parking.

This is not only irrisponsible of the planning applicants but demonstrates an unsympathetic approach to the local community.

There would be an increase in inconsiderate and illegal on-street parking which would significantly increase the risk to all road users in the area, particularly the local residents.

concerned of WP said...

I don't particularly care what it is used for as long as it doesn't involve large volumes of people or vehicles. By the very nature of a gathering place, or place of worship - this is what it will do. The supporting evidence states low numbers and some nonsensical figures to back it up. The facts are that this building never had the number of people visiting it during it's occupation. The Hamptons Estate was not built at the time. The level of traffic in the area when it was occupied was nowhere near the same as it is now.
The supporting document states that there is sufficient parking in Green Lane and the neighbouring closes and highlights them for use. The author obviously has no regard to the quality of life for those living in these roads. I had a neighbour who went to pray in the early hours and the banging of car doors and noise from family members at that time of the morning is disruptive - by the way he was a very nice person and we got on well. When I discussed the noise levels he tried to quieten the rest of the family down but, the banging of car doors will wake most people. Multiple cars will drive the neighbours mad.
Find somewhere else with suitable parking and where you wont affect the residents. Anyone claiming that parking and local disruption will not be an issue are kidding themselves and playing the rest of us for fools.
There are plenty of Churches struggling to keep their flock - why not share and demonstrate that we CAN live in harmony.

BenjyP said...

Not being adverse to the need for a place of worship for the Muslim members of our commnity, but more interested in the practicality of the property that they are requesting, I looked at the last page which shows the location of the various individuals that signed for the a need for the facility, by a long way most individuals actually live on the Malden green side of the train tracks. Therefore wouldn't it make much more sense to reduce the impact on both parking and traffic, that they would be best served with a facility on the other side of the train tracks, perhaps at one of the many vacanct properties at Malden Green?

Guest with eyes said...

How many of these vacant properties have a vacant car park for up to 140 vehicles?


Can you suggest a vacant road network around Malden Green, to get a convoy of an extra 140 vehicles to and from the vacant car park, five times a day?

BenjyP said...

I have no idea, although from your comment I gather that there is nothing at all that side of the bridge which you think is fit for purpose.
The comment was merely focusing on the figures presented within the planned proposal that it would potentially drive significant traffic under the bottle neck of the railway bridge at Worcester park Station, which I don't think would make anyone's life easier.

Guest with eyes said...

"I have no idea"... yet you put forward favourable response? Strange...

As many have already highlighted, from start to finish, the figures presented within the planned proposal OBVIOUSLY do not add up, whilst the plan itself is based on unqualified statements, that are clearly not even close to credible and even conflict with the data supplied!


Strangely, in sharp contrast, I note your words of contempt for those choosing a Christian faith, under March's article 'God Effort', here on this blog.. This referred to the efforts of volunteers from a church, who were actually asking for nothing from the community!



You seem to want us all to accept and have imposed something that would undoubtedly make everyone's lives a lot harder (whatever their faith), based on patently fictitious claims and ideas you haven't thought through... if it's in support of "the Muslim members of our commnity"...


...but if it's another faith, you have nothing but unprovoked venom for those who actually did something beneficial for the entire community, without any detrimental effect on anyone! Strange...



[I suggest another of your outbursts about the Bible is unlikely to convince anyone that you are strictly impartial on this proposal, but it might generate a few laughs around Worcester Park].

Gregoire Le Gros said...

This blog looks as if it has been hacked and interfered with by some sinister party. Can anyone admit to inserting the advert for a Muslim charity ? We should be told

David said...

Under "Neighbours", but presumably meaning those who have contacted LBS, in the Planning Application at
http://213.122.180.105/FASTWEB/fulldetail.asp?AltRef=A2012/66050
there are listed addresses in Hackbridge, Banstead, Streatham, Colliers Wood, Wallington, Croydon, Morden, Tooting, Raynes Park, Mitcham, Surbiton, Feltham, Hampton Court, Preston Lancashire (!) and London E10 .
What businesswould anyone in any of those places have in supporting, or objecting to, a Planning Application for a mosque in Worcester Park?

David said...

Just to add that there are now 570 addresses on that list.

Guest said...

David, as you suggest 'neighbours' is a list of those who have contacted the LBS in response to the mosque, which finally broke cover, after LBS knew about it for 2 years! 577 enquiries (and rising) shows considerable concern.


You don't have to live in KT4 to be affected by the arrival of an extra 140 vehicles in Worcester Park, with nowhere to park, 5 times a day:


Clearly, anyone currently parking in Worcester Park, anyone using Green Lane or Central Road, or anyone with a business in or around Worcester Park, or any business making deliveries in Worcester Park is going to be adversely affected, should Sutton Council force this upon us, after what is rather obviously, a planning application that a below average GCSE student can spot is fictional nonsense.

David said...

I take your point, that some of the people from the places I listed might have concerns about deliveries or their visits to Worcester Park.
The impression I have is that at least some of them are supporters of the Planning Application but would be unlikely users of the mosque - 'bussed in', as it were. I shall have to visit the LBS Planning Offices to check those particular ones out.

Local resident said...

Q: Who exactly are the bigots here? A: People (apparently largely from out of town and outside the Borough), who demand a mosque not where they live, but wherever they want, and couldn't give a monkey's about parking or how it affects the whole local community ... and then play the race card when they don't get exactly what they want!


To quote the manager of Kingfish, Green Lane (see Epsom Guardian, page 7):"There has to be provisions in place for the increased traffic. People need somewhere to park and if that is not accounted for, I am against the plans".



And before you launch your predictable vitriol, let me point out that the manager of Kingfish is called Mr. Mustapha Hussain. I hope the small number of mosque supporting bigots like you aren't going to throw insults and accusations of racism against this local businessman who is objectively stating common sense.

x said...

Ironic how peitions can be found in four local shops? surely in these hard times they would welcome the vast influx of potential customers? or as already highlighted is the extra traffic not the real issue here?

Balsam said...

I am opposed to the mosque, I think WP has enough traffic. A few comments-

Firstly, there has been a recent unsuccessful change of use application in WP directly relevant to this. In July 2008 Sutton Council turned down an application to change the use of 60 Central Rd (The “Betty Boop Shop”) from shop use to restaurant and takeaway use.
Although turned down for a number of reasons they included that

“(3) The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed scheme would not result in a increase in traffic movements to and from the site and this would impact on the amenities of adjoining occupiers contrary to the aims and objectives of the Sutton UDP Policies TSC7, TR12 and TR13 of the Sutton Unitary Development Plan.
and
(4) The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would not have an impact on the highway network in terms of increased traffic generated, demonstrating that the network could meet the additional demand created in line with Policy TR18 of the Sutton Unitary Development Plan.”

As we are, I think, mostly agreed that the mosque will result in substantially increased traffic and parking congestion in the area it’s a matter of convincing Sutton Council of that then hoping they are consistent in applying their policies to planning applications they receive.

Secondly, for those that have signed the petition, its said that one individual letter of objection is worth a hundred or more signatures on a petition. If you have signed the petition but not made an individual objection through the Sutton council weblink you should consider doing so.
Also if you live in the Kingston part of WP don’t also contact Paul Burstow as you’re not one of his constituents. Contact Ed Davey and ask him to take up the matter with Paul Burstow and Sutton Council for you.

Lastly I have a certain feeling that this might be a foot in the door application, that is to say an application to establish the use of the site as a place of religious worship then, once that’s been obtained from the council, follow up in a few months time with a second application with ambitious plans to redevelop the site with a new building with minaret and space for hundreds of people etc. Let’s hope not.

Skip said...

Okay, so I just read the planning application for the mosque. Number one - traffic - I am currently in the process of applying for permit parking for my street so getting the flyer through my door obviously has increased the level of traffic on my street already so I am definitely against the mosque!
I don't mind the fact I have to park either at the top or bottom of my street in an evening as nearly every homeowner has a car but on my weekdays off I can't even park near my house because Tom, Dick and Harry from Wimbledon and other areas come and park in my street for closer access to the train station and no parking fees. What annoys me is the amount of damage to my car - which recently has been quite serious and probably over £200 in damage - I believe if that was caused by a neighbour they would of said or left details.


Number two - I would like to know where they get their figures from. A mosque placed there must serve a 'role or function to the character of the catchment area' However the majority of signatures are not in WP - which is strange as apparently there are hundreds of families here. If they would like a mosque there, they would be the first people I would get to sign!

Number three - rules of a petition - surely the basic is you sign your own signature beside your own name - that petition is a mess and very unprofessional to be handing in as part of a planning application supporting document. I also don't think that under 18's are represented on petitions so people writing their full families down is invalid I am sure. Full addresses should be written down and not just postcodes or one line of address either!
Also could someone tell me where the town centre car park is - if they mean Waitrose car park then not only will the residents in the local streets have problems parking on returning to work but people going shopping will. The worst part is - it's not just one day a week it's five times a day at key high traffic flow times!!

Anyway - let us all see what the outcome is and deal with it then!
I'm all up for redevelopment but think that the building could be put to much better use - especially as a large building only providing two employment opportunities - it's hardly an improvement of the local level of employment.

Local resident said...

Are you now going to tell us where exactly this "vast influx of potential customers" are actually going to park? . Or haven't you actually thought that out?


By last report, there is actually a large selection of shops outside Worcester Park, making it unlikely that this 'vast influx' are going to do their shopping here, when they can more conveniently do it at home.


If Waitrose car park becomes the unofficial mosque car park (which is the first option in the planning application) where are our local traders' existing customers going to park?


Ironic how everybody in support of this mosque is so desperate to write about anything other than traffic and parking, and when they repeatedly come up as the (glaringly obvious) issues, the claim is that they're not the issues!

Skip said...

Q: Who exactly are the bigots here? A: People (apparently largely from
out of town and outside the Borough), who demand a mosque not where they
live, but wherever they want, and couldn't give a monkey's about
parking or how it affects the whole local community ... and then play
the race card when they don't get exactly what they want!

Very good point!!

Hamed said...

I am not white and i am not muslim however we must not this mosque go through. I want my kids to grow up in a safe place not having child rapists around as we have seen up north. I have spent some time in birmingham and bradford where there is a big muslim influence and i tell you they are shit holes. Worcester park is one of the nicest places left to live in london and we dont want it ruined with these knd of people. I have no problem with chinese, sikh, and other peaceful religions.

Gary said...

I have lived in WP for 15 years, i have no problem with all religions except muslims. I find sikh, hindus and christians very nice peaceful people. When it comes to religions muslimes are all the same, be one of their or be an outsider, they just wants to push their religion on others by force if neeeded. If you look at history they have always tried to convert non muslims, we dont want you in WP so go elsewhere!!!!! gary

Concerned said...

I would like to know if both BT and the Royal Mails views on the proposals the old Post Office stands in the middle between both accesses to their site.There is no parking on the road because of the traffic lights.
Plus it is on a bus route.
I think the proposed plan is illconcieved and it is obvious who ever come up with it does not use Green Lane very often.
Waitrose car park is already over used every day of the week.
Sutton council must reconsider their proposal

Another concerned resident said...

Sutton Council need only state the obvious:
...application rejected.


It's an impractical idea supported by unconvincing data that highlights how poorly thought out the planning application is.

Hettie said...

I would also be interested to know what view Waitrose are taking on this proposal. Clearly if the Central Road car park is going to be full of the proposed mosque visitors where are their customers going to park? I myself would no longer consider parking there to shop and would take my business to an alternative supermarket. This would clearly have a knock on effect to other local business's in the high street. Would I be the only person to do this? I think not.....

Resident of KT4 said...

For sure, many Waitrose customers rely on available parking on-site and the car park is near capacity for most of the day - at capacity on Friday's which just happens to be the busiest day for mosque attendances.


All local traders are worried - four even set up a petition. The planning officer and local council will have to way up which is their priority:


Either:


100 local businesses along the high street
Many 100s of local jobs employed by those businesses
Access and parking near those businesses for 10,000 local residents
Local parking for residents in their own residential streets
Access to parking for local residents who commute via the station
Preventing the high street and junction being blocked by vehicles whose owners visit the mosque, five times a day.
Pollution levels rising from static traffic and longer journeys
Public Transport being slowed by a bottleneck in Worcester Park


Or:


Agreeing to open a mosque in Worcester Park, mostly for non-residents from New Malden, who have access to mosques in Kingston and Merton (with on-site parking), but have had the crazy idea to open one neither where they live, nor with parking facilities.


Oooh it's tough one for any responsible councillor! If the answer isn't obvious enough for them, think of it this way, What will be the outcome for our elected representatives?


Open a mosque in KT4 and you stand to permanently lose 10,000 local votes from those whose lives are going to be blighted by the dumbest decision in Sutton's planning history.


Meanwhile, on the plus side (if you can call it that), since most of the petitioners are from outside the Borough and outside the constituency, their votes aren't going to count for anything in Sutton.

guest said...

There are three ways that customers get to the shops in WP, on foot, so not affected in the first instance, by public transport again not affected and by car.

Those coming by car will most commonly do that because they are disabled or planning to do a large shop, this last group if parking becomes restricted will go to either a large supermarket (North Cheam, New Malden) or shop in Sutton or Kingston as these will provide a broader range of shops at more competitive prices.

This will free up parking spaces for the Mosque, but will also hasten the closure of many of WPs shops and so affect the first two groups.

Resident of KT4 said...

And apparently there are now three ways to address this:


1. Those residents of New Malden who want a mosque (since the make up the majority number of the petitioners in the application) can install one in New Malden, where it's most convenient for them to get to - even without requiring a car and parking place - and not inconvenient for everyone else.


2. Or since the intention is apparently that they don't want a local Mosque in New Malden, and they want to have to drive to a mosque, why don't they drive to the existing one in Morden with 300 existing parking places.


3. Or follow the brilliant plan offered by 'guest' above...
- Force the residents of Worcester Park to go shopping by driving to New Malden, adding lots of extra car journeys and adding lots of lovely extra expense and wonderful pollution.
- Force all the shops and business in Worcester Park to lose their local customer base and close down, turning it into a ghost town.
- As the businesses die, naturally destroy all the hundreds of local jobs that these businesses provide, turning Worcester Park into a slum.
- Give all the car parking spaces in Worcester Park to New Malden residents, so gridlock results when the Worcester Park residents having to shop in New Malden meet the New Malden residents at their out of town mosque in Worcester Park.
- Finally, convert all the closed shops in Worcester Park into the second biggest mosque in Europe, because, well, the one in Morden is like, so many miles away and it's impossible to get there, because the streets are now full of gridlocked traffic due to the chaos 'guest' has caused .


So all is well, until 'guest' finds their free benefits have been stopped, because nobody has a job or a business any more and therefore nobody is left to pay the bill for the idle lifestyle that guest pursues...

Fence sitter said...

I'm sorry but this is such a hyped up lynch mob attitude....'full of mosque supporters'....how many people live in WP? Well Wiki says over 10,000 as of 2007, so we can only assume that it's a lot higher today.


So can you please explain how at a capacity of anywhere between 140 people (the proposed higher end capacity) to over 300 (the 'peoples' estimation), that WP will be 'full' of people from the mosque.


I'm sorry, but this will not add to the already chaotic scenes already occurring in Green Lane each and every day out of term times....do we propose closing the school to ease the traffic solution maybe?


WP's infrastructure is poor at best, being the only real route between the Sutton and Kingston directions, and it's only going to get worse. We can't stop 'new' places opening up in WP, whatever they may be, because the traffic is bad.


If this was a community centre, it would be just as busy with cars and people....yet the bloggers seem happy with such proposals.

Fence sitter said...

Sorry...'in' term times.

Hettie said...

'WP's infrastructure is poor at best'......at least we agree on one thing! The Hamptons in my opinion is what has caused much of WP's traffic problems. A ridiculous planning decision made without any thought being giving to the impact on the daily lives of existing residents or the new residents these houses would attract. But what's done is done, we can't change that. Contrary to what you have written new places CAN be stopped from opening in WP because the traffic is bad. Planning regulations exist to help prevent such things happening. Sadly LBS failed us once, let us hope this will not be repeated.
10,000+ existing WP residents do not descend on Green Lane and the one existing car park at one time......the 140 to 300 people attending the mosque will and up to five times a day. Worcester Park the shops will not be full of mosque visitors ( I didn't use the term 'supporters' that you wrongly chose to quote) they will be either in the mosque and their cars will be using much needed space in the only car park or on the heavily congested roads in said cars. Of course this will add to the (I quote) 'already chaotic scenes already occurring in Green Lane each and every day' How could it not? It is also my opinion ( and I can only speak for myself) that the mosque users will only come to WP to use the mosque then return home, thus not bringing any extra much needed trade into the community.
I have never suggested a community centre and would look at such a proposal in the considered way I have looked at the proposed mosque......i.e looking at it's impact on the area as a whole. A community centre would be just that, local, for the local community to use with ease of access without a car and not a place closed to the majority of residents (on religious grounds) yet open to potentially hundreds from outside the borough.

Get off the mosque's fence said...

Fence
sitter .if you're truly sitting on a fence, it must be Mr. Aziz's fence, who sent in the mosque application!


Have a read of the planning application - making a comment on it
without doing so frankly makes your comment look as absurd as the planning
application. 10,000 people in Worcester Park have to go along with the wishes
of 230, largely from out of town? "We can't stop 'new' places opening up
in WP, whatever they may be" Are you serious? What the hell do you think
the planning laws are for then?


Residents, the Council and the MP all rejected the Hamptons extension, so can you tell us where exactly residents have stated they would welcome 230 people driving into Worcester Park, five
times a day, parking up (without parking places), and attending a community
centre?

Roger Knight said...

I am baffled, it is so simple really....Sutton Counciol SHOULD look at all the objections......the objections to the traffic, the unsuitability for a mosque, the fact that siad mosque is mainly going to be used by non w parkers, the fact that the application looks highly suspicious frankly and the fact that some of thenames that want the mosque don't even live in WP, amosque would destory Worcester Park, there are enough mosques in the area already to not warrante another one and to top the list - the VAST majority of people in WP do not want said mosque. I hope everyone has in fact lobbied Paul Burstow and Sutton, this is really important for the wellbeing of the area and when Sutton pass the applicaiton on grounds of they are too scared to be un PC not to, then WP will taken over and the whole place will change, but sadly not for the better! And those people that post about extra business are very sadly mistaken, businesses will close not open, Waitrose will just be a car park and not a place where people shop......people in the area will not be able to park in a town where they live due to mosque traffic and its not good saying they will take public transport in reality they won't, and couldn't for the late night prayers anway! And truly have you seen what happens about prayer meetings - congregations of people outside, ok at other venues, but this uilding does not have a frontage other than the pavement where people can congregate.
Please all SAY NO to this mosque and let's get on with doing something about stopping it. Do we know who OWNS the building and has put in the planning application or is it just up for rent etc etc

Free Thinker said...

It makes me very sad to read many of these comments. I teach in
Worcester Park and have worked with many Muslim pupils who would benefit
from a mosque. Shame on you!

Free Thinker said...

Gary, have you ever read a history book?

David Wilson said...

Dear Teacher, if you feel your Muslim pupils would benefit from going to a mosque please tell them they can go to the several mosques already in the area, for instance there is a very very large one in Merton, they can go there!
thanks because we do not want one in Worcester Park!

Guest said...

Grubby politician calling yourself 'free thinker',

A town of 10,000 is to be brought to a halt because 200, mainly from out of town, want a place of worship at the town's worst bottleneck. Presumably you're not a maths teacher?


It seems only a small proportion of Muslim families in Worcester Park want this mosque - perhaps they are free thinkers who have worked out the impact and don't want it?

Free Thinker said...

Guest, you can't even give yourself a name!

Free Thinker said...

Guest I'm sure you are a racist rather than someone who cares about 'the town's worst bottleneck. Give yourself a name and call me wrong!

Guest said...

I'm not a teacher, but I can do basic maths.


Someone who, like you, on the basis of race, puts the wants of a small minority above the needs of the overwhelming majority is indeed racist. [Ask any good teacher to explain the concepts of 'hypocrisy' and 'racism' to you].


But it's good to draw the racists like you out of the closet, and to demonstrate the unsavoury, politics behind your support for this joke of a planning application.


No doubt many Muslim families in Worcester Park are as equally appalled at the thought of traffic and parking chaos where they live, exactly the same as their non-Muslim neighbours.


And no doubt they have very little time for anyone like you, who tries to hijack their faith for a sinister political agenda.

Free Thinker said...

Dear Guest (unregistered),
1. Please have the balls to register. Your aggressive tone suggests you are an angry male racist!
2. I really have no' sinister political agenda'. It is purely a mater of equality.
3. Please try to calm down as I don't want you to give yourself a heart attack.
4. Peace!

Nikko63 said...

Free Thinker, as you claim to be a teacher, I’m surprised that
you appear to be unaware that Islam is a religion, not a race, and that you
confuse racism with religious intolerance. Not that Guest has shown any hint of
either in his/her response to you. In fact, although there have been some examples
of religious intolerance in the comments, I haven’t seen any signs of racism,
except when the term is used, incorrectly, by supporters of the mosque.

Holly said...

No one is being racist Its not like anyone will have to drive for hours to get to the nearest mosque. Wp is to small and already overcrowded. Are you also saying that the residents of wp should have no say about where they live and their community? You are also very contradictory with regards to your " racist fellow shoppers" comment as you then go on to Say "muslim households dont raise drunk teenagers" which i myself find derogatory to any other religion.

Well done you really proved your point.

Guest said...

In the real world, anonymously registering on-line, (particularly with the added obscurity of an ostentatious pseudonym - and, I note, a paradoxical one) is certainly not having 'balls'. BUT that claim, (albeit only possible under the disguise of your alter ego) certainly displays convincing evidence of your lack of 'balls'! [If you can't work this out, ask a psychology teacher to help you].


If there's one thing that equality transparently isn't, it's a small minority of a population dictating to and enforcing their will on a larger surrounding population. Shame on you for being so dumb! [Ask any teacher - or any of the kids you (worryingly) claim to teach].


Your belief that a minority view should override a majority on the basis of race is indeed the very definition of racism. And that your only, default response is but an ignorant chant of 'racist' serves only to further publicly disgrace your tarnished character [Try asking any educated member of the community].


As here, 'peace' is often peddled by those with ulterior motives, which are anything but peaceful. It doesn't wash! [Just ask any of the many Muslim families, who have made their way here to avoid persecution, incarceration and violence, at the hands of 'peace' chanting dictators].


It's disturbing to hear we have an ignorant racist with malicious intentions, who has access to Worcester Park's children. Clearly Sutton Council need to weed you out, pronto.

dontvotelibdem said...

Well said Guest. I don't believe "Free Thinker" can be a teacher with grammar that poor, but given the state of our education system she probably is. I share your concerns. As for the mosque, I fear Sutton council are too weak to object so I will not be surprised if it is passed. I suspect Worcester Park and I may have to part company after 22 happy years here as it will definitely deteriorate.

Free Thinker said...




Nikko63
(unregistered) thank you for your patronising reply. I’m sure you think you are
very clever. However, you obviously do not have intellect to recognise the
connection between some people’s anger towards the planning application for an Islamic
community centre/mosque and racism against the mostly Asian members of the community
that will benefit from it.





Do
you truly believe that when the English Defence League or British National
Party rally against a mosque/ Islamic community they are doing it because of
religious intolerance? I think they do it because they are racists!





Before
the mosque was built in Morden there was a heightened presence of BNP members
vocal in the area. I am now receiving more BNP propaganda through my door and I
don’t appreciate it!

Free Thinker said...

Dear Guest (unregistered), thank you for your rant!
You obviously have taken no notice of my previous advice.
I am now even more conceived that you are a very angry male racist!
I myself do not have any balls. However, if I did I'm sure they would be bigger and much more compassionate than yours. Once again-please calm down.
Peace

Guest said...

Dear ignorant, uneducated racist (covertly/pseudonym registered),
Your continual reliance on the words 'rant!' and 'racist!' (now all over this blog and aimed randomly at anyone and everyone), are like a bad joke: ever less credible with each predictable and increasingly counterproductive reappearance.


Clearly, there's only one ranting racist, without any balls (metaphorically or however else you choose to reinterpret it), writing on this website, and it's rather obvious to everyone else who that is.


It's also increasingly unconvincing that someone of your poorly educated and unstable character would ever be given the responsibility of a teaching role. If you don't know the difference between 'convinced' and 'conceived', you certainly need to go back to school and study both English and biology!


Was 'conceived' a Freudian slip? Are having no (or literally 'getting no') balls and the resulting inability to conceive the root cause of this mindless aggression and psychological meltdown of yours?


With each reappearance, you exalt your shameful ignorance: As both millions of non-Asian Muslims and billions of non-Muslim Asians demonstrate, Asian and Muslim are completely unrelated terms. The same goes for your blundering incompetence in associating 'race' with Muslim and 'racist' with 'Christian'.


That said, as an opponent of the planning application, I welcome your demonstrations of obnoxious, socially unacceptable views and your militant campaign to support it. That this application attracts the support of this Borough's 'Vicky Pollards' is another reason for Sutton Council to turn it down.

Free Thinker said...

I'm happy to be the borough's Vick Pollard if your are willing to be the borough's Mr Angry!
Peace

Guest said...

It seems along with your ignorant belief that Muslims are a race, you can't differentiate between education and anger.


Don't get angry and writing 'racist!' all over the blog again. Instead, do something more constructive - get an education!


Then, one day, you might, actually become a real teacher - though admittedly, your chances aren't great!

Guest said...

Pot? Kettle?

Free Thinker said...

I'm very aware that Muslims are not a race thank you. However I am also very aware that there are some very worrying and nasty racist undertones here. I'm sure the BNP literature I have received recently is not a coincidence.

BovisCommendentis said...

Wow, what a passive aggressive loon you are Free Thinker. You call everyone racists when there's no racial issue, even so far as to insinuate there's a BNP assosication. And then tell people to "calm down" when they respond calmly to point out your error. If you think you're positively improving you side's argument you are a bigger prat than first appears.

DT said...

No doubt when Sutton Planning Committee reject this application, on the grounds of unsuitability of a high foot fall site including many young and infirm at a busy and therefore dangerous junction, you will accuse them of racism.

Why not spend your time trying to get this group to use one of the many church halls either in WP or Malden for their prayer sessions.

Guest said...

So if you got some militant Islamic literature through the door, would you immediately blame Mr. Aziz? [Since his planning application appeared shortly before it]... I think not!


If the boot was on the other foot, I've a feeling you would calmly excuse it and dismiss any outraged responses as overreaction (oh, and of course, racially inspired!).


The only person who has made any statement that would qualify as racist here is you. The only racist undertones are those of your own construction.


Your intention was CLEARLY an attempt to disguise opposition to this planning application as a racial issue. You failed - you succeeded only in labeling yourself a racist.


You keep trying.
You keep failing.
And you keep labeling yourself a racist.


Racists not only come in all colours, but adopt any and every kind of faith and every kind of occupation... including teachers!

Free Thinker said...

I don't have any opposition to the planning action at all. I actually think WP would benefit greatly in the long run. If there is a rise in BNP activity over the next few months I will not be surprised at all.

To be honest I'm sick of reading your bitter and twisted rants and have better things to do with my time so this will be you hear from me.
Peace!

Guest said...

Presumably that was a genuine misinterpretation, since we're all only too well aware of your militant support for the planning application.

'WP would benefit greatly in the long run". Few of us can see any benefit in the short run or the long run, though we're looking at it from the perspective of the costs and benefits of the entire local population - and certainly not favouring the interests of any particular sub-group.


If your "long run" is focused on achieving a more specific agenda, for the benefit of only a specific element of the population, you naturally may be content or even happy to inflict all kinds of problems upon the rest of Worcester Park's residents, at any cost... Of course, that's exactly the kind of activity that provokes a rise in the popularity of extremism.

Peace said...

@disqus_Go3u8k30AZ:disqus Goodbye, may you find peace in your crazy world. I suggest your time is better spent learning how to construct proper sentences rather than spouting racist remarks on this blog.

You know I'm right

Hettie said...

Whilst I support yours and everybody's right to post their thoughts and opinions on this blog I have been saddened and to be honest alarmed that you have not felt able to show the same courtesy to others. Each time somebody has not shared your view you have accused them of ranting/racism/anger or to find a better way of spending their time other than trying to support the community they clearly love and have chosen to live in. A community which will clearly deteriorate if this application succeeds and the traffic situation becomes totally unmanageable.

No doubt, once again you will consider this a 'bitter and twisted rant' full of 'anger'. I assure you this is not the case and in a calm, non bitter manner I bid you farewell.........

Hettie said...

It will be a great addition to wp. Lets all just live peacefully under the law of sharia

Free Thinker said...

I strongly disagree with this having just joined the BNP and seen the light.

You know I'm right..

blackie said...

The mosque in Woking causes traffic gridlock nearby at the time of Friday prayers.The carpark at the nearby retail park is full to overflowing.

ElmsteadCommentator said...

I find it odd that Ross the fruit shop hosted the anti Mosque petition. One of the main factors for this petition was the increased parking issues caused by the Mosque's presence. Have you ever noticed what one of the main causes of traffic congestion is when approachign WPk from the west? its the illegal parking of Ross's vans outside their shop (under the pretence of unloading) which stops cars moving up Central Road when vehicles are turning right into the Waitrose car park - total bloody hypocracy! Anyway Ross when are you going to stop causing the traffic problems? Like to know why you never get booked by the wardens...

Commentate on what you know said...

I find it odd that even though the Planning Application itself details the traffic congestion and parking issues caused by the mosque in Morden (even with the advantage of a 300 space car park), those hypocrites so in love with the idea of a mosque in Worcester Park and the planning application refuse to acknowledge parking and traffic issues!


Anyway Elmstead, when are you going to read the Planning Application? Would you prefer 1 Ross van or 200 extra vans, parked where there are no parking spaces, 5 times a day? Since the facts, the numbers, the consequences and even the planning application itself are all so unimportant to you, is there a deeper political motive?

Longfellow said...

totally agree i have seen the warden walk past a ross's van and booked the car next to it

Traffic said...

I think you will find that the proprietors of Ryan Gate also park outside their store on a semi permanent basis and do not seem to attract parking penalties so why take a dig at Ross's. Is he to be expected to walk over to Stone Place with his deliveries to load them? That is assuming he would have a place to park if the proposed Mosque Application goes through.

Guest of WP said...

Traffic, A small minority (evidence suggests largely from out of town) consider it 'racist' to subject a planning application for a mosque in KT4 to the same scrutiny as every other application...


So I'm pretty sure the idea of subjecting Ryan Gate to the same parking laws as every other business in KT4 is going to to be similarly considered 'racist' by those outside the Borough, with political views outside the mainstream.

Hettie said...

This is exactly the point that I and many others are making on this blog. Traffic in Worcester Park is a nightmare. Small businesses such as the fruiterers already struggle to park to carry out their legitimate business in a legitimate way because of the lack of parking facilities in the town. How will this possibly be helped by a mosque opening and an unknown number of extra people descending on the area up to five times a day and using the already saturated car park. The knock on effect will be that local residents will no longer be able to park to shop in Worcester Park, will take their business elsewhere and small businesses such as the fruiterers will suffer and may even close as a result. There is still a chance that Sutton council will see sense, actually listen to the majority and thus give Worcester Park shops and the community they serve a chance to survive. If they do not, the future for the whole of Worcester Park looks bleak and I after 22 years plus of happily living here will sadly need to reconsider.

Guest of WP said...

Hettie, I don't think there is any real danger of this planning application succeeding. To do so would have repercussions far and wide, which our local Councillors and our (newly reshuffled out of his Govt. post) MP can ill afford.


it is rather clear to everyone what the impact will be, on every one of the 10,000 local residents, on every one of the unknown 100s of local businesses, on every one of the many 100s if not 1000s of local jobs and everyone else who passes through or near KT4 between sunrise and sunset.
I'm sure many of us have formally submitted our reasoned objections, so Sutton Council subsequently claiming the impact was 'unforeseen' just isn't an option for them.
It's equally apparent from the comments here that those behind the move simply don't give a damn about any of the above and feel only contempt for this local community. Also, (from the application) it's clear that they number just 200, are largely from outside the London Borough of Sutton and have thrown together a planning application that even a below average GCSE student, let alone a trained planning officer is going to spot is as dishonest as it is conflicting.
For Sutton's locally elected representatives to approve a patently thoroughly dumb proposal that would severely disrupt the lives of every resident, threaten untold jobs and businesses, and was in the interests of a proportionally tiny group, who - in any case - are external to the Borough and our Councillors' and MP's constituency, would be nothing less than an act of deliberate sabotage.
Such an assault by local Councillors on their constituents would be long remembered, not just at the next election, but far beyond. No local Councillor is ever seriously going to approve something that will see them collectively ousted, picking up the label of Britain's worst rogue Councillors.

WhoWantsALoft said...

I must admit I can't help smiling when I read the comments on here. WP traffic is only a nightmare when the kids are at school or on a Saturday when people are driving through WP to get elsewhere or most people are just to damm lazy to walk. I've personally never had a problem parking in WP anytime of day, and if you know the back streets it's quite easy to get around. I've come to realise that most English people(yes I am english) aren't happy unless they're moaning or have something top complain about. I don't mind if the mosque opens or not, non fussed either way. Life will just go on as normal. So just get over it.....

Native Worcesterparker said...

Has anyone seen this....
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ban-the-Worcester-Park-Green-Lane-Mosque/112002265487998.


I think this whole situation is painting a terrible picture of WP and its people. I don't want to align my views with the people making these comments, and I instantly want to disagree with them - traffic issues or no traffic issues.


Maybe this is how Mr Burstow will feel when it's decision time.


All the people on here who again and again say that it's not about racism....just look at the comments on the FB page. For some, if not all, that is clearly ALL it is about, and it makes me ashamed to say I too am from Worcester Park.

Convert the useless loft said...

So you appreciate there's already a problem with parking in Worcester Park on every day other than Sunday, unless you restrict yourself to parking at Easter, Summer holidays or Christmas, or unless you know the right backstreets.


...and you're more than happy to make far worse!
...and anyone with a disability or who otherwise can't walk and/or carry all their weekly shopping is considered "to damm lazy to walk" (presumably your solution is they can just xxxx off and live somewhere else, to make room for mosque visitors?)
Unlike "most English people", it seems hosting the paralympics has taught you absolutely nothing. A pity - most of us have learned and taken something very positive from it, particularly with Dave Weir living in our London Borough of Sutton.

Regrettably, it seems there are one or two who are non fussed about anything deemed to not directly affect their own life ... presumably they are also unaware that selfishness and ignorance aren't considered qualities in any community ... including, and especially the Town Planning Department!

LittleSmiff said...

Re: WhoWantsALoft, you may be English but are you a resident of Worcester Park and if so can you please enlighten me as to which Utopian area of WP that you travel through and reside in? WP was snarled up all through the recent school holidays due to the closure of Green Lane, badly parked cars and even the X26 bus "parked" at the stop outside the station. Oh and how about the water works and the gas works prior to them? The traffic flow through WP has both been increased and restricted over the last 30 years to the point where the queue to get to the town quite often starts in New Malden. Where possible I do walk into the shops but I need to drive to commute. I do 17 miles, each way, to and from work and frequently spend longer doing the last two miles than the first fifteen. Yes, I chose to live in Worcester Park but would happily move if my circumstances allowed. This is not the same place I moved into thirty years ago. It also suffers from being on the extremes of both Kingston and Sutton councils whereby neither of them really give a monkey's about what happens as long as the money keeps rolling in from the taxpayers. TFL could also help by rephasing the lights at the station where the red halt is longer than the green go by between fifteen and twenty seconds. So, WhoWantsALoft, let us know where you live and we'll make sure that all the mosque users park in your road and walk down to the mosque and then they can all do their shopping in Central Road when they go back to pick their cars up after prayers. Not so Utopian now eh?

Dave said...

Hettie - I'm sure you won't be the only one reconsidering their position, in the unlikely event that LBS perversely approve this 'mosque'.
It will be 'interesting' to see whether house prices within, say, a two mile radius rise, fall or stay about the same. I have already formed an opinion, with sound reasoning, and others will doubtless have done so too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01m0pq2

David said...

I wouldn't single-out Ross Fruiterers as there are many infringements the length of Central Road. What I particularly object to is the parking of so-called "security" vans across the footpath for their convenience in serving various banks and building societies. Has anyone ever seen such a vehicle being ticketed?
What people lose sight of is that the road is for traffic, the footpath (primarily) for pedestrians. Neither should be treated as a car/vehicle parking lot, other than in designated parking places.
Since there is very little enforcement in Worcester Park that sends out the wrong message to visitors, including attendees of the 'mosque'.
I seem to remember something in the Planning Application about its being convenient for their delivery vans to park immediately outside, on Green Lane, quite regardless of the traffic and there being 6 busses an hour, six days a week. Yet another example of how little the applicants know, or care, about Worcester Park.

WhoWantsALoft said...

I must admit I don't know what the Paralympics has to do with this? so will comment no further...


If you read my post clearly, you'll see that I said I've never had an issue with Parking in WP....


I agree WP is busy at times as I mentioned, but not to the extent that People say on here... Try getting into any local town at bust times and the problems are the same....


There are far more important things in my life that this topic....

WhoWantsALoft said...

Yes I am a resident of WP and travel all over without any real issues. I would be more that happy for any Visitor to park down my road. However it's best to avoid the school run as our road has no spaces at these times, due to the fact that children and parents are unable to walk. Also avoid Friday afternoon into early evening as our road is full of work Vans, due to the fact they no long park in the pub car park as they don't want to get caught drink driving.

To the Naive Worcesterparker said...

For those with time to read empty-headed garbage on facebook, it's a shame you don't actually read the Planning Application itself.


And if you think writing something racist on Facebook and playing the victim of it is a creative way of forcing any unrealistic planning application through, you're incredibly 'naive', rather than 'native'.


Repeated attempts to draw attention away from this nonsense Planning Application isn't going to get it through - what it does do is demonstrate how badly thought out it is - even in the eyes of those supporting it!

Bogus_data_joke_application said...

Most residents will understand a connection between walking, parking, and carrying shopping - especially for people with disability (local paralympians or otherwise). If you can't, you're opinions on the subject aren't worth much.


As your opinion is on the basis of being part of a very lucky minority (of approximately one), who never has any issues with parking or traffic in Worcester Park, then ditto the value of your blinkered opinion.


That you don't think the local community is important in your life is pretty clear, without you to literally expressing that on a community blog.


But thanks for putting us beyond any doubt, no need for you to comment further and bye bye.

Roger Knight said...

I am baffled, it is so simple really....Sutton Counciol SHOULD look at all the objections......the objections to the traffic, the unsuitability for a mosque, the fact that siad mosque is mainly going to be used by non w parkers, the fact that the application looks highly suspicious frankly and the fact that some of thenames that want the mosque don't even live in WP, amosque would destory Worcester Park, there are enough mosques in the area already to not warrante another one and to top the list - the VAST majority of people in WP do not want said mosque. I hope everyone has in fact lobbied Paul Burstow and Sutton, this is really important for the wellbeing of the area and when Sutton pass the applicaiton on grounds of they are too scared to be un PC not to, then WP will taken over and the whole place will change, but sadly not for the better! And those people that post about extra business are very sadly mistaken, businesses will close not open, Waitrose will just be a car park and not a place where people shop......people in the area will not be able to park in a town where they live due to mosque traffic and its not good saying they will take public transport in reality they won't, and couldn't for the late night prayers anway! And truly have you seen what happens about prayer meetings - congregations of people outside, ok at other venues, but this uilding does not have a frontage other than the pavement where people can congregate.
Please all SAY NO to this mosque and let's get on with doing something about stopping it. Do we know who OWNS the building and has put in the planning application or is it just up for rent etc etc

Post a Comment

The Worcester Park Blog welcomes your comments and opinions!