Wednesday, 25 September 2013

Green Lane Mosque Rejected


Sutton's Development Control Committee this evening unanimously rejected the latest application to turn the Old Bank Chambers at 2-4 Green Lane into a Mosque. The meeting attended by approximately 180 people of which at least three quarters were vocally against the proposal, applauded and cheered loudly when the decision was made.

The rejection comes after fierce opposition to the proposal, with literally thousands of local residents objecting to what they claim will be unacceptable traffic and disruption from the development in the former Bank Chambers premises next to the 'Kingfish' fish and chip shop on the corner of Green Lane and Central Road.

The was loud applause for Arthur Hookway, Chair of the Worcester Park Residents Association, before, after and several times during his speech on the problems this proposal would cause and the "laughable" claim that no one would drive to the Mosque. Councillor Stuart Gordon-Bullock also spoke against the proposal and received his greatest applause when he noted that the premises would be far better suited to a firm of accountants or architects which would also bring  employment to the area. Councillor Stephen Fenwick also spoke against the proposal.

Once again the applicant did not speak but two professionals spoke on his behalf to say that in their expert opinion, no one would use their cars to visit the Mosque.

The best comment of the night was from Conservative Councillor Tony Shields, sitting on the Development Control Committee when he told one of these people:
"I've been a councillor for quite a while and I've heard a lot of tosh in these meetings but you are way out in front". 
Councillor Shields was the most effective and incisive councillor on the committee while Liberal Democrat Councillor Mary Burstow also made some excellent points as did the only other Conservative councillor on the committee, Peter Geiringer. Councillors Monica Coleman and John Leach, who was Chairing the committee, made a couple of useful comments but none of the other councillors on the committee spoke.

Undoubdedly this will also go to appeal like the other one but I would take this opportunity to ask the applicant to really consider if continuous applications and appeals is really the best way forward with this. This is clearly the wrong building for a place of assembly and surely it would be much better for your objective, your wallet and community relations to look at selling this building and buying one much better suited to public assembly. You would not then have to jump through hoops making it a 'Green Mosque' and pretending no one will use their cars even when it's wet and cold and trying to limit the number of people who can attend. If you purchase the right building in the right place then surely that would make everyone's job a lot easier and make for much better community relations. - Just a thought.

4 COMMENTS (Add Yours Now!):

guest D said...

I agree with your suggestion as to the best way forward, but unfortunately so much ill will has been generated with the succesive applications, appeals and flouting of the first rejection, that even if the ideal building was found in WP I suspect it would also raise a storm of protest.

Comedy Night at Sutton Library said...

Last time, it appeared that the wrong guy presented the case for the applicant, because he shared the same surname. This time around, it appeared that the applicant's case was presented by a comedy double act! ... I think many of us shared Cllr. Shields' view of the presenter who spoke of "robust assumptions", which patently collapsed under the weight of even the first, easiest and glaringly obvious question that any Councillor asked.
Apparently, he was from RGP. Russell Giles Partnership: "transport planning and infrastructure design consultants", who state on their website that they have a 97% success rate. I guess it would be a 'robust assumption' that after tonight, that percentage will need revising downwards.

BAZZA said...

I totally agree with guest Ds comments. The fact that Mr Aziz has not even bothered to turn up for any of meetings shows a complete disregard of the community that he shares with. The deceptive way he has dealt with this from the very beginning(do many of you remember the website that he closed down as soon as it was exposed, see blog archives) does nothing for public relations. It would be nice if Mr Aziz would now consider asking the community what they would like the building to be used for. The first application he made after all was for a "community building", somehow I think his ideal of a community remains very different the rest of us. There in lies the problem, Mr Aziz we await your response.
Ps Looking forward to the next meeting see what the Mr Aziz comedy roadshow act will be like!

ManorAve said...

These are the new owners of the Worcester Park Tavern. with well developed
plans it seems to turn the Worcester Tavern into a Religious Centre “for its community”
They are leafleting local streets. A Consultation is planned via “The JTS

Post a Comment

The Worcester Park Blog welcomes your comments and opinions!