Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

To think that just because a Gurdwara got planning permission and a supermarket didn't, it doesn't mean there is a "PC" conspiracy at our local council

27 replies

CherryChoc · 19/04/2009 12:53

Recently where I live there has been a Gurdwara built. It's 5 storeys high and gold-plated. Most people I speak to (Including DH ) are saying that they only got planning permission because the council were trying to be PC - as Sainsbury's over the road from the Gurdwara was refused planning permission for an extension which would increase the size of the supermarket from single-storey to two storey. I think they ABU because a religious building looks much less of an eyesore than a giant supermarket. Also it's not like it's in a residential area (between two retail estates) and if you stand in the general area, you can see the local College's 6-storey classroom building anyway, which again you couldn't exactly describe as pretty.

OP posts:

qwertpoiuy · 19/04/2009 13:00

Had to Google to find out what a Gurdwara is. It's a beautiful type of building - I wish they'd build one near me!

Original poster

CherryChoc · 19/04/2009 13:03

Yes sorry - it's a Sikh temple. I think it looks nice as well! Can't help thinking people are only objecting to it for racist reason

OP posts:

edam · 19/04/2009 13:06

Five storeys high and gold-plated does sound rather noticeable. So I'm not entirely surprised people are wondering why this was approved while a two storey supermarket extension across the road was turned down. Doesn't seem to make sense.

KayHarker · 19/04/2009 13:07

I think planning rules are a bit arbitrary which can lead to confusion.

But yes, some people like to whip up rubbish for their own reasons.

Blu · 19/04/2009 13:09

YANBU.

Plannning law is very detailed and subject to all sorts of things like overall volume, the UDP, use of buildings, impact on traffic - both volume of traffic and turnings onto roads etc..highly unlikely that a council would grant one application over another to 'be pc'.

And if there was any 'swaying' of thought to be done it's much more likely to come from a huge retail company in the form of 'planning gain', which may possibly influence a council's decision.

Disenchanted3 · 19/04/2009 13:09

I think they look awful.

TotalChaos · 19/04/2009 13:09

did the sainsbury extension get turned down just for aesthetic reasons or for other reasons? as it could have been felt an even bigger supermarket would have implications on surrounding shops/housing in a way a religious building wouldnt...

Bonneville · 19/04/2009 13:10

Definitely sounds far too big and 'in your face'.

Ivykaty44 · 19/04/2009 13:15

It will be interesting to see if tesco get planning permision - as they also want to expand, but on one level. Both the supermarets are unattractive buildings whereas the Gurdwara is rather impressive. St Marys tower is also viewable from afar and higher than the gurdwara...

onepieceofcremeegg · 19/04/2009 13:30

Cherry I think you may live near to where I work? Is there a disused semi-derelict building in that vicinity, formerly owned by Ford.

Imo, the Sainsburys was extended significantly, and has caused parking/access difficulties a lot of the time.

The Gurdwara (as Ivy has said) is a beautiful and impressive building, again imo.

Assuming I am thinking of the same place, there is a fairly new Sainsbury's Local that has also sprung up and I reckon there are about 4 Sainsburys within a very few miles of each other.

LuluisgoingtobeanAunty · 19/04/2009 13:32

i'd rather have a temple than another supermarket

onepieceofcremeegg · 19/04/2009 13:32

Just seen your profile, I am indeed in "the right place" !

Ivykaty44 · 19/04/2009 13:42

lulu - there are both buildings, a supermarket and a temple. The supermarkt wanted to expand (which it did on one level last year and took part of its own carpark to add a starbucks and additional store floor space) and the only remaining option was to extend upwards and put another floor onto the building - which was refused it seems.

Strangley the area where the temple is based (right next to the side of the sainsbury store, but over he road) was wanted by waitrose. Waitrose tryed hard to get planning for a store in the area for a good few years and kept being turned down.....eventually they got a site in a nearby town.

Blu · 19/04/2009 13:43

Of course, anyone had the chance to view the plans before they went to committee and lodge a comment about look of the proposed temple, if they so wished, and to talk to their councillor about it.

It's impossible to comment on any proposal without knowing the site, context and any planning restrictions governing the area etc.

LuluisgoingtobeanAunty · 19/04/2009 13:43

oooh, i read in a bit of a hurry

llareggub · 19/04/2009 13:44

Cherrychoc, I suspect you live very close to me...

Blu · 19/04/2009 13:45

Also, any decisions about planning applications will be minuted in planning committee meetings and should be available online. If you want to know whay the Sainsbury's extension and waitrose were refused, check the minutes of the meetings.

llareggub · 19/04/2009 13:45

and a few others, from the looks of things!

Original poster

CherryChoc · 19/04/2009 13:51

I was wondering if anyone would recognise it!

I don't know much about the details but just felt everyone moaning about "They only got planning permission because the council didn't want to look racist" was a bit ridiculous. They kept saying I was being naive if I believed that though!

OP posts:

HecatesTwopenceworth · 19/04/2009 13:54

We can't have a bigger sainsbury but they agreed to a temple. [boggle] It's about need as much as anything, isn't it? Does the area NEED another/a bigger supermarket? Does it NEED a temple?

The 2 are totally seperate issues. I don't see why anyone would link them.

Ivykaty44 · 19/04/2009 13:58

It was an old factory site before with awful corrigated buildings - they knocked thoses down and have built a building that is far nicer than the original buildings on the land.

This is a building that stands out on an industrail estate of ugly buildings warehouses and car dealerships - the warehouses stand at least 3 storeys high (admittidley they blend with the trees far better as the temple is white and gold so stands out)

This building is costing somewhere in the region of 7 million

I wonder if it is on google earth?

llareggub · 19/04/2009 14:02

It looks amazing, I think, given that the rest of the area is industrial and retail units. Now, if someone would just pull down the old Ford site...

diedandgonetodevon · 19/04/2009 14:05

I would have thought there are likely to have been more objections to the supermarket at the planning stage hence why it was refused.

Ivykaty44 · 19/04/2009 14:08

They have pulled the tower down at fords - but doubt now that houses will be built as planned with the current climate....

onepieceofcremeegg · 19/04/2009 14:26

I miss the thermometer that used to be on the Ford building. It was something to look at as one sat in that traffic jam thinking "wow 26 degrees" - or whatever (in summer, obviously.)

If they gave the local tip a bit of a makeover (bit of leftover gold plating or similar) that would also look lovely.

Flip

1 2