A plan to build a place of worship on land at Louth Park is again on Maitland City Council’s agenda.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The controversial application, which council planners have recommended for refusal, will be discussed at a meeting on Tuesday night. The development was placed on public exhibition from December 17 last year to January 8 this year but the exhibition period was extended until January 22 due to the Christmas and New Year break.
A report to Tuesday night’s meeting says that 173 submissions were received opposing the development and a further 43 supporting it.
Many of the issues raised in response to the public notification are considered valid. Approval ... would not be in the public interest.
- Maitland City Council report.
The report said a place of worship is permissible within the area with the consent of council, however it also states that the development is contrary to the R5 (large lot residential) zone objectives and will adversely impact on the surrounding residential area given the excessive hours of operation from 5am to 7pm seven days a week. The report also flagged potential noise and lighting impacts, visual impacts due to the erection of a 1.8 metre high acoustic wall as other issues. Late last year Fairfax Media reported that principal applicant for the development Robina Moughal wanted to reassure the Maitland community that they had nothing to fear from the development or the people it would attract. She also indicated she would challenge an unfavourable decision in the courts if necessary.
Mrs Moughal said a maximum number of 20 people will attend any prayer session and this allows for anticipated growth. The report said the prayer hall building will also provide a venue for weekly education and social events, which are likely to occur before or after a prayer session.
“Many of the issues raised in response to the public notification are considered valid,” the council report said. “Approval of this place of public worship would not be in the public interest.”