CONTROVERSIAL plans to build a mosque that have divided a town's Asian community were given the thumbs-down by councillors.
Clitheroe Town councillors voted by five to three to recommend Ribble Valley's planning committee to refuse the application to build the mosque in a terraced street because it would be "unneighbourly".
Objectors and supporters of the scheme turned out in force and packed the council chamber.
Mohammed Sarfraz told the meeting that the single-storey mosque would only be used for prayers.
"There won't be a call tower and it will have a car park," he said.
"People say it will be noisy, but it is near a veterinary surgery and a football ground.
"We have been looking for a mosque for 18 years and this is the ideal site, as it is near the town's Asian community. We want to get on with residents. We don't want any problems."
But Mohammed Amin, who lives next door to the proposed development, handed in a petition signed by 60 residents objecting to the scheme. "You may be surprised that a Muslim family is objecting to a mosque, but it is on the grounds of noise, parking and access. This facility will be used at all times and the people using an Islamic Education Centre at the site already have no regard for the feelings of people living in the street.
"I have lived in Holden Street for 20 years and this is a totally inappropriate site."
Coun Pat Rawson said the street was already a busy area and parking and traffic problems were difficult throughout Clitheroe. "We must not become embroiled in arguments between two parties and I support this plan in principle subject to appropriate conditions," she said.
Former mayor Howel Jones also "agreed in principle" to a mosque in Clitheroe, but questioned whether the proposed site was appropriate.
"An application for a Christian church at a similar site a few years ago was rejected for very much the same reasons. This development would be unneighbourly," he said.
The application will go before Ribble Valley Council's planning committee for a final decision.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article