By Cam Lucadou-Wells
THE proponent of a once-rejected Narre Warren North mosque is planning to re-apply with a smaller-scale proposal after this month’s Casey Council elections.
Zain Shah, of Saarban Islamic Trust, said the proposal for 365-367 Belgrave-Hallam Road, was likely to be dropped to a single storey and be similar in scale to a nearby animal hospital.
It was not yet known how many worshippers and visitors could be held at the mosque, Mr Shah said.
The original proposal was rejected unanimously at a fiery Casey Council meeting in April.
The gallery overflowed with residents and pro- and anti-mosque protesters – including members of Casey Against Racism and Stop the Mosque groups.
Mr Shah was confident that the revised application would be “good as gold” when it’s submitted to Casey planners, but “we’re in no hurry”.
“We’ve got a new architect which will change the whole thing. It will be more modern looking,” Mr Shah said.
He believed the council would have no power to enact its proposed ban on places of worship from green wedge areas such as Narre Warren North.
“I believe that’s only in the power of the state planning minister to change.”
He welcomed recent comments from VicRoads which claimed it was unfairly linked to the original proposal’s rejection by Casey on 26 April.
“I think it will help our application, but I think it was more political reasons behind (the council’s rejection).
“The traffic issues weren’t a big drama.”
VicRoads south east metro regional manager Aidan McGann said Casey Council had deflected responsibility for the mosque’s rejection by stating it was bound by the road authority’s objection.
“We’re concerned that VicRoads has been seen as fundamental to the council choosing to reject the application in a pretty heated political environment.
“VicRoads has been put out as the main reason for the objection.
“We have made those concerns. The council knows our view.”
Mr McGann said VicRoads didn’t accept the original proposal to create access via an uncontrolled four-way intersection on Belgrave-Hallam Road but believed there was a safe alternative access point.
“We’d need some sort of traffic control. We asked if the proponents sat down with the council and us to discuss modifications and they did express an interest in doing that.
“We haven’t heard anything since and the offer still stands.”
In its planning report on 26 April, Casey Council stated it must refuse to grant a permit due to VicRoads’ objection.
The report stated that VicRoads regarded the proposal as “premature” and “does not represent sufficient orderly planning in the area”.
“Council officers are not supportive of the application on traffic grounds as the applicant has not demonstrated that the site can accommodate the expected traffic demand and safety of vehicle movements to/from the site.”
The council also based its decision on other grounds including the height and bulk of the buildings, and its location in the green wedge and Casey foothills.
Casey Council declined to comment but referred Star News to the 26 April report.
