Petition against building a Temple and Community Centre adjacent to Tattenhoe Pavilion.

We the undersigned are opposed to the proposal for a temple and community centre on land owned by MK Community Foundation off Holborn Crescent, adjacent to Tattenhoe Pavilion in the heart of Tattenhoe. Planning application Ref:20/00551/FUL.

A year ago an almost identical proposal was withdrawn due to significant concerns from the local community about the lack of consultation, design of the building, traffic congestion and parking, loss of bio diversity, pollution, and the ability of established leisure activities and sport to continue to operate at Tattenhoe Pavilion if the temple and community centre was built in this location.

The Development Control Committee (DCC) of MK Council will decide whether this new application gets the green light.  Normally residents would be able to go to DCC to make their voices heard but the coronavirus makes this unlikely so the next best thing is a residents’ petition.  You can also comment on the planning application using the Council’s on line system and are encouraged to do this. Click here to visit the Planning application.

DCC will only take notice of “valid” planning objections.  The statement below lists these and in signing this petition you are putting your weight behind these objections.

1.       Location. The Temple is to be a site of national presence for the Shital community, accessible to a wide audience, not just Tattenhoe, hosting events for up to 250-300.  Tattenhoe is a residential area and unsuitable for this facility.

2.       Design. The appearance of the temple, its design, and construction materials will detract from the overall character of the area, which is an area of traditional housing construction.   The amenity value of the street scene will be badly affected.  Its presence will be overbearing to nearby housing in Benacre Croft, Fife Court, and Holborn Crescent.  Gardens in Eastoke Place will look onto it.

3.       Traffic, pollution, noise.  Tattenhoe estate is served by narrow estate roads and small roundabouts.  Tatt. Pavilion hosts a successful football club and other facilities for local people.  Traffic on Thursday evenings and weekends is heavy with roads and parking facilities stretched to full capacity. Thursday and Saturday are peak usage times for the temple, creating an additional unbearable and unsustainable impact on roads and for residents living there. Houses front onto the access roads so families would be put at risk from the additional significant traffic volumes, noise and pollution.

4.       Safety. Access onto the V1, already a dangerous junction, would be an issue as motorists queue to exit the estate and feel under pressure to "make a break" to get out. Access and exit via V2 would take cars through Tattenhoe estate on narrow roads, with many parked cars. 

5.       Parking.  The 13 extra spaces to 55, in the new application, are insufficient.  Peak time traffic already causes obstruction and gridlock. Adding 300 additional visitors for all day parking for events with just 55 spaces does not pass the common sense test.  We question the allocation of space between worship and community use; worship space which has a higher parking standard appears low compared to community use. A more realistic allocation to worship space would mean that parking spaces are inadequate and do not meet MK parking standards.

In addition the temple and community centre will produce a substantial number of meals for distribution each day.  No allowance is made for distribution vehicles.

The size of each parking space is inadequate for the size of modern cars.  Park and ride is infeasible as no facilities exist for this.

6.       The access road to the car park crosses the footpath to the Pavilion. Key safety issue.

7.       Environmental health and protection. Houses are very close to the temple and will be affected by noise, smells and light pollution.  An average of 21,000 meals per year are to be supplied directly to the homeless, on top of normal catering for worshippers and events.   There is a concern therefore about cooking smells escaping into the surrounding environment.

Bats and other wildlife will be disturbed by the 7 day 12 hour operation. 

8.      Consultation. Claims about consultation and support of local residents are grossly overstated.  This proposal does not have the support of local residents.

9.      Any Planning conditions to restrict numbers would be unenforceable.  Experience is that visitors arriving would not be turned away. 

In summary, residents, the community and the environment would suffer if this application was allowed. This location in the heart of Tattenhoe is unsuitable for this facility.  We ask DCC members to carefully consider the objections presented and to decline this application.  A more suitable location for the temple and community centre is required.