Plans for Hindu temple on former Burnell Arms site in Manor Park
A third attempt to seek permission to erect a new Hindu temple in East Ham has sparked objections from people living close by.
The Lakshmi Narayana Trust has proposed replacing the existing Sri Mahalakshmi Temple on High Street North with a two to three-storey building on the site of the former Burnell Arms.
The pub was burnt to the ground in 2009 and the site has since been surrounded by hoarding.
Residents in Byron Avenue and Plashet Grove have objected to the temple, and have expressed fears it would reduce light and increase the amount of traffic.
Dr Seeni Naidu, president of the trust, said their current base is no longer suitable because their congregation had grown in size.
If they are able to move, they will rent out the Sri Mahalakshmi temple for commercial use.
He said: “Over the weekend our current temple becomes really crowded. It is not really suitable in terms of its structure.
- 1 Gallery: Hidden photos reveal London's East End in the 1960s
- 2 Convicted: Forest Gate man plotted contract killing of Rotterdam blogger
- 3 Men from Newham and Bow among seven jailed in organised crime crackdown
- 4 Motorcyclist, 19, died in hospital after A13 crash near Beckton flyover
- 5 New youth hub set for Stratford Park
- 6 100 people leave Stratford block of flats after fire breaks out
- 7 Jailed: Teen who inflicted life-changing injuries as he squirted acid in boy's face
- 8 'A kind, gentle man': Tributes to retired printworker and beloved father
- 9 Newham man among UK's 'most wanted fugitives' who may be hiding in Spain
- 10 New documentary on murders of women whose bodies were hidden in freezer
“The new application is going to have a smaller footprint but it will be entirely the same inside. The exact same congregation will be moved to a more suitable place.”
Proposals include a kitchen, dining room and toilets in the basement.
A prayer hall capable of fitting 200 people will be situated on the ground floor. A previous application for a new temple on the site was withdrawn in 2005 because of concerns over the size of the proposed building and an increase in
It was re-submitted in 2006 and approved. But it emerged that the temple’s previous management committee did not own the entire development site.