Churches Don't Stand a Prayer: Houses of worship shouldn't be zoned out of the neighborhood.

Wall St Journal ^ | January 22, 2003 | PATRICK KORTEN

[SJackson]

For decades, a quiet but disturbing trend has been picking up steam in communities throughout America. Churches and other religious institutions, once a welcome part of virtually every neighborhood, have become for many city officials something akin to second-hand smoke.

[weikel]

Well I can't say I disapprove when it comes to mosque. If you can't ban Islam then zone it out. I would not want a mosque anywhere near where I live.

[Support Free Republic]

Interesting.

[R. Scott]

“Churches and other religious institutions, once a welcome part of virtually every neighborhood, have become for many city officials something akin to second-hand smoke.”

Possibly because the neighborhood church has changed from a quiet good neighbor to a large and bothersome commercial enterprise with amplified sound systems and large parking lots with events scheduled nearly every day of the week.

[Cvengr]

yeah, just imagine,...some people actually want to be involved with God..EVERY day of the week. /sarcasm off.

[TheBattman]

Yep - the liberals would rather have public housing and liquor stores in the 'hood than a church.

Driving by a church every day tends to at least make you think, whereas a liquor store helps you not t hink.

Public housing helps "diversify" the neighborhood. Afterall- poor people have the right to live in the nice neighborhoods too! And all of course, these preferred entities in your neighborhood help the property values too! < / sarcasm >

And for those who post regarding noise and "business enterprises" as churches - Those are the exception, not the rule.

[valkyrieanne]

Our suburban city would *not* want "a liquor store rather than a church;" in fact, liquor stores are banned entirely and we have a large number of old churches.

What people don't like about churches in residential neighborhoods is that they add a great crush of traffic. Our streets are narrow and there's barely parking for the 2-3 cars per household that everyone seems to have these days. In the 1870s, when the houses were first built, people didn't even have cars.

Another thing churches do in residential neighborhoods is attempt to buy up neighboring houses and tear them down for new church buildings. Older neighborhoods with "classic" architecture generally will fight *any* tear-down proposals.

In property that was formerly zoned commercial, there should be no reason not to convert a building (like a theater) to a church. The parking space probably already exists. But if they're converting from a low-traffic use (like a small business that has maybe 3 employees) to a high-volume traffic use, you're going to see opposition from neighbors.

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[R. Scott]

I have no problem with people who wish to be involved with God every day of the week. My point is that some churches have gone from houses of worship to commercial enterprises, and the quiet worship service has become an amplified noise fest.
With the amount of traffic and sound generated by these new style churches they would be more appropriately located in a commercial area than in a quiet residential area.

[Cvengr]

I've observed the opposite. The large churches tend to be approved by city or municipal governments as they attract even outside people into the community and increase a tax base.

Where I have seen codified opposition has been in small 20-100 person congregations which have nightly services for perhaps 5-20 people, something akin to a dinner party with sevral families. In these situations I've seen municipalities attempting to lay a burden of a 100-1000 person design on a 10-100 person facility, which is absurd. When they shoot for a 100 person atendance, they probably peak at about 70, but frequently zoning and code officials attempt to recategorize the effort at several times the size the facility will ever hold.

This tactic has caused many a church undue burdens and is frequently viewed by agnostic or atheist officials as a carousing point to intimidate devout community members.

Obviously, a church must also present itself so as not to bring disfavor amongst the community. Unfortunately, those who generally reject the church are also the same ilk who tend to contrive arguments where no real material conflict exists, so the conflicts aren't that uncommon.

[Cvengr]

I've observed the opposite. The large churches tend to be approved by city or municipal governments as they attract even outside people into the community and increase a tax base.

Where I have seen codified opposition has been in small 20-100 person congregations which have nightly services for perhaps 5-20 people, something akin to a dinner party with sevral families. In these situations I've seen municipalities attempting to lay a burden of a 100-1000 person design on a 10-100 person facility, which is absurd. When they shoot for a 100 person atendance, they probably peak at about 70, but frequently zoning and code officials attempt to recategorize the effort at several times the size the facility will ever hold.

This tactic has caused many a church undue burdens and is frequently viewed by agnostic or atheist officials as a carousing point to intimidate devout community members.

Obviously, a church must also present itself so as not to bring disfavor amongst the community. Unfortunately, those who generally reject the church are also the same ilk who tend to contrive arguments where no real material conflict exists, so the conflicts aren't that uncommon.

[R. Scott]

What I posted applies just as equally to small congregations, and I had in mind a small independent church that I lived next door to for about a year.
On a typical Sunday they would have 50 or 60 people in attendance, meaning about 15 – 20 cars trying to park in a 5 car parking lot. The remainder of the cars would be parked in and in front of my two driveways, along side the alley between my home and the church – blocking use of the alley (which in a small farm town is a well used thoroughfare). This small church used an amplified sound system, and even with the windows closed in bad weather the service could be heard fully a block away.
This small church had a Sunday evening service as well as the day service, a prayer service on Wednesday and Friday nights and church dinners and other get togethers on Monday and Thursday nights. On Saturday night was choir practice – using the sound system.
I have nothing against people practicing their religion, but some can carry it to extremes.
What is the extreme? When your freedom to worship interferes with my enjoyment of my home.
Think of the Christ’s number one rule – “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Would these people welcome a motorcycle club next door to their home? It would have the same amount of noise and traffic.

[Cvengr]

Perhaps in your city, this isolated situation occurs. I've worked with 4 major municipalities and in over 20 years have never experienced one such episode. I have observed many situations where Bible study groups, foundling churches and poor congregations are targeted by neighbors who are not disturbed using any claim possible to disrupt Godly worship by others. That is a much more frequent public inconvenience IMHO.