Columbia Presbyterian Church won unanimous approval last week from the county Board of Appeals to double the size of its Route 108 facility, despite objections from neighbors and what one board member called an atmosphere of "mistrust and unkept promises" between the neighbors and the church.

The April 23 decision overturned a county hearing examiner's ruling last summer denying the church's request to expand.

The board did order the church to build fencing along portions of its property line, to screen the building from residential lots.

Bruce Corriveau, a resident whose property abuts the church land and who has been serving as a spokesman for the group of concerned neighbors, said his group was "deeply disappointed" in the board's decision.

"I really don't think the board appreciated the concerns of the neighbors or factored our concerns into their decision," he said, adding that his group is considering appealing the decision.

The Rev. Allen Harris, pastor of the church, said he was pleased with the board's decision, but did not view it as justification to ignore the neighbors' concerns.

"I would want the neighbors to know that we appreciate that many of them did not move to that neighborhood expecting a busy church to be in their back yard," he said. "We've learned through this process a lot about how to be better neighbors."

Classrooms, nursery planned

Under expansion plans unveiled last summer, Columbia Presbyterian Church wants to add 17,763 square feet onto its existing 16,700 square-foot facility. The addition would include classrooms, a lounge, library, nursery, retractable stage, storage space, restrooms and a reception room. Church leaders say the space is necessary to accommodate the existing congregation and the demand for Sunday school and church ministries.

However, a group of residents who live adjacent to the 6.6-acre church property contend the church and its activities have grown beyond what they had expected or supported.

Before opening its two-story brick facility across from Centennial Park in 1994, the church won a special exception from the county in 1990 to build a multi-purpose gymnasium and a sanctuary on residentially zoned land.

With its multi-purpose gymnasium complete, the church now seeks to begin the second phase of construction. However, the church's new plan is to build classroom additions instead of a sanctuary. Church leaders said they plan to continue to conduct their Sunday services inside the gymnasium.

After county Hearing Examiner Michele LeFaivre denied the church's request last summer, the church appealed her decision to the Board of Appeals, which held six sessions on the issue.

Neighbors argue the expansion is designed to suit the needs of a school, rather than a church. They note that two home-school groups composed of more than 200 children meet at the church for activities four days each week.

"They are not building the church they promised to the community," said Corriveau, the spokesman for the neighbors who also is an attorney. "Regardless of what you call it, it has the feel, function and features of a school."

Complaints seen as irrelevant

In his closing argument April 23, Richard Talkin, a land use attorney representing the church, said much of the opposition voiced by neighbors was irrelevant to the matter before the board.

"Complaints about existing conditions and mere speculation about future use are simply not enough," Talkin said.

He added that the church is willing to work with neighbors to mend their relationship.

"The disconnect between the neighbors and the church is obvious," Talkin said. "It is our hope that this process will begin to reconnect that disconnect."

The neighbors, while objecting to the church's expansion plans, also said that they would like to see several conditions mandated if the board approved the plans. Those conditions included limiting the church's membership, capping the number of students on the site on weekdays, adding fencing and tree buffers, getting rid of two trailers on the property, adding a security gate and turning the property lights out at 10 p.m.

With the exception of the fencing, the board rejected all of the suggestions.

Board member Maurice Simpkins said much of the testimony he heard revolved around "issues of credibility, mistrust and unkept promises." But he and other board members agreed that much of the neighbors' discontent concerned current conditions at the property rather than the expansion proposal, and therefore was outside of their purview.

Board member Henry Eigles seemed most sympathetic to the neighbors' concerns.

"I have difficulty with the degree of usage that is not religious in nature, per se," Eigles said. "I'm at a quandary whether the use of the property is what is authorized. ... They're asking for one thing, but they're really doing something else, in my opinion."

This story has been updated.

---

user comments (0)