08-02-2008, 07:45 AM
http://forums.hometownlife.com/viewtopic.php?t=32485
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 0
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:26 am Post subject: Homeowners hire attorney to force temple changes
Reader comments and feedback for the
Homeowners hire attorney to force temple changes
article.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:50 am Post subject:
McGraw (the attorney for the homeowners around the temple) says the Planning commission failed to address whether the new construction would meet current zoning requirements.
The Planning commission has already approved the Hindu temple plans. Now the homeowners are suing the Hindu temple, because they feel the Planning Commission didn't do its job??!!! Shouldn't they sue the Planning Commission instead? Why sue the temple?
It's almost like the homeowners will do whatever they need to do to thwart the temple plans. How about suing the temple to recover the cost of black paint they had to buy to paint their windows black?
I hope Canton is not becoming a Red Neck town. It's beginning to quack like one.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
amaun
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 61
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:51 am Post subject:
This is my suggestion to residents, in the three subdivisions bordering the Hindu temple, who agree that the temple ought to expand since it was approved by the Planning Commission.
1) Speak with your homeowners association president/secretary and let them know that you agree with the Planning Commission approval of the expansion of the Hindu Temple.
2) Ask the president/secretary if any association funds are being used to retain the lawyer opposing the temple expansion.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
Fsquared
Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 32
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:16 pm Post subject: More race baiting....
Pay close attention Canton residents, because amaun and desi are back again and are once again showing their true side. desi writes: "I hope Canton is not becoming a Red Neck town. It's beginning to quack like one."
Why desi? Because some Canton residents are exercising their rights to avail themselves of the court system? Playing the race card is divisive and is a tell-tale sign that your opponents are getting desperate folks. People like desi and amaun only like the rules when they favor their agenda. Going to court and placing your case before a judge isn't racist, it's the American way. Now perhaps you don't like that. But, until this Country becomes something else, you are going to have to live with the fact that people have a right to their opinion just as you do. The difference here is that you are now engaging in a smear campaign against the entire populace of Canton. If a race problem exists here, it's because you own the problem, not the rest of Canton.
You got rid of Ms. Johnson with smear tactics and bullying. Now what? you're going after a homeowners association for exercising their rights?
I submit that Canton is in desperate need of adopting architectural standards In an effort to maintain the aesthetic and economic value of the homes in our township, architectural standards and a design review procedure should be established. These architectural standards would be designed to regulate the style, size, location, proportion, color, material and basic construction methods of all structures within the Township.
Has anyone taken a good look at some of the religious structures that have been erected along Canton Center road? Are they at all proportionate to the surrounding homes and businesses? It's about time the Township Planning Commission stop cowering to a few shrill voices and start doing their duty in protecting what values we have left in our homes in Canton. If not, then they can all be replaced from the top down.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
amaun
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 61
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:19 pm Post subject:
> Has anyone taken a good look at some of the religious structures that have been erected along Canton Center road?
Yes.
> Are they at all proportionate to the surrounding homes and
> businesses?
No, and neither is the baptist church on Cherry Hill or the catholic church on Lilley.
> It's about time the Township Planning Commission stop cowering
> to a few shrill voices and start doing their duty in protecting what
> values we have left in our homes in Canton.
The values in my home are Vedic-Hindu. I am a contributing member of this township. I expect the Township Planning Commission to represent me and my values just as you expect them to represent you and your values.
Why would you expect them to protect only your values?
What are your values?
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:47 pm Post subject:
AMAUN
You listed 2 other churches in the area.
1. Baptist Church on Cherryhill
2. Catholic Church on Lilley
Both of these building are build away from existing homes and as close to the main street as possible. They made it a point prior to any building plans to get input from the neighbors. This avoided any bad feelings.
No one opjects to the Hindu Temple. We just want it built as close to Cherryhill as possible.
Please go look at the site. You will see it is 200 ft wide by 1,300 ft deep. It is a very unusual site. Not really suited for this type of layout.
I would object to any building that deep into the site. Whether a business or religious building.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject:
The Hindu temple MET ALL the zoning regulations. The homeowners say the Planning commission didn't do its job. So the homeowners want to sue the Hindu temple, not the planning commission! Brilliant!
This is AMERICA. You are supposed to punish the guilty, not the innocent. You are going after the temple that spent more than $30,000 to COMPLY with all the zoning regulations that YOU and YOUR ELECTED representatives created.
This is AMERICA, not your third world christianstan. We live by the laws we create. We don't just tell the immigrants to obey and live by the laws when it suits us, but when the law goes against us, we'll sue the immigrants to take out our frustrations. If you don't like the zoning regulations, go CHANGE THE ZONING REGULATIONS. Go after the Planning commission.
The fact is the homeowners want to sue the temple for complying with all the laws, and they don't want to hold the planning commission responsible for supposedly not doing its job. That tells me all I need to know about the motive of those who are suing.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
marscal
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 1
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:37 pm Post subject: Its all about the building...
This is not about race, religion or ritual! This is merely about a building that is too large for the property where it is planned to be placed. We welcome the diversity in the township and have no objection to expansion to meet the needs of the temple. However, the site selection and placement for a building that to too large is what most of us object to. Moving the building to the north east side of the property would minimize the impact to the surrounding homes and serve the expansion needs of the Hindu Community. It is unfortunate that people jump to the lowest, most offensive denominator when referring to this issue. Please see the facts for what they are...size of the building, narrow lot, placed too close to lot lines and homes.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:35 am Post subject:
Marscal and others: If the issue is really about the lot size and other zoning issues as you claim, and not about religion, YOU SHOULD BE SUING THE PLANNING COMMISSION which approved the plans and NOT THE TEMPLE.
Please answer why the temple which met all the rules is being sued, and not the planning commission which (according to you guys) didn't enforce or have enough regulations.
MAKE the planning commission add new zoning regulations and/or change the existing regulations so that ALL buildings will have to comply with the new rules. MAKE the planning commission ENFORCE the SIZE and SHAPE of lot rules on ALL THE buildings. All the churches. All the public schools. Not just the Hindu temple selectively.
Selectively suing a Hindu temple that MET all the zoning regulations, but NOT WANTING TO CHANGE the regulations so they will apply to ALL buildings (including future churches) has all the hallmarks of a banana republic with shotgun justice. You are saying a Hindu temple has to MEET A HIGHER STANDARD THAN the existing rules, but you don't want to change the rules? Why? So future churches and other buildings don't have to be held to this higher standard about lot shapes and sizes?
Any judge with half a brain will see thru' this lawsuit.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:20 am Post subject:
desi
It is true that the Temple has met all zoning requirements. However, zoning requirements and ordinances never anticipated a lot size and shape with such a deep impact (1,300 ft deep) into a subdivision.
You really need to go and look and the site to appreciate the issues of the Temple being build so deep and so out of character with the surrounding homes. The questions you need to ask yourself are;
Will home values go up or down?
Will there be security issues with parking so close to peoples homes?
Will there be noise and other problems from parking & lighting?
I have attended many events at this Temple. The people are great. However, I must admit that this was an odd shape site that we never should have purchased to begin with. We should have known this would be a future problem for planned expansion.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:11 am Post subject:
I grant you all the points about the lot size and shape. But my question remains: WHY ARE THE PEOPLE SUING THE TEMPLE, AND NOT THE PLANNING COMMISSION to change the rules about lot sizes and shapes? Is it because they want ONLY the temple to be held to more stringent requirements, and not the next Church that's built on an odd shaped lot?
Is it the temple's fault that the planning commission supposedly didn't enforce the existing rules? Is it the temple's fault that the planning commission didn't have more rules about lot shapes?
As for the question of home values, I have two points to make:
1. Extensive studies in UK has shown that home prices normally go UP when a Hindu temple is built nearby. People like a good landmark. I can give you references if you want.
2. In any case, home value issue has NOTHING to do with complaince with the laws. The existing laws must be uniformly enforced whether or not it's favorable to the home owners. Can I sue the Canton schools saying the presence of dumb students there depreciates the value of my kid's education?
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:45 am Post subject:
desi
You maintain that the residents are suing the Temple. That may mislead readers to believe the residents want $. That is incorrect. They only want it moved closer to Cherry Hill.
I do not understand why you believe this to be unreasonable. And this request would be made regardless of the purpose of the building. Have you visited this site?
Regarding changing the zoning requirements - that may occur. However, it would not address existing zoning laws.
I encourage you to visit this site.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:55 am Post subject:
I have visited the temple many times, though I am not a member of that temple.
BTW, talking about home values, read the below from BBC website:
----
A Hindu temple in London has won the inaugural pride of place award - meaning, it has won the rank of the landmark that residents are most proud of. The temple beat the Manchester United Football Club by a whopping nine ranks.
According to BBC News, more than 2,300 residents from nine different councils voted for the Shree Swaminarayan Mandir in Neasden, London for the award. The Swaminarayan Mandir is one of the largest Hindu temples in Europe.
According to the Mandir's website, the temple was built "using 5,000 tonnes of Italian Carrara marble and the finest Bulgarian limestone", which was then "hand-carved into 23,600 pieces by 1,526 skilled craftsmen" and then flown to London. It took three years to assemble these pieces.
------
Granted the Canton temple is MUCH smaller than this landmark, but I would rather have an outstanding landmark in my neighborhood than rows and rows of cookie cutter houses anyday. What depreciates the home values in American neighborhoods is that ALL houses look exactly the same. There are no distinguishing features (unique architectural styles, unique colors etc), so buyers usually play one house against another to beat down prices.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:35 am Post subject:
I will agree that landmarks may increase the value of homes nearby. However, the issue here is that the new Temple is too close to the homes. Moving the new Temple closer to Cherry Hill solves many of the issues.
Also, this is not the U.K.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
H.T.
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 1
Location: Canton
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:45 pm Post subject: Hindu Temple
Desi-
Not sure where your information is coming from but the residents are NOT suing the Temple!!
> hurray Posted: Also, this is not the U.K.
Not yet. We can only hope we reach the same level of religious tolerance that Europeans practice. I know you probably think America is more tolerant than Europe, but that's only on paper. American tolerance towards religion has NEVER BEEN PUT TO TEST. I'm not talking about different flavors of Christianity, but different (non Judeo-Christian) religions.
Non Judeo-Christian people are still less than 5% of the population. When we have about 20% Hindus, 20% Buddhists, 20% Muslims etc in population (if that ever happens) the real test of tolerance will begin.
Right now the U.S. behaves like a Christian country that tolerates non-Christians. Whereas infact it should behave like a secular country where Christianity is just one of many religions practiced. Public tax money, and public laws and rules should NEVER favor Christianity or any other religion.
Witness the spending of tax money on Christmas lights, but try asking the township for allocation of tax money for Diwali lights and see what response you get! Witness the traffic rules which require the traffic to stop to let a Christian funeral procession to pass, but try asking for permission to stop traffic to let a Hindu wedding processing thru' and see what response you get!
I've asked for these, and have been told there's no public support for them. But that only proves that our elected representatives don't understand the constitution! You don't need public support to enforce the separation of church and state.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:29 pm Post subject:
desi
Again. You keep trying to turn this into a religious issue. IT IS NOT. It is about a potential building they is far to close to existing homes. That is all.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
daisydot
Joined: 28 Mar 2008
Posts: 2
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:48 pm Post subject: Canton
DESI:
You said:
MAKE the planning commission add new zoning regulations and/or change the existing regulations so that ALL buildings will have to comply with the new rules. MAKE the planning commission ENFORCE the SIZE and SHAPE of lot rules on ALL THE buildings. All the churches. All the public schools. Not just the Hindu temple selectively.
THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO! no one cares that this is a religious institution... I am not christian nor would i condone any christian church trying to overbuild an area the way the Temple is trying to do. THIS IS AN ISSUE ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING. No one can make the planning commission DO ANYTHING. ALSO NO ONE IS SUING ANYONE!! They are just consulting a lawyer the way the hindu temple is consulting THEIR LAWYER. You are making very rash judgements about the citizens trying to live in this area. Please don't be so ignorant about the issues and immediately think that EVERYONE IS A RACIST because there is racism. You should try and look at this from both perspectives RATIONALLY before you jump to conclusions and make generalizations.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:00 am Post subject:
Oh, I know it's NOT about religion. *Everyone* knows that! This is America! It's illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion. Everyone knows that! No,no, this is strictly about the rules. This is America. We go by the rules ... What? WHAT? The planning commission says they actually MET all the rules? Are you sure? Oh, then it's about the lot size. No, the lot shape. Wait, maybe parking lot size? Building shape? C'mon lawyers, think of something quick. We're running out of time. How bout public safety issues? Fire safety? Security!! That's it, security issues. We value our kids. There, we got them! ... Wait, they'll pay for security 24x7? Rats! What now? ... Oh, they agreed to delay their start date? Oh good, we have more time!
C'mon, c'mon you lawyers! We're paying you good money. Think of some more issues fast. How about public sanitation issues? Urination issues? Wet land issues? Easement? Land use? Mode use? Eminent Domain? Didn't you guys learn ANYTHING in law school? Anything, anything!! But NOT religion. No siree Bob! THAT would be illegal!! WE don't discrinminate on the basis of religion. Or race.
Where do these immigrants come from anyway? To think we would make religion an issue. Really! How dumb do they think we are? Don't they know it's illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion! We would NEVER do that. This is not some third world country where they openly discriminate on religion. Give me a break!! We go strictly by the rules here. This is America. I wish these immigrants would understand how things work here. Oh wait, strike that!
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
amaun
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 61
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:59 am Post subject:
daisydot wrote:
> I am not christian nor would i condone any christian church trying
> to overbuild an area the way the Temple is trying to do.
The planning commission has not found the temple trying to "overbuild"! The temple met all zoning regs and hence the approval.
Is your definition of "overbuild" a function of religion?
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:11 am Post subject:
desi / amuan
Let's try a different approach.
Let's say you are a Hindu Priest. Just of the plane at metro and you would like to buy land & build a Temple in Canton.
Q.
Would you honestly buy this site to build when there are so many other sites available that are better suited (And much cheaper today - thanks to Jenny)?
I do not believe you would pick this site on Cherry Hill - too deep and too too narrow.
The Priest and representatives at the Temple were told this by the membership. I was there. However, the Priest and many of the Temple officials now live very very close to this site. They are not open to finding another site becuase they would have to move and believe they would take a big loss on their home sale (thank you Jenny).
The problem as I see it is we at the Temple we will not admit to a mistake and continue to compound it by claiming this is a religious issue. No one likes to feel they are being told what to do - this is human nature.
However, it is time we let go and find a new site that is better suited.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
daisydot
Joined: 28 Mar 2008
Posts: 2
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:32 am Post subject:
Okay, the planning commission found the zoning regulations fine. THE RESIDENTS DIDNT HOWEVER! If you have ever been to this space you would know that a giant building in that small of a space in two neighborhoods wouldn't be right.
amaun:
I am not religious at all and I have no problem with people practicing their religions. By overbuild the area I mean that the building is twice the height of surrounding houses, it butts right up to the property lines, blocks people's views out of their windows, possibly causes so many water and waste runoff issues. There is land next door that would be perfect for them to purchase but because of who owned it before, it can only be used for "christian purposes". I think that is purely wrong. I would have no problem with them building this temple, which will be beautiful I am sure, if they had a bigger space. If there was any way that land could be purchased, then a lot of these issues would go away. But because of someone's religious views that there is something "holy" or whatever about that land this can't happen. SO they should find a new place to build or comply with the residents to not face so many difficulties.
Desi:
You are still really ignorant and making no logical sense. The residents didn't have a lawyer from the beginning and they still had concerns. Have you ever lived somewhere in canton where they were building right up to your property line? Where construction disrupts your everyday routine? Where, when you moved in, a main concern was a building expansion and you were promised that it wouldn't be expand because it was on protected land? I don't live there but this situation is not right. You are saying that because we live in America and we are all pretty much christian narrow minded people that only want Americans in our country and if immigrants try and build something then us Americans need to stop them. Now, I am neither christian nor narrow minded. Your argument, on the other hand, is very narrow minded. You never put yourself in the situation of the residents. You never took religion out of the picture and you never considered that people are worried about their quality of life and the lives of others. You seem not be able to consider the other people's side because you are blinded by race and religion. You have a prejudice against Americans or the people of Canton and you cannot see that this issue has nothing to do with religion or race. Come look at the site and consider this from another perspective.
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 0
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:26 am Post subject: Homeowners hire attorney to force temple changes
Reader comments and feedback for the
Homeowners hire attorney to force temple changes
article.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:50 am Post subject:
McGraw (the attorney for the homeowners around the temple) says the Planning commission failed to address whether the new construction would meet current zoning requirements.
The Planning commission has already approved the Hindu temple plans. Now the homeowners are suing the Hindu temple, because they feel the Planning Commission didn't do its job??!!! Shouldn't they sue the Planning Commission instead? Why sue the temple?
It's almost like the homeowners will do whatever they need to do to thwart the temple plans. How about suing the temple to recover the cost of black paint they had to buy to paint their windows black?
I hope Canton is not becoming a Red Neck town. It's beginning to quack like one.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
amaun
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 61
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:51 am Post subject:
This is my suggestion to residents, in the three subdivisions bordering the Hindu temple, who agree that the temple ought to expand since it was approved by the Planning Commission.
1) Speak with your homeowners association president/secretary and let them know that you agree with the Planning Commission approval of the expansion of the Hindu Temple.
2) Ask the president/secretary if any association funds are being used to retain the lawyer opposing the temple expansion.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
Fsquared
Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 32
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:16 pm Post subject: More race baiting....
Pay close attention Canton residents, because amaun and desi are back again and are once again showing their true side. desi writes: "I hope Canton is not becoming a Red Neck town. It's beginning to quack like one."
Why desi? Because some Canton residents are exercising their rights to avail themselves of the court system? Playing the race card is divisive and is a tell-tale sign that your opponents are getting desperate folks. People like desi and amaun only like the rules when they favor their agenda. Going to court and placing your case before a judge isn't racist, it's the American way. Now perhaps you don't like that. But, until this Country becomes something else, you are going to have to live with the fact that people have a right to their opinion just as you do. The difference here is that you are now engaging in a smear campaign against the entire populace of Canton. If a race problem exists here, it's because you own the problem, not the rest of Canton.
You got rid of Ms. Johnson with smear tactics and bullying. Now what? you're going after a homeowners association for exercising their rights?
I submit that Canton is in desperate need of adopting architectural standards In an effort to maintain the aesthetic and economic value of the homes in our township, architectural standards and a design review procedure should be established. These architectural standards would be designed to regulate the style, size, location, proportion, color, material and basic construction methods of all structures within the Township.
Has anyone taken a good look at some of the religious structures that have been erected along Canton Center road? Are they at all proportionate to the surrounding homes and businesses? It's about time the Township Planning Commission stop cowering to a few shrill voices and start doing their duty in protecting what values we have left in our homes in Canton. If not, then they can all be replaced from the top down.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
amaun
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 61
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:19 pm Post subject:
> Has anyone taken a good look at some of the religious structures that have been erected along Canton Center road?
Yes.
> Are they at all proportionate to the surrounding homes and
> businesses?
No, and neither is the baptist church on Cherry Hill or the catholic church on Lilley.
> It's about time the Township Planning Commission stop cowering
> to a few shrill voices and start doing their duty in protecting what
> values we have left in our homes in Canton.
The values in my home are Vedic-Hindu. I am a contributing member of this township. I expect the Township Planning Commission to represent me and my values just as you expect them to represent you and your values.
Why would you expect them to protect only your values?
What are your values?
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:47 pm Post subject:
AMAUN
You listed 2 other churches in the area.
1. Baptist Church on Cherryhill
2. Catholic Church on Lilley
Both of these building are build away from existing homes and as close to the main street as possible. They made it a point prior to any building plans to get input from the neighbors. This avoided any bad feelings.
No one opjects to the Hindu Temple. We just want it built as close to Cherryhill as possible.
Please go look at the site. You will see it is 200 ft wide by 1,300 ft deep. It is a very unusual site. Not really suited for this type of layout.
I would object to any building that deep into the site. Whether a business or religious building.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject:
The Hindu temple MET ALL the zoning regulations. The homeowners say the Planning commission didn't do its job. So the homeowners want to sue the Hindu temple, not the planning commission! Brilliant!
This is AMERICA. You are supposed to punish the guilty, not the innocent. You are going after the temple that spent more than $30,000 to COMPLY with all the zoning regulations that YOU and YOUR ELECTED representatives created.
This is AMERICA, not your third world christianstan. We live by the laws we create. We don't just tell the immigrants to obey and live by the laws when it suits us, but when the law goes against us, we'll sue the immigrants to take out our frustrations. If you don't like the zoning regulations, go CHANGE THE ZONING REGULATIONS. Go after the Planning commission.
The fact is the homeowners want to sue the temple for complying with all the laws, and they don't want to hold the planning commission responsible for supposedly not doing its job. That tells me all I need to know about the motive of those who are suing.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
marscal
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 1
PostPosted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:37 pm Post subject: Its all about the building...
This is not about race, religion or ritual! This is merely about a building that is too large for the property where it is planned to be placed. We welcome the diversity in the township and have no objection to expansion to meet the needs of the temple. However, the site selection and placement for a building that to too large is what most of us object to. Moving the building to the north east side of the property would minimize the impact to the surrounding homes and serve the expansion needs of the Hindu Community. It is unfortunate that people jump to the lowest, most offensive denominator when referring to this issue. Please see the facts for what they are...size of the building, narrow lot, placed too close to lot lines and homes.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:35 am Post subject:
Marscal and others: If the issue is really about the lot size and other zoning issues as you claim, and not about religion, YOU SHOULD BE SUING THE PLANNING COMMISSION which approved the plans and NOT THE TEMPLE.
Please answer why the temple which met all the rules is being sued, and not the planning commission which (according to you guys) didn't enforce or have enough regulations.
MAKE the planning commission add new zoning regulations and/or change the existing regulations so that ALL buildings will have to comply with the new rules. MAKE the planning commission ENFORCE the SIZE and SHAPE of lot rules on ALL THE buildings. All the churches. All the public schools. Not just the Hindu temple selectively.
Selectively suing a Hindu temple that MET all the zoning regulations, but NOT WANTING TO CHANGE the regulations so they will apply to ALL buildings (including future churches) has all the hallmarks of a banana republic with shotgun justice. You are saying a Hindu temple has to MEET A HIGHER STANDARD THAN the existing rules, but you don't want to change the rules? Why? So future churches and other buildings don't have to be held to this higher standard about lot shapes and sizes?
Any judge with half a brain will see thru' this lawsuit.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:20 am Post subject:
desi
It is true that the Temple has met all zoning requirements. However, zoning requirements and ordinances never anticipated a lot size and shape with such a deep impact (1,300 ft deep) into a subdivision.
You really need to go and look and the site to appreciate the issues of the Temple being build so deep and so out of character with the surrounding homes. The questions you need to ask yourself are;
Will home values go up or down?
Will there be security issues with parking so close to peoples homes?
Will there be noise and other problems from parking & lighting?
I have attended many events at this Temple. The people are great. However, I must admit that this was an odd shape site that we never should have purchased to begin with. We should have known this would be a future problem for planned expansion.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:11 am Post subject:
I grant you all the points about the lot size and shape. But my question remains: WHY ARE THE PEOPLE SUING THE TEMPLE, AND NOT THE PLANNING COMMISSION to change the rules about lot sizes and shapes? Is it because they want ONLY the temple to be held to more stringent requirements, and not the next Church that's built on an odd shaped lot?
Is it the temple's fault that the planning commission supposedly didn't enforce the existing rules? Is it the temple's fault that the planning commission didn't have more rules about lot shapes?
As for the question of home values, I have two points to make:
1. Extensive studies in UK has shown that home prices normally go UP when a Hindu temple is built nearby. People like a good landmark. I can give you references if you want.
2. In any case, home value issue has NOTHING to do with complaince with the laws. The existing laws must be uniformly enforced whether or not it's favorable to the home owners. Can I sue the Canton schools saying the presence of dumb students there depreciates the value of my kid's education?
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:45 am Post subject:
desi
You maintain that the residents are suing the Temple. That may mislead readers to believe the residents want $. That is incorrect. They only want it moved closer to Cherry Hill.
I do not understand why you believe this to be unreasonable. And this request would be made regardless of the purpose of the building. Have you visited this site?
Regarding changing the zoning requirements - that may occur. However, it would not address existing zoning laws.
I encourage you to visit this site.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:55 am Post subject:
I have visited the temple many times, though I am not a member of that temple.
BTW, talking about home values, read the below from BBC website:
----
A Hindu temple in London has won the inaugural pride of place award - meaning, it has won the rank of the landmark that residents are most proud of. The temple beat the Manchester United Football Club by a whopping nine ranks.
According to BBC News, more than 2,300 residents from nine different councils voted for the Shree Swaminarayan Mandir in Neasden, London for the award. The Swaminarayan Mandir is one of the largest Hindu temples in Europe.
According to the Mandir's website, the temple was built "using 5,000 tonnes of Italian Carrara marble and the finest Bulgarian limestone", which was then "hand-carved into 23,600 pieces by 1,526 skilled craftsmen" and then flown to London. It took three years to assemble these pieces.
------
Granted the Canton temple is MUCH smaller than this landmark, but I would rather have an outstanding landmark in my neighborhood than rows and rows of cookie cutter houses anyday. What depreciates the home values in American neighborhoods is that ALL houses look exactly the same. There are no distinguishing features (unique architectural styles, unique colors etc), so buyers usually play one house against another to beat down prices.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:35 am Post subject:
I will agree that landmarks may increase the value of homes nearby. However, the issue here is that the new Temple is too close to the homes. Moving the new Temple closer to Cherry Hill solves many of the issues.
Also, this is not the U.K.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
H.T.
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 1
Location: Canton
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:45 pm Post subject: Hindu Temple
Desi-
Not sure where your information is coming from but the residents are NOT suing the Temple!!
> hurray Posted: Also, this is not the U.K.
Not yet. We can only hope we reach the same level of religious tolerance that Europeans practice. I know you probably think America is more tolerant than Europe, but that's only on paper. American tolerance towards religion has NEVER BEEN PUT TO TEST. I'm not talking about different flavors of Christianity, but different (non Judeo-Christian) religions.
Non Judeo-Christian people are still less than 5% of the population. When we have about 20% Hindus, 20% Buddhists, 20% Muslims etc in population (if that ever happens) the real test of tolerance will begin.
Right now the U.S. behaves like a Christian country that tolerates non-Christians. Whereas infact it should behave like a secular country where Christianity is just one of many religions practiced. Public tax money, and public laws and rules should NEVER favor Christianity or any other religion.
Witness the spending of tax money on Christmas lights, but try asking the township for allocation of tax money for Diwali lights and see what response you get! Witness the traffic rules which require the traffic to stop to let a Christian funeral procession to pass, but try asking for permission to stop traffic to let a Hindu wedding processing thru' and see what response you get!
I've asked for these, and have been told there's no public support for them. But that only proves that our elected representatives don't understand the constitution! You don't need public support to enforce the separation of church and state.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:29 pm Post subject:
desi
Again. You keep trying to turn this into a religious issue. IT IS NOT. It is about a potential building they is far to close to existing homes. That is all.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
daisydot
Joined: 28 Mar 2008
Posts: 2
PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:48 pm Post subject: Canton
DESI:
You said:
MAKE the planning commission add new zoning regulations and/or change the existing regulations so that ALL buildings will have to comply with the new rules. MAKE the planning commission ENFORCE the SIZE and SHAPE of lot rules on ALL THE buildings. All the churches. All the public schools. Not just the Hindu temple selectively.
THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO! no one cares that this is a religious institution... I am not christian nor would i condone any christian church trying to overbuild an area the way the Temple is trying to do. THIS IS AN ISSUE ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING. No one can make the planning commission DO ANYTHING. ALSO NO ONE IS SUING ANYONE!! They are just consulting a lawyer the way the hindu temple is consulting THEIR LAWYER. You are making very rash judgements about the citizens trying to live in this area. Please don't be so ignorant about the issues and immediately think that EVERYONE IS A RACIST because there is racism. You should try and look at this from both perspectives RATIONALLY before you jump to conclusions and make generalizations.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
desi
Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 9
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:00 am Post subject:
Oh, I know it's NOT about religion. *Everyone* knows that! This is America! It's illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion. Everyone knows that! No,no, this is strictly about the rules. This is America. We go by the rules ... What? WHAT? The planning commission says they actually MET all the rules? Are you sure? Oh, then it's about the lot size. No, the lot shape. Wait, maybe parking lot size? Building shape? C'mon lawyers, think of something quick. We're running out of time. How bout public safety issues? Fire safety? Security!! That's it, security issues. We value our kids. There, we got them! ... Wait, they'll pay for security 24x7? Rats! What now? ... Oh, they agreed to delay their start date? Oh good, we have more time!
C'mon, c'mon you lawyers! We're paying you good money. Think of some more issues fast. How about public sanitation issues? Urination issues? Wet land issues? Easement? Land use? Mode use? Eminent Domain? Didn't you guys learn ANYTHING in law school? Anything, anything!! But NOT religion. No siree Bob! THAT would be illegal!! WE don't discrinminate on the basis of religion. Or race.
Where do these immigrants come from anyway? To think we would make religion an issue. Really! How dumb do they think we are? Don't they know it's illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion! We would NEVER do that. This is not some third world country where they openly discriminate on religion. Give me a break!! We go strictly by the rules here. This is America. I wish these immigrants would understand how things work here. Oh wait, strike that!
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
amaun
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 61
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:59 am Post subject:
daisydot wrote:
> I am not christian nor would i condone any christian church trying
> to overbuild an area the way the Temple is trying to do.
The planning commission has not found the temple trying to "overbuild"! The temple met all zoning regs and hence the approval.
Is your definition of "overbuild" a function of religion?
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
hurray
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 6
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:11 am Post subject:
desi / amuan
Let's try a different approach.
Let's say you are a Hindu Priest. Just of the plane at metro and you would like to buy land & build a Temple in Canton.
Q.
Would you honestly buy this site to build when there are so many other sites available that are better suited (And much cheaper today - thanks to Jenny)?
I do not believe you would pick this site on Cherry Hill - too deep and too too narrow.
The Priest and representatives at the Temple were told this by the membership. I was there. However, the Priest and many of the Temple officials now live very very close to this site. They are not open to finding another site becuase they would have to move and believe they would take a big loss on their home sale (thank you Jenny).
The problem as I see it is we at the Temple we will not admit to a mistake and continue to compound it by claiming this is a religious issue. No one likes to feel they are being told what to do - this is human nature.
However, it is time we let go and find a new site that is better suited.
Back to top
View user's profile Report Abuse
daisydot
Joined: 28 Mar 2008
Posts: 2
PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:32 am Post subject:
Okay, the planning commission found the zoning regulations fine. THE RESIDENTS DIDNT HOWEVER! If you have ever been to this space you would know that a giant building in that small of a space in two neighborhoods wouldn't be right.
amaun:
I am not religious at all and I have no problem with people practicing their religions. By overbuild the area I mean that the building is twice the height of surrounding houses, it butts right up to the property lines, blocks people's views out of their windows, possibly causes so many water and waste runoff issues. There is land next door that would be perfect for them to purchase but because of who owned it before, it can only be used for "christian purposes". I think that is purely wrong. I would have no problem with them building this temple, which will be beautiful I am sure, if they had a bigger space. If there was any way that land could be purchased, then a lot of these issues would go away. But because of someone's religious views that there is something "holy" or whatever about that land this can't happen. SO they should find a new place to build or comply with the residents to not face so many difficulties.
Desi:
You are still really ignorant and making no logical sense. The residents didn't have a lawyer from the beginning and they still had concerns. Have you ever lived somewhere in canton where they were building right up to your property line? Where construction disrupts your everyday routine? Where, when you moved in, a main concern was a building expansion and you were promised that it wouldn't be expand because it was on protected land? I don't live there but this situation is not right. You are saying that because we live in America and we are all pretty much christian narrow minded people that only want Americans in our country and if immigrants try and build something then us Americans need to stop them. Now, I am neither christian nor narrow minded. Your argument, on the other hand, is very narrow minded. You never put yourself in the situation of the residents. You never took religion out of the picture and you never considered that people are worried about their quality of life and the lives of others. You seem not be able to consider the other people's side because you are blinded by race and religion. You have a prejudice against Americans or the people of Canton and you cannot see that this issue has nothing to do with religion or race. Come look at the site and consider this from another perspective.