My Turn: Neighbors oppose proposal by church

Our quiet country neighborhood has been faced with a 42,000-square-foot church and school proposed by the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Just to give you an idea of what that size looks like — the Safeway on Neider is 54,318 square feet, and the Albertson's on Prairie is 51,000 square feet. These are commercial-sized buildings which, in our opinion, have no place in our agriculturally zoned area. We cannot figure out why eight homeschooled children which numbers are to grow to about 100, need a 20,000-square-foot structure. In the past, they have stated the complex would be used as a church, a health care clinic, educational classes, have a free lunch program on Wednesday, a place for Alcoholics Anonymous, weddings, funerals, youth rallies, etc.

CUPS can be amended. Let's not be fooled that these 42,000 square feet will not be amended down the road to increase the capacity of parishioners and uses. Is this commercial-sized building appropriate for neighbors living on 5 mm acre parcels, two-lane roads, and a hayfield with cows?

Disturbing to me is that all the governmental agencies designed to guide the growth and development of Kootenai County signed off on this project. The Lakes Highway District said fine when Rimrock Road is a narrow two-lane road with no shoulders. The road will have to be enlarged at taxpayer expense.

Lancaster is already a nightmare, with gravel, concrete and other trucks barreling to their construction sites from 6 a.m. to dark. Anglers, boaters, neighbors and repair vehicles flow in a constant stream. In looking at the site plan, there are no designated holding ponds.

With 42,000 feet of roofs and acres of blacktop for parking, where is the water going to go? There is a ditch on Rimrock that flows into Hayden Lake and a ditch on Lancaster, flowing into Avondale Lake. So the oil, gas and antifreeze from the cars and the fertilizers from the lawns will add to the lakes' contamination and the milfoil problem. I am not sure a holding pond could hold all the water because when we have snowmelt or a severe rainstorm, the creek on my property overflows its huge banks. Do they come out and look at the sites to see if it is appropriate, or do they just look at a piece of paper and rubber stamp projects?

Their attorneys brushed off the additional traffic as minimal, stating they had done a traffic study and statistically had come up with minimal use. Further questioned, it turned out they had gone to some manual, then put in the numbers. They also stated Rimrock and Lancaster were two major arterials. Rimrock and Lancaster are NOT major roads but two-lane country roads. With all the activities the church has stated they plan to do, this is going to be a big addition to the traffic load, as well as problems with people turning in and out, causing problems for other vehicles.

Their lawyer then listed four large churches in the county that fit nicely with their neighbors. These turn out to be on the Prairie with few house neighbors, and one is in a commercial area. They are comparing apples and oranges, not apple to apple. Their other attorney stated the Comprehensive Plan supports the preservation of prime agricultural land. She said the property in question is not prime agricultural land. Why not? There are an old house and barns on the property, but the rest has hay growing on it, which Rosenberger uses to feed his cows and then lets the cows free range.

Added to the mix is since it is a church, does RLUPA apply. This a federal law designed to protect churches from discrimination. The neighbors have all along said it is NOT an issue of a church that has us upset. It is the commercial-sized structure and its impact on our rural area. Their attorney focused on the hardship burden aspect of the law. What has bothered the neighborhood from the beginning is the church already has a 10-acre parcel on the corner of Lancaster and Government with a beautiful church, classrooms, etc.

We feel we are being burdened by parishioners who do not even live in the neighborhood but live in Athol, Rathdrum, Coeur d'Alene and Post Falls. Their building is about 10 years old. We did not design it. They did. If they did not plan ahead, why should we be burdened? Why can't they expand and remodel? David Morgan, their pastor, previously stated that the cost to expand was too expensive. In talking with Hayden city leaders, it came to my attention that David Morgan was not providing totally accurate information to his leaders or others with respect to the project. They are not burdened as they can choose another site. There is still a lot of land available closer to where their parishioners actually live.

So, what do I get out of this if this passes? When I open my front door, I will see a commercial-sized building, a line of cars parked fronting Lancaster looking directly at me with headlights shining, car horns, beep beep of car doors being unlocked, doors slamming, people calling to each other, the roar of cars starting up and overhead lighting all nightlong. We were assured by their attorney our fears were unfounded concerning the lighting. That the lighting effect would be mitigated as the lights will be directed downward and shielded.

Who is she kidding? The property is on a rise. The whole neighborhood currently has no overhead lighting. There is total darkness. With this commercial complex, the whole corner will be lit up. Go check out what it looks like at Target, a high school, etc., at night. This violates the planning codes c, d and g. With all the programs, they anticipate this will be what I see almost nightly. This is not considered a burden?

The neighborhood has collected more than 1,240 signatures against the project, and 130 letters have been written, all saying we have no religious objection. Our focus and desire are to keep the area as it is and has been — quiet, rural, with large open areas, star-filled skies, wildlife, clean lakes and a distinct character. We are shocked that this church, while touting brotherly love, continues to force itself upon us no matter the overwhelming opposition.

If this RLUPA case is allowed to pass with this project, this is going to set an extremely dangerous precedent in the county. Any church can force itself in the county and badger its way into any neighborhood by claiming it's been burdened.

• • •

Linda A. Kulesza is a member of Save the Lancaster Corridor.org.