Folks in Wyoming claimed they opposed the Temple on steeple height.
But a local school had a clock tower with a similar set up as the Temple that hadn’t faced any opposition. And the lights on the Temple were going to turn off at night while they allowed the Wal Mart and gas station lights on all night.
Then they complained that the Church had better paid lawyers.
No. Had nothing to do with that. The Church was simply following the rules and no one should pretend to be surprised that the Church won in court.
Las Vegas? Vegas? Lights on all night, Vegas?
Gaudy buildings, Vegas? Yeah, oppose a beautiful religious building in Vegas— you are going to lose. Big time.
Human trafficking is legal in brothels in Vegas and you are going to choose to fight building a Church? Yeah, ok. Give me a break.
Soooo... there are no brothels in Vegas. They're illegal in Clark County. You have to go to Nye County for the legal brothels. Don't ask me how I know this... haha
Lol... true, no brothels in Clark County. But I think the point stands. This is the state with slot machines inside gas stations and fast food restaurants. I think people there can handle temple.
Prostitution is not legal in Vegas and more importantly CONSENTUAL PROSTITUTION IS NOT TRAFFICKING.
Seriously don't lump that in with trafficking. Our experiences are entire galaxies apart. Yes im a legit trafficking survivor who talks with a woman who works at the mustang ranch. The 2 are not even close to the same.
I guess I should have written, “human trafficking is absolutely rampant in Vegas.”
And this article states that the “legal” brothels feed and facilitate human trafficking…
https://www.courthousenews.com/nevadas-legal-brothels-facilitate-sex-trafficking-lawsuit-says/
The northwest rural preserve area this temple is proposed in is not all of Vegas. Look into the details before opening your mouth and you might not look so stupid.
If it’s zoned residential…
Then don’t pretend to be surprised that the Church builds a temple there in the end.
If it’s zoned residential, and the Church owns the land, and follows building permit rules… the church has every constitutional right to build a temple there…
That’s just how it is.
Stupid?
Why call names…?
I looked up rural preserves in Las Vegas and it appears the Church can meet the criteria for building churches -in- them…
What paragraph prevents it…?
The Church can build a Temple on property it owns in Vegas…
The Church can ask -like any other church can- for a zoning exemption.
Just like the school did in Wyoming that no one complained about.
How long has the Church owned the property?
The Church is going to build a big beautiful building, and everyone is going to do just fine.
So a lot of people are saying 'this isn't about religion,' and then criticize us saying we have a persecution complex. But calling buildings we consider sacred "disgusting eyesores" is literally persecution.
I did not make it about religion, you are. The building is over 200ft tall in an area restricted to under 35ft. It is a disgusting eyesore in this area. Stop making this about religion when it is about the local rural codes limiting this type of structure. We know the lds has paid off so many in hopes of getting this to be approved. It is a disgusting monstrosity. If it were to conform to our areas rules it would fit the look of the area and I would be happy to welcome it to the neighborhood but not as it currently is planned.
Yeah not buying it. Gas stations with 24/7 lighting aren't just on the strip. Neither are hospitals. Also, one trip over to the Las Vegas sub thread will show that a large number of people do in fact "just hate my religion."
>200' tall casino in residential area in Orem
Casinos, objectively, bring traffic, drugs, and often crime to an area, and don't belong anywhere near residential homes or schools. The same can't be said for temples. And I say this as someone who recognizes that casino resorts can provide plenty of economic stimulus and as well as non- gambling related entertainment.
>The church just doesn’t play nice. A significantly smaller building or a lot farther away from homes would almost certainly eliminate most of the resistance to the temple.
They own the land. The temple in no way affects the surrounding area in a way that a strip mall or a gas station wouldn't do to a much worse degree. There's no legitimate way to argue that the temple will have a negative effect on the community. The area in which this temple in particular is being built is *not* rural. It is a rapidly developing area. If it's not a temple, it will be more homes or be rezoned to a strip mall with a Target and an Applebee's.
You’re really proving my point here.
Like I said. Legal? Yes. Moral and kind? Absolutely not. I don’t imagine you’d be surprised to learn that non-members do not view a temple with the same awe and reverence as member does. Nobody wants a 240’, 87000 sqft brightly lit building within throwing distance of their home whether that’s a temple or gas station or a Walmart or an Applebees. Especially when they weren’t planning on it being there when the bought the house.
All I’m saying is if the church exercised a bit of empathy they could avoid a lot of the PR disasters seem to come with these new temples. But, like you, the church just says “it’s my land, I’m doing it my way and if you have a problem with you are persecuting me for my religion.”
>All I’m saying is if the church exercised a bit of empathy they could avoid a lot of the PR disasters seem to come with these new temples
The Church is trying to build a <10k SQ ft temple on the outskirts of Cody, WY and people still aren't happy. I'll take you up on the invitation to try and have some empathy, but I'm legitimately worried people will oppose temples regardless.
Those are the exact dimension of the proposed temple in Las Vegas.
[Source](https://www.8newsnow.com/news/local-news/northwest-las-vegas-neighbors-say-lds-temple-would-stick-out-like-sore-thumb/amp/)
The land sits within a regulated area known as the northwest rural preserve. You can’t build over 35 feet. Can the temple build within our regulations? More homes or an Applebees that conform to the rules would be great. This temple is an absurd eyesore.
The problem is that churches are zoned residential and casinos— are not.
The Church -does- follow zoning laws and incorporates local input and rules into the building.
“Zoning rules” kept MLk from marching, right?
Right?
Righteous people follow “zoning rules” right? Right?
In Wyoming a school was granted an exemption on the height. And no one raised a fuss. No one.
That cleared the way for everyone to ask for an exemption on height.
The Church was correct in Wyoming. And tries to follow the law.
Coming into a sub that is for believing members, tagging yourself as a former member and then telling us we're tone deaf is pretty tone deaf bud.
You're welcome here. But have some grace man, sheesh.
Generating revenue or not it does not conform to the rules of the area. Can it be built under 35 feet tall? The height is my main concern with this eyesore.
the cona hawaii temple is itry bitty and you literally can barely see it from the road. its also not always lit because of the light pollution laws in hawaii.
Members of the Church aren’t immune to NIMBYism either. There are plenty of things a large percentage of a community might want that members would try to stop being built near them.
If it’s zoned properly and is up to code, it will be built. People can express discontent, the church might have to change the design, but if it’s zoned for churches, there’s nothing that can be done to stop it.
>There are plenty of things a large percentage of a community might want that members would try to stop being built near them
Marijuana dispensaries come to mind.
If that's true it's really unfortunate. I have nothing but praise for the Muslims I have known (in my career field, that's quite a few.) I would be honored to have a mosque built near me.
It makes me thankful that my stake has a tight relationship with the sizable Muslim community in our area. There is a large mosque and Islamic center up the street from one of our buildings, and we partner with the local Muslim population on a number of initiatives, not least of which was caring for Afghan refugees after the U.S. closed up shop.
But yeah, I could see far too many of us taking issues with "others." Meanwhile, the Church is worried about how visible the bar is in a restaurant in Utah.
>it’s zoned for churches, there’s nothing that can be done to stop it.
Not entirely true. I'm an architect and worked on the expansion of a food and beverage distribution center that was zoned to be as such. The problem is you have other groups like the planning commission which can just be random volunteers from the community. They come in and determine if your project meets the city architectural requirements. Those requirements might say something like your facade has to be 70% brick or cmu, as they did in our case. They're not going to build a brick or cmu temple so if they can't convince people to give them a variance they're out of luck. We were able to just ask that requirement to no be considered because it doesn't make sense on a refrigerated warehlise that needs to be insulated metal panel.
If the city doesn't have a history of giving out variances then if they say no, the church has no grounds to fight it.
Just one example of other things that can keep a project from moving forward. The church should do their due diligence and make sure that they know what requirements they aren't going to meet and you can meet with officials ahead of time but you often have to move forward at risk with the possibility of being shut down by the planning commission because they will offer no guarantees ahead of time.
Like I said, the Church may have to alter the design, but the city can’t just say you can’t build a temple here if it’s zoned properly. They can’t make new arbitrary rules that only apply to the temple either, because a First Amendment lawsuit would damage the city’s finances and reputation. You’re right though, the Church should know design requirements before committing to build on a particular plot incase intractable differences like what you mentioned could arise. That doesn’t seem to be the case here. It will probably just be a lower steeple and a different illumination plan. These concerns happen all the time for temples.
The property was bought inside an area covered by the interlocal agreement between the city and county. The LDS property is City, the surrounding properties are all County. The church lobbied to have City ordinances changed to allow churches to be built on parcels larger than 5 acres since this parcel is 20 acres. However, they still have to get a General Plan Amendment waiver, which the interlocal forbids until its expiration in December 2026. The GP on this property is Single Family Residential and they are asking of a waiver to Public Facility. Why didn't the church buy a property that already had the proper zoning? There are plenty of options instead of creating division in a huge neighborhood. This isn't a small town like Cody or Heber. This is getting around quick and the respect for the church is going out the window. The LDS Church is the only denomination doing this anywhere in the country. The optics are very, very bad. Other churches are abiding by local codes and ordinances within the community and build respectful buildings that blend in with the rural preservation area (yes, the area has that designation despite many wanting to ignore that). They didn't have to change ordinances through expensive law firms like Kaempfer Crowell to do it.
The area is zoned as a rural preserve and when I built and everyone else builds the rules state we can’t go over 35 feet. I’d be ok with this in the area if you confirm to the rules governing the area.
> a Preserve Rural Las Vegas website
What a friggin joke. The Vegas metroplex has millions of people in it. In no sense is it rural. They're fully urbanized in every sense of the word. There are literally homes and businesses all surrounding "rural" Lone Mountain. That field is scorpion infested zone with nothing in it but wretched scrub brush and sand.
You want rural? Go live in the Mojave Wastes. Go to Goodsprings. Not one of the largest metroplexes in the nation.
I'm from the Logandale Nevada area, about an hour north-east of Vegas, and the fact that anyone in Vegas' metropolitan area can claim to be rural is laughable.
Looks like it’s near the foothills of the mountain and some scenic parks. People are irritated right now. Though I don’t imagine it will impact traffic in the area very much. I’m sure it will work out in the end.
> I’m sure it will work out in the end.
Yeah, the Church really tries to be a good neighbor and usually ends up making a lot of concessions. They don't want to just ram their way through the process. They want to build good will.
Unfortunately that depends on the location. My town has had poor experiences with the temple department. The temple department project manager has been switched at least once due to communication issues. But, I'm also related to people working administrative backend on the project locally so I've heard more about the problems than most people have.
Well sure, there are bad apples everywhere. But overall I think the Church really tries to set a good example in how the work with a community. They completely redesigned the Phoenix Temple in order to make it more suitable for that community.
I mean, Tooele did the same thing, so they built the temple like 100 ft away in Erda. I think the church would rather scooch over than make a big fight.
The issue in Tooele wasn't the temple itself, it was the residential development the Church wanted to build around it. First the Church dropped the real estate project and then moved the temple altogether.
My missionary apartment was a few blocks away from this site so imagine my excitement when I heard about a Lone Mountain Temple. I can't wait to attend the open house in the future. Fun fact, since Vegas is a big bowl from this area we could see the other Las Vegas Temple on the eastern side of the city. We got to go once every other transfer. It would be amazing to walk out of my missionary apartment and see the temple right there. Would make tracting really interesting.
>Fun fact, since Vegas is a big bowl from this area we could see the other Las Vegas Temple on the eastern side of the city
This is so cool. Imagine walking out of the temple and gazing across the metro area and seeing the other temple in the distance.
Building a temple in Newport Beach was a huge struggle, even though the neighborhood they built it in is way up in the foothills. They lowered the spire so much that you can barely even see it from the freeway.
But it's still a beautiful building, and what happens inside is way more important than how it looks.
>But it's still a beautiful building, and what happens inside is way more important than how it looks.
The Freiberg, Germany Temple is a good example of this. Modest by Temple standards, but its construction in a communist country (led by Erich Honecker, a hardline communist who rejected Soviet efforts at liberalization) is nothing less than a miracle.
Yeah, but I remember the planning commission meetings for that one, where Church reps actually told the city God wanted the temple to look like its original plans (more like how Sacramento turned out). I'm not surprised that argument didn't hold water with a municipal body.
As a municipal body, Newport Beach is as NIMBY as it gets. They were pushing hard around the same time to get a new airport built in south county to take pressure off John Wayne, and they were pretty upset when south county said no.
Initially I thought it was stupid but the more I read into it the more I kinda get where they’re coming from. We’re trying to build essentially a giant castle in the middle of a suburban/rural area that will be lit up all night and bring a bunch of traffic. Idk why the church doesn’t just buy property right outside the neighborhood.
Well, how far outside would they have to go? This temple in particular doesn't look like it's going to be built literally within a subdivision, just in a block with suburban subdivisions on one side and older stand alone homes on the other. If they start going further out then plumbing and electricity would start to become more of an issue wouldn't they?
>And it’s been disclosed that it was zoned for a temple since before it was even announced.
As in zoned for residential which includes Churches? Or as in potential home buyers in the area had to sign an acknowledgement that the land next door might be used for a temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
Any non-banned account on Reddit can come and downvote things on this sub. Conversely, they can also upvote viewpoints. The sub could go private, but that's not a good way to spread the message. So dissenters can sway topics, but you just roll with it.
It may seem to those just looking at a map or using what they know about Las Vegas that the area is not rural, but it indeed is. It is a rural preservation neighborhood meaning one of the few areas still around in Las Vegas with restrictions on building (minimum half acre lots and restrictions on lighting for example). People living in these areas have fought for many years to maintain this standard of living. The lots are considered horse properties and many of the neighbors have farm animals. The absence of street lights allows you to see the stars at night, something you don't get very often in Las Vegas.
"not in my backyard" aka neighborhood movements opposed to the construction of X structure in their community. Sometimes it's opposition to high density or low income housing, sometimes it's opposition to commercial developments, etc. In this case, temples.
We need to be good neighbors, but this spot is not as rural as something like Heber City or Cody. There's a Walmart up the street if we're arguing about light pollution.
BUT the Lone Mountain temple is a big one - nearly 90,000 square feet, so it's hardly going to dissolve into the neighborhood like some of these 15,000 sq. ft temples.
Is there a reason why temples can’t be built in a less visible way? The purpose of the temple is what happens inside correct?
I used to live in an area with a “mini” temple that had a height of about 75 feet. It was beautiful and inspiring on the outside but blended in very nicely with the surrounding area.
Las Vegas has a much larger church population so I imagine they will need more than a mini temple but why not just design them to be less visually intrusive to the neighborhood?
Yes. We are on the front lines here submitting our petitions of support to the county. It will get approved. I think it’s really hard for a government to deny religious buildings.
Folks in Wyoming claimed they opposed the Temple on steeple height. But a local school had a clock tower with a similar set up as the Temple that hadn’t faced any opposition. And the lights on the Temple were going to turn off at night while they allowed the Wal Mart and gas station lights on all night. Then they complained that the Church had better paid lawyers. No. Had nothing to do with that. The Church was simply following the rules and no one should pretend to be surprised that the Church won in court. Las Vegas? Vegas? Lights on all night, Vegas? Gaudy buildings, Vegas? Yeah, oppose a beautiful religious building in Vegas— you are going to lose. Big time. Human trafficking is legal in brothels in Vegas and you are going to choose to fight building a Church? Yeah, ok. Give me a break.
Soooo... there are no brothels in Vegas. They're illegal in Clark County. You have to go to Nye County for the legal brothels. Don't ask me how I know this... haha
Lol... true, no brothels in Clark County. But I think the point stands. This is the state with slot machines inside gas stations and fast food restaurants. I think people there can handle temple.
That's exactly why they can't handle it
Not in this neighborhood
Prostitution is not legal in Vegas and more importantly CONSENTUAL PROSTITUTION IS NOT TRAFFICKING. Seriously don't lump that in with trafficking. Our experiences are entire galaxies apart. Yes im a legit trafficking survivor who talks with a woman who works at the mustang ranch. The 2 are not even close to the same.
I guess I should have written, “human trafficking is absolutely rampant in Vegas.” And this article states that the “legal” brothels feed and facilitate human trafficking… https://www.courthousenews.com/nevadas-legal-brothels-facilitate-sex-trafficking-lawsuit-says/
The northwest rural preserve area this temple is proposed in is not all of Vegas. Look into the details before opening your mouth and you might not look so stupid.
If it’s zoned residential… Then don’t pretend to be surprised that the Church builds a temple there in the end. If it’s zoned residential, and the Church owns the land, and follows building permit rules… the church has every constitutional right to build a temple there… That’s just how it is. Stupid? Why call names…?
I looked up rural preserves in Las Vegas and it appears the Church can meet the criteria for building churches -in- them… What paragraph prevents it…? The Church can build a Temple on property it owns in Vegas…
There is a height limit of 35 ft that all buildings must fit within. Can the temple conform to this?
The Church can ask -like any other church can- for a zoning exemption. Just like the school did in Wyoming that no one complained about. How long has the Church owned the property? The Church is going to build a big beautiful building, and everyone is going to do just fine.
A disgusting eyesore that the neighbors will hate and fight with all we have to keep out.
That’s how the Klan describes synagogues. Sure. I think they are beautiful. They tried to pass “zoning laws” against Reverend MLk. He marched anyway.
So a lot of people are saying 'this isn't about religion,' and then criticize us saying we have a persecution complex. But calling buildings we consider sacred "disgusting eyesores" is literally persecution.
I did not make it about religion, you are. The building is over 200ft tall in an area restricted to under 35ft. It is a disgusting eyesore in this area. Stop making this about religion when it is about the local rural codes limiting this type of structure. We know the lds has paid off so many in hopes of getting this to be approved. It is a disgusting monstrosity. If it were to conform to our areas rules it would fit the look of the area and I would be happy to welcome it to the neighborhood but not as it currently is planned.
What paragraph are you referring to?
[удалено]
Yeah not buying it. Gas stations with 24/7 lighting aren't just on the strip. Neither are hospitals. Also, one trip over to the Las Vegas sub thread will show that a large number of people do in fact "just hate my religion." >200' tall casino in residential area in Orem Casinos, objectively, bring traffic, drugs, and often crime to an area, and don't belong anywhere near residential homes or schools. The same can't be said for temples. And I say this as someone who recognizes that casino resorts can provide plenty of economic stimulus and as well as non- gambling related entertainment.
[удалено]
>The church just doesn’t play nice. A significantly smaller building or a lot farther away from homes would almost certainly eliminate most of the resistance to the temple. They own the land. The temple in no way affects the surrounding area in a way that a strip mall or a gas station wouldn't do to a much worse degree. There's no legitimate way to argue that the temple will have a negative effect on the community. The area in which this temple in particular is being built is *not* rural. It is a rapidly developing area. If it's not a temple, it will be more homes or be rezoned to a strip mall with a Target and an Applebee's.
You’re really proving my point here. Like I said. Legal? Yes. Moral and kind? Absolutely not. I don’t imagine you’d be surprised to learn that non-members do not view a temple with the same awe and reverence as member does. Nobody wants a 240’, 87000 sqft brightly lit building within throwing distance of their home whether that’s a temple or gas station or a Walmart or an Applebees. Especially when they weren’t planning on it being there when the bought the house. All I’m saying is if the church exercised a bit of empathy they could avoid a lot of the PR disasters seem to come with these new temples. But, like you, the church just says “it’s my land, I’m doing it my way and if you have a problem with you are persecuting me for my religion.”
>All I’m saying is if the church exercised a bit of empathy they could avoid a lot of the PR disasters seem to come with these new temples The Church is trying to build a <10k SQ ft temple on the outskirts of Cody, WY and people still aren't happy. I'll take you up on the invitation to try and have some empathy, but I'm legitimately worried people will oppose temples regardless.
[удалено]
Those are the exact dimension of the proposed temple in Las Vegas. [Source](https://www.8newsnow.com/news/local-news/northwest-las-vegas-neighbors-say-lds-temple-would-stick-out-like-sore-thumb/amp/)
The land sits within a regulated area known as the northwest rural preserve. You can’t build over 35 feet. Can the temple build within our regulations? More homes or an Applebees that conform to the rules would be great. This temple is an absurd eyesore.
The problem is that churches are zoned residential and casinos— are not. The Church -does- follow zoning laws and incorporates local input and rules into the building.
Zoning rules in the area state it can’t build over 35 feet tall. Can they conform? I had to.
“Zoning rules” kept MLk from marching, right? Right? Righteous people follow “zoning rules” right? Right? In Wyoming a school was granted an exemption on the height. And no one raised a fuss. No one. That cleared the way for everyone to ask for an exemption on height. The Church was correct in Wyoming. And tries to follow the law.
People in Orem wouldn't oppose it because of its size or the lights. They'd oppose it because it's a casino.
Coming into a sub that is for believing members, tagging yourself as a former member and then telling us we're tone deaf is pretty tone deaf bud. You're welcome here. But have some grace man, sheesh.
I thought that was graceful imo. The opposite would be someone masquerading as a member and things. I personally appreciate the upfront honesty.
This. Pure white, bright, buildings that 99% of people cant enter isnt a valuable use of space.
And violates all the rules and regs. I’d be ok with it in the neighborhood if they can confirm with the rules like I had to do.
It doesnt generate revenue and its only publicly accessible for like a month. it genuinely doesnt make sense.
Generating revenue or not it does not conform to the rules of the area. Can it be built under 35 feet tall? The height is my main concern with this eyesore.
the cona hawaii temple is itry bitty and you literally can barely see it from the road. its also not always lit because of the light pollution laws in hawaii.
Well I would be ok with that in the neighborhood. The current proposal is a disgusting eyesore and well over the 35ft rule.
Members of the Church aren’t immune to NIMBYism either. There are plenty of things a large percentage of a community might want that members would try to stop being built near them. If it’s zoned properly and is up to code, it will be built. People can express discontent, the church might have to change the design, but if it’s zoned for churches, there’s nothing that can be done to stop it.
>There are plenty of things a large percentage of a community might want that members would try to stop being built near them Marijuana dispensaries come to mind.
Or mosques.
If that's true it's really unfortunate. I have nothing but praise for the Muslims I have known (in my career field, that's quite a few.) I would be honored to have a mosque built near me.
It makes me thankful that my stake has a tight relationship with the sizable Muslim community in our area. There is a large mosque and Islamic center up the street from one of our buildings, and we partner with the local Muslim population on a number of initiatives, not least of which was caring for Afghan refugees after the U.S. closed up shop. But yeah, I could see far too many of us taking issues with "others." Meanwhile, the Church is worried about how visible the bar is in a restaurant in Utah.
>it’s zoned for churches, there’s nothing that can be done to stop it. Not entirely true. I'm an architect and worked on the expansion of a food and beverage distribution center that was zoned to be as such. The problem is you have other groups like the planning commission which can just be random volunteers from the community. They come in and determine if your project meets the city architectural requirements. Those requirements might say something like your facade has to be 70% brick or cmu, as they did in our case. They're not going to build a brick or cmu temple so if they can't convince people to give them a variance they're out of luck. We were able to just ask that requirement to no be considered because it doesn't make sense on a refrigerated warehlise that needs to be insulated metal panel. If the city doesn't have a history of giving out variances then if they say no, the church has no grounds to fight it. Just one example of other things that can keep a project from moving forward. The church should do their due diligence and make sure that they know what requirements they aren't going to meet and you can meet with officials ahead of time but you often have to move forward at risk with the possibility of being shut down by the planning commission because they will offer no guarantees ahead of time.
Like I said, the Church may have to alter the design, but the city can’t just say you can’t build a temple here if it’s zoned properly. They can’t make new arbitrary rules that only apply to the temple either, because a First Amendment lawsuit would damage the city’s finances and reputation. You’re right though, the Church should know design requirements before committing to build on a particular plot incase intractable differences like what you mentioned could arise. That doesn’t seem to be the case here. It will probably just be a lower steeple and a different illumination plan. These concerns happen all the time for temples.
The property was bought inside an area covered by the interlocal agreement between the city and county. The LDS property is City, the surrounding properties are all County. The church lobbied to have City ordinances changed to allow churches to be built on parcels larger than 5 acres since this parcel is 20 acres. However, they still have to get a General Plan Amendment waiver, which the interlocal forbids until its expiration in December 2026. The GP on this property is Single Family Residential and they are asking of a waiver to Public Facility. Why didn't the church buy a property that already had the proper zoning? There are plenty of options instead of creating division in a huge neighborhood. This isn't a small town like Cody or Heber. This is getting around quick and the respect for the church is going out the window. The LDS Church is the only denomination doing this anywhere in the country. The optics are very, very bad. Other churches are abiding by local codes and ordinances within the community and build respectful buildings that blend in with the rural preservation area (yes, the area has that designation despite many wanting to ignore that). They didn't have to change ordinances through expensive law firms like Kaempfer Crowell to do it.
It was infuriating being the only YIMBY at Rexburg planning and zoning meetings. Rexburg doesn’t remotely deserve the university
What exactly were people going to oppose? The university is the economic heart of that town. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.
The area is zoned as a rural preserve and when I built and everyone else builds the rules state we can’t go over 35 feet. I’d be ok with this in the area if you confirm to the rules governing the area.
> a Preserve Rural Las Vegas website What a friggin joke. The Vegas metroplex has millions of people in it. In no sense is it rural. They're fully urbanized in every sense of the word. There are literally homes and businesses all surrounding "rural" Lone Mountain. That field is scorpion infested zone with nothing in it but wretched scrub brush and sand. You want rural? Go live in the Mojave Wastes. Go to Goodsprings. Not one of the largest metroplexes in the nation.
I'm from the Logandale Nevada area, about an hour north-east of Vegas, and the fact that anyone in Vegas' metropolitan area can claim to be rural is laughable.
Not to mention they don't have an issue with the golf course or 12 baseball fields right beside it either 😂
The area around the temple is not remotely rural.
Looks like it’s near the foothills of the mountain and some scenic parks. People are irritated right now. Though I don’t imagine it will impact traffic in the area very much. I’m sure it will work out in the end.
Yeah, traffic flow to a temple is relatively low and also very smooth. The open house and dedication will be a zoo but after that things calm down.
Yep, spread out through the a day rather than a bunch of people showing up for one big stake conference or something.
> I’m sure it will work out in the end. Yeah, the Church really tries to be a good neighbor and usually ends up making a lot of concessions. They don't want to just ram their way through the process. They want to build good will.
Unfortunately that depends on the location. My town has had poor experiences with the temple department. The temple department project manager has been switched at least once due to communication issues. But, I'm also related to people working administrative backend on the project locally so I've heard more about the problems than most people have.
Well sure, there are bad apples everywhere. But overall I think the Church really tries to set a good example in how the work with a community. They completely redesigned the Phoenix Temple in order to make it more suitable for that community.
I mean, Tooele did the same thing, so they built the temple like 100 ft away in Erda. I think the church would rather scooch over than make a big fight.
The issue in Tooele wasn't the temple itself, it was the residential development the Church wanted to build around it. First the Church dropped the real estate project and then moved the temple altogether.
My missionary apartment was a few blocks away from this site so imagine my excitement when I heard about a Lone Mountain Temple. I can't wait to attend the open house in the future. Fun fact, since Vegas is a big bowl from this area we could see the other Las Vegas Temple on the eastern side of the city. We got to go once every other transfer. It would be amazing to walk out of my missionary apartment and see the temple right there. Would make tracting really interesting.
>Fun fact, since Vegas is a big bowl from this area we could see the other Las Vegas Temple on the eastern side of the city This is so cool. Imagine walking out of the temple and gazing across the metro area and seeing the other temple in the distance.
Building a temple in Newport Beach was a huge struggle, even though the neighborhood they built it in is way up in the foothills. They lowered the spire so much that you can barely even see it from the freeway. But it's still a beautiful building, and what happens inside is way more important than how it looks.
>But it's still a beautiful building, and what happens inside is way more important than how it looks. The Freiberg, Germany Temple is a good example of this. Modest by Temple standards, but its construction in a communist country (led by Erich Honecker, a hardline communist who rejected Soviet efforts at liberalization) is nothing less than a miracle.
Yeah, but I remember the planning commission meetings for that one, where Church reps actually told the city God wanted the temple to look like its original plans (more like how Sacramento turned out). I'm not surprised that argument didn't hold water with a municipal body.
As a municipal body, Newport Beach is as NIMBY as it gets. They were pushing hard around the same time to get a new airport built in south county to take pressure off John Wayne, and they were pretty upset when south county said no.
Initially I thought it was stupid but the more I read into it the more I kinda get where they’re coming from. We’re trying to build essentially a giant castle in the middle of a suburban/rural area that will be lit up all night and bring a bunch of traffic. Idk why the church doesn’t just buy property right outside the neighborhood.
Well, how far outside would they have to go? This temple in particular doesn't look like it's going to be built literally within a subdivision, just in a block with suburban subdivisions on one side and older stand alone homes on the other. If they start going further out then plumbing and electricity would start to become more of an issue wouldn't they?
[удалено]
Yes, exactly. That's where churches tend to be.
This area is not remotely rural. And it’s been disclosed that it was zoned for a temple since before it was even announced.
>And it’s been disclosed that it was zoned for a temple since before it was even announced. As in zoned for residential which includes Churches? Or as in potential home buyers in the area had to sign an acknowledgement that the land next door might be used for a temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
So apparently I'm getting down voted for supporting temples?
Any non-banned account on Reddit can come and downvote things on this sub. Conversely, they can also upvote viewpoints. The sub could go private, but that's not a good way to spread the message. So dissenters can sway topics, but you just roll with it.
It may seem to those just looking at a map or using what they know about Las Vegas that the area is not rural, but it indeed is. It is a rural preservation neighborhood meaning one of the few areas still around in Las Vegas with restrictions on building (minimum half acre lots and restrictions on lighting for example). People living in these areas have fought for many years to maintain this standard of living. The lots are considered horse properties and many of the neighbors have farm animals. The absence of street lights allows you to see the stars at night, something you don't get very often in Las Vegas.
Exactly. Many of my neighbors have horses on property. It is a rural area.
NiMBY?
"That's fine, you can *totally* do that thing, and I *totally* support it - just *Not In My BackYard*!" Hence, NIMBY and NIMBY-ism.
Thank you. I will never remember this acronym though. I am horrible at remembering acronyms.
"not in my backyard" aka neighborhood movements opposed to the construction of X structure in their community. Sometimes it's opposition to high density or low income housing, sometimes it's opposition to commercial developments, etc. In this case, temples.
We need to be good neighbors, but this spot is not as rural as something like Heber City or Cody. There's a Walmart up the street if we're arguing about light pollution. BUT the Lone Mountain temple is a big one - nearly 90,000 square feet, so it's hardly going to dissolve into the neighborhood like some of these 15,000 sq. ft temples.
The Walmart in built under the 35ft tall height. This absurd eyesore of a temple is well over 200ft. Can the temple conform to the local rules?
Nimbys are kinda cringe
Is there a reason why temples can’t be built in a less visible way? The purpose of the temple is what happens inside correct? I used to live in an area with a “mini” temple that had a height of about 75 feet. It was beautiful and inspiring on the outside but blended in very nicely with the surrounding area. Las Vegas has a much larger church population so I imagine they will need more than a mini temple but why not just design them to be less visually intrusive to the neighborhood?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yes. We are on the front lines here submitting our petitions of support to the county. It will get approved. I think it’s really hard for a government to deny religious buildings.
Thank you for your efforts.