Neighbors had steeled themselves for a vigorous debate on a church expansion proposal Thursday night, but the issue was defused when the church withdrew its special use request.
Bradley-Epworth United Methodist Church, 1314 W. Columbia Terrace, has been acquiring property for the past few years. They purchased 1215 N. University St., adjacent to the church, in September 2004, and in 2005 got a special use permit to house its student ministries there. Since then, the church has purchased two more homes on University (1205 and 1207) and the house at 1216 N. Elmwood, which is also adjacent to the church. They currently use the homes at 1205 and 1207 University as rental property. The Elmwood house is vacant.
The stated long-range plan was to acquire up to ten properties, leave the houses intact, but use them for ministry purposes, such as a 24-hour house of prayer, a coffee shop, etc. They would also pave the back yards of the properties to provide additional parking for the church.
Church officials recently requested a special use permit for the Elmwood property to use the house for church offices.
The church is located in the Uplands neighborhood. The Uplands Residential Association voted in favor of the church’s special use request in June 2007. However, several URA members — including several Elmwood Ave. residents — complained that they were not informed a vote was going to be taken on the special use request at that meeting. Only nine people attended the June 2007 meeting.
The issue was on the agenda again Thursday because the one of the intended uses of the property was to house guest speakers overnight in one of the bedrooms of the Elmwood house. That use was not approved at the June 2007 meeting because it wasn’t presented as part of the special use request. Church and URA officials mistakenly believed that overnight stays would not have to be specified in the special use request since the house is already zoned residential. When they found out that all uses had to be specified, URA officials brought it back to the Association for a vote.
But the vote never happened.
Jerry Jackson, Second VP of the Association and chairman of the Associations’ Zoning and Land Use Committee, read a short e-mail from Bradley-Epworth pastor Tom Eckhardt. Here’s the e-mail, reprinted in its entirety:
Jerry [Jackson] and Bernie [Goitein, URA President],
I wanted to let you know that Bradley Epworth Church is withdrawing its request to the city for special use zoning of the property at 1216 N. Elmwood. In addition, we no longer plan to use our properties currently zoned as residential for any purpose other than residential, specifically that there will be no effort on our part to put in parking for the church behind the University properties or anywhere else.
Tom Eckhardt
Pastor, Bradley Epworth Church
Jackson also stated that it was his understanding the church would be divesting themselves of the properties at 1205 and 1207 N. University, and that the church is looking for an alternative site to hold their largest worship service.
No reason for the change in plans was given.
Several Elmwood Ave. residents published an article in the neighborhood newsletter, The Uplander, outlining their concerns about the church’s recent acquisitions and expansion plans. It’s unknown whether the article’s publication prompted the church to reconsider its special use request.
After the e-mail was read, several members in attendance indicated they felt this was a positive development for the neighborhood. However, one couple that spoke at the meeting thought it was a negative, saying they were worried that the houses on University would fall into the hands of a slumlord. If that happened, they said it would negatively affect their property, since they live across the alley from those houses.
Upland residents, be careful what you wish for. Churches are not that bad of neighbor and those people are right, the houses will probably end up in the hands of slumloards. What homeowner is going to want to buy facing University in that area? If the church ends up relocating then who knows what you could end up with on that corner.
Peoriafan —
Believe me, this is not an easy decision for Uplanders. But in the end, many of us feel that the fewer parcels they acquire and combine, the better it is for our neighborhood. Originally (1953), the church sat on a single or double lot on Columbia Terrace. Then they demolished the house on the corner and built an education wing (’60s). Then they started buying houses on the rest of the block (from Elmwood to University) starting in 1973. Then they let those houses run down until they were so bad, they lost HUD funding and were cited with code violations by the city. The church decided to raze the houses and put in a parking lot in 1985. It was definitely not a good neighbor back then.
Since then, however, there’s been a change in leadership, and they have actually been good neighbors. They bought the houses on University and did some fixing up, and kept noise and litter down in the houses that they rent out.
I have no animosity toward the church and understand their desire to grow and minister to more people. And I’m appreciative that the church has tried to think through the neighborhood’s objections and try to compromise by buying houses and fixing them up to maintain the appearance of a row of single-family homes, rather than tearing them down and building another building expansion or something. However, my concerns and those of many of my neighbors are these:
One, pastors get reassigned and church boards come and go; if the church assembles and combines a large number of parcels, the vision for that land could change in 10-20 years. Setting aside the past landlord issues, the church started buying properties on Columbia Terrace in the early 70s, and it wasn’t until the mid-80s (just a few years after a new pastor – Dr. Batz – was assigned, incidentally) that they razed them for a parking lot. So while everyone may trust the current pastor and board to keep their word, their word doesn’t bind future boards or pastors who may have a different vision. That makes a number of neighbors feel vulnerable.
Secondly, along with that fear is the worry that eventually the church may decide — whether they’re allowed to expand at this location or not — to move, in which case they would sell their property. If their assembled parcels are large enough, it’s very likely that a developer would buy it in order to put a commercial venture on that corner (e.g., Walgreens). If the church didn’t have so many parcels combined, that threat would be lessened.
Finally, the neighborhood’s vision for the Uplands, as stated in the URA’s bylaws, is to “retain[] the original vision of The Uplands as a single-family residential neighborhood.” That is, the homes should not just appear to be single-family homes, but actually be used and function as such. Thus, it seems as though the church’s vision and the neighborhood’s vision are at odds with each other.
I could go on and on (and have already!), but I just want you to know that we’re not having a knee-jerk reaction to this issue. There’s a history, and residents have had a long time to think about what we want the future of the neighborhood to be. We don’t want to see more encroachment. We have to deal with landlords and their properties every day — that’s nothing new. We know how to handle problem situations through the appropriate channels. To trade short-term security for long-term vulnerability is a poor trade-off.
The horrors! A church or business wants to expand.