Permit Denied for McKinney Temple

[Tacenda]

Sorry to use this thread but back when it was in discussion with the Cody, Wyoming temple I had started following them on FB and the recent posts say the church is already starting to develop the land for the temple and it's not even been approved yet. Does this seem right to anyone? 

Here's the last couple of posts:

12/2/24

As the power has been in and out on the west side of Cody affecting residents, Livingston Elementary, Walmart, and many more, the City of Cody electrical department has been working feverishly all morning on the LDS temple site. They are still on site now at 11:25am.

About two weeks ago, there was a planned power outage for neighbors near the temple site, at which time new power lines appeared to be installed into the temple site.

Keep in mind, this site will require 1200 amp of service, 6x larger than a typical house. . .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11/24/24 UPDATE

Early September, 2024:

POCN appealed the District Court’s Aug 26th temple decision to the Wyoming Supreme Court (WSC), which accepted the case.

11/11/24:

POCN filed its first brief to the WSC. You can read it here:

https://preserveourcodyneighborhoods.org/legal

Going forward:

LDS will have 45 days to respond to the 11/11/24 brief, and POCN will have another 30 days for our final response brief. The WSC hearing will be scheduled in the following months and continued until the WSC completes its review. A decision is unlikely to be rendered until the summer of 2025.

In the meantime:

LDS contractors continue to move forward with construction, entirely at their own risk and peril, despite LDS contractor Haskel stating to a City of Cody official they would “….hold off on any activity on the Cody Temple project while court proceedings continue.”

We encourage you to review the 2024-11-11 POCN Appellants Brief on our Preserve Our Cody Neighborhoods website under the following link:

https://preserveourcodyneighborhoods.org/legal

[bluebell]

13 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Sorry to use this thread but back when it was in discussion with the Cody, Wyoming temple I had started following them on FB and the recent posts say the church is already starting to develop the land for the temple and it's not even been approved yet. Does this seem right to anyone? 

Here's the last couple of posts:

12/2/24

As the power has been in and out on the west side of Cody affecting residents, Livingston Elementary, Walmart, and many more, the City of Cody electrical department has been working feverishly all morning on the LDS temple site. They are still on site now at 11:25am.

About two weeks ago, there was a planned power outage for neighbors near the temple site, at which time new power lines appeared to be installed into the temple site.

Keep in mind, this site will require 1200 amp of service, 6x larger than a typical house. . .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11/24/24 UPDATE

Early September, 2024:

POCN appealed the District Court’s Aug 26th temple decision to the Wyoming Supreme Court (WSC), which accepted the case.

11/11/24:

POCN filed its first brief to the WSC. You can read it here:

https://preserveourcodyneighborhoods.org/legal

Going forward:

LDS will have 45 days to respond to the 11/11/24 brief, and POCN will have another 30 days for our final response brief. The WSC hearing will be scheduled in the following months and continued until the WSC completes its review. A decision is unlikely to be rendered until the summer of 2025.

In the meantime:

LDS contractors continue to move forward with construction, entirely at their own risk and peril, despite LDS contractor Haskel stating to a City of Cody official they would “….hold off on any activity on the Cody Temple project while court proceedings continue.”

We encourage you to review the 2024-11-11 POCN Appellants Brief on our Preserve Our Cody Neighborhoods website under the following link:

https://preserveourcodyneighborhoods.org/legal

I mentioned this on the thread specifically for the Cody temple.  I think it's a little odd that they are moving forward, but technically they got the all clear back in september so they aren't doing anything wrong, just taking a bit of a gamble.  They must feel pretty good about their odds of winning.

And to the power outage, that is just dumb.  The power went out yesterday three times.  Are they trying to say that the city of cody was at the temple site yesterday, on a Sunday?  From 10 am until 5 at night?  The power was down across the entire town (I only know that because I actually called the sheriff dispatch to see what was up--since the power is provided by the actual city of cody, the sheriff is their emergency number to call during outages).  The city has been working feverishly all over town trying to get the power restored.  They had cops at all the intersections with traffic lights, and you could see them at different transformers throughout the city.  They were even in my alley for a while (we didn't get power back until around 2 today and I think our area might have been one of the last to get it restored).

I just checked their facebook group and the city actually put out an alert explaining what caused the power outage, but these geniuses who are 'only concerned about the lighting and have nothing against the church' can't be bothered with it.

 This kind of stuff is why I don't believe that group when they repeatedly say that their issues have nothing to do with the church and it's just about the roadwear and lighting.  Yeah, trying to spin a city-wide power outage as the result of temple construction really shows their true colors.  

Yep, very unbiased.  

[Amulek]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

It can’t be worse than the Boise Idaho temple. That building looks like a Stake center. 

Dallas is basically the exact same design as Boise.

And while I've never found it to be architecturally inspiring, my daughter actually loves it and wants to get married there someday.

 

[Amulek]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

[R]ecent posts say the church is already starting to develop the land for the temple and it's not even been approved yet. Does this seem right to anyone? 

My understanding is that the city has approved it, and the litigation being referenced in the posts is from a group of private citizens - not the town itself - so I think the church is in pretty good shape here.

 

[bluebell]

12 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Dallas is basically the exact same design as Boise.

And while I've never found it to be architecturally inspiring, my daughter actually loves it and wants to get married there someday.

 

That's good, I'm sincerely glad that the design has its cheerleaders.  It is not my cup of tea but that's ok.

The ogden temple used to look like the Provo temple (before they basically tore it down) and I have a friend who was SO sad when they redid it because she had been married in the old one.  I don't see the appeal of that space ship design but some people really loved it.

[bluebell]

8 minutes ago, Amulek said:

My understanding is that the city has approved it, and the litigation being referenced in the posts is from a group of private citizens - not the town itself - so I think the church is in pretty good shape here.

 

The private group appealed the city's decision and tried to get the church blocked from beginning construction until the appeal process was complete but a judge denied that request in February.  Technically the church had the right to begin construction then but decided to hold off until the appeal was decided on. In august the judge went in the church's favor and it was basically at that point that the church decided to move forward.

The group is upset that the church has begun construction and there are lots of negative comments about it on that facebook page (the page that's not biased against the church) but the church isn't doing anything wrong.

[bluebell]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Sorry to use this thread but back when it was in discussion with the Cody, Wyoming temple I had started following them on FB and the recent posts say the church is already starting to develop the land for the temple and it's not even been approved yet. Does this seem right to anyone? 

Here's the last couple of posts:

12/2/24

As the power has been in and out on the west side of Cody affecting residents, Livingston Elementary, Walmart, and many more, the City of Cody electrical department has been working feverishly all morning on the LDS temple site. They are still on site now at 11:25am.

About two weeks ago, there was a planned power outage for neighbors near the temple site, at which time new power lines appeared to be installed into the temple site.

Keep in mind, this site will require 1200 amp of service, 6x larger than a typical house. . .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11/24/24 UPDATE

Early September, 2024:

POCN appealed the District Court’s Aug 26th temple decision to the Wyoming Supreme Court (WSC), which accepted the case.

11/11/24:

POCN filed its first brief to the WSC. You can read it here:

https://preserveourcodyneighborhoods.org/legal

Going forward:

LDS will have 45 days to respond to the 11/11/24 brief, and POCN will have another 30 days for our final response brief. The WSC hearing will be scheduled in the following months and continued until the WSC completes its review. A decision is unlikely to be rendered until the summer of 2025.

In the meantime:

LDS contractors continue to move forward with construction, entirely at their own risk and peril, despite LDS contractor Haskel stating to a City of Cody official they would “….hold off on any activity on the Cody Temple project while court proceedings continue.”

We encourage you to review the 2024-11-11 POCN Appellants Brief on our Preserve Our Cody Neighborhoods website under the following link:

https://preserveourcodyneighborhoods.org/legal

https://cowboystatedaily.com/2024/12/02/bird-not-controversial-new-lds-temple-to-blame-for-cody-power-outages/?fbclid=IwY2xjawG7Sh1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHUXDYmIslOvIxDcOTmJrOrSG5w-a50hGMPD4aKD51nWpDwOUbouTOtKLqw_aem__eMUnXi03WdZVwBnoFtjNg

The accusation was so outlandish that it actually made a state newspaper out of a completely different city.

Edited December 3, 2024 by bluebell

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

https://cowboystatedaily.com/2024/12/02/bird-not-controversial-new-lds-temple-to-blame-for-cody-power-outages/?fbclid=IwY2xjawG7Sh1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHUXDYmIslOvIxDcOTmJrOrSG5w-a50hGMPD4aKD51nWpDwOUbouTOtKLqw_aem__eMUnXi03WdZVwBnoFtjNg

The accusation was so outlandish that it actually made a state newspaper out of a completely different city.

Thanks for...the rest of the story! 

[Amulek]

Back to Fairview, I won't be able to attend the Town Council meeting tonight - I'll be at my kiddos winter orchestra concert instead.

However, I don't see anything on the agenda tonight pertaining to the temple project, so unless it is commented on by private citizens during the open comment section I don't imagine there will be much there. The agenda has a link to the live broadcast of the meeting tonight @ 7:30 PM Central if anyone is so overwhelmed with curiosity that they are willing to listen in and see if anything comes up.

[bluebell]

11 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks for...the rest of the story! 

Sadly, whoever posts for that group has doubled down on it actually being the temple and not a bird, making it a conspiracy theory the city of Cody (which has not been very welcoming of the temple either) is creating to protect the church.

The hopeful part of this is that the wacko-ness of these posts will showcase how disconnected from reality that group actually is.

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Amulek said:

Back to Fairview, I won't be able to attend the Town Council meeting tonight - I'll be at my kiddos winter orchestra concert instead.

However, I don't see anything on the agenda tonight pertaining to the temple project, so unless it is commented on by private citizens during the open comment section I don't imagine there will be much there. The agenda has a link to the live broadcast of the meeting tonight @ 7:30 PM Central if anyone is so overwhelmed with curiosity that they are willing to listen in and see if anything comes up.

Let us know if you find out anything new.  I've appreciated you keeping us updated.

[ZealouslyStriving]

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/faith/2024/12/04/fairview-residents-speak-out-against-temple-compromise-with-church-of-latter-day-saints/

** Surprise, surprise, surprise.

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/faith/2024/12/04/fairview-residents-speak-out-against-temple-compromise-with-church-of-latter-day-saints/

** Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Paywall, dang it. What's the surprise, non surprise about?

[Calm]

Quote

Comments from Fairview residents at Tuesday’s Town Council meeting show the fight is far from over. While some were grateful the town negotiated the church’s requested temple down, opposition in green “Fairview United” T-shirts expressed dissatisfaction with the concessions made under threat of a lawsuit from the church, according to town officials.

“I thought y’all were going to be a hero, not only for the residents of Fairview, but for others who have been trampled on by the LDS,” said Fairview resident Alycia Kuehne to the Town Council at Tuesday’s meeting. “Y’all were so fearful about a lawsuit. I say, bring it.”…

After mediation, the council’s next step was to hear public feedback. Fairview’s town hall filled with close to 60 people Tuesday night to discuss the compromise, including members of the opposition group “Fairview United,” church representatives and church members.

Over an hour, more than a dozen spoke out against the proposed compromise. Church representatives did not speak publicly in the discussion.

Many expressed concerns the structure is still too tall at 120 feet and asked why the church wouldn’t consider building in a commercial area. Several people asked the council not to end negotiations at this settlement, which is non-binding.

Residents also expressed concerns that allowing a tall building would set a precedent for other religious institutions ignore the town’s zoning laws in the name of religious freedom….

“We need to defend ourselves against this Goliath,” Fairview resident Richard Hevey said at Tuesday’s meeting. “We have rules. They need to live by them. We do, they need to, and if they don’t like it, we’ll go to court. I think we can win.”

The Town Council did not take any action Tuesday night but expects to hear the church’s new proposal in the spring.

Lessner said after the meeting the negotiation is “just the first inning.” He hopes the church leaders heard residents' concerns and will keep them in mind when they come to the town’s planning and zoning committee next year.

“To be good neighbors, they need to come in and do something that’s acceptable to the town without us operating under the threat of a major lawsuit,” Lessner said. “I don’t think it’s over yet. ... It’s kind of in their court to make a change. We will see.”

 

Some paywalls still allow you to read if you use the “show reader” option.  This one lets me.  Doesn’t work on my phone, but will for my tablet.  If you don’t know that option, it used to be in the AA icon menu on the left end of the url address bar.  Now it is a rectangle with two lines of different lengths under it.

Edited December 6, 2024 by Calm

[Amulek]

Unsurprisingly, some are still not content with the project, despite the concessions agreed upon by both sides during the recent nonbinding arbitration.

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/faith/2024/12/21/fairview-choir-sings-out-against-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-temple/

 

I'm not sure that "dozens" are going to be enough to move the needle here.

I think local officials were willing to roll the dice in court over the original design, but that was back when the proposed building would have been the largest thing in town.

However, now that the church has come back with a design that puts the building height in compliance with the town's existing code and is only looking for a variance on the architectural piece - one that is smaller than variances that have been granted for other structures previously - I think the Town Council knows they would get creamed in court. And if that happens, there is the possibility the court could allow the Church to proceed with its original design. I don't think they are going to take that risk, but the story's not over yet. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[webbles]

Looks like a legal fight might actually happen - https://www.deseret.com/faith/2025/01/27/church-fairview-town-mckinney-texas-temple-rluipa/.  The article says that the town appears to be walking back their agreement.  They want more changes.

[Nofear]

Another article on the subject.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/faith/2025/01/27/church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-to-sue-fairview-over-temple-dispute/

[Vanguard]

On 1/28/2025 at 9:08 AM, webbles said:

Looks like a legal fight might actually happen - https://www.deseret.com/faith/2025/01/27/church-fairview-town-mckinney-texas-temple-rluipa/.  The article says that the town appears to be walking back their agreement.  They want more changes.

The article reports Church representatives stating - "The Fairview side of the road is known as 'church row' because four churches in a row line the street." I believe the street this quote references is 'Stacy Road' (the temple would be on this road) though I cannot find four churches in a row on it - not even three. Further east on Stacy Road at the juncture with Country Club Road you'll find a cluster of at least four churches on both sides of Country Club Road though only one could be legitimately considered off of Stacy Rd. I wonder what the Church representative meant by the quote?

[bluebell]

45 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

The article reports Church representatives stating - "The Fairview side of the road is known as 'church row' because four churches in a row line the street." I believe the street this quote references is 'Stacy Road' (the temple would be on this road) though I cannot find four churches in a row on it - not even three. Further east on Stacy Road at the juncture with Country Club Road you'll find a cluster of at least four churches on both sides of Country Club Road though only one could be legitimately considered off of Stacy Rd. I wonder what the Church representative meant by the quote?

Maybe @Amulek would know. 

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, Vanguard said:

The article reports Church representatives stating - "The Fairview side of the road is known as 'church row' because four churches in a row line the street." I believe the street this quote references is 'Stacy Road' (the temple would be on this road) though I cannot find four churches in a row on it - not even three. Further east on Stacy Road at the juncture with Country Club Road you'll find a cluster of at least four churches on both sides of Country Club Road though only one could be legitimately considered off of Stacy Rd. I wonder what the Church representative meant by the quote?

If they're the ones I can find on google maps, i wouldn't say they're in a row. THere's for that I can see, 2 and 2 rather than completely connected. There's also a huge outlet/mall/commercial area all of a 3 minute drive from there. Stacy Rd is a main drag that Is by no means a quiet rural plot. I would say the LDS church and the adjacent temple lot is at the tail edge of the busiest part of Stacy. And all of the churches I could see on the map were definitely in more residential areas. That's pretty common for the area. I lived behind a massive catholic church 5 minutes away from the lot and most churches that I could think of neighbored main roads and neighborhoods. 

 

It's been a while since I've been down there. Last trip was a little over 2 years ago to visit my fam that still lives in the area. But it's not about to get quieter. The main point of that paragraph is still very accurate for the area. 

 

[webbles]

5 hours ago, Vanguard said:

The article reports Church representatives stating - "The Fairview side of the road is known as 'church row' because four churches in a row line the street." I believe the street this quote references is 'Stacy Road' (the temple would be on this road) though I cannot find four churches in a row on it - not even three. Further east on Stacy Road at the juncture with Country Club Road you'll find a cluster of at least four churches on both sides of Country Club Road though only one could be legitimately considered off of Stacy Rd. I wonder what the Church representative meant by the quote?

I think the article is getting it from https://mckinneytexastemple.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Member-Fact-Sheet-v2.pdf which says "The temple site in Fairview along Stacy Rd., is known as “church row,” and will have four houses of worship."  And I think the 4 houses of worship mentioned there are talking about the future 4 church buildings (since it says "will").  Where the temple is going, there are already two church buildings to the west and another one is planned to be built in the lot directly east of the temple.  So, once the temple and the other church is built, there will be 4 in a row.

[Amulek]

On 1/29/2025 at 3:12 PM, bluebell said:

Maybe @Amulek would know. 

Been gone from the board for a while (slammed with work), but yes, there will eventually be four churches right next to each other, all in a row. 

Going from east-to-west you've got:

1. Chase Oaks Church - Sloan Creek Campus (already built)
2. Fairview LDS meetinghouse (also already built)
3. McKinney Texas Temple (currently in dispute, but will ultimately be built)
4. Twin Creeks Church of Christ (also not yet built; anticipating permit process to begin later in the year)

The 'church row' moniker came about from the town's refusal to budge on letting any type of business expand that far from the commercial district, coupled with the impracticality of there being enough space for residential construction to be profitable, so people kind of just assumed you would ultimately end up with churches, schools, or something similar. Once a couple of plots were used for churches, the 'church row' name started to gain some traction. I suppose it could have just as easily been 'Montessori row' if the demographics leaned more that direction around here.

 

[longview]

3 hours ago, Amulek said:

The 'church row' moniker came about from the town's refusal to budge on letting any type of business expand that far from the commercial district, coupled with the impracticality of there being enough space for residential construction to be profitable,

How far are the four churches set back from Stacy Rd.? Will the temple be set further back than the other three? Does not the community care that the temple will have beautiful landscaping that will almost conceal cars/parking lot?

[Amulek]

On 2/3/2025 at 10:27 PM, longview said:

How far are the four churches set back from Stacy Rd.? Will the temple be set further back than the other three? 

Chase Oaks is is about 120' away from the road, and the meetinghouse is more like 105'.  Twin Creeks hasn't even started the planning process, so there's no way of knowing what they plan on doing just yet.

I would have to go lookup the earlier renderings to try and find an exact number, but I know the plan was for it to be set further back from Stacy Rd. than the meetinghouse, while still more than exceeding the setback requirement with respect to the residential neighborhood to the north. 

 

On 2/3/2025 at 10:27 PM, longview said:

Does not the community care that the temple will have beautiful landscaping that will almost conceal cars/parking lot?

Perhaps - just not more than they care about the size or height.

 

[The Nehor]

On 12/23/2024 at 4:02 PM, Amulek said:

I'm not sure that "dozens" are going to be enough to move the needle here.