Jefferson church, residents differ on parking

Members of Jefferson First United Methodist Church appeared before the Jefferson City Council Monday night to appeal a recommendation by the historic preservation commission that planned new parking spaces be surfaced with grass pavers instead of pavement.

The council heard from a representative of the church, as well as area residents opposed to their appeal. No action was taken at the work session, but the item will be on the agenda when the city council meets at 6 p.m. on Monday, April 23, at the civic center.

“These spaces need to be replaced by suitable spaces that provide safe, level access to the church buildings for our elderly and disabled members and guests,” church representative Tim Cornelison wrote in a letter to the council. “The plastic grids overplanted with grass, in our opinion, are not a safe alternative for individuals utilizing a walker, a cane or crutches.”

Christy Johnson, chairman of the HPC, said the board felt the grass pavers would be “more in keeping with the historical character” of the Martin-Cooley Historic District.

Henry Johnson, a resident of the neighborhood, spoke in opposition to the church’s appeal.

“This church has pushed us, pushed us and pushed us,” he said. “We are tired of this. They don’t live in the neighborhood."

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 just curious on 04/11/12 at 09:14 PM [Reply]

How did the HPC get so much power? They aren't elected officials, are they? How can a nonelected body supersede the property rights of a church, or an individual for that matter?

#2 Do Not Forget on 04/12/12 at 07:31 AM [Reply]

Mr. Jonhson stated, "...They don’t live in the neighborhood." The last time I checked they actually DO live in the neighborhood. The Church IS located in the neighborhood. Their place in the community is no different than their neighbor, Mr. Johnson, or any other property owner that happens to reside there. Just because they do not lay their heads down and sleep at night in the neighborhood does not mean that they are not equals within the neighborhood.

#2.1 Concerned neighbor on 04/12/12 at 08:40 AM [Reply]

I hardly think that church members who live elsewhere would consider themselves "neighbors" of the people who live on Martin or Church Streets. Their concerns would be to further their own agenda related to the parking situation and not the effect that might have to the real neighbors who have to look at the changes ever single day and not just 2 hours on Sunday.

#3 "neighbor" on 04/17/12 at 02:20 PM [Reply]

It's not just 2 hrs on Sunday, there are people there all the time for different events. I live on Martin Street, parking for the church is needed desperately. You can't even get out of your own driveway most Sundays and when they have other events as well.

#4 keysfisherman on 04/18/12 at 10:14 AM [Reply]

The church could provide a shuttle for the members who are unable to walk to church. The rest of the congregation should park downtown and walk to the church. Unless they're too fat and lazy to walk.

#5 really on 04/18/12 at 02:43 PM [Reply]

it alway is weird how people buy homes in aareas where there are airports chuches concert venues etc, get them cheaper due to this then try to stop what nade them able to get the place at lower cost once they move in

#6 Old Reporter on 04/27/12 at 07:06 AM [Reply]

The church's property rights are not being usurped because it is expected to abide by the same Historic District rules that the homeowners must follow. Historic Districts maintain a town's flavor and improve/protect property values. Chambers of Commerce often brag (rightfully so) about historic districts along with great parks and great schools when convincing new business owners to bring their companies to a town.

When the city council overrules HPC--a fact not included in the online edition of the Herald--it broke state law. The state law that allows cities to have HPCs and historic districts forbids city councils from overruling HPC decisions unless it can be shown the HPC did not follow due process. The fact that council members feel like overruling and HPC for political or personal reasons is not a legal rationale permitted by law.

Sooner or later, Jefferson will get in trouble for this. I wish the Herald reported the council's failure to follow correct procedures in these HPC stories. The church put its needs ahead of those of the community and the historic district and the council aided and aberred their me-first shub, weakening the historic district concept for the region.

#6.1 as on 04/28/12 at 07:48 AM [Reply]

but it would be violating the americans with disabilites act, and how are platic pavers historic??? come on now by the way the ADA is to make sure both public and private area have access for the disabled. nothing in this seems under historic area of the city, wanting to put in new items is not historic.

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment: E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.

Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
Phone*

What is seven minus six?
: Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Jefferson church, residents differ on parking

JacksonHeraldTODAY

Jefferson church, residents differ on parking

Recent Stories

Recent Comments

This Week's Poll

Sister Sites

Archives

Community

Keyword Tags