If they are concerned about an increase in traffic, then they should support more public transit for the neighborhood so that cars won’t overflow the area once this temple is built.
There are always NIMBYs whining about anything. Guess what, sir: Just because you moved there 40 years ago doesn't mean you're entitled to it staying like that forever.
I live in the vicinity of Toledo Ohio where there was a similar situation a few years back. A Buddhist Sangha had been using a rented business space, but outgrew it, so they purchased land in a residential neighborhood and planned to build a temple. Of course, here came the neighbors, it will bring traffic, disrupt the neighborhood, I didn't buy a house here to live by a temple, blah blah. Permits were approved and they moved in a year ago. There is on site parking, it is quiet (been there once), but one significant difference. In the event on property parking isn't enough, the nearby University of Toledo allows use of one of their lots on weekends. Typical NIMBY behavior whenever anyone wants to build or open anything
It's very very small congregation and adds a "scenic retreat" ambiance to the area. Would probably add to the property values over time. Sometimes neighborhood groups can become so closed to everything reasonable including beautiful ideas such as this. With this type of uncompromising behavior over small changes, this can lead to a developing negative perception of their intentions. I think they are going to be regretful when Sacramento starts disregarding their opinions entirely and forces major changes. This includes rezoning for much high density in the area. Nobody will feel bad for this homeowner group then because of how they are behaving now. This guy has seen the value of his place in increase nearly 15 to 20 times over the last 40 years. Free money buddy. Don't be so ugly and greedy towards others.
I agree with changing communities for its need, but let’s be honest: making changes to the city is not something that’s possible, even on abandoned, dilapidated land that no one ever uses. Try to make a change to your own land, and go to city or county, they will outright deny your request. Clearly they are a well off billionaire husband and wife, I’m sure they used their influence (and money) to convince the city council members it was a very good idea. I’ve talked to a council member in the past, they don’t really want to talk to you unless you have a significant project.
I honestly don’t think that the neighbors are protesting the fact that a Buddhist temple, in particular, is being built. What they are protesting is the building of any building, religious or not, that is being built in a seemingly residential area. I think they would equally protest if a church, synagogue, mosque, or any other house of worship, were to built in their residential spaces. The amount of visitors and traffic that their area would receive would be horrible. If the owners who want to built the property are billionaires then why not buy a more adequate space that can accommodate to an influx of people who will come in for worship and for those who might come to simply visit?
There are only few Buddhist holidays in a year, traffic issues shouldn't be a problem at all. Billionaire could've bought land elsewhere, but members who cannot drive will face obstacles. Most members lived in the city, so they want the temple within their neighborhood.
I have lived all over the world and very early in my adult years I chose to practice Buddhism. One of the reasons was I couldn’t be a part of physical churches, owning land, tax exempt etc. It has been heartbreaking to watch golden shrines to Buddha rising in Asia, mainly to draw tourism. To see these proposed plans is the antithesis of the Buddhist beliefs I subscribe to.
Buddhist meditation SAVED me from depression!
I rather have a temple than have low income housing with homeless and mental health. Let’s trade!
imagine thinking monks are noisy.
Monks are chanting inside the temple, not outside.
If they are concerned about an increase in traffic, then they should support more public transit for the neighborhood so that cars won’t overflow the area once this temple is built.
There are always NIMBYs whining about anything. Guess what, sir: Just because you moved there 40 years ago doesn't mean you're entitled to it staying like that forever.
Khmer build temple similar in CAMBODIA 🇰🇭 good job CAMBODIAN 👍
Budist Temple,
Too Much Noise ~ you got to be Quaking Me......
It's better than church bell and choir singing caused frustration🤫
I agree with this.
I live in the vicinity of Toledo Ohio where there was a similar situation a few years back. A Buddhist Sangha had been using a rented business space, but outgrew it, so they purchased land in a residential neighborhood and planned to build a temple. Of course, here came the neighbors, it will bring traffic, disrupt the neighborhood, I didn't buy a house here to live by a temple, blah blah. Permits were approved and they moved in a year ago. There is on site parking, it is quiet (been there once), but one significant difference. In the event on property parking isn't enough, the nearby University of Toledo allows use of one of their lots on weekends. Typical NIMBY behavior whenever anyone wants to build or open anything
city should put Safe injection site or drug rehabilitation center here, then the neighbors would gather to pay for the monks to move in
It's very very small congregation and adds a "scenic retreat" ambiance to the area. Would probably add to the property values over time. Sometimes neighborhood groups can become so closed to everything reasonable including beautiful ideas such as this. With this type of uncompromising behavior over small changes, this can lead to a developing negative perception of their intentions. I think they are going to be regretful when Sacramento starts disregarding their opinions entirely and forces major changes. This includes rezoning for much high density in the area. Nobody will feel bad for this homeowner group then because of how they are behaving now. This guy has seen the value of his place in increase nearly 15 to 20 times over the last 40 years. Free money buddy. Don't be so ugly and greedy towards others.
If they can afford it...They should move outside of the city zone with little to no neighbor in order to limit the traffic to a minimal.
Make sense in a way, but too far from the city could posed problems for people who can't drive, language barriers, and confronted with animals etc.
How about a park land preserve instead? Assessor offers tax relief and city needs green parks, not more buildings
maybe we can tear down the countless churches for a park?
Homeless would have tents on the land if it became a park.
Just what the community needs…another tax exempt religious organization.
I agree with changing communities for its need, but let’s be honest: making changes to the city is not something that’s possible, even on abandoned, dilapidated land that no one ever uses. Try to make a change to your own land, and go to city or county, they will outright deny your request. Clearly they are a well off billionaire husband and wife, I’m sure they used their influence (and money) to convince the city council members it was a very good idea. I’ve talked to a council member in the past, they don’t really want to talk to you unless you have a significant project.
The temple builted to close to the neighbors. If they are rich why they don't built temple far away from people houses🙁
Nobody drive too far into the mountain. City is where people lived, so building the temple is necessary to serve Buddhist.
lovely
I honestly don’t think that the neighbors are protesting the fact that a Buddhist temple, in particular, is being built. What they are protesting is the building of any building, religious or not, that is being built in a seemingly residential area.
I think they would equally protest if a church, synagogue, mosque, or any other house of worship, were to built in their residential spaces. The amount of visitors and traffic that their area would receive would be horrible.
If the owners who want to built the property are billionaires then why not buy a more adequate space that can accommodate to an influx of people who will come in for worship and for those who might come to simply visit?
There are only few Buddhist holidays in a year, traffic issues shouldn't be a problem at all. Billionaire could've bought land elsewhere, but members who cannot drive will face obstacles. Most members lived in the city, so they want the temple within their neighborhood.
I have lived all over the world and very early in my adult years I chose to practice Buddhism. One of the reasons was I couldn’t be a part of physical churches, owning land, tax exempt etc. It has been heartbreaking to watch golden shrines to Buddha rising in Asia, mainly to draw tourism. To see these proposed plans is the antithesis of the Buddhist beliefs I subscribe to.
Well then don't go to this temple, Karen.
Where will they put the illegal slot machines?
So you can join the fun 🤪
I am afraid they are gonna take Jesus out of the neighborhood
Are you kidding? Jesus is always around, doing your yard work.
yeah ... no that water stain in your bathroom isn't Mary...didn't mean to hurt your feeling.
Jesus long been gone to heaven, so he is doing fine.