The quote in the title for my newest article just published in The Sociological Quarterly comes from a comment made at a 2011 public hearing in the Chicago suburbs involving a proposal from a Muslim group to buy land. At face value, the claim is preposterous: what suburbanite living in a well-off suburb would want to live next to a trailer park?
My study titled ““Would Prefer a Trailer Park to a Large [Religious] Building”: Suburban Responses to Proposals for Religious Buildings” looks at what factors lead to more opposition from neighbors and local leaders when religious groups look to buy land, construct a building, or renovate/use an existing building. Is it related to the size of proposed building, the setting for the building, or the group making the request (thinking of multiple cases of Muslim groups facing opposition in the Chicago suburbs – see examples here, here, here, and here)?
The abstract to the study:
To worship in the suburbs, religious congregations often have to apply to local governments for zoning and building approval. Examining 40 proposals from religious groups in three Chicago suburbs between January 2010 and December 2014 shows that local governments approved the majority of requests. For the proposals that received more negative attention or “no” votes from government bodies, opposition was related to locations adjacent to residences, experiences with one local government, and requests from Muslim groups. These findings have implications for how suburbs address pluralism and new development as the application of zoning guidelines can make it more difficult for religious groups, particularly ones involving immigrants or racial/ethnic minorities, to find and establish a permanent presence in suburban communities.
In sum, religious groups in the United States can theoretically worship in many places – until a local government suggests otherwise, often due to zoning concerns. Religious groups can counter with the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) but lawsuits require time and effort and can hinder positive community relations.
Pingback: Seeing changes in suburbs through the presence of religious congregations | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Publication in Soc of Religion: “Religious Freedom and Local Conflict: Religious Buildings and Zoning Issues in the New York City Region,1992-2017” | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Approving a controversial suburban mosque proposal – with conditions | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Acknowledging that a building proposal from a religious group can lead to a “painful” process | Legally Sociable
Pingback: NIMBY concerns about affordable housing even when it is not adjacent to single-family homes | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Who benefits from preserving open space in the suburbs? | Legally Sociable
Pingback: Why might suburban residents oppose the sale of park district land to a church? Here are some reasons | Legally Sociable
Pingback: New mosque on 248th Avenue in Naperville almost complete after a long process | Legally Sociable