Laserfiche WebLink
not been made. In Rarrison the First Baptist ChUrch of <br /> Greensboro, like the First Baptist Church. of Concord, used the <br /> lof for outdoor meetings. <br /> <br /> In Harrison the Supreme Court used the following words to <br /> address the question of proximity of the subject land to the <br /> church's buildings. <br /> <br /> What is meant by adjacent land? Webster, in defining <br /> the word "adjacent" says: 'Objects are adjacent when <br /> they lie close to each other, but not necessarily in <br /> actual contact; as adjacent fields, villages.' When <br /> given this ordinary meaning, adjacent land which' is <br /> reasonable necessary for the convenient use of the <br /> building wholly and exclusively for religous purposes <br /> must lie close to, but not necessarily in contact with <br /> the land on which the building is situated. Id. at <br /> 722 <br /> <br />· The First Baptist Church of Concord could not locate a suitable <br /> tract of sufficient size any closer to its Spring Street facility <br /> to allow it to conveniently relocate. Significantly, the Supreme <br /> Court= concluded-the-.Harrison 9pinion_by sayiDg: . ~. <br /> <br /> The lot in question is stated to be four or five <br /> blocks.v.~way,--but other -adjoining lands were not <br /> available.~i ~he agreed Sacts show that the lot is ~ <br /> reasonably..~ne~essar~ for, the-convenient use of th~ '' <br /> church, and is wholly and exclusively used for ' .~ <br /> religious worship. I_~d. <br /> <br /> The Branchview site was at all times reasonably necessary for the <br /> convenient use of the church's Spring Street facility in <br /> furtherance of its long range plans and was at all times wholly <br /> and exclusively used for religous worship. <br /> <br /> The case of Southeastern Baptist Theoloqical Seminary! Inc. <br /> vs. Wake County, 251 NC 7?5 (1960)' further illustrates the proper <br /> application of exemption statutes to land used in 'building <br /> programs. In Southeastern-the Supreme Court affirmed the ruling <br /> of the trial court that two properties on which the construction <br /> of a cafeteria building had begun were in 'actual use" within the <br /> express terms of t~e applicable statute. <br /> <br /> Under the Supreme Court's interpretations of exemption <br />statutes the construction and relocation of church facilities <br />'clearly pertains to practicing, teaching, and setting forth a <br />xeligion." The General Assembly in adopting the exemption <br />statute intended to exempt real property purchased and used <br />solely for the relocation and construction of new .church <br />facilities. <br /> <br /> <br />