Carolina Raptor Center Notes on Piper Glen Eagles May 15th Update

We appreciate Bob with the Carolina Raptor Center sharing his "field notes" once again from his usual Monday visit.

The photo courtesy of Emilie Knight all rights are reserved. 

Hope you enjoy Bob's observations and commentary. 

We continue to work to protect wildlife in the Rea Road area and encourage Charlotte City Council to embrace smart growth protecting all wildlife. 

OBSERVER: Bob

NEST LOCATION: Piper Glen

DATE OF VISIT: 05/15/2023

TIME OF VISIT:11:00 AM – 12:45 PM

WEATHER CONDITIONS: 72 F; wind 7mph ESE; mostly sunny

BAEA’s PRESENT: Yes; 2 eaglets & 2 mature BAEAs

OBSERVATION NOTES:

Ugh! Another Monday tournament and a full parking lot. I slipped past the golfers and got out onto the dam. From the dam I sighted a BAEA perched in the favored tree across the reservoir ready to pluck a fish from the water. 

From the dam I spotted an eaglet in the nest. It was tearing at some food in the nest. I was amazed when I saw it try to swallow what looked like an entire squirrel, although it also looked like a string of sausages. I watched as it repeatedly threw its head back over a span of 5 minutes as it moved around the nest and tried to down its meal. When it finally got that down it immediately picked up what appeared to be a whole fish and again tried to force it down. It took a while and it then flew up above the nest and perched. There was no sight of the second eaglet in the nest. 

A BAEA appeared and flew loops around the nest tree vocalizing all the while. It then perched beyond the golf cart path. I moved to the lower level, careful to avoid the torrent of golf balls raining down on the driving range. I watched the nest from the area of the small pond where there was an unobstructed view of the nest. 

A second BAEA flew to the nest area with something in its talons. It perched above the nest and I could see the fish on the limb. It seemed to be trying to urge the eaglet to come for lunch.

Of course, this eaglet had just gorged itself and probably couldn’t fit anything else in its crop. 

Without a response from the eaglet it soon flew away. The mate then flew to the nest and there was lots of keening from the eaglet. I do believe that the parents were trying to urge this eaglet to flee the nest, but it wasn’t cooperating.

The BAEA then flew from the nest to the tree line along the creek. I walked beyond the golf cart path to look for the second eaglet, but had no luck. 

As I looked back toward the dam I spotted the second eaglet perched in the tallest tree along the creek. So, we now know that one eaglet has fledged and I would guess the second one has or is about to. Both BAEAs disappeared from my view. 

The two eaglets remained on their respective perches as I left the property.

Rea Road Gillespie Property Rezoning Update No. 9

 MAY 4, 2023  

On April 19th, Charlotte City Council Member Ed Driggs sent out an email that offered what appeared to be dramatic and encouraging news regarding the Rea Road Gillespie Property Rezoning Request:

“I have been advised that Charlotte planning staff, up to and including the Planning Director, have communicated their strong opposition to rezoning petition 2022-121 as submitted by RK Investments Charlotte LLC.  

The staff position was based on many of the same concerns I had expressed in my first meeting with the petitioner, and which you have all communicated so clearly to me and the petitioner since then.  

Staff made some suggestions for a dramatically different approach to development including a mix of housing types with minimal if any apartments.  They also suggested that the petitioner try harder to achieve some kind of alignment with residents before submitting any further proposals."  

Councilmember Driggs went on to state:

“I had indicated to you previously that I thought the staff analysis might serve as a wakeup call for the petitioner and that residents should wait to see how that turns out before engaging in any further in opposition to this proposal.  Based on the staff response and my own clearly stated opposition, I can safely say there is no chance the petition will be approved in anything like its current form.”  

At the time the email seemed at least on the surface very promising.

Yet the City of Charlotte Planning Staff website offered no indication of the same or even remotely similar sentiment. 

Last Saturday Councilmember Driggs held a “coffee” billed as a town hall meeting with “topics for discussion” including rezoning petitions and decisions.

Sadly Mr. Driggs “town hall” was really just a "dog and pony show" where few questions were permitted. This included a long presentation regarding Northwood Development’s “Ballantyne Reimagined” project which was nothing more than a "progress pep rally" which was preceded by a detailed review of Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools construction projects.

Throughout the three-hour meeting with 200 people in attendance no more than a half dozen questions were permitted.

When I rose to ask the Charlotte Planning spokesperson about the planning department’s website and if it was up to date with regards to the Gillespie Property, I was told by Councilmember Driggs to sit down and that they were not going to debate the Gillespie Property. 

On Monday I emailed the City Planning Staff with regards to Councilmember Driggs email of 19 April, asking if Mr. Driggs statements were accurate.

This is the response:

"We have reviewed two versions of their site plan thus far.  In both reviews we have asked that they reduce their building height to 65 ft. We have also noted that the Policy Map recommends Neighborhood 1 Place type and have told them during comment review meetings that they need to make revisions to the plan to better align with the recommended place type.  

Staff can only require changes made to plans to ensure Ordinance compliance.  

Our other comments such as aligning with the recommended place type are requests and the petitioner can choose to work to address those requests or not.   If the petitioner chooses to not to or not fully address the requests then our goal would be to get to the best possible plan the petitioner is agreeable to. If they’ve make changes staff would review and determine if they were sufficient to warrant a positive recommendation.

I haven’t spoken to or heard from them since our last set of comments were provided on March 1st so I’m not sure what direction they may be taking at this point."

On Monday evening I emailed Councilmember Driggs asking if he could explain the apparent conflict and why the planning staff’s opinion of the project didn't seem to align with his personal “take” on the project.

Four days later with no response I must assume that there is little if any merit to Mr. Driggs' email regarding the Rea Road Gillespie Property Rezoning request.

Clearly this is a disappointing revelation.

What is even more concerning is that Mr. Diggs would suggest ”residents should wait to see how that turns out before engaging in any further opposition to this proposal” in other words “sit down and shut up”. 

Collectively we wait for an explanation from Mr. Driggs. 

In the meanwhile we continue to vigorously oppose the Rea Road Gillespie Property Rezoning Request and seek alternative solutions to the development of this untouched natural habitat inside the 485 beltway.

Again, thank you for your continued support and sharing this petition with neighbors, friends and family.

Footnote: Norman Rockwell's painting “Freedom of Speech” (published by the “The Saturday Evening Post” more than 80 years ago) depicting Rockwell's own town hall meeting, seemed fitting.