Rea Road Willow Oaks

There was a tidal wave of concern last week, after one of Ed Driggs' "Secret Squirrel Society" meetings word leaked out that the Rea Road Gillespie Developer had threatened to remove all the Willow Oaks along Rea Road if the local homeowners associations forced a "by-right" development, rather than accepting the proposed rezoning petition.

That combined with this site plan from the city staff was enough to convince some that removal of nearly forty 30 year old Willow Oaks was indeed a possibility.

You'll notice that the above site plan submitted by the developer is without the Willow Oak trees and that the 30% "possible tree" save as indicated by the developer is really pretty marginal.

Turns out that a city planning staff member or Tom Coyne was the person who brought up the subject of sidewalk requirements vs the Willow Oaks. And at least from some attendees perspective this suggested that the developer could remove all of the Rea Road Willow Oak trees.

Now it seems likely the developer hasn't actually addressed the Willow Oaks one way or the other at least not publicly. 

So the question was sent to the City Chief Arborist:

Is there a way that the developer would be required to provide a sidewalk and yet also preserve the trees? Or perhaps a waiver on the sidewalk requirement?

In typical bureaucrat fashion it took nearly a week to get the answer. But here it is:

Yes to a degree. 

 

City trees are considered assets of the City and protected at all times. Healthy and structurally sound City trees must be preserved in all scenarios unless significant site conflicts exist. In some cases healthy and structurally sound trees may be authorized for removal if reasonable and adequate measures cannot be provided to ensure success preservation.

 

Per past survey work, it’s my understanding that all street trees north of the existing driveway on Rea Rd. adjacent to this site are City trees and all trees south of the driveway are not City trees. Planted oak trees south of the driveway likely don’t have any UDO or Charlotte Tree Ordinance protection attached as they’re not City trees or heritage trees.

Tim Porter
Chief Urban Forester – Division Manager

So it seems the tree lined Willow Oaks section of Rea Road is safe for the moment.

But that's the trouble with the "Secret Squirrel Society" and the lack of communication where outsiders are not updated when news, rumors or facts emerge it quickly becomes a fire storm.  

The other problem is that Ed Driggs has repeatedly said:

"My personal view is that denial of this petition could lead to by-right development of the property that residents like even less, with half as many trees and minimal traffic improvements.  If, however, the HOA leadership group that met in December considers whatever RK's final offer is and still wants to take a chance on what might come next instead, I will oppose the petition and encourage my colleagues to do likewise.  I just hope that residents, and you in particular, will carefully study what the real options are and choose thoughtfully.  If we kick it to by-right, there will be no opportunity for me or residents to weigh in, and I cannot be responsible for the outcome."

 

Just My Opinion:

In other words Ed Driggs is listening only to select few within the "Secret Squirrel Society" and not to his district citizens, residents and taxpayers.

This has put those who have opposed this project from day one at a terrible disadvantage.

Ed Driggs has been working against those who opposed this project from the beginning often telling taxpayers they don't understand and routinely blaming his democrat counterparts party affiliation as the reason he is unable to convince other city council members to vote no on this petition. 

Mr. Diggs has apparently told many others that it is "his job" to negotiate an agreement with the neighborhood associations. Seems like Mr. Driggs considers himself an agent of not the citizens, residents and taxpayers but rather the developers.

I've found it very disheartening that Mr. Driggs has never once said he was opposed to this rezoning request despite having two huge meetings with more the 150 attendees at each, where there was unanimous opposition. 

Driggs went even as far as tell one reporter that the meeting at St. Matthews was the worst meeting he ever attended. Apparently not because of infighting or bickering among the constituents but because he was unable to appease the taxpayers. 

He has simply let the clock run out on this petition to rezone the Rea Road Gillespie Property and has yet to say no or even attempt to convince other council members to support him and the Charlotte citizens of district seven. 

It is simply heartbreaking that not only would our district representative let us down but he's also our neighbor.

The Rea Road Gillespie Property rezoning request offers nothing for the Piper Glen area residents, nor for Charlotte residents as a whole. 

If approved it will overburden our schools, our roads, and our stormwater system.

If built it was add additional strain on our infrastructure including utilities, sanitation and public safety. 

There has been no consideration given to the environment, including wildlife, wetlands, tree canopy or stream water resources. 

In the end Ed Driggs will vote no but will have done nothing to convince the other council members vote against this poorly designed big box apartment complex and at this point we do not have the votes to vote it down. Once approved he will then tell the homeowners in district 7 that they should have negotiated with the developer and that he's not responsible.