Something Nasty - Ed Driggs

During last month's Charlotte City Council meeting Ed Driggs cautioned the 200 plus south Charlotte residents sitting inside city council chambers that if the Rea Road Gillespie Property was developed "by right" they could "end up with something nasty".

What is it about Republicans calling people and things "Nasty"?

The only thing nasty is how Ed Driggs talks down to his constituents. Every meeting in the last two years I've attended Ed Driggs was telling citizens that "they don't understand" and that "its complicated".

For the record Mr. Driggs has been told again and again by hundreds of residents, in person, online, via phone calls and email that the RK Investments Charlotte LLC Rea Road Gillespie Property rezoning petition is a solid NO.

He has also been told by a group of select nearby HOA board members in "no uncertain terms" that they do not support the rezoning petition and would rather see the property developed as currently zoned, that is "by-right'.

Yet even after months of being told no one supports it he still spent nearly fifteen minutes trying to scare residents about the possible something "nasty" via the "by right" option during Charlotte City Council's discussion last month.

Here is the refresher:

The current zoning under the newly adopted Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) is NA-1 which allows somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 single family homes and prohibits a 640 unit rental apartment complex and buildings higher than 48 feet.

The 300% increase via the new UDO from the former R-3 (3 homes per acre 159 single family detached homes) to 400 under N1-A is not attractive but is far better than the proposed apartment complex.

In other words "by-right" would mean; no rental apartments, less density, less traffic and no big box apartment buildings that reach skyward to 65 feet. 

Which all my neighbors agree is a win.

Despite the obvious advantages to "build by right" Ed Driggs continues to side with the developers. 

In a email Ed Driggs says"

"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." - Ed Driggs

Mr. Driggs has even gone as far as to point out that if the property is developed "by-right" citizens will not have the opportunity to voice their concerns about the property to Charlotte City Council as we were doing last month.

Let's be clear, citizens have no voice in council chambers, they were given all of ten minutes to voice their concerns. Allowing 200 plus citizens to speak for a collective Ten Minutes is hardly fair or having a voice or input into the process, as the developer has been talking to Ed Driggs and City Staff on a continual basis for the last two years.

But this is how Ed Driggs seems to operate:

A developer decides on a project that needs rezoning in the future, so they reach out to Ed Driggs because they've been funding his political campaign for the last several years. (Nothing illegal about developers making contributions to a Charlotte City Council member's election fund).

Mr. Driggs then apparently suggests they come in with a big request, to give him something to work with, so that they can reduce the size of the request later and therefore have the appearance of making big oncessions.

In this case the developer asked for a crazy amount of 1,100 units on 53 acres of which only 37 is developable. Effectively going from 3 units per acre to 20 units per acre. Remember the new UDO already gave them a 300% density increase without having to ask for rezoning.

Then the developer says we've reduced the project to 640 units, to which Ed Driggs reminds residents about over and over again. During last month's council meeting Mr. Driggs continued to push this reduction myth saying: "recognizing that we are getting close to the point where we have half as many units as were originally proposed". 

The developer then presents a traffic study as "suggestions" and calls them "improvements" when in fact these are "requirements" that have been worked out in advance with NCDOT and Charlotte DOT. Mr. Driggs also parrots this idea of being improvements and enhancements. 

The facts are, all but two of the "improvements" are poorly conceived and counter intuitive. Some are just stupid. Everyone of them is required by city staff.

Developer then holds required community meetings and hopes that no one shows up. In this case both meetings were overflow crowds with absolutely zero support for the project.

Again let me be very clear NO ONE NOT ONE PERSON SPOKE IN FAVOR of the Gillespie Project Rezoning Request.

During each these meetings Mr. Driggs refused to state that he would oppose the project despite the overwhelming opposition. 

With the massive pushback, Ed Driggs suggested smaller meetings to get to know the developer better and understand the plan. His goal however is always reach a compromise.

Ed Driggs then recruits local HOA board members to discuss the project and then works towards a "compromise" that he can present to his fellow council members as the community "coming together" to reach an agreement.

When asked if "by right" would allow rental apartments, Mr. Driggs answers in doublespeak that the UDO doesn't differentiate between rental property and home ownership.  Despite the fact that the UDO clearly prohibits apartment complexes in N1-A.

Mr. Driggs encourages the HOA board members to draft a request list. This "ask" once completed runs five pages. What the developer returns in compromise is nothing. Absolutly nothing.

Ed knows that participation in most HOA's is typically very limited and that most homeowners are not involved or even concerned. Unfortunately for Mr. Driggs with this group they are not your average crowd and not easily swayed.

So Mr. Driggs tries a more conciliatory route:

"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."

What Mr. Driggs is really telling the group of just a few board members is that if after his big sales pitch they still want "by-right" and are willing to "take a chance" he will finally formally oppose the petition.

In other words based on just a few HOA board members agreeance he will tell Charlotte City Council the neighborhood came together as a whole and agreed to support the rezoning petition or that the community is opposed.

This is what happened to our neighbors along Endhaven and Rea Roads and to our neighbors along Ardrey Kell. Get a few HOA contacts to agree to some small concession and claim the entire neighborhood came together.

In the above statement reading between the lines he clearly wants to move forward with telling his fellow council members that the neighbors agreed to accept the developer proposal. 

Never mind that during every step in the process, every meeting, even with council chambers filled with a sea of green t-shirts saying NO! Ed Driggs has refused to support the residents of south Charlotte. 

Instead behind the scenes he's conducted "tours" of the Gillespie Property with HOA Board members and the developer and then touts the positives of those on site visits.

Telling south Charlotte residents "I wish there was a way to preserve this as the habitat I walked it over the weekend it is beautiful it breaks my heart". 

Later adding "if you walk the site as a number of us did this weekend it’s really quite striking how far away the roads are from the nearest building".

For Mr. Driggs there is just one problem perhaps due to the overwhelming opposition the HOA board members are not willing to support Ed Driggs scheme without having a community meeting and allowing that group of neighbors to decide on that outcome.

Ed Driggs is not your friend. His mixed signal emails are terribly disingenuous. 

He routinely indicates that there is no rush and plenty of time before council votes on this petition. His fear mongering about "build by-right" is relentless.

He has become nothing more than an info-mercial sales channel for RK Investments.

What is the answer?

Unless RK Investments presents a 200 unit non-rental development with a majority of single family detached homes. Any proposal is a non-starter. Ed Driggs has promised "substantial" changes. So expect an 180 degree shift on density and stunning concessions from the developer. Widening Elm Lane to a two lane with bike lanes and sidewalks from 485 to Pineville Matthews Road. Single entrance and fulltime security and no more than a four year construction time table.

Update: the developer has come back with a reduction of wait for it 80 units? 80!

So much for Ed Driggs "substantial" change.