640-home project on Rea Road puts Charlotte council between a ‘rock and a hard place’

Upset residents from south Charlotte filled the city council’s meeting chamber on Monday night, wearing green in solidarity against a developer’s plan to build more than 600 homes between Elm Lane and Rea Road.

RK Investors wants to add apartments and townhomes on 53 acres for its Sutherland development. Residents are worried about more traffic, flooding and wildlife being disrupted. They held up signs with “Vote No!”

The project has been an ongoing controversy since it was first surfaced in 2022. It continued during a public hearing held at the rezoning meeting. A vote was not held.

Charlotte City Council member Ed Driggs, whose district covers the area, described the process as a work in progress. Meetings and talks with the developers will continue in the upcoming months, Driggs said.

RK Investors would like to add 642 housing units. Up to 500 of them are allowed to be multifamily unit. The previous plan called for up to 1,100 units. The company anticipates monthly rent costing up to $7,500 for a townhome and one-bedroom apartments starting at $1,600.

If a rezoning proposal is rejected by the council during upcoming meetings, RK Investors still has the option to build under rules already in place.

That could result in 450 to 500-plus units instead of more than 600, according to the company. But this also means having fewer trees and a possibility of fewer traffic improvements.

“Personally, I’m a little bit between a rock and a hard place here,” Driggs said about keeping sight of the options. Charlotte council members shared the opinion.

Concerns about eagles, other issues

A bald eagle’s nest on the Piper Glen country club golf course is a major concern for neighbors against the project. Robin Berkman wore a hat with a stuffed bald eagle to show support.

“The eagles are very important,” she told The Charlotte Observer before the meeting. “That’s like the mascot of the country and it needs to be preserved.”

Bald eagles are a protected species by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, but the nesting area is too far away — about 900 feet — to stop construction. If construction activity is more than 660 feet from a nest, activity is unlikely to bother bald eagles, according to wildlife officials.

Resident Freda Rosen is also concerned about the environmental impacts.

“I think that future generations should be able to enjoy that piece of pristine property that’s located right there at the greenway,” Rosen said before the meeting.

It will cost $220 million for RK Investors to build the project. The homes would be built in phases, with the first residents moving in by the summer of 2026, if rezoning is approved this year.

Garland Green was one of the residents who had a chance to speak during a public comment session. He told the council that 20,000 people have signed a petition against the development.

“If 20,000 people signed up from your area, how would you feel about the petition?” Green asked. “You would probably be opposed to it.”

What the developer could do

To address traffic concerns, the firm would also like to make improvements including intersection upgrades and 14 turning lanes on Rea Road and Elm Lane, which could reduce waiting times by up to a minute.

RK Investor founder Russell Ranson said the firm will comply with all municipal rules by adding controls to mitigate storm water from its property to address flooding. He plans to save 15 acres of trees (more than what the local ordinance requires), restore a nearby pond for wildlife and add more than 3 miles of walking trails.

City staff members from the planning department are not recommending approval because it doesn’t fit in a policy map for single family or multi-family homes.

“If you remain united against it, I will not support it,” Driggs said to residents. “But I’m concerned that when we look at what can happen if it is withdrawn, you might end up in a position that it worse than this.”

Park and preservation ideas were also brought up by residents. But Driggs said that’s not an option with the land owners and for other legal reasons.

“I’m in a difficult spot here,” he said. “I understand your passions and can see the ‘Nos’ on your shirts. But the truth is, we need to make a responsible comparison between whatever comes out of these continuing conversations and whatever might happen.”