Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer reduces multifamily plan, offers deed restrictions and sidewalk contribution for land near Idyllwild Park; residents raise traffic, tree and school‑s‑
Summary
Brookchase Properties presented a revised plan for land near Idyllwild Park that reduced townhouse/unit counts and added deed restrictions and facade changes; neighbors and the planning director raised traffic, sidewalk and environmental concerns. The public hearing was kept open and will return to the planning board.
The applicant Brookchase Properties returned to the board April 14 with a revised plan for property near Idyllwild Park (addressed in the record as 4420 Margaret Wallace Road) that reduced the original proposal, committed to a for‑sale product with deed restrictions and offered a monetary contribution toward off‑site sidewalk improvements.
Bridget Grant, land use consultant for the applicant, said the team reduced unit count and “we're willing to add some deed restrictions that no unit shall be available for rent for 18 months from purchase” and said the developer would limit entity ownership to prevent bulk investor ownership. Grant said facade modulation and internal sidewalks were added in response to staff comments.
Planning staff and the applicant discussed a request to install about 625 feet of 10‑foot sidewalk along the park frontage; the petitioners' response offered up to $35,000 toward the off‑site improvement rather than constructing the full segment through park property. Planning Director Jay Camp said Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation is contemplating a trail connection to Margaret Wallace in FY26 but that “not necessarily sidewalk” is in their current plans and the park agency had not identified a need to require sidewalk construction from the petitioner.
Multiple public commenters objected to the scale and traffic impacts. Alex Freeman, who registered concerns and said he had sent materials to commissioners, argued the traffic study did not fully account for nearby projects and school traffic and said the site “has no benefit to the city of Matthews” and that he “vehemently oppose[d]” the plan. Other speakers cited impacts to park tranquility, tree removal and school capacity.
Applicant traffic consultant Randy Goddard said the project’s traffic impact analysis was prepared per the approved scope from NCDOT and the town, that NCDOT had already approved counts, and that resubmitted documentation was under town review.
Staff recommended closing the public hearing and moving the petition to the planning board for decision after the outstanding technical reviews. The public hearing remained open for further review; staff said the matter will return to the planning board before coming back to the board of commissioners.
Ending: No final vote was taken. The planning review and the town’s third‑party traffic consultant will complete outstanding analysis; the application will continue through the planning board process before a final decision.
