A four-pump fueling proposal at E. W. T. Harris and Idlewild faced staff opposition and a sharp rebuke from District 5’s Marjorie Molina, who points to a nearly 27.5-acre county park coming up the road. The hearing closed with no vote, but the signals were clear.
What Was Proposed at Harris and Idlewild
The case labeled Petition 2025-021 sought to rezone roughly 1.24 acres east of E. W. T. Harris Boulevard and north of Idlewild Road from N1B to Neighborhood Center Conditional. The plan shows a vehicle fueling facility with four pump islands and a principal building that would include a commercial kitchen and retail space.
The site plan presented these street and design elements:
- Access from both E. W. T. Harris and Idlewild
- Dedication of 53 feet of right-of-way from the centerline on Harris and 52 feet from the centerline on Idlewild
- A 12-foot multi-use path along E. W. T. Harris
- An 8-foot planting strip and 6-foot sidewalk along Idlewild
- A 25-foot Class B landscape yard on the eastern property line abutting Neighborhood 1
- Prohibited exterior materials listed as vinyl siding and unfinished concrete block
- Rooftop mechanicals to be screened from view
Why Staff Balked
Planning staff did not recommend approval in its current form. Their concerns included physical constraints on a small site, utility easements, and whether a fueling use could meet all prescribed design conditions intended for better urban performance in a Neighborhood Center district. Staff also flagged policy consistency. The current place type on the policy map for the parcel is Neighborhood 1, and the requested district would allow a fueling station.
Staff said they would continue working with the petitioner and with transportation partners ahead of a Zoning Committee review, but they did not provide a checklist that would guarantee support. The main point was simple. In their view, the proposal does not yet meet the standard.
The District 5 Case Against the Pumps
Council Member Marjorie Molina, who represents the district, opposed the request on policy and context grounds. She described the corridor as highly residential and noted that Mecklenburg County is investing in a public park of about 27.47 acres a short distance up E. W. T. Harris. Molina said the corridor already hosts multiple fueling and convenience operations. In her view, adding another fueling use with food preparation runs counter to what a Neighborhood 1 area near a park should offer.
She also called out the process. Only three people attended the community meeting, and she said she did not receive a notice postcard even though she lives across the street. She reminded colleagues that rezonings are exceptions to a framework council already adopted. Her message was that this exception did not make the case.
The Petitioner’s Pitch
The petitioner, identified during the hearing as Harold Jordan, argued that the station would serve a gap on the corridor. There is a station across the street, but a median forces drivers into U-turns. The design is limited in scale at four pumps. The team said the site plan allows for fire truck access and that they would maintain the property daily with an additional weekly cleaning crew and security cameras.
On neighborhood feedback, Jordan referenced a request for a wood fence from a neighbor and a related concern that a fence might invite littering. He also said a revised plan addressing minor legibility items would be submitted by the next internal deadline.
A Park Up the Road, Approved the Same Night
The broader context is not abstract. On the same agenda, council unanimously approved a Mecklenburg County petition to advance a 27.47-acre park along E. W. T. Harris. Members highlighted that it exceeds UDO open-space requirements, preserves open space, and sits in a residential area. The district representative praised the public amenity and its proximity to Spark Central, an opportunity hub. Those facts set an obvious contrast with a new fueling use less than a mile away.
Process, Postcards, and the Rules of the Game
At the top of the meeting, the body restated how hearings work. Staff present first with no time limit. The petitioner typically gets three minutes. If the staff is in opposition or if community opposition is signed up, each side receives ten minutes and the petitioner gets a two-minute rebuttal. For decisions, the comment period is closed because a previous hearing has already occurred. Speakers register with the Clerk.
As for what moves staff from a no to a yes, Council Member Dimple Ajmera asked that question. Staff declined to set a formula, citing multiple factors that include policy, context, access, and screening. Council Member Ed Driggs delivered a short reality check to the petitioner. Without staff support and without the district representative on board, the path to approval will be bumpy.
What Happens Next
The hearing closed with no vote. Staff said an updated plan could arrive by the next submittal deadline. The Zoning Committee will take up hearing petitions at its next scheduled meeting to make recommendations. Council will set a decision date after that. Nothing in the transcript sets a vote calendar for this case.
The Stakes
The question is local but not small. If the east-side corridor is adding a large park and trail segments, how should the corners fill in near it. A fueling use with prepared food will always be an easy stop. A park invites a different pattern. Where the council lands on this one will show how much weight the 2040 map carries in a close call and how a single use can shape a block for years.
About the Author
Jack Beckett drinks enough coffee to qualify as an annex to the water department. When the espresso hits, he files on time and only occasionally speaks to streetlights.
Curious what else we have. Start at the quiet front door, no tracking, just reporting, on our Homepage. Want to know what really happened at last night’s meeting. Hit News. Want the sausage-making that everyone swears they love until it is time to eat it. Wander through Politics. And because this city cannot go twelve months without an election, our special 2025 coverage is titled with the maturity it deserves, Poll Dance 2025. You can always message us on X, or Twitter, or as we call it, Twix, at @QueenCityExp. Be nice. Or at least entertaining.
The Fine Print
We read the fine print so you do not have to, but if you are into that kind of thing, put on a pot of coffee and browse our policies and postings. They are concise, readable, and do not chase you around the internet.
Creative Commons License
© 2025 The Charlotte Mercury / Strolling Ballantyne
This article, “Parks or Pumps? District 5 Clash Pits a New Gas Station Against a 27-Acre Park,” by Jack Beckett is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0.
“Parks or Pumps? District 5 Clash Pits a New Gas Station Against a 27-Acre Park”
by Jack Beckett, The Charlotte Mercury (CC BY-ND 4.0)