Event space and future homes | Source: Griffin Family
April 22. By Dave Vieser. An event venue planned for Nantz Road received a chilly reception from five different residents at the Town Board’s April 21 meeting. They urged the board to deny the request from the Griffin family.
The former owners of the Griffin Bros. Tires, Wheels & Auto Repair chain had previously conducted several meetings with neighbors in their efforts to gain support for turning lakefront property on Nantz Road into an events venue.
However, those in attendance still urged the board to reject the application, with a special concern regarding traffic generated on Nantz Road by events at Ramsey Cove Park.
Quotable
“We’ve had drivers spin out on our lawn and pull out our pavers,” said neighbor Ken Miller,who has lived on Nantz Road for two years. “The police try their best but they cannot control this situation.”
Background
The project, located on 8.6 acres, includes converting two existing mansion-size homes into event space for weddings and corporate events. The proposal will also include a 6,000 square foot event tent space.
No decision was rendered at the meeting, but the proposal will next be considered by the Planning Board in the “June/July time frame.”
Cashmere
Later during the same meeting, the commissioners heard from applicants Adam and Irnya Jones who have filed the required rezoning paperwork for a project called Cashmere, a six-story condominium/mixed use building project proposed for the northwest corner of Jetton Road extension and Bethel Church Road.
This proposal didn’t fare much better as all four speakers urged the board to deny the rezoning. Particular attention was focused on the requested six story height, and that it might conflict with the town’s land development code. No decision was rendered and the required Planning Board hearing is expected to be held on June 9.
Other action
In other action the commissioners approved the annexation of several Mayes Road properties which would permit the construction of the Mayes Meadows Project.
Hilarious that the Griffins are referred to as “former owners of….” Why not mention, at minimum, the total number of businesses they do own? Would double the size of the article? Oh, and don’t forget “on the side businesses” owned by a Griffin and operated by relative(s), such as self storage, by a wife! In other words, it should be obvious that they the goal absolutely is not to do something for the community!
Posted by William Stanford | April 22, 2025, 12:25 pmEverything the Town Board does these days is utterly ridiculous! Stop with the constant building when the roads won’t handle anymore traffic! What is wrong with y’all?
Derangement on steroids!!
Posted by Disgusted! | April 22, 2025, 1:07 pmWilliam,
If you want a complete list of the Griffin family’s accomplishments, I’d be happy to provide it—though it would be a long one, especially if you include the more than 100 charitable and volunteer initiatives they’ve supported for our community! The Griffin family’s record of generosity, civic engagement, and philanthropy is not just impressive; it’s foundational to the well-being of our area.
They have given back in ways that far exceed what most families, or even organizations, contribute. Through their charitable foundations, the Griffins have provided over $1 million in scholarships and grants to local students and organizations, directly investing in the future of our community. Their support has enhanced parks, libraries, youth programs, and vital community spaces—tangible improvements that benefit everyone. Their commitment isn’t just financial; it’s personal, with years of volunteer service and leadership in countless local projects.
You may have concerns about zoning or business operations, and reasonable people can disagree with the policy. But to question the Griffin family’s motives or community spirit is simply unfounded. Their long-standing integrity, generosity, and hands-on involvement have made a positive, lasting impact that speaks for itself.
Let’s keep the debate focused on the specifics of the event venue, not on casting doubt on the character of a family that has done so much for so many. The Griffins have earned the respect of this community through decades of service and giving—something that should be recognized, not dismissed.
Posted by Joe a vagnone | April 22, 2025, 1:08 pm5 people who think they matter above ANYONE else disapprove.
Posted by Deborah Penkaty | April 22, 2025, 5:59 pmGreat response and very well said, Joe.
Posted by Becky Johnson | April 23, 2025, 5:54 amNorth Mecklenburg is fortunate that it is home to the Griffin family who have contributed much to quality of life in the community. I am not involved in this deal nor do I represent the Griffins, but any time there is an opportunity to open up lake front space for public use, the government should encourage such an opportunity. The access of the public to Lake Norman is strangled by all of the residential property on Lake Norman. This is a chance for the community to improve access to the lake and to first class facilities that can be enjoyed by those who live on the lake and those who don’t. Duke’s deal with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission mandates as much public access as possible.
Posted by Cliff Homesley | April 22, 2025, 4:56 pmSo, you are saying that the Griffins are typical very wealthy people? That is, use every tax break available only to the rich and then throw some money at charities to use as a cover story? And then use charities as a media story and reason they should be allowed to do whatever they want? Wow! Your comment is nothing more than fluffy PR.
Posted by William Stanford | April 22, 2025, 8:11 pmYeah there are way more than five people. They had people at their house and all but one person I heard from were against it. Everyone I spoke with on Yachtman and my neighbors on both sides of the park along Nantz…all against it. I work Tuesday evenings so I couldn’t be there to voice dissent but I have not spoken personally with anyone around here who wants it. But typically it will pass (the mayor came out in support of it before the rest of us even knew about it if that tells you anything). Typical modern “representative government” that represents the people who have wealth and not the typical resident who will pay the freight on this thing in loss of home value, increased traffic and diminished quality of life.
Posted by James Retarides | April 23, 2025, 4:57 pmBuilding #1 appears to really encroach upon the neighboring property to a point that I don’t think they would be very happy at all. It would almost certainly block views from their property and home. I could see where they would be upset. But as for anyone else it really doesn’t make a lot of sense. Traffic is more largely dictated by the giant park and beach next door than it would be from an event venue. All that aside, I have trouble seeing the fiscal benefit here. This property would make more money as residential properties that it ever would as an event venue.
Posted by Steve | April 24, 2025, 8:33 am