Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #27 third submission from Anne Kelton & Mark PittmanNovember 5, 2018 Via Email Only: nchavez@carmel.in.gov Nathan Chavez Administrator - Plan Commission City of Carmel One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Re: November 5, 2018 City Council Meet Docket No. 18070001 Z: 201 W. 106th Street Rezone – S-2 to B-1. Dear City Council Members: Our names are Mark Pittman and Anne Kelton and we are writing to you about the above-referenced docket number and the request to rezone 201 W. 106th Street (the “Property”) from S-2 to B-1 (the “Rezone”). We are the owners of approximately 20 acres of land at 111th and Springmill that lies approximately one mile from the Property. We are also the son and daughter or Dr. John and Euna Pittman and are previous owners of the Property. We are developer Steve Pittman’s siblings. As a result, we have unique information to share with the Council. A. Approximately 80% of the Immediately Adjacent Property Owners Oppose the Rezone As noted in previous filings, the owners of approximately 80% of the property that shares a common property line with the subject Property oppose the rezone. These property owners include the Rosado Hill Residents and DK Dwellings. In addition, other neighbors have opposed the project. The three residents of Rosado Hill and the DK Dwellings (the owners of Dr. Pittman’s former party barn) have made substantial investments in their homes. PL Properties proposed development is essentially a wealth transfer from these residents to the developers. In obtaining approval of the Plan Commission, Steve Pittman represented that he had the complete support of the Reserve II. However, this is not accurate as DK Dwellings is the largest owner of lots – by far – in the Reserve II and the owner strongly opposes the rezone. While the developers have written letters for several other residents to sign supporting the project, the fact remains that the developers have failed to obtain the support of the most important property owners – those that own property that immediately abuts the subject Property. B. Bad Politics: Developer Steve Pittman Has Stated that in Carmel Politics Is More Important than Good Planning If the owners of approximately 80% of the immediately adjacent land oppose the rezone, then why would the Council even consider approving the application? Steve Pittman has stated 2 Carmel’s policy is that politics is more important than good land planning. Steve Pittman recently testified under oath as follows: “[Carmel] said – they would always say, politics trumps good planning. Politics trumps good planning.” Steve Pittman should be pursuing good land planning that doesn’t damage the land values of 80% of his immediate neighbors instead of jamming a project through over the reasonable concerns of his neighbors. C. Steve Pittman’s Representations about Another Developer Discussing a 4- story Apartment Complex or Medical Office Are Disingenuous and Misleading Steve Pittman has made statements to the effect that another developer, Thompson Thrift, stated that the Property would be suitable for a four-story apartment complex or medical office 1. Steve insinuates that these are the only two choices for the Property, which is misleading. We were directly involved in the discussions with Thompson Thrift. We are not aware of Thompson Thrift making any such statement. Further, Thompson Thrift never made an offer for the Property for any use; instead they passed on getting involved with the Property. Accordingly, to rely on an alleged statement by a developer who showed no interest in the Property is misleading, disingenuous and irrelevant. Moreover, the property was sold at a public auction after being widely advertised, and both of us attended the auction. We are aware of no other developers who sought to purchase the property for commercial use. The argument that Steve has asserted – that he decided to develop the Property to protect residents from other developers – is unfounded and absurd. D. Carmel Incurred Substantial Costs at the Insistence of the Pittmans, including Steve Pittman, to Maintain the Residential Nature of the Property As noted in a letter dated August 16, 2018 posted to Carmel’s website as Letter #3 (http://cocdocs.carmel.in.gov/weblink/0/fol/1514883/Row1.aspx), Carmel entered into a contract with Steve Pittman at Steve Pittman’s request where Carmel spent approximately $400,000 to build a driveway to 106th Street and put in a screening wall to maintain the residential character of the property. Now, less than 4 years later, Steve is seeking to develop the project commercially. Laura Campbell, who is sponsoring the rezone, and other members of the Council have stated that they are fiscally conservative and good stewards of taxpayer’s money. For example, on her website LauraCampbellforCarmel.com Ms. Campbell writes: 1 Steve implies that Thompson Thrift endorses a medical office use, however Thompson Thrift does not develop offices, let alone medical offices. 3 “I believe that elected officials should be careful stewards of taxpayers’ money, and as a pragmatic fiscal conservative I will consider each project and issue that comes before the council.” At a fundraiser in 2015 hosted by Developer Steve Pittman 2 at his father’s party barn (currently owned by DK Dwellings which strongly opposes the rezone), Ms. Campbell also stated that while she believes in Brainard’s vision, she’s also concerned about the level of debt accrued in achieving that vision. Given that Carmel was induced into spending more than $400,000 based upon representations that the land would remain residential, it would be unfair to the City and to taxpayers to have Steve Pittman, who was involved in the negotiations and signed the agreement, attempt to convert that same property to commercial use. The Council should seek to claw back the $400,000 it invested into this property from the developers. E. Developer Steve Pittman’s Outrageous and Abusive Conduct Toward Neighbors Finally, Carmel officials should question developer Steve Pittman about the tactics he employs to intimidate and threaten residents and neighbors who oppose his rezoning efforts. Multiple neighbors have complained about Steve Pittman’s strong-arm tactics. We have received more than a dozen disturbing comments in writing from Steve’s neighbors 3 who have informed him that they oppose this rezone. Below find a small sample of the types of troubling comments we have received: “I’m wide awake. [Steve’s] threats have me worried sick.” “Most concerningly [Steve] said by taking this approach (opposing the rezone) we are ruining our business. It was an implied (or overt) threat that by taking him on he’s going to bury us financially.” “I’m racking my brain for what [Steve’s] so mad about [for opposing this rezone]. He literally told us to go for it – he understood its business if we have to oppose – it was basically “knock yourself out and Carmel wants this and I could care less.”” “[Steve] terrifies both of us [husband and wife].” “It certainly doesn’t look like the average property owner has a chance in this process.” These types of venal attacks against good neighbors who dare to oppose Steve is not new. For example, in another rezoning effort down the street Steve Pittman and his brother Chad 2 See Exhibit 1 for a fundraiser announcement. 3 We are omitting their names to protect them from further attacks from Steve Pittman or his brother Chad Pittman, who has also participated in confrontations with local residents. 4 Pittman were opposed by a local neighbor named Bill Ferree, who was a former plan commission member. Chad wrote an email to Steve and their nephew, Tyler Pittman. Recognizing that his email was wildly inappropriate, Chad cautioned the recipients by writing “Do not forward this email.” The letter ends with a message to Tyler, who Chad recruited to join the Army and then guided him into military intelligence. “Tyler, that is “William Joseph Ferree” at [street address omitted for privacy concerns] Sycamore Street, Zionsville, Indiana. There is a reason I had the Army send you to military intelligence, make your friends at the IRS and DOJ proud.” Here, Chad (who partnered with Steve in the rezone) instructs Tyler to dig up dirt on the neighbor (and former plan commission member) to have him charged at the IRS with tax evasion or otherwise criminally prosecuted by the Department of Justice. A true and correct copy of the email, except for redactions made for privacy purposes, is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. Is this the kind of conduct that City of Carmel condones from its developers? As the neighbor asked plaintively, do average property owners have a fair opportunity in Carmel? CONCLUSION We urge the Council to either (i) deny the rezone or (ii) approve the rezone with appropriate limits, such as a limit to two stories and other restrictions requested by the neighbors and (iii) order the developers to reimburse the city the approximately $400,000 in costs the city incurred to maintain the residential nature of the property at Steve Pittman’s request. /s/ ________________________________ Anne Kelton /s/ ________________________________ Mark Pittman Enclosures EXHIBIT 1 Events - Laura Campbell Republican Member of Carmel City Council https://www.lauracampbellforcarmel.com/events.html[11/5/2018 12:11:21 PM] Paid for and authorized by the Laura Campbell for Council Committee (317) 665-0311 or Home About Events Donate/Volunteer Contact You are invited to attend a reception for Laura Campbell Candidate for Carmel City Council Northwest District Thursday, January 29, 2015, 5:00 to 7:00 pm Hosted by Steve Pittman and David Brooks The Pittman Party Barn 340 Sanner Court, Carmel, Indiana East side of Spring Mill Road – South of 106th Street Suggested Contribution - $100 per person or $150 per couple Please make checks payable to Laura Campbell for Council P.O. Box 382, Carmel, Indiana 46082 RSVP to lauracampbellforcouncil@gmail.com or call (317) 665-0311 Paid for by the Laura Campbell for Council Committee, David Brooks, Chairman EXHIBIT 2