HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #065 Matt & Erin Uber - second submission
Shestak, Joe
From:Matthew Uber <mattuber@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, July 6, 2020 4:40 PM
To:Shestak, Joe
Cc:Carmel59acres; erinlindneruber@gmail.com
Subject:Opposition to Courtyards of Carmel Proposal by Epcon - Docket No. PZ-2020-00028
PUD
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
**** This is an EXTERNAL email. Please exercise caution and Do Not open attachments or click links from
unknown senders or unexpected email. ****
Residential Committee Members,
We are submitting this letter to share our opposition to the development request from Epcon that is before
you. As you are aware, for the past several years the adjacent neighborhoods have been very involved in this
process. We certainly hope and expect that this deliberative process will produce the kind of quality result
that Carmel residents have come to expect and take pride in.
As we review and understand the current proposed development from Epcon we are not satisfied that this
would meet community expectations or be a source of pride. The fact remains that in many ways this is a
challenging piece of land to develop. This difficulty and the underlying economics of land price should not be
cause for our city and our community to settle for a sub-par project. The designated process has produced a
number of ideas and concepts that have been reviewed, scrutinized and amended. Our perspective is that the
current proposal is the least appealing for a number or reasons. We are sure you have read many letters
and/or have many yet to read so we will try to lay our concerns out succinctly below...
Density - the number or lots, their individual size and the % lot covered by dwelling is concerning
Traffic - Everyone knows this intersection is over-taxed today. This amount of additional traffic is a
community concern and the conversation must include the likelihood that the acreage on the SE
corner will be developed. This should not be addressed with a temporary fix or a solution that is
probably good enough for the time being.
Aesthetics - The almost certain look of monotony when you place this many structurally identical units
in this space is concerning. A well addressed transition plan from existing neighborhoods to new
development is lacking. We cannot find an example of an Epcon finished product that would meet the
4-sided architectural standards that have been a critical part of all previous development plans and
Carmel's identity.
In closing we must reiterate that we are not and will not be opposed to development of this land. We firmly
believe that our efforts share common cause with those of the city of Carmel and we are thankful for
that. We appreciate the time and effort that you and the various committees are investing to review this and
for your continued commitment to our city and its residents.
1
Sincerely,
Matt & Erin Uber
3179 Driftwood Court
Carmel, IN 46033
(317) 414-1776
2