Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #110 Robyn Pauker - second submission Shestak, Joe From:Robyn Pauker <rpauker@paukerfranklinlaw.com> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 2:45 PM To:Shestak, Joe Subject:Epcon PUD **** This is an EXTERNAL email. Please exercise caution and Do Not open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email. **** Dear Carmel Planning Commissioners: The purpose of my email is to respectfully request that you oppose the Epcon PUD in its current form, as the proposal still fails to address the traffic and related density, the monotony of design, and the fact that the meager reduction in the number of homes still poses a significant challenge to the remaining three neighborhood access points. I am additionally concerned about the issues raised with regard to Epcon’s nearby Zionsville development and am even more troubled by Epcon’s attempt to dodge all responsibility for those issues - instead attempting to shift the blame to “a franchisee.” A quick trip to Epcon’s website features the Zionsville development, which of course, continues to bear their name. I know that you’ve worked diligently to negotiate through three proposals and I can honestly say that there is a lot of fatigue to go around. Unfortunately the sellers of the 59-acre parcel continue to price the land at a far higher value than the market can bear. If proposals repeatedly prove unprofitable to potential buyers (without extreme zoning concessions), then I posit that the asking price is too high. In my humble opinion, the market should determine the value of the land, based upon a transaction that contemplates a reasonable development plan for the area. I implore you to once again consider the effect on the surrounding neighbors, who relied upon the adjacent R-1 zoning when we bought our homes, and continue to do what is right and reasonable. I believe that the Epcon PUD in its current form is not a reasonable proposal, in its density, lack of setback and buffers, architectural monotony, and ultimate impact on the traffic congestion in the area. I am confident that you will continue to thoughtfully deliberate this PUD proposal and I appreciate your consideration. Respectfully, Robyn Pauker 2811 Maralice Drive Robyn G. Pauker | Attorney, Registered Civil Mediator, Managing Partner Pauker Franklin Law, LLC 160 West Carmel Drive, Suite 285 Carmel, Indiana 46032 Office: 317-975-1825 Direct: 317-975-1895 Fax: 317-975-1925 rpauker@paukerfranklinlaw.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: this message and any attachments are confidential and are subject to the attorney-client privilege and the privilege relating to attorney-client work product. It is intended only for the named recipient(s) and may be exempt from disclosure under other applicable law, as well. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you receive this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender, delete this e-mail from your computer, and destroy any copies in any form immediately. Receipt by anyone other than the named recipient(s) is not a waiver of any attorney-client, work product, or other applicable privilege. Any tax 1