U-Haul/SPAm-CS000921 (4)SEP 21 2000 1S:3G FR NICHOLS JACKSON DILLA4 9G5 0010 TO 97230470~2
P.02
Robert E. He,er
F.-miih rhsger(~n]dhLcom
NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAGER & SMITH, L.L.P.
Attorneys & Coun~elo~ nt Law
lg00 Lincoln Plaza
500 Nonlt Akard
D~llns, Texas '/5201
Fax (2~4) 965.0010
E-n~il N~DI-IS ~ NJDH$.com
September 21, 2000
VIA FACSIMILE 017) 587-7829
Ms. Barbara A. Wolenty
ROBINSON & WOLENTE LLC
8888 Keystone Crossing
Suite 710
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
RE: U-Haul International
Dear Ms. Wolenty:
Please be advised that, pursuant to our telephone conversation of September 20, 2000, I
am writing to confum that the Planning and Zo_ning Commission has scheduled a meeting to
review the Site Plan for U-Haul International.
On Wednesday, September 13m, pursuant to a telephone conversation with you, we
learned that the contract, which had been previously provided to me, by and between the Denton
Tap Development, LLC and Five Sack Storage Corporation executed on June 6, 2000 had been
cancelled. They appear in the records of the planning and Zoning Commission being the
applicant for the Site Plan review. In visiting with Mr. Art Anderson, representative of U-Haul
International, we indicated to him that this matter could not go forward because U-Haul was no
longer authorized to represem the landowner or have any interes~ in the land. We also informed
Mr Anderson that the application would be denied since the c.ur~,~,n.tJ~do_wnL~r w,~ not
apphcant before the Planning and Zoning Commission. ~'~c,
During the course of our conversation, yo~dicated to ~ that_that contr~_ t w..ould i~, ,fact
be reinstituted, During the course of our ~digcussion, we indicated to you that
necessary for us to have a signed addendum extending the contract afar learmng that the
contract had in fact been cancelled. This fact was also confirmed by Mr. Anderson at Winstead
Sechrest & Minick, P.C., the representatives of U-Haul. For those reasons, b~fore any action to
either delay or approve the Site Plan for thc propmy located at the southeast corner of State
Highway 121 and Denton Tap Road, it would be necessary to have proof of the reinsfitution of
that contact.
In addition to the discussion concerning going forward with either an extension of time or
approval of the Site Plan, it would be necessary to actually receive this documentation.
Likewise, we indicated to you that we were not in the position to guarantee the outcome of the
SEP 21 2000 1G:37 FR NICHOLS JACKSON DILLA4 9G5 0010 TO 97230470B2 P.03
Ms. Barbara A. Wolenty
ROBINSON & WOLENTY, LLC
September 21,2000
Page 2
September 21, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.. We, as attorneys for the City,
can make recommendations. Thosc recommendations may or ma)' not be accepted by those
members of thc Zoning Commission who were given the jurisdiction under Smtc law and
Ordinances of the City of Coppell to review and make recommendations to thc City Council.
In addition, we have also received mixed communications from U-Haul who appears to
be a party of interest in this case. U-Haul has asked for au extension from the Sep0~nber 21~
Planning and Zoning meeting to the October 190' meeting. Again, we are not in position to grant
ch re uest if in fact U-Haul, or any of its partners or associates concerning this property, no
~o~ger Y~vc any interest in the land, In reviewing the Planning and Zoning Commission-miames~
as well as the documents from the development review committee for the City of Coppell, there
are several technical issues from thc Fire DeparUnenta~9~c~c~ming ~ !anes, .as well ~ issues
involving landscaping and other requirements in the Subd:Z~n RegulaUons. As you aha I have
discussed, many of the comments which staff has heretofore made have also included issues
involving the aesthetics of the building, as well as the placement of the outside storage doors and
other issues concerning activities on the property which might present a health, safety, and
welfare issue concerning the approximate location of said fire lane.
As a result of thc foregoing, it is our opinion that there are some legitimate health, safety,
and welfare issues concerning the fire lane and the radius as represented on the Site Plan. The
Commission has three alternatives: (1) approve the Site Plau as submitted; (2) dcny thc Site Plan
based on technical health, safety, and welfare concerns; or (3) continue this case. We have
cxprcsscd our concern with whether or not U-Haul currently has contractual right to co-offer a
Site Plan,
During the course of dictating this letter, I have been handed an extension of your
contractual relationstfip under the institution of the original contract by and between the Five
Sack Storage Corporation. We assume Five Sack Storage Corporation to be U-Haul in this ease,
though there is some confusion as to the property owner on this matter. We assume that Mr.
Anderson will be present to proffer his request for a continuance this evening. As represented to
you on other occasions, I do not control nor inappropriately influence either the Planning and
Zoning Commission or thc City Council concerning their legislative prerogatives. The granting
of a continuance in this matter is a matter that is well within the discretion of the Commission
based upon the request of U-Haul dated September 19, 2000. We intend to make sure that th~
Planning and Zoning Commission receives a copy of the request for the continuance. I will
express our concern as legal counsel whether this continuance is sought for the purpose of
correcting a known defect in the Site Plan in which the Planning and Zoning Commission would
use as a basis to reject this propos~ use. Without commenting further on this, we do not expres?
an opinion about the motives for the request. However, we note that the fact the request may~
have been granted in the past and, as a consequence, misunderstandings have occurred bctwce~
the respective parties. These previous misunderstandings cause some reluctance by the
undersigned as to the motives for such continuance. Thus, it would be our recommendation to
you that a representative of U-Haul be present tonight to proffer its request for a continuance in
NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAOER & SMITH, L.L.E
36163
SEP
21 2000 1G:37 FR NICHOLS JACKSON DILLA4 965 0010 TO 9T~304709~
Ms. Barbara A. Wolenty
ROBINSON & WOLEArTY, LLC
September 21, 2000
Page 3
this matter and address qucstio~ thc Commission may have concemin~ their review of the Site
Plan set for the Planning and Zoning Commission tonight.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions please contact us
at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
NICHOLS, SACKSON, DILLARD,
HAGER & SMITH, L.L.P.
P.04
KEH/jld
cc: Gary Sieb VIA FAX
By:
DICTATED BUT NOT READ
Robert E. Ha~cr
NICHOLS, IACKSON, DILLARD, HAGER &SMITH, L.L,P.
36163