Laserfiche WebLink
<br />similar to this before on another property sharing a :eenced in area with access to a building. Mr. <br />Sharp indicated he was not willing to be fle~iple in (the fenced in area and does not want cars to <br />be located there. Mr. Fisher indicated he su~gested Jj110vingthefencedline towards Highway 10. <br />This was not a compromise acceptable toejther pamr. They have come to an impasse on the <br />parking with neither tenant willing to be flexU:11e. <br /> <br />Ms. Patty Sharp, K & K Sharp, asked when the 25 vehicle necessity in the gated area was <br />included in the lease, as they were not notifiedofthi$. <br /> <br />Mr. Fisher replied the 25 car parking allowance w~ initiated at the beginning of negotiations <br />with Midwest Car Care. Originally there was a conc~rn that they would be selling used cars, and <br />Midwest Car Care assured that there would not be u~ed cars, A cap of25 was put on the number <br />of cars that would be allowed in the rear of the buil41ing. From that time forward, Midwest Car <br />Care has grown accustomed, or has favored the position, of having vehicles in the back because <br />it is secure. <br /> <br />Ms. Sharp stated on September 26, Dennis ~harp was present at the Council meeting when the <br />lease was approved and she (Ms. Sharp) is curious if the 25 spaces were approved at that time. <br />K & K Sharp was not aware of the 25 car issue, which results in security issues for them. They <br />are offering secured boat storage, so they hold keys, along with Pro Sports. If they add a third <br />party into tIus area they are very concerned .about;thesecurity issues. It will be difficult to <br />monitor who is coming in and out of the property. K& K Sharp would not be flexible in regards <br />to the 25 spaces in writing, but she feels they can work something out However, in the past <br />when something like this is allowed inevitably there are problems getting the vehicles moved; <br />they have run into many Wngs that caused too much trouble. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson asked if moving the fence towards Highway 10 would increase the size of <br />the fenced in area. <br /> <br />Mr. Fisher replied yes, he had suggested moving the fence from the. rear of the building up to the <br />end of the garage areas. However, the cars would s~ill be parked in front of the doors that K & <br />K Sharp would access, so from time to time the cars would need to be moved. Moving the fence <br />would relieve the issue of security because there would be>adouble gated area, but Mr. Sharp <br />had indicated he would still have to be counting on the .cars being moved. Mr. Sharp indicated <br />that was not a workable solution. <br /> <br />Council member Olson inquired about splitting ,another portion of the parking in the rear. <br /> <br />Mr. Fisher replied this was discussed as well; 6701 has a fair amount of width, as does 6745, and <br />he suggested splitting the vehicles behind. each; building. Mr. Sharp needs access for <br />maneuvering and was not very excited abollt this q>ption.Mr. Sharp also expressed concern <br />regarding the issue of security and having mOre than two or three people with key access. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson questioned ifthere is not an option to have separate fenced areas. <br /> <br />Mr. Fisher replied logistically it may be possible. It is more of a security issue with Mr. Sharp. <br /> <br />City Council'fNoveIDlher 14, 2006 <br />Pag, .'15 of $l <br /> <br />" :r <br /> <br />P23 <br /> <br />