February 9, 2005

Dave Corliss

6^th E. 6^th Street

Lawrence, Kansas

66044

RE: Auto Exchange, 33rd & Iowa

Dave,

In response to your memorandum yesterday; I am not trying to retract our previous proposal or back peddle on any of my previous statements. Rather, the situation has changed based on what the city commission has approved versus what we had proposed.

I talked with my client extensively this morning and he has indicated that if the City can provide him with a public access easement from 33^rd and Neider to the South property line of his site, he can live with a single point for ingress and egress.  I still feel a better solution is to provide traffic flow through the site, which would require two drives.  This could be accomplished in a safe manner by having a median installed on 33^rd Street to eliminate left turns across traffic into the site.  However, if the city believes that a single access point on the south side of the property is the best solution; my client is willing to proceed with that. 

In previous discussions of a very general manner with the operator of Uno’s (Chris Werth) he told me that an access easement with a maintenance agreement between Uno’s and the Auto Exchange would probably be acceptable. When this item was finally put on the City Commission agenda I initiated contact with Chris again. After several attempts I have yet to have a conversation regarding this matter. I cannot, therefore, state whether he is willing to grant a public access easement.  In light of his having not returned my last few calls, it is possible that I was overly optimistic about his willingness to provide the easement. 

As you and I have discussed numerous times, my client and I simply do not have the authority or ability to demand or take the easement. However, the City of Lawrence does have that power.  It also has the responsibility to do so.  Because the city wants to take away the direct access to 33^rd Street, the City needs to provide my client with legal access from his property to 33^rd Street.  Because you have indicated you can’t do that across Culver’s, it will have to be across Uno’s and Neider Road.

The wording you propose for the conditions would essentially kill the project.  I can’t force the issue of the access easement. That puts my client in a very difficult position.  I ask, therefore, that the PDP be allowed to move forward with the condition and understanding that the access will be provided by the City either on the north end or the south end; whichever the City is able to provide.  This allows the project to move ahead regardless of the location at which the access is ultimately provided.  (Again, we still believe two driveways to allow traffic to flow through the site would be better, but my client will settle for just one driveway, and will let the City decide whether it be on the north or the south.)

If you want to discuss these items prior to Tuesday night, please give me a call.

Sincerely,

/s/ Paul Werner

Paul Werner