Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/15/1997BOOK MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, December 15, 1997 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Minutes December 1, 1997 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Resolution of Appreciation- Barbara Ericson 6. New Business Special Agreement and Lot Division - Uracey (Beam Avenue and Hazelwood Street) 7. Visitor Presentations 8. Commission Presentations a. December 8 Council Meeting: Mr. Frost b. December 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach c. January 12 Council Meeting: Mr. Thompson 9. Staff Presentations 10. Adjournment WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This outline has been prepared to help you understand the public meeting process. The review of an item usually takes the following form: The chairperson of the meeting will announce the item to be reviewed and ask for the staff report on the subject. Staff presents their report on the matter. The Commission will then ask City staff questions about the proposal. The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. o This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions about the proposal. Please step up to the podium, speak clearly, first giving your name and address and then your comments. After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the chairperson will close the public discussion portion of the meeting. The Commission will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. The Commission will then make its recommendation or decision. o All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes the final decision. jw/pc~ocagd Revised: 01195 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA DECEMBER 1, 1997 I. CALLTO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Bunny Brueggeman Commissioner Barbara Ericson Commtss~oner Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jack Frost Commissioner Kevin Kittridge Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner William Rossbach Commissioner Milo Thompson Present Present Present Present Absent Present Present Present III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 17, 1997 Commissioner Frost moved approval of the minutes of November 17, 1998, amended to have VI. C. read, "Chairperson Fischer was concerned about the effect the commercial zoning might have on the future financing or remodeling of a property that is residential." Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes--Ericson, Fischer, Frost, Pearson, Rossbach, Thompson Abstain--Brueggeman The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Pearson moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Frost seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. V. PUBLIC HEARING Land Use Plan Change (R-3M to R-1)--East Side of Hagen Drive between Larpenteur and Ripley Avenues Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report and answered questions. Chairperson Fischer asked if there were any comments from the public. There were none. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the resolution which changes the land use plan for the area with single dwellings on the east side of Hagen Drive between Larpenteur and Ripley Avenues. This change is from R-3(M) (residential medium density) to R-1 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Planning Commission Resignation December 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION Barbara Ericson has resigned from the planning commission. I have attached her letter of resignation and a resolution of appreciation for her. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached resolution of appreciation. kr/p:miscell/pcresig.mem Attachments: 1. November 19, 1997 letter 2. Resolution MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Code Variation and Driveway Agreement Southeast comer of Beam Avenue and Hazelwood Street December 8, 1997 INTRODUCTION Request Mr. Jack Desai, representing Uracey, Inc., (the property owners) is requesting that the city council allow him to divide a vacant property into two lots. (See the maps on pages 7-9.) The first lot would be 83,033 square feet (1.9 acres) behind the new cancer clinic building at 1580 Beam Avenue. This proposed parcel would not have frontage on a public street and thus would be landlocked. The second lot would be 82,760 square feet (1.9 acres) fronting on Hazelwood Street. Mr. Desai intends to' sell the two lots for future development. To approve the lot division, the city must approve a code variation to allow a lot that would not front on a public street. Section 30-8(f)(4) of the City Code requires all lots to abut a publicly dedicated and maintained street. The code allows the council to approve lots that do not front on a public street in special situations. As proposed, the easterly lot (behind the Cancer Center) would not front on a publicly dedicated and maintained street. Reason for the Requests Mr. Desai wants to divide this property into two lots so he may sell each of the two parcels separately. However, as I noted.above, one lot would not have frontage on a public street. He feels that the market for property in the area is for smaller parcels (about 2 acres) rather than for larger properties. Mr. Desai also notes that the drainage ditch that crosses the property creates a natural barrier between the two proposed lots. Crossing this ditch with a driveway and parking lot would be expensive and would not be practical. If the city denies the lot split, he would have to sell the 3.8-acre property as one parcel. (See his letter starting on page 11.) BACKGROUND On October 14, 1997, the community design review board (CDRB) approved the design plans for the Maplewood Cancer Center at 1580 Beam Avenue. This design approval is for the property north of this site and was subject to five conditions. (Please see the approved site plan on page 10.) DISCUSSION Fire Marshall's Concerns I asked Kevin Kelly, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, to review this proposal. He noted that there are several parts of the Uniform Fire Code that the developer of the proposed landlocked parcel must meet to use the lot. These include providing a fire hydrant on the lot, having at least a 20-foot- wide access drive to the lot, and providing a place for fire apparatus to tum around on the site. If the council approves the lot division, then they should make these requirements conditions of approval to ensure that future developers and users are aware of them. For access to the landlocked lot, the applicant is proposing to use the cancer clinic ddveway and parking lot through an easement. Mr. Desai required the owners of the cancer clinic to provide the access easement as a condition of the sale of the property to the clinic. Engineering Concerns The city engineer wants to ensure that the proposed parcels will have adequate sanitary sewer and water service. Sewer and water for the site will probably need to come in from Beam Avenue on the north. Uracey has a utility easement agreement with the owners of the new cancer clinic. This easement is over the west 15 feet of the clinic property and provides a location for the developer of the landlocked parcel to run utilities to the new lot. The city engineer reviewed the easement agreements and found that they were acceptable. Wetlands The wetlands shown on the map on page 9 are approximations of the wetlands near the site. Mr. Desai has not had the wetlands delineated. The lot division would not directly affect the wetlands. This is because the owner is not planning to develop this property until he finds a buyer to use the new lots. However, since the watershed district has classified the wetlands as Class III, the wetland protection ordinance requires at least s 25-foot-wide buffer area around the wetland. This buffer area could affect the use and grading of the southeast corner of the proposed landlocked parcel. In addition, the watershed district has classified the ditch that crosses the site that drains Markham Pond as a stream. The wetland protection ordinance requires land owners to provide a 50-foot-wide buffer area on both sides of a stream. As such, the council should require the applicant to delineate the wetland, the stream, and the buffer areas around each of these. The applicant then should have the delineations surveyed and described for putting into a recordable document. Mr. Desai needs to prepare the wetland and stream protection buffer documents so he can record them with the lot division. As such, city staff will need to review the documents before the city approves the lot division deeds. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the resolution on pages 15 and 16. This resolution allows the division of the vacant property south and east of 1560 Beam Avenue into two lots, one of which would not front on a public street. This resolution requires that the property owner complete the following conditions before the city will sign the new deeds for the lot division: The legal description for the lot division shall follow the plan shown on page 8 of the December 3, 1997 staff report. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. Record the following with Ramsey County: A permanent 30-foot-wide street and access easement between the landlocked parcel and Beam Avenue. The alignment shall be as shown on the plan on page 8 of the December 3, 1997 staff report. The Director of Community Development may approve minor alignment changes. A permanent wetland protection buffer easement. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall descdbe the boundary of the buffer for the area within 25 feet of the wetland, and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a building permit. A 100-foot-wide (50 feet on each side) permanent stream protection buffer easement. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer, and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a building permit. d. An agreement against the property that: 1. Holds the City harmless from any liability for using the pdvate driveway or any delay in emergency vehicles finding the structure(s). 2. States that the property owners shall maintain, plow and sand this driveway to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Safety. The City Attorney shall prepare these agreements. The property owner shall pay for the Attorney's costs. The property owners shall record all the above items before the city issues a building permit and shall provide the city with copies of all recorded documents. Install a sign at Beam Avenue and the ddveway that states the address of the future structure(s). Inform the buyers of the landlocked parcel that they shall provide a fire hydrant on the lot and that they shall provide a place for fire apparatus to turn around on the site. 3 REFERENCE SURROUNDING LAND USES Northerly: Westerly: Southerly: Easterly: Saint John's Hospital across Beam Avenue Open Space across Hazelwood Street Markham Pond Markham Pond PAST ACTIONS ON SIMILAR REQUESTS On April 20, 1978, the city council approved a request for Lorde Heinzen to construct a house at 2554 Idaho Avenue. Ms. Heinzen's lot did not front on a paved street. The Council approved the request, subject to the owner paving a ddveway to the existing street. On May 18, 1978, the city council approved a request of James Sobota to construct a storage building east of 2054 English Street. This building is on property that does not front on a paved street. This approval was subject to two conditionsmthe city engineer approving the driveway design and the applicant recording a maintenance agreement for the driveway. On May 1, 1980, the city council approved a request from Keith Libby to build three homes on a landlocked parcel. The site is on Century Avenue, south of 1-494. Access to this parcel is only available via a 30-foot ddveway easement from Century Avenue. This approval was subject to Mr. Libby installing a paved driveway on the existing easement to the city engineer's specifications. The city also required the applicant to sign an agreement to maintain the drive to City standards, including snow plowing. On July 13, 1992, the city council approved three requests for Radmila Popov for the Piletich property at 860 Burke Court. Burke Court is a private driveway. These requests allowed Ms. Popov to divide the property at 860 Burke Court into three lots. This approval also allows a total of five lots that do not front on an improved public street. On November 23, 1992, the city council approved a construction agreement and street vacations for Marlow Priebe. This agreement allowed the property owner to build two houses on a private driveway. The property is south of the Eldridge Avenue right-of-way and west of Birmingham Street. These two houses are on lots that do not front on an improved public street. On July 26, 1993, the city council approved a construction agreement and an increased front setback for Rodney and Susan Korf. These approvals were so the Korfs could build a house on an existing 7.5-acre tract of land east of Steding Street that did not front on a public street. On October 11, 1993, the city council approved a construction agreement for Steve Lukin. This approval was so Mr. Lukin could build a house on property that is north of County Road C and east of Kennard Street. The property does not front on an improved public street. UTILITIES There is sanitary sewer and water in Beam Avenue and Hazelwood Street. kdsec3/umcey, mem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line / Zoning Map 3. Proposed Lot Division Plan 4. City Staff Site Plan 5. Approved Cancer Clinic Site Plan 6. 11-6-97 letter from Uracey, Inc. 7. Resolution 5 Attachment 1 VADNAIS HEIGHTS COUNTY COUNTY NOR 1. SUMMIT CT. 2. COUNTRYVI~ CIR. ,,%. DULUTH CT, 4. LYDIA ST. BF.A~ b.I J~ C DEMONT BROOKS AVE.. RADATZ RD, RAUSEY COUNTY COURT KOHUdAN GERVAIS AVE. VIKING SH£RREN AVE. AW- COPE AV~. RI:). ~ ?, (1) CHAMBERS ST LOCATION 6 Attachment 2 /.- / I ~ ~', -,,i ~ I I I ~ :~ · , / .~_ !:1 i MAPLEWOOD ?' ;- ~.:,.',,,' :~ ~1 ST. JOHN'S I B~ PROFESSiONAL,, ST. PAUL EYE CLINIC i~ ',~1 HOSPITAL I D~ BUILDING pOTO~RYNGOLOGY ,.4 ~1- I ,, _.~ ;..~%~,.~ .l~.s, , , ~ ~ .' , ~, ~.~ , ,M ,~D.,~ . I I I ...~ ~~:~ ~, , ~-'H~ELWOOD ON BEAM ~': . ~ :"'~'~ MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING . o ~) -M MAPLEWOOD OFFICE PARK )SED LAND-LOCKED* PAI~CE~. / PROPOSED LOT T F PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP Attachment 3 APPROVED SPLIT S.FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT P~CF..L 2 10-FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT :~OPOSED LOT SPLIT PROPOSED LAND-LOCKED PARCEL PARCELS TWO AND THREE MUST BE RECORDED AS ONE LOT--NOT TWO AS SHOWN PROPOSED LOT DM$ION FOR URACEY, INC. Attachment 4 Uracey, Inc. Lot Division Request F~oposed La St. John's Hospital Beam Avenue Clinic Existing Wetland N Attachment APPROVED CANCER CLINIC SITE PLAN 10 ! Attachment URACEY, rNC. November 6, 1997 City of Maplewood Maplewood, MN 55109 Aonlication for a Special Council Agreement for the Lot Split of our PropertT Legal Description of the Property: It is attached as Exhibit I to this letter. .Why this Application? On October 23, 1997, Uracey, Inc. and M. C. Holdings, Trustee (for the Physician Reliance Network, Inc. of Texas) had made a Lot Division Application with the Community Development Department of the City of Maplewood to divide Uracey's land into three parcels: Parcel 1, 2 and 3 as shown in the drawing accompanying our October 23, 1997 Lot Division Application. On October 31, 1997 the Community Developed Department approved only Parcel 1. Parcel 2 is land locked and it can be approved only by the Maplewood City Council. Hence this application. We requested Mr. Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner of the City of Maplewood, to give us some guidelines which the City of Maplewood uses to make its decision for the land locked parcels. He stated that there are no such guidelines and each application is considered on its own merits. In the absence of any formal or informal criteria which the City requires for a land locked parcel, it is impossible for us to know what issues we need to address to allay whatever concerns the City may have for a land locked parcel. We have attempted to provide as much relevant information below as possible for the City of Maplewood to grant us: 1. Approval for separate Parcels 2 and 3. 2. A Beam Avenue Address for the Parcel 2 when it is developed. 3. Permission to display a sign on the Beam Avenue for the Parcel 2. .What is Uracey~ Inc..* In May 1969, a few Maplewood neighbors who lived around Edgerton Elementary School and their friends wanted to find a site in Maplewood where we aH could relocate our homes. We found an ideal site of approximately 10 acres, zoned FamffResidential, near the Hazelwood Elementary School, formed a corporation called Uracey, Inc. and purchased it on June 27, 1969. Out of the nine original incorporators, five were Maplewood residents. Three of the original five have since died and their heirs .today are part owners of Uracey, Inc. The only asset of Uracey, Inc. is the present Maplewood property. Uracey is neither a land speculator nor a real estate developer. It is a group of Maplewood neighbors and their friends who purchased a piece of land in 1969 in good faith to build homes for themselves and has been paying very high property taxes on it for 20 years since 1977. 2404 DIANNA LANE, ST.-PAUL, MN $$117-1616 PHONE: 612-484-0243 F~4X NO. 612-486-8073 - 2- NOVEMBER 6, 1997 History of the Site: Our plan in 1969 was to build 10 homes for ourselves. The site had a small stream meandering through it (County Ditch 18) and the Markham Pond was nearby. In 1970 when we tried to implement our plan, we found out that the character of that neighborhood was in a limbo because Maplewood had just received a proposal for a shopping mall in that area and the future of the Hazelwood Elementary School was In 1971, the City of Maplewood acquired almost two acres of our property through condemnation (paid us $0.04/sq. ft.) for the Beam Avenue and in 1974 tried to assess the remaining land about $0.30/sq. ft. for the Beam and Hazelwood improvements. In exchange, the City offered to rezone the land from farm/residentiai to R3, Multiple Housing, with the knowledge from its own appraiser that 'the resulting increase in the property valuation would not support the assessments. After a two year long acrimonious debate to determine a desirable zoning that could support the assessments, the City in 1976 created a new Modified Business Commercial zoning exclusively for the properties in our neighborhood and levied the assessments which were challenged in the court by a couple of property owners. During the construction of the Beam Avenue, some one from the City Engineer's office dredged the County Ditch 15 and made it considerably wider than what it originally was, resulting in a loss of our net land area. We put the land for sale in 1976. By 1983, because we could not pay the property taxes separately from the assessments while the latter were under dispute, our unpaid taxes, assessments, and penalties had reached a point where we would have to tax forfeit the property. We then found a buyer, the Maplewood Professional Associates, who purchased approximately two acres in 1984. We have been aggressively marketing the balance six acres since 1984 through Towle Real Estate, the prime Realtor in our area, and paying rather substantial real estate taxes in the meantime. It is only now in 1997, 13 years after we sold the first two acres, that we received an offer from the Physician Reliance Network, Inc. who insisted on acquiring only 2.5 acres which is Parcel I in the drawing. In summary, since 28 years ago that Uracey purchased ten acres, it has received only three offers, one of it involuntary, and each offer has been consummated: 1. Two acres taken over in 1971 by the City of Maplewood through condemnation for the construction of the Beam Avenue. 2. Two acres purchased by the Maplewood Professional Associates in 1983-84. 3. Two plus acres purchased by the Physician Reliance Network, Inc. in 1997. Based on the above history of 28 years, it is clear that this particular site does not attract users of a piece larger than 2.5 acres. Parcel 2 is 1.9 acres and Parcel 3 is 1.56 acres. -3- NOVEMBER 6, 1997 Present Status of our Property: When we started our negotiations Ofthe terms of sale of the Parcel 1 to the Physician Reliance Network, Inc. who had insisted to purchase only the Parcel 1, we informally consulted Maplewood's Associate Planner, Mr. Kenneth Roberts, on May 22, 1997 and showed him the site as it existed then. We told him that the potential buyer wanted to purchase the entire Beam Avenue frontage of our property and did not want to buy it aH the way to its southern boundary, leaving us with a land locked Parcel 2 which is blocked on its west side by the enlarged County Ditch 18. Mr. Roberts susgested that we should obtain an easement for the access of Parcel 2 to the Beam Avenue, so that if and when it is developed it can use the Beam Avenue access. We followed Mr. Robert's advice and have obtained a 30 ft. Driveway and Access E~ement from Physician Reliance Network, Inc., buyer of the Parcel 1, and a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 2. We also anticipated a Beam Avenue address for the Parcel 2 and obtained an easement to display a sign on the Beam Avenue for the benefit of the Parcel 2. A copy of the Sign Easement is attached as Exhibit 3. We have no prospect for Parcels 2 and 3 at this time. ,Why Should the City Council Approve a Special Ag.cement with Uracey~ Inc.? Parcel 2 has a natural western boundary of the County Ditch 18. So it does not have an access to the Hazelwood Street. The 30 foot driveway between its northern boundary and the Beam Avenue, as originally suggested by Mr. Kenneth Roberts, is as big as a normal city street, and will provide an immediate Beam Avenue ingress and egress to the Parcel 2. o Based on our historical experience of 28 years, we have been unable to find someone who wants a four acre parcel, particularly one divided by the County Ditch No. 18. Separation of these two parcels will expedite their development. The sooner we can sell Parcels 2 and 3 to developers the sooner improvements will occur on them and the sooner the Maplewood taxpayers will benefit from the increased property taxes. 4. We do not see anY negative impact on either the Beam Avenue or Hazelwood Street for the approval of our application. Because we will own both the Parcels 2 and 3, we will accommodate the utility and sewer requirements of these parcels depending on the specific requirements of their developers. Again, because we are unaware of any formal or informal criteria of the City to evaluate the application of a land locked parcel, it is difficult for us to know what the City wants and what it does not. We have tried to give as much information as we believe necessary. - 4 - NoWM~£R 6, 1997 If the City has any specific concerns that we have left unaddressed, please let us know so that we can address them. lagadish Desai, Secretary Uracey, Inc. Attachments: Special Agreement Application dated November 6, 1997. Exhibit 1 - Legal Description of the Property Exhibit 2 -.Driveway and Access Easement to Beam Avenue for Parcel 2. Exhibit 3 - Sign Easement for display of Parcel 2 sign on the Beam Avenue. Attachment 7 DRIVEWAY AGREEMENT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. Jack Desai is asking that the city approve a code variation to divide a vacant property south and east of 1560 Beam Avenue into two lots; WHEREAS, the legal description of the property is: The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, except the South 75.00 feet of the West 83.20 feet and except the following: That part of the North 492.00 feet of the West 395.00 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, lying n. ortherly, northeasterly, and southeasterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northwest comer of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 3; thence South 00 degrees 28 minutes 21 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter a distance of 239.62 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 80 degrees 01 minute 09 seconds East 52.95 feet; thence South 84 degrees 16 minutes 09 seconds East a distance of 111.00 feet; thence-easterly a distance of 39.02 feet along a tangential curve concave to the southwest having a radius 72.12 feet and a central angle of 31 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds; thence South 53 degrees 16 minutes 09 seconds East tangent to said curve a distance of 90.00 feet; thence southeasterly and southerly a distance of 44.92 feet along a tangential curve concave to the southwest having a radius of 51.47 feet and a central angle of 50 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds; thence South 03 degrees 16 minutes 09 seconds East tangent to said curve a distance of 37.89 feet; thence South 31 degrees 46 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 107.76 feet to the south line of the north 492.00 feet of said Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter. and also except the following: That part of the north 492 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the west 395 feet thereof. Subject to streets and avenues of record. (1580 Beam Avenue). WHEREAS, Section 30-8(f)(4) of the City Code requires all lots to abut on a publicly dedicated and maintained street. WHEREAS, the proposed Parcel Two would not front on a publicly-maintained street. WHEREAS, the history of this request is as follows: 1. The Planning Commission discussed this request on December 15, 1997. They recommended that the City Council approve the request. The City Council discussed this request on ,1998. The council gave everyone at the meeting a chance to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations from the City staff and Planning Commission. 15 I II NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council allow the lot division for the above-described property with the following conditions: The legal description for the lot division shall follow the plan shown on page 8 of the December 3, 1997 staff report. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 2. Record the following with Ramsey County: A permanent 30-foot-wide street and access easement between the landlocked parcel and Beam Avenue. The alignment shall be as shown on the staff site plan on page 8 of the December 3, 1997 staff report. The Director of Community Development may approve minor alignment changes. bo A permanent wetland protection buffer easement. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer for the area within 25 feet of the wetland and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a building permit. Co A 100-foot-wide (50 feet on each side) permanent stream protection buffer easement. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a building permit. d. An agreement against the property that: 1. Holds the City harmless from any liability for using the private driveway or any delay in emergency vehicles finding the structure(s). 2. States that the property owners shall maintain, plow and sand this driveway to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Safety. The City Attorney shall prepare these agreements. The property owner shall pay for the Attorney's costs. The property owner shall record all the above items before the city issues a building permit and shall provide the city with copies of all recorded documents. ° Install a sign at Beam Avenue and the ddveway that states the address of the future structure(s). Inform the buyers of the landlocked parcel that they shall provide a fire hydrant on the lot and that they shall provide a place for fire apparatus to turn around on the site. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on ,1998.