01-10-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M04-3016 “Crccksidc in Orono” January 6, 2005 Page 7 Monument Sienage: Liehtinc. Tlic applicant has proposed no temporary or pemiancnt subdivision identi fication or monument signage, although such signage is contemplated within the proposed Covenants. Such signage will need City approval and permits, and must confonn to location and design standards. No street liglitinghas been proposed, and the neighboring property owners arc in opposition to any street lighting. The City Code does not require street lighting. Such lighting i f proposed should be subject to Council approval. Neighbor Letters. The City has icccived letters from the 2 adjoining neighbois to the immediate west of the site. Both neigliboring homes arc situated somewhat higher in the topography than the proposed homes, and will have var>'ing seasonal views of the development tluough the woods. The letters arc attached as Exhibit F, and the applicant’s response to them is Exhibit G. With regard to the McCuskey letter, staff offers the following: •Items 1 thru 4 are suitably addressed by the applicant's letter. •Item 5: The HA, the developer and Mr. McCuskey will have to reach some agreement as to whether or to what extent McCuskey is obligated for maintenance costs. -Item 6: McCiKskcy should conclude whether the resjionse is satisfactory in regards to the driveway reconstruction. ■Item?: It is assumed that McCuskey has longhad apemianent access ea.sement over Tract G; however, the City road casement over the noilh 10’ of the McCuskey property, combined with the Road. Drainage and Utility casement gi anted to the City by Dunn, would seem U) provide such easements. The City Attorney may be able to address this further. Item 8: It is very possible that the USES will pot accept individual mailboxes for the individual properties on this pnvate road, but will require a bank of mailboxes cither on Brown Road or along the private road but very ne.ar Brown Road. Most ofour private road subdivisions utilize such a shared mailbox system. ■Item 9: While the City has agreed to the provision of water and sewer to McCuskey, and has required that the utility plans be re-designed to provide .McCuskey with easy access to those utilities, the City is not party to any fomtal agreement between McCuskey and the applicant as to cost sharing in the provision of such service. Item 10: The developers response and the revised landscape plan suitably address the issue of reforestation of the west 50' of Lots 1 and 2. i ¥ Ji