Laserfiche WebLink
15-3724 <br /> April 15,2015 <br /> Page 4 <br /> to allow separation of ownership of two-family dwellings can only apply to those such dwellings <br /> existing as of the date of adoption of the ordinance? A question to ponder is whether the creation <br /> of new duplexes is likely, or will most future two-family dwellings be created so as to be <br /> individually owned... <br /> - Should the types of two-family dwellings be better defined? See Exhibit _ which includes <br /> dwelling-related definitions for Orono, Mound and Maple Grove as examples for discussion. <br /> Note that Maple Grove makes a distinction between side-by-side units ("Double Bungalow") and <br /> stacked units ("Duplex"). <br /> - One of the risks in separating ownership of a duplex building is the real possibility that two <br /> owners have extremely divergent ideas about the visual and maintenance aspects of individual <br /> ownership. Examples can be readily found in other cities where two different fa�ade colors and <br /> styling emerge on one building, for instance. How to eliminate such possibilities through the <br /> approval process, such as establishing specific code provisions dictating uniformity via <br /> maintenance covenants, is worthy of discussion. Cities do not as a rule dictate building colors or <br /> siding styles, but this might be an example where some level of control is necessary... <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> A draft ordinance has not been prepared, but would be drafted based on Planning Commission <br /> discussion and recommendations, likely very similar to one of the attached examples. <br /> Planning Commission is requested to review the attached materials and discuss the concepts and <br /> possible concerns noted. <br />