Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Council Action Form dated March 27, 2001 5CGS Cd C' ( C' or f ITEM # tv�/Q'4,b DATE March 27, 2001 STAFF REPORT REVISION TO THE MUNICIPAL RENTAL HOUSING CODE TO CORRECT INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE ZONING CODE REGARDING OCCUPANCY LIMITS BACKGROUND: For many years the enforcement of the Rental Housing Code in the City of Ames was consistent with enforcement of the Municipal Zoning Code. The two codes allowed a family and two roomers per dwelling unit, or up to three unrelated persons in all zoning districts. The concept of three unrelated people dates back more than 30 years in Ames and is similar to other communities that have been researched. The previous zoning regulations contained a few exceptions which allowed more than three unrelated persons in areas zoned R-3 and R-4, if additional parking was provided and documented on the Letter of Compliance. As part of the creation of the new Zoning Code that was adopted in May of 2000, time was spent discussing problems that the City has experienced with respect to occupancy in rental units throughout the community. At meetings held as part of the Zoning Ordinance process, numerous residents expressed concern regarding the number of occupants in single-family and two-family rental units and the negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. As a result of this feedback, the City Council revised the Zoning Ordinance to accomplish the following objectives: • The greatest density is to be provided for in multiple family zones classified as RM and RH. • The greatest occupancy is to be provided in apartment dwellings (previously referred to as multi-family dwellings). • The occupancy in single-family and two-family dwellings is to contain less people than allowed in the prior legislation. The rationale behind this approach in the new Zoning Ordinance is to protect single-family and two-family neighborhoods, encourage greater occupancy in apartment dwellings that are properly designed for larger numbers of people, and to limit the tendency of converting single-family and two-family structures to rental units, which results in excessive use of the property and the corresponding negative impact on the neighborhood. 1 It is important that City Council understands that with the adoption of the new Zoning Ordinance, a new relationship has been created between the occupancy limitation in the Zoning Ordinance and the need for a more precise occupancy limitation in the Rental Housing Code. The new Zoning Ordinance establishes a maximum allowable ,occupancy based on structure type (i.e., apartment dwelling, single-family dwelling, etc. . The proposed change to the Rental Housing Code will further define the Council's occupancy limitation policy based solely on unit type and number of bedrooms. For the first time, the newly adopted Zoning Ordinance defined occupancy limits for an apartment dwelling different from a single-family or two-family dwelling. Again, the rationale for this was to provide for a greater number of occupants in apartment dwellings, while limiting the number of occupants in single-family and two-family dwelling units. According to the definition in the new Zoning Ordinance an "Apartment dwelling means a dwelling containing three or more residential units. The term includes what is commonly known as an apartment building, but does not include community residential facilities or single-family attached dwellings. Apartment dwellings may be occupied by families only, or by a group of unrelated persons limited to five or less per residential unit." "'v Inspections Staff discovered a problem with the implementation of the new Zoning Ordinance when they started to issue Letters of Compliance. Completing the Letter of Compliance requires Inspections Staff to identify how many occupants caneside in each dwelling unit. As a result the Inspections Staff has not been issuing Letters of Compliance since the new Zoning Code took effect last summer. The Inspections Staff noted the following inconsistency: The new Zoning Code allows for a family or up to 5 unrelated occupants per unit in an apartment dwelling, and a family or no more than 3 unrelated occupants in single- family and two-family dwellings, regardless of Zoning District. However, the Rental Housing Code limits the number of occupants to a family and two roomers or three unrelated occupants in all dwelling units in all Zoning Districts. (A copy of a comparison table showing the previous code requirements, the newly adopted Zoning Ordinance, and the proposed change to the Rental Housing Code is attached.) After this discovery, the Building Official met with Planning and Housing staff to determine if this definition was intended to mean that five persons could occupy every apartment dwelling throughout Ames regardless of the amount of on-site parking. It is staffs' belief that the intent of the apartment dwelling definition and the removal of "roomers" allowed by the previous definition of family was to allow for more persons to live in new apartments while protecting the integrity of single-family and two-family neighborhoods. However, City staff determined through calculations that increasing the occupancy limit to five unrelated persons for all apartment dwellings may increase parking problems, traffic concerns, and create additional concerns regarding life, safety, and sanitation for existing structures. 2 Inspections and Planning and Housing staff then started brainstorming and calculating various methods to determine occupancy limits that would not create excessive problems for the existing neighborhoods. .After careful study and working through many examples, staff has decided to recommend a level o occupancy for unrelated peop a to an amounfia wou a one person r of be rooms for each dwelling unit, up to a maximum of five. in many cases this would increase the density per structure over what is currently allowed in the Rental Housing Code and would still protect the integrity of single-family and two-family neighborhoods. At this point Inspections staff discussed this proposal with numerous landlords and received feedback concerning existing units that were already occupied by more than what the proposed Rental Housing Code would provide for. As a result of this feedback, staff is prepared to propose a change in the Rental Housing Code to include a "grandfather" provision to allow for non-conforming occupancy status to remain. This _provision means that any rental unit in Ames that currently has a Letter of Compliance, allowing more occupants than the proposal previously described could continue WR the same number of occupants for the life of the structure, as long as the property ,_owner maintains a valid Letter of Compliance. An example of how the proposed change to the Rental Housing Code would apply to a hypothetical 4-unit apartment dwelling is shown in the following table. Maximum Number of Unrelated Occupants Allowed Example: 4-Unit Apartment Building Built in 1995 Each apartment has three bedrooms Regulation Total Number Total Number of Total Number of of Bedrooms Occupants Allowed Parking Spaces Previous Zoning Ordinance 12 12 (3/apt) 8 Current Zoning Ordinance 12 20 (5/apt) 8 Current Rental Code 12 12 (3/apt) 8 Proposed Rental 16 (4/apt or 1 more than the Code Change 12 number of bedrooms) 8 All through these discussions, staff has supported the Council's policy to limit occupancy in single-family and two-family dwellings to a family or three unrelated people. In terms of single-family and two-family units, the only difference in the proposed change to the Rental Housing Code, compared to the current Code, is the elimination of the provision that allows two roomers to live with a family. There are approximately 30 single-family and two-family, owner occupied homes in 3 Ames that currently have roomers, and it was decided to allow those to remain, since the Letter of Compliance is current. Again, they will be allowed to remain as long as they remain registered with the City of Ames and are inspected. If this proposal is adopted, all apartment dwellings in Ames will be allowed to be occupied by a family, or by one more person than the number of bedrooms per unit regardless of parking, or by the allowed number of unrelated persons stated in a current Letter of Compliance, whichever is greater. All single-family and two-family structures and duplexes, in all areas of the City, will be allowed to be occupied by a family, or three unrelated persons, or the number of occupants identified by the Letter of Compliance issued prior to May 1, 2000. Therefore, staff believes Council should "grandfather" existing situations. Staff believes few, if any, rental property owners will be harmed by this proposal, and the density will increase in the areas and structures designed to handle it while protecting single-family and two-family neighborhoods. Inspections staff made the following efforts to notify property owners and landlords of the proposed change in the Rental Housing Code: • Flyers were made available at the Inspections counter. • Inspectors handed out as many flyers to landlords as possible. • A notice for a public meeting to discuss the proposed change in the Rental Housing Code was published in the Ames Tribune. A public meeting was held on February 26, 2001 in the City Council Chambers and was attended by most of the Inspections staff, one member of the City planning staff, and ten rental property owners representing about 1300 rental units. Also, a few of the same property owners met with Planning and Housing staff prior to the February 26 meeting for further clarification of the proposal. Many of the landlords or property managers in attendance would like the number of occupants to be the same in all units regardless of whether it is a small apartment dwelling, a large apartment dwelling, or a single-family or two-family structure. Other rental property owners felt that single-family and two-family structures, located in medium density and high density zoning districts should be allowed to have the same number of occupants as apartment dwellings (one more than the number of bedrooms). The staff believes that the proposed change to the Rental Housing Code best reflects the City Council's objectives to promote greater density in apartment dwellings, limit occupancy in single-family and two-family units, reduce the negative effects on neighborhoods, and minimize the negative consequences to existing rental property owners. It is possible that some properties that contain single-family or two-family dwellings may experience a lower occupancy limitation than what was previously allowed. Staff believes that the number of properties in this situation is relatively few in number. Since the Inspections staff have found it difficult to issue Letters of Compliance since the new Zoning Ordinance was put into effect, it is critical that the City 4 Council make a decision with respect to the existing Rental Housing Code. Therefore, staff urges that the City Council decide on one of the following options: 1) City Council could direct that an ordinance be prepared that reflects the proposed revisions to the Rental Housing Code, as proposed by staff and attached to this staff report. 2) City Council could direct that an ordinance be prepared as above, but also allow for the same occupancy for single-family and two-family dwellings in Residential Medium Density and Residential High Density zones as what is being proposed for apartment dwellings in those zones. 3) The City Council could direct that an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance be prepared that would provide for up to two roomers in single-family and two-family dwellings in all zoning districts. 4) The City Council could direct that an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance be prepared that would provide for up to five unrelated occupants in single-family and two-family dwellings, if additional parking were provided in residential medium and residential high density zones. —Staff believes that the first option is most closely aligned with the intent of the ._recently adopted Zoning Ordinance and also reflects what staff believes was the ._..-intent of the City-_Council by allowing greater numbers of occupants in apartment F_dwellings as compared to single-family and two-family dwellings. The difficulty with the second option is that it would not serve to accomplish the objectives of the City Council to the same degree. This option could result in a greater conversion of existing single-family and two-family dwellings to rental units, which has been shown to be problematic with respect to compatibility with owner-occupied units. There are a number of instances where rental occupancy of single-family and two-family dwellings with a larger number of occupants has resulted in problems associated with poorly designed on-site parking and a tendency to have a greater negative effect in the neighborhood. Staffs objections to options 3 and 4 are that it would it would reverse the adopted policy of the City Council of protecting single-family and two-family neighborhoods from the negative consequences of larger numbers of unrelated occupants in single-family and two-family dwellings. Regardless of which option is ultimately adopted, the staff urges the City Council to make a final decision on this matter as soon as possible so that changes to the relevant code can be made and the issuance of Letters of Compliance can recommence. Therefore, the City Council should next select a preferred option and request the City Attorney to prepare a revised ordinance to be brought back to the City Council for your approval, which would likely occur on April 10, 2001. 5 0 E E 7 / 2 0 E o 0 \ _ = 7 E o e o ° E @ E 2 3 2 / @ o E 2 \ X C cCL 2 § � Q 2 = E E £ QCL 2 E ° � 0 o 0 a E L- 0 L- 0 k 0 0 o " 2 0 / \ n > � � � a) -0 0 o _ E f E © ± 2 2 E G 2 / J / ± / ± E 2 � / � / @ 0 0 / _§ 2 _§ \ 0 0 a Q) § / 0 7 7 � E �.E � ou m a) ) CL0 § E < E x E E o o E n 9 o@ o m - .§ = e m o = / E E E E ® C / e 2 I @ \ E ° \ § Q- CL = 0 \ \ 2 \ / k" \ m m 2 2 M o o e n �L- n o £ -a 3 o p 3 \ e 0 E c � © \ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o k N �o 70 _0 70 70 -a _0 7 — x n ® 3 0 2 = ® 3 J E ± ® » 7 n \ S 7 7 = c 3 k 2 a a) a) (D � e2 / c c E E c _ = E -a-0J _ _ _ =3 _ _ _ = E m m o 0 o m m m e m o .§ � e E § ® E E § E o o 0 •- ■ § 0 @ ® @ § 0 0 \ q \ q o U 2 q \ % % k a 2 0 £ e £ § § n 70 % / § > % >1 § § \ { 0 : / E k a J / § I 0 / M 0) o cm o E- m o ° 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 § ° \ 2 0 \ � 7 c 7 2 \ c- \ » a 2 m C � E � � � _� a a � a) � � a) \ § § k § � § § k § m a M = m 3 �L- o n e o �t- m g E b % k ƒ 0 0 _0 a CD § § .g E § 2 G f G $ § 7 § ° ' k CZ E G n0 : a 3 2 0 0 3 = e = c 0 7 0� 2 D E 2 >,.R _� 2 -0 / 7 0 7 \ Com w 7 % § N ' N a 0 N 7 \ ) f �� �� § f @ y » � o 7 m k § \ k § f c 2 � C w m