HomeMy WebLinkAbout8B - Change to Boulder's Occupancy RegulationsMemo: Consideration of
Revisions to B.R.C.
Title 9
Agenda Item v111-B
CTTYOF BOULDER
CITY CQUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
NTEETING DATE: Apri18, 2004
AGENDA TITLE:
[ntroducHon, 6rst reading, and consideraUon of a motion to order published by title only an
ordinance amending Title 9"Land [Jse Regulation" BRC 1981 to: 1) modify the term
"family" as used in Section 9-3.2-8 (a)(2) "Occupancy of Umts" to make it raore inclusive
of extended family members and marriage neutral; and 2) amendments to the occupancy
limitations for dwelling units in low density residential zones.
PRESENTERS:
Peter Pollock, Plauning D~rector
Liz Hanson, Acting Land tJse Review Manager
Crary ICretschmer, Seuior Planner
Executive Summarv:
At the February 10, 2004 study sess~on, City Council discusseci and avaluated modifications to
the definition of "Family" to be more inclusive of extended family members mcludmg revisions
to the term so that it would not have a discruninatory impact on non-tradirional famll~es by
replacing references to married couples with "two heads of a household" An impact associated
with the latter change could be a potenUal increase in occupancy. The Council narmwed the
discussion to two optrons and directed staff to present those opUons to the Planning Board for
review and recommendation. Staff research into options has continued and an altematrve
approach has been identified
A community meeting is planned for March 30, 2004. The options that have been evaluated by
the Planmng Board and City Council will be discussed. Several oprions that aze bemg evaluated
by staff will be presented for review and comment. All feedback received from the meeting wtli
be compiled and distributed to City Council prior to first readmg.
Fiscal Impacts:
No fiscal impacts to the city are anticipated from the proposed amendment.
.
S U'LAN~Cc-demsVvIEMOS\GK408-OACCoccupancylatrcadmg doc Agenda Item. age ~{_1!
Other Imaacts:
These amendments will improve clarity of the existmg code and address social issues of
imporiance to the commmiity The ordmance, if not revised to miniruize the potential for
occupancy abuse, could result in an on-go~ng occupancy concems m impacted neighborhoods.
Board and Commission Feedback:
At its February 26, 2004 hearmg the Planmng Board recommended thAt C~ty Council adopt the
following proposed land use regulation amendments: a change in the definition of "fanuly" and
"consanguinity" (dropping the reference to "mamage" in the definition) and an allowance that
"two heads of household" be allowed two roomers m the low density and lower zoning distncts
(shown as Opuon i in the staff inemo). Passed 5 to 1, Pommer opposed, favoring instead Option
2, as reconunended by staff
The Boazd mdicated tliat the goal of making the ordmance marriage neutral weighed heavily m
its decis~on. Option 2 introduced a new variable requiring home ownership versus non-
ownership on wluch to base maximum permitted occupancy. The board felt that this option
would result in rednced or lost housmg opporlunit~es While the boazd expressed concerns that
Option 1 d~d have Uie potential for occupancy abuses, We board felt that the loss of housmg
opportunihes and treating heads of household that rent differently than those who own homes
(as specified in Ophon 2) outweighed tlns concern.
The specific code changes recommended by the Planning Board included the followmg:
1) Make the defimhon of "Consangumity" marriage neutral by removing
references to husbands and wives and replacing those tecros with "heads of
the household";
"ConsarJguiniry" means only the /'oJlowinp ~ersons are related wrthin the '" ",
~,,7~~,~ i f~2 E'C O COI1SCpI illl S n Y' 4~ -~_,~,~~~iy, .. i t3~:~{;,' s,* U~':'~"-.:;~x`,
.+/~!h'dY,~ ~Y' .f $u ~3xte~.~`,~}b~B~dl-t~~~~"~~°a~~~(~`i~N+F~~~~'t~'~
~tt,~,~{~Ai~~t~~ parents antl children, grandparents and granrlchtTdren, brothers and
s+sters, aunts and :mcles, ``{ nenhews and nieces, ~F-first cousins. i~~t
~~?~~~,~+e~~.~zi~~~~~~;~r~zt~~~>>~~:'~~~~~~r~~i~#~"~~~~~~~+~ These
relat~onsh~ps n:ay be of the whole or• half bloocl, by adopteon, or by af,~enity
{Additions and deletions are highlighted)
2) Define "Heads ofthe household" as: "up to two persons that lrve together, who
pool thetr resources, and share the responstfiiltry for providing for support of the
famlly "
3) Define "Family" as: ' people related up tv the fvurth degree of consangumity to the
heads of the household that occupy a dwelli»g umt, "
s
S\PLAMCc-rtemsVvl6MOS\GK408-04CCoccupancylstreadmg.doc AgendaItemL.+~PageliT2_
Public Feedback:
Potential impacts of the proposed changes were first raised by neighborhood representatives at a
Plannmg Board study sess~on on Februuy 27, 2003 to discuss the 2002/2003 Land Use
Regulation amendnnents.
Staff conducted a public meeting in October of 2003 to d~scuss these issues and other related
issues. Approximately 2S people attended which included neighborhood representaGves,
students, university housm~ representatives, landlords, and cooperative housing advocates. In
general, the comments received were divided between those concerned about neighborhood
protection and those who questioned the need for occupancy reshichons.
At the February 26, 2004 Planrung Board meeting, those addressing this item generally
supported the changes to make the definition of fam~ly marriage neutral and revising the
ordinance to be more inclusive of extended family members. They, however, expressed conccros
about the term "heads of a household" and the lack of cnteria in the definition that would prevent
two people from declaring themselves heads of a household for the sole reason of increasulg
occupancy in low density neighborhoods. Any increase in occupancy in low density
neighborhoods was identified as bemg unacceptable.
Numerous e-raails have been sent to City Council in response to the Piannuig Board
recommendation. In summary, one letter su~gests not regulating occupancy at all but encourages
smct enforcement of all environmental regulations (noise, Irash, parkmg, etc.). All the remaining
letters are opposed to any cha~iges that could have an impact of inereasing allowable occupancy.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that City Counml approve the introduction, first reading, and motion to order
publishing by tifle only, an ordinance amending Title 9"Land Use Regulation" BRC 1981 to. 1)
modify the term "family" as used in Section 9-3.2-8 (a)(2) "Occupancy of Units" to make it
more inclusive of extended family members and mamage neutral; and 2) amendments to the
occupancy limitations for dwelling units m law density residentiat zones as recomrnended by the
Planning Boud. StatF, however, recommends that the original defini6on of "heads of a
household" be rev~sed to be more explicit and prevent potential occupancy mcreases w}uch aze
possible with the initial definition (See Option lA).
Note: The attached ordinance reflects Option 1 as recommended by the Planning Board. Should
the Council wish to revise the language to reflect Option lA, the attached ordinance would have
to be amended.
Analvsis•
The proposed amendments have been divided into two parts for d~scussion purposes:
S•1PLAN~Cc-rtemsVvtEMOS\aK4-OB-04CCoccupancylsUeadmgdoc AgendaItem~...,J~Page#`3_
Part "A"- Modify the term `y'amily" and the definition of "consanguiniry" to be
more inclusive of eztee+ded faneily members: and
Part "B"- CHange the occupancy section of the code to make ft marriage neutral
and to acknowledge otleer forins of don~estic relationships uad address
occupancy related issues tliat result from this cHange.
P~rt "A" Discussiun & Analysis.
The City af $oulder Human Relations Commission requested that the definition of family
be amended to be more inclusive of extended family members. This ~s especialty
imponant to ethmc communiGes and families The care of senior relatives is deemed to
be an important family obhgahon in many ethntc communities. The recommendahon is
to include great-grandpazents and great-aunts and great-uncles within the family
definition. The current definihon of family which restricts family members to the second
degree of consangumity does not accomplish this
Consanguinity is curreutly defined as:
"Consangumiry" means only the following persons are related within the seconii degree
of consangu:nrty• husbands and wrves, purents and ch~ldren, grandparents and
grandchtldren, brother ared ststers, aunts and uncles and nephews and nieces, and first
cousrns. These relationshrps may be of the whole or half blood, by adopt:on, or by
a~nity (Secteon 9-1-3(af, B.R.C 1981)
To allow the extended fam~ly members referenced to reside in the same dwelling umt, the
degree of consanguinity would have to be changed &om the second to the fourth.
Altematively, the c~ty could expand the definition of consangumity to ind~cate those
members of a family that can reside together.
Staff has received some comments that cia~m that larger families tend to generate more
impacts, such as traffic and pazking generation While this may be true, it's doubtful that
the older occupants (that the change would allow) would contribute sigmficantly towards
such impacts.
Part "B" Discussion & An~lysis:
The ]ocal chapter of flie American Civil liberties Union recommended that the city
cons~der revising tUe occupancy requirements of the code making it "marriage neutral"
and thereby, recognizing other forms of domestic relationships. To make these changes,
the defimfion of consanguinity and references to marriage in the occupancy ret}utrements
could be removed and replaced with "heads of a household" and a defuvtion of this term.
During the initiai discussions to make the occupancy regulations "marriage neutral",
speakers at public hearings suggested that the change could be used to circumvent
existmg occupancy limitauons. It was suggested that two people could declaze
S V'LAN\Ce-rtems\MEMOS\GK408-04CCoccupancyistreadmg doc A.genda Item~ Page # 4~
themselves as "heads of a househald" to take advantage of the two roomer allowance and
allow a total of four unrelated people (where only three nnrelated people are cunently
allowed) in dwelling units in low density zones.
As a result of t2us concern, staff was directed to look at opfions that would allow the
definition to be "marriuge neutrai" and to mitigate if possible, the potential occupancy
related concerns.
The current regulations that govem occupancy are found in Section 9-3.2-8 and aze as
follows•
(a) Genernl Occupanq~Restrictrons• Subject to the provisions of Chapter 1D-
2, "Housrng Code, ° B R C 1981, no persons except the followmg persons
shall occupy a dwelkng unat:
(1) Members of a family related to the head of the household by marriage,
udoption, or blood, up to the second degree of consangu+n~ty, plus one ar
two roomers, but only if the ~uarters that the roomers use do not earceed
one-~h:rd of the tota! Jloor area of the dwelling unit and do not occupy a
separate dwellang urat;
(2) Up ro three persons tn P-E, AE, R1Z, RRl, ER, and LR aones;
(3J Up to four persons m MU, MR, MXR, HR, RMS, flZ, TB, CB, BMS,
RB, RBl, RB2, RB3, IG, IM, IS, nnd IMS zones; or
(9) 71vo persons nncl any of their children by blood, marriage, or
adoption
Options Considered By Citv Council & PlanninQ Board:
At the City Council study session on February 10, 2004 staff presented four options for
the Council's review and comment. The Council was divided between two options and
directed staff to present those options to the Planning Board. As menHoned eulier, the
Planning Board recommended approval of Option 1. A brief summary of the two options
and the benefits andlor detriments of each are discussed below
Please note that both options include changmg the occupancy section to expand the
degrea of consanguinity (as addressed in Part "A° above) and assumes that references to
mamage would be changed to "heads of a household:'
Option 1- Retain the current two roomer allowance
This option reflects the current occupancy hnutations and standards. lt preserves the
ability for families (including two heads of a household) to have up to two roomers reside
in a dwelling unit. The downside is the potent~ai impact to ]ow dens~ty residential
~~----
S.~PLAN~Co-rtems\MEMOSIGK4D8-04CCoccupancylstreadmgdoc AgendaItem~_~Page#_5_
neighborhoods that may result fioxn mcreasmg the number of permrtted unrelated persons
&om three to four persons. The potenfial increase occurs when two individuals identify
themselves as heads of a household in order to have two additional roomers to maximize
density. This would not be an issue m mediurn and high density zones where four
unrel ated persons cazi currently reside in a dwelling unit.
tion 2- Allow nvo roomers f tlie dwelIing unit is owner occupied and only one
roorner ~n non-owner occup~ed dwelkng units (rental unzts).
The city's enforcement experience mdicates that when over-occupancy occurs, it
generally happens in rental situations. This option could irunimize some of those
problems by allowmg We maximum occupancy of two roomers only in owner-occupied
dwellings. The maximum number of roomers would be one if the pmperty is not owner-
occupied.
Tha benefits of this opt~on are:
Ownership is easily verifiable and does not pose an enforcement problem;
This option contributes to malnng home ownersYup more affordable; and
This option preserves the three person occupancy lixnitation in low density
residenfial zones.
The downsides aze~
The proposal treats renters differently &om homeowners; and
The proposal may reduce housmg oppo~twtities.
Additional Ootions Pronosed for Considerarion:
To address the potential over occupancy concerns associated with Option ] above, two
addrtional options have been developed by staff Option lA is mtended to supplement the
Planning Board's recommendation. .
Gon tA - Domestic Partnership Op6on:
This option is intended to rainimize the potential for occupancy abuse associated
with Option 1 and retains the exisring number of allowed roomets as
recommended by the Planning Board. Th~s would be accomplished by revismg
the definition of "two heads of a household" with the addition of the tem~
"Domestic Parinership" as foilows. ~
SiPLAMCc-itemslMEMOS1GK40S-04CCoccupancylsaeadtng doc Agenda Item •%-+"Page #~6_
"Fleads of the household " means one person or two persons in a domestic
partnersh~ who live together, pool resources, and share responsibilities
of providrng for mutual support.
The term "Domestic Partnership" ~s used by several crties and states and provides
a more detailed defimhon than the onginal definition of "heads of the household."
The proposed defuuUon of "Domeshc Partnership," provides standazds that
should discourage most relationshrps intent on max~mizmg occupancy. The
definition was crafred using ordinances from Madison, Wisconsin, Ann Arbor,
Michigan and the State of New York as guidelines:
"Domestic partnershrp" mean,r a marriage nr hvo persons having a
relationsh~p which is of u permanent and distinct character and that
mnnrfests a demonstrable and recognizahle bond of the type characteristtc
of a coheseve housekeeping unit occupying a smgte dwelling. A domestic
parhters)t:p does not ~nclude any soctety, club, fraterniry, sorority
arsocialion, lodge, orgun~zation or group of students or other andlvtduals
wlrere common lrving nrrangements, or the basis for the estabhshment of
the housekeeping un~t, is temporary or transetional. A domestic
partnershsp does not include roammates who establish shnred living
arrungements solely for the purposes of economic or logestic convenience.
The definition of"Fanuly would be revised as follows:
"Family" means arry persons related up to the fourth degree of
consanguimry that occupy a dwell~ng unit or, two people in a domeshc
partnership and their dependents and persons related up to the fourth
degree of consangutnity that occupy the same dwefltng untt.
Stafi' would also recommend the creation of an "affirmative defense" Should an
enforcement situation arise as to whether two people are a"domestic partnerslup,
prov~du~g specifia forms of evidence would be considered as adequate proof of
the existence of a domestic partnersh~p:
A person charged wtih vtolatrng the provcstons of Sectron 9-3.2-8,
"Occupancy of U»iis, " may a~rmatively estabhsh thaJ he or she was a
°head of household" if that person can eslablish thai on !he dute of the
charged ofJ'ense, he or she was occupying the properry as a memfier of a
domesttc partnershrp that was formed prior to the date of the alleged
offense.
EstabCishment of two or more of the following factors, accomparaed by a
der.laration of domest:c partnershrp, may be considered by a tner of fact
as estaGlish:ng pr~ma facte evidence of the exastence of a domestic
partnershtp:
S.IPLAN\Cc-~tems\MkMOS\GK4-08-04CCoccupancylstreadmg doc Agenda 7tem~--~-r+~- Page #_7_
(a) The person ci~arged marntaaned a~ornt mor•tgage ar,/oint tenancy
on a residential lease wiih hts or her domestic partner;
(l~) The person charged maintained a,/o:nt bank account w-th hu or
her domestic partner;
fc) The person churged shared,/o:nt leabilihes such as credit cards or
car loans with his or her domestic partner;
(d) The person charged mnrntarned jornt ownershep of sign~cant
property, such as a vehicle or house, with hu or her domestic
partner;
(e) The person charged had established mutual durable health care
powers of attorney with hrs or her domestic partner;
(fl The person charged ma:ntained mu~ual wills, life rnsurance
polzcies or ret:rement annuities wtih his or her don:esnc partner in
which each domesttc partner was named as the primary
ben~caary pnmary of the other,
(p, f The ~erson charged and h:s or her domeshc partner maintained
rnutual written agreements or contracts impos~ng mutua! support
obltgarions or providing for the jotnt ownershtp of assets ; or
(h) The person charged can pruduce a copy of a declaration, a~~j`idavU,
or similaw document that was filed with a governmental entity prior
to the daie of the alleged ofJ'ense and thut ~ncludes a statement of
mient on the part of the person and his or her domestic pnrfner to
be recogmzed as a domestic partnershrp
Option 3- No Change or Minunal Change.
This option is a"no change" or "mmimal revision" approach. The current
occupancy regulaUons, while not reflecting or acknowledging non-traditional
lifestyles and livmg arrangements, would pass legal and conshtutional challenges.
The changes being requested, while desirahle, aze not legally requ~red
The changes requested by the Human Relations Committee to make the definition
of "Family" more inclusive of a broader range of relaUons, could be
accommodated wrth minimal changes to the existing regulations and without
impacdng or generating any of the occupancy related issues. Th~s could be done
by replacing "second degree" with "fourth degree" in the existin$ defiaition of
consangwnity.
Enforcement:
In keeping with City Council Resolution 903 (Gmding Principles and Pol~cies for Code
Enforcement), the city's occupancy regulat~ons are enforced on a complaint basis and as a
follow up to other enforcement efforts involvmg matters such as noise, trash and parking.
Fifty-four occupancy cases were investigated in 2003 and two suuunons were issued for
violations of the city's occupancy regulat~ons. Seventy-one cases were mvestigated in
~
5~PLAT1~Ce-rtemsUvIEMOSIGK4-08A4CCoccupancylstreadmg doc Agenda Item age #_8_
2002 and 5 of tl~ose cases resulted in tlie issuance of a summons. None of these cases
involved definrtion of a fanuly or nou-tradrtional household issnes.
Rarely do issues involvmg non-traditional couples or families arise. During the last five
years, staff can recall only three such cases One complaint related to a property in the
East Aurora neighborhood and two complauits related to properhes in the ICeewaydin
neighborhood. In two of these cases, the haads of the household ind~cated that they had
"common law" marriages. The third case involved a couple of the same sex. All three
cases mvolved rental properhes.
In all three cases, the couples demonstrated their status as joint heads of household by
producmg financ~ai records (jointly filed tax returns and banking statements). Thia
information was accepted as adequate documentation, the ~mpact issues that caused the
initial complaints were resolved, and the cases were closed.
Coda enforcement staff l~ave not used the domestic partnership registrat~on as a means to
venfy relationsh~ps since the registration is voluntary, and has no legal status. However,
one crty udmimstratrva staff person involved with the rental licensing program had
incorrectly advised some citizens that staff did rely on the domestic parinerslrip
re~stration. Staff traimng was provided to remedy dus situahon and correct the
mismformation.
Approved By
Frank-~~Crty Man er
ATTACHMENTS:
A Ordmance
S.\PLAMCc-itemslMCMOS\GK4-08-04CCoccupancylstreadmg dce Agenda Ifem ~~"Page #_9,
ATTACHMENT A
ORDINANCE NO. _
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OCCUPANCY
12EQUIREMENTS AND REGULATION3 RELATED TO TE~
DEFINTI'ION OF "CONSANGUINITY" IN CHAPTERS 1-2, 3-1,
AND 9-1, B.R.C. 1981, AND SETTING FORTH DETAIIS IN
RELATION THLRETO.
BE TT ORDAINED BY THE C1TY COUNCIL OF THE CTI'Y OF BOULDER,
COLORADO:
Secdon i. The following de5nitions in Section 1-2-1, B.R.C. 1981, are added or amended
to read:
"Consanguinity" means only the following persons are related w~thin the xcond-;~~~ °
degree of consanguuut . ' ,'~~ ~ ~~~ ~arents and
children, grandparents and grandchildren, brothers and sisters, aunts and unclas; mid-nephews
and nieces, mx~-~first cousins~,~~~~~"~'~~~'~`,~`~~~~~~ . . _ ` ,
These reladonships may be of the whole or half blood,
~`~P~~ ~~r by affinitY
"Multi-unit dwelling" means a building used by two or more of the following groups of
persons livmg indapendently of each other in separate dwelling units but not including
motels, hotels, and resorts.
(1) The members of family related to the headfi of the household ' , '
orblaod,-up to the second-~~~degree of consanguinity, plus one or two roomers~
;~pre~vidccl-thattht~[~~quarters the roomers uae de-''y,`~ ~` ~~~not exceed one-third of the
total floor azea of the dwelling unit and m~c-~~~not~~,a sepazate dwelling unit;
(2) Up to three individuats in RR, RRl, ER, and LR zones;
(3) Up to eight persons sixty years of age or older in RR, RRl, ER, and LR zones;r~;
xwcc~nn-xaoawx«~u~my-3-vcme~ emwvc
,'~€Kk;`dt'a~~ ~,'~#5~,..~PAGE.,/(~..~,
(4) Up to four individuals in MR, MXR, MU, HZ, HR, TB, CB, RB 1, RB2, RB3, IS, IG,
IM, IMS, BMS, RMS, and RB zones~~,-or
, , .
"Rooming house" means an esiablishment where, for direct or indirect compensation,
lodging, with or without kitchen facilities or meals, is offered for one month or more for
three or more roomers not related to the head~ of the household by , ,
i~leed; iip to the secand~'~'r~}j;degree of consanguimty
"Single-unit dwelling" means a detached princ~pal building other than a mobile home,
designed for or used ac a dwelling exclusively by one group of tha following persons as an
indepepdent livmg unit:
(1) Members of a family related to ti~cone of he head~, of the
household by ' , ', , up to the sr.earne~-~' ~;~~egree of
consanguinity, plus one or two roomers~~,~ batenlq-if-thc--~,~°~:pquarters that the
roomers use de-~~~uhot exceed one-third of t6e total floor area of the dwelling unit
and da-neteecnpy~ "~~j "'~ "~, "s*i~ separate dwelling unit;
(2) Up to tlu~ee individuals in RR, RRI, ER, and LR zones;
(3) Up to eight persons sixty yeazs of age or older in RR, RRl, RMS, ER, and
LR zones;k~
(4) Up to four mdividuals in MR, MXR, MU, HZ, HR, TB, CB, RB 1, RB2, RB3,
IS, IG, IM, IMS, BMS, RMS, and RB zones;er
, , .
SecU n. The followmg definidon m Section 3-1-1, B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
"Food service establishmenP' means any place that is kept or maintained for the purpose of
preparing or serving food, but dces not include:
(1) Homes containing a family, related by , , p to the seeond
~"',~`~}degree of consanguinity, and its non-payu~g guests;
(2) Outdoor recreation locations where food is prepared in the field rather than at a fixed
base of operahons; '
xwu.ue.sooo um-oac~~y-3 ynarc~ ~rwPe
,4i,F^~PA 1't^F~4 #~ ~ ~AGE nL~.
(3) Hospital and health cue facility feeding operations licensed by the Colorado
Department of Health or its authonzed agents or employees;
(4) Child care centers licensed by the state of Colorado or Boulder County;
(5) Vending machines;
(6) Grocery stores and similaz establishments, if such grocery store or similaz
establishment meets the qualifications for participadon in the federal food stamp
prograzn, pursuant to 7 C.F.R. subparagraph 278.1(1)(i) and (ii), excluding sub-
subparagraphs (A) through (C) of subparagraph (ii), as such subpazagraphs exist on
October 1, 1987, or are thereafter axnended, whether or not such grocery store or
s~milaz establishment is actually authorized to so participate;
(7) Food or beverage manufacturing, processing, or packaging plants that are not
categorized as food service establishments by the Colorado Department of Health;
(8) Food catarers that use the customer's kitchen to prepaze food.
ection 3 The following defmitions in Seckion 9-1-3, B.R.C. 1981, ue amended to read:
"Consanguinity" means only the following persons are related within the secotTd-~~
dagree of consanguinit . ~ , ~~.'~~~~;~~~~;~!~'~~,'~, . ~„Parents and
children, grandparents and grandchildren, brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles attd-ne hews
and nieces, m~d-first cousins~~`~~~, ~f~~~~r~~"g' `~~~~~' ". ? ~ ~ . ~'. . . '
These relationships may be of the whole or half blood, by adophon,
~ , '~(" ` ",or by affinity ~°j ~, ` ' ~.
K1PI.CUb.2004LUR-oceuparcy$~pbdmc ehfwpd
46 r~~4i~i~k ~'~~~~'i~ ~ ~~.~l~.r ~
"Rooming house" means an establishment where, for direct or indirect compensation,
lodging, with or without kitchen facilities or meals, is offered for one month or more for
t6ree or more roomers not related to ~~~~`the heads' of the household by marria~e; adoptiem
orbleod;-up to the sccomd- ;',~j~~degree of consanguinity.
Section 4. Subsection 9-3.2-8(a), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
(a) General Occupancy Restrictions: Subject to the provisions of Chapter 10-2, "Housing
Code," B.R.C. 1981, no persons except the following persons shall occupy a dwelling unit:
(1) Members of a family related to p"~ `,' e head~' of the househoid by marriagc
adeptimr-or~load; up to the ~~'~ ~szcond-de of consanguinity, one or two
roomers~x~, , ~`~yquartere that the roomers use do
s~~not exceed one-third of the total floor area of the dwelling umt and-do-aet
occa~~~~;~,~,~a separake dwelling unit;
(2) Up to three persons in P-E, AE, RR, RRl, ER, and LR zones;,~~' ,
(3) Up to four persons m M[J, MR, MXR, HR, RMS, HZ, TB, CB, BMS, RB, RB 1,
RB2, RB3, IG, IM, TS, and IMS zones"~;-er
, •
ec 'o . Subsection 9-3.4-12(a), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
(a) tandaz . An owner or the owners of a lot or pazcel with an existing smgle-family dwelling
unrt may establish and muntain an accessory dwelling unit within the principal structure of
a detached dwelling unit in the LR-D, LR-E, IsR-E, RR-E, RRl-E, A-E, or P-E districts if
all of the following condihons aze met and continue to be met during the life of the accessory
dwelling unit:
(1) Owner Occupied• The detached dwelling unit within which the accessory dwelling
unit is located, or the accessory dwelling unit itself, is ~~ ,' '~~"~
>
, .
(2) Parking: In addition to the parking required in each district, one ofF-street parking
space is provided on the lot upon which the detached dwelling unit is located meeting
the setback requirements of Sechon 9-3.2-1, "Schedule of Bulk Requirements,"
x~.cuw-saoa um-occue~r-~W~ ~ wM
;~t~~:RdD.A z`w~;N] ~ ~~+'~'hGl~;.~.~...._
B.R.C.1981, unless a variance to the setback is granted pursuant to Secdon 9-3.6-2,
"Variances and Interpretations," B.R.C. 1981.
(3) Occu~y Requirement: The occupancy of the accessory dwellmg unit dces not
exceed two persons, and the occupancy of the detached dwellm unit including the
HYr,~sQ-Rr~rsi -T'e. ~«>rc' P. ' r n w,M~ i~, m
accessory dwellin~ unit does not exceed ~s~,~~~~~?C'~~ ,, ~1,~~~
, ,
~~~
(4) Additional Roomers Prohibited: The detached dwelling unit is not also used for the
renting of rooms pursuant to Section 9-3.2-8, "Occupancy of Units," B.R.C. 1981.
(5) N~ighborhood Area• In khe LR-D, LR-E, ER-E, RR-E, RRl-E, A-E, or P-E zonu~g
districts, no more than ten percent of the single-family lots or pazcels in a
neighborhood area contain an accessory dwelling unit For the purpose of tlus
paragraph:
(A) The "neighborhood area" in LR-E, LR-D, and P-E zoning districts is the azea
circumscribed by a line three hundred feet from the perimeter of the lot line
wrthin which any accessory dwelling unit will be located.
(B) The "neighborhood azea" in ER-E, RR-E, RRl-E, and A-E zoning districts
is the azea circumscribed by a line six hundred feet from the perimeter of the
lot Lne withw which any accessory dwelling unit will be located.
(C) For the purpose of calculadng the ten percent hmitation factor, a legal, non-
conforming structure containing two or more units is counted as an accessory
dwelling unit. The city manager may promulgate regulahons defming
additional methods to be used in caiculadng the ten percent limitation factor
and the neighborhood area.
(D) If an application for an accessory dwelling unit exceeds the ten percent
requirement set forth in this pazagraph (5), the city manager wiU place the
applicant on a waidng list for the neighborhood azea. At such Ume as there
is room for an additional accessory dwelling unit within a neighborhood area,
the city manager will notify the fust eligible person on the waiting list. Such
person on the waiting list shall be required to provide notice of intent to file
an applica6on within thirty days and file an apphcation within sixty days of
such notice.
xwi.cw-2ooaiua~o~,ye~v-~pbarec enr~,a
~.f;w~;k}~ M'~3~~J4~1~ACzF~.-
(6) Cri~: The accessory dwellmg unit is c]early incidental to the principal dwelling
unit and meets the following criteria:
(A) The accessory dwelling unit is created only in a single-family detached
dwelling unit on a lot of 6,000 square feet or more.
(B) The accessory dwelling unit is a minimum of 300 square feet, and dces not
exceed one-third of the total floor area of the principal structure, unless a
variance is granted pursuant to Section 9-3.6-2, "Variances and
Interpretations," B.R.C. 1981, or 1,000 square feet, wluchever is less.
(C) The accessory dwellmg umt utilizes only thosa utility hookups and meters
allotted to the detached dwelling unit.
(D) The accessory dwelling unit is created only through internal conversion of the
principal structure. Minor exterior changes may be made on the building,
however, if the squaze footage addad constitutes no more than five percent of
the pnncipal structure's existing foundat'ron area.
(E) If there is au mterior connec6on between the accessory dwelling unit and the
principal dwelling prior to the creation of the accessory dwelling unit, the
connection shall be maintained dunng the life of the accessory dwelling unit.
Any addiaonat entrance resulting &om the creauon of an accessory dwelling
unit may face the side of the lot frontmg on tha street only if such entrance is
adequately and appropriately screened in a manner that dces not detract from
the siagle-family appearance of the principal dwelling.
(7) Pernvts for Ex~sfin Units: No permrt for an accessory dwelling umt shall be granted
for a detached dwellmg that is not at least fiva years old.
5 ction Paragraph 9-3.4-13(a)(1), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
The detached dwellmg unit or the awner's accessory unit itself is
1 ~~~~~~
,
K ~FLCUb 2pOq LUR~occuppocp3-p6d,ec rJp'wpd
'~~r~~"t'~~i, ~.'l ~'~~Y SFL/"~t~..~}~ ~~
Section 7. The following definition in Sechon 10-1-1, B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
"Rooming house" means an estabhshment where, for direct or indirect wmpensation,
lodging, with or without kitchen facilides or meals, is offered for one month or more for
three or more roomers not related to ~~~~~`~~,~head~ of the household by mmriagt+
ado~tiear, -erb}ood;-up Co the seca~ x" `~~degree of consanguiniCy.
ectio 8. SubsecGon 10-2-14(a), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
(a) Every dwallmg unit shall contain at least I50 square feet of floor space for the fust occupant
thereof and at least 100 additional square feet of floor space for every additional occupant
thereof. The floor space sha11 be calculated on the basis of total habitable room area plus non-
habitable room area up to a maximum of ten percent of the total required floor space. But this
floor space requirement dces not ap ly when the residents of a dwelling unit ue members
m in~e+,~~
of a family related "~~"~"~,~ ~ ,;~ "`~ P ~;by , ~ ~
iralf~lea}-np to the ` egec of consanguimty.
ec ' n. The following defirution in Section 10-2.5-2, B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read.
"Relative" means an individual related by consangmnity within the scerntd-,~~'t„~i~ii~,~}.'degree as
defined in Secdon 1-2-1, "Defimtions," B.R.C. 1981.
Section 10. Subsection 10-3-2(b), B.R.C. 1981, ~s amended to read:
(b) Buildtngs, or buildmg azeas, described in one or more of the following pazagraphs are
exempted from t6e requu~ement to obtatn a rental l~cense from the city manager.
(1) Any dwelling unit occupied by the owner, or members of the owner's funily by
~"~~ " ~" "' ~ ",~ ~ ~" " r~or whole or half blood
mamage, adoprion, ~~ ~I,'~~~~~~S~J~#~~$,~~~~~
up to the secand-~~ „~~"degree of consanguinity, and housing no more than two
roomers who aze unrelated to Uie owner or the owner's family.
(2) A dwelling unit meeting all of the following condrtions:
(A) The dwelhng unit constitutes the owner's principal residence;
(B) The dwelling urut is temporarily rented by the owner for a period of time no
greater than twelve consecudve months in any twenty-four-month period;
(C) The dwellmg urut was occupxed by the owner immed~ately prior to its rental;
xw~c[no-zaoawrs.accu~amr-3-d~ac wcw„+a
;~wi'~.°v~A 3'~~„dt #h~AG~:.,~,,..._
(D) The owner of the dwellrng umt is temporarily living outside of Boulder
County; and
(E) The owner intends to re-occupy the dwelling unit upon terminadon of the
temporary rental period identified in subparagraph (B) above.
(3) C.ommerci~l hotel and motel occupancies which offer lodging accommodations
primarily for periods of time less than thirty days, but bed and breakfast facihties aze
not excluded from rental hcense requirements.
(4) Common areas and elements of buildings containing attached, but mdividually
owned, dwelling units.
ection 11. The following defiqihons m Section 11-1-2, B.R.C. 1981, are amended to read:
"Multi-unit dwelling" means a building used by two or more of the following groups of
persons living mdependently of each other m separate dwellmg units but not mcludmg
motels, hotels, and resorts:
(a) The members of faruily related to ~t"i~~ the head$ of the household by mmriage;
xdophea; er~vod; iap to the seeend~i~~'~ciegree of consanguinity, plus one oriure
roomers, provided that the quar[ers the roomets use do not exceed one-tturd of the
total floor area of the dwelling unit and are not a separate dwelling unit;
(b) Up to three indrviduals m RI2, RRI, ER, and LR zones;
(c) Up to eight persons sixty yeazs of age or older m RR, RRl, ER, and LR zones;Y~~r
(d) Up to four individuals in MR, MXR, MU, HZ, HR, TB, CB, RB, RB 1, RB2, RB3,
IS, IG, IM, IMS, BMS, and RM$ zones; or
, , .
c ion . This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of
the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern.
KV'LCUb20MLl1R.accupancy.3-pbdnec ehfwpd
xC~l'"a64w "TP:C~'f ~~'A~:i~..,(,,.~.~.m..
Section 13. The council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by ude only
and orders that copies of this ordmance be made available in the office of the city clerk for public
mspection and acqtusition.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY TTI'LE
ONLX this day of , 20_.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
D~rector of Fmance and Record
READ ON SECOND READING, PASSED, ADOPTED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
BY TITLE ONLY t}us day of , 2~-•
Mayor
Attest.
City Cierk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
K:U'LCNn-2004LUR-occuyancy-3-pbdrec eAfwpd
( k, t,'! F,'uv &','„r~-•'!~AGE ~
tl6~~Yal'M1 t Y