The co-living ordinance is crafted to expand the city’s housing choices in alignment with its comprehensive plan. It specifically addresses the need for deeper affordability by allowing for flexible leases and shared living environments. A major element of the ordinance is its redefinition of “family,” permitting up to six unrelated adults to live together, or any number of related individuals with minor children. This redefinition is designed to encourage roommate situations and multigenerational living arrangements.

During the meeting, potential implications of these changes were discussed, particularly concerning living conditions and residential density. A point of discussion was the ordinance’s requirement for kitchens to be located on the same floor as living units in co-living developments. This stipulation, aimed at ensuring accessibility, sparked concerns about its feasibility in multi-story buildings and potential barriers to converting existing homes into co-living spaces.

Parking requirements also drew attention, with the ordinance proposing half a space per co-living unit. This was noted as being more restrictive compared to other cities, and there was acknowledgment that this requirement might need to be revisited based on future outcomes.

Commissioners expressed concerns about living conditions within co-living units, particularly regarding the number of bedrooms and bathrooms necessary for accommodating six residents comfortably. It was suggested that two bathrooms would be ideal to maintain livability among the occupants.

Following the approval of the co-living ordinance, the board turned its focus to proposed changes in the Rental Homes for Future Homebuyers Program. The changes include a shift from a waitlist system to a lottery-based approach, which aims to streamline the application process by targeting households ready to move and engaged with homeownership programs. The lottery system would allow applications for a limited period of ten days to two weeks, enabling more prepared households to submit their applications within that timeframe.

While the proposal intends to enhance administrative efficiency, concerns were voiced about its potential impact on fairness, particularly for applicants who had been waiting under the previous system. Some commissioners suggested incorporating a priority mechanism for those who applied early, to balance efficiency and fairness.

The Rental Homes for Future Homebuyers Program also proposes aligning its definition of “family” with the city’s updated definitions, as revised through the co-living ordinance. Additionally, the program seeks to remove the requirement for households to move if their income exceeds the program’s limits, promoting financial self-sufficiency and readiness for homeownership. This change recognizes that while increased income is advantageous for purchasing a home, it is only one of several factors that contribute to homeownership readiness.

Further discussions centered on the program’s criminal activity definitions, which align with the housing choice voucher program’s criteria, focusing primarily on violent crimes and drug offenses. This aims to clarify what constitutes disqualifying behavior under program guidelines.

The meeting revealed a broad recognition of the need for refining the housing program to better serve the community’s needs. However, debate persisted over the lottery system’s implications, particularly regarding its fairness and transparency. Marketing strategies were also discussed to ensure diverse community representation among applicants, emphasizing outreach through multiple languages and community-based organizations.