0:00At the forefront of the meeting was the detailed examination of parking standards for co-living developments. The current proposal recommended maintaining existing parking standards for single and two-family dwellings while introducing a new requirement of 0.5 parking spaces per co-living unit. This was a central topic of debate, with some commissioners questioning whether this ratio would suffice given Bloomington’s less dense urban environment and limited transit options. The Planning staff highlighted the contrast with more densely populated regions where similar standards have been adopted, noting that the proposed ratio is a conservative estimate for Bloomington.

39:51Further complicating the parking debate was the issue of whether developers could charge for parking spots in co-living projects. The commission recognized that current city code ties the prohibition of charging for parking to incentives related to parking reductions. If co-living developments do not qualify for these reductions, alternative pathways will need to be devised, potentially allowing developers to charge for parking. This raised concerns about equitable access to parking facilities and whether a higher parking minimum should be established to prevent inequities among residents.

0:00The commission also delved into the implications of co-living developments within the broader landscape of Bloomington’s housing policies. The proposed co-living standards included changes in definitions within the zoning code, such as broadening the definition of a family to include up to six adults and minors living together without requiring blood, marriage, or adoption relationships. This amendment aimed to make housing definitions more inclusive while ensuring they remain enforceable by Environmental Health staff. The introduction of new terms like “co-living unit” and “co-living development” sought to differentiate these arrangements from traditional multi-family housing, which is subject to more regulations.

39:51Another aspect of the meeting was the discussion on design standards for co-living developments. Some participants advocated for maintaining existing design requirements to ensure visual compatibility and architectural coherence, arguing that this would support neighborhood integration and equity. Others cautioned that overly design standards could stifle creativity and flexibility, potentially leading to outdated aesthetics.

The commission also considered establishing minimum floor area requirements for co-living units, with suggested sizes ranging from 70 to 250 square feet. A higher minimum floor area could help distinguish co-living units from traditional multi-family apartments while ensuring livable conditions for multiple occupants. Participants stressed the importance of quality over mere size, emphasizing the need for adequate common spaces to enhance the living experience.

Discussions acknowledged the importance of aesthetics but prioritized creating affordable living spaces over uniformity in appearance.