Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 02/23/2016 - COMPLETE AGENDA
City of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC) Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Gino Campana, District 3 Kristin Stephens, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14 Ross Cunniff, District 5 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann City Attorney City Manager City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. City Council Work Session February 23, 2016 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER. 1. Neighborhood Livability. (Staff: Ginny Sawyer, Tom Leeson; 15 minute staff presentation, 50 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to discuss potential options and tools to increase neighborhood livability throughout the city. 2. Short Term Rentals. (staff: Ginny Sawyer, Ted Shepard; 10 minute staff presentation; 50 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to provide regulatory options for short term rentals (STRs) located within Fort Collins and update Council on work since the October 2015 work session. 3. Airport Work Plan and Financial Plan. (staff: Jason Licon, Mike Beckstead; 15 minute staff presentation; 30 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to inform City Council about the Airport and to provide an update on the progress being made on the Airport Strategic Plan that was adopted by City Council in 2015. OTHER BUSINESS. ADJOURNMENT. DATE: STAFF: February 23, 2016 Ginny Sawyer, Policy and Project Manager Tom Leeson, Director, Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svrs WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Neighborhood Livability. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to discuss potential options and tools to increase neighborhood livability throughout the city. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What aspects of neighborhood livability should staff focus on? 2. Is there additional information Council would like to see? 3. Does Council want to pursue specific actions to increase neighborhood livability? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION During the 2015 Council retreat, rental licensing was identified as a potential means to address and improve neighborhood livability. Since the retreat the focus of the conversation has shifted to increasing overall neighborhood livability and methods to ensure quality neighborhoods for all. Numerous communities have rental licensing or rental registration programs. Fort Collins last considered a licensing program in 2004-05. In preparation for this item, staff has provided information and data related to rental housing in Fort Collins, including: Research into other communities Housing data Rental inspection data Nuisance code data Public Nuisance Ordinance data Existing educational programs Vacancy information Best Practice Research In reviewing other communities, staff went reviewed the original research list from 2004 and followed up with three communities, then added an additional eight communities from the current peer cities list. (Attachment 1) New information is shown in red on the Attachment. The two most common themes amongst these communities include: Programs were typically designed to address substandard, older, modified or unsafe housing. 1 Packet Pg. 2 February 23, 2016 Page 2 Most programs have gone through multiple iterations with changes to costs, scope, and inspection changes. Fort Collins Housing The most recent data from the 2013 Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) shows Fort Collins has approximately 25,336 rental units which represent roughly 45.5% of total housing units. Rental housing tends to be concentrated near Colorado State University (CSU) but exists throughout the city in a variety of housing types, including multifamily complexes. Distribution is shown in Attachment 2. Substandard or Unsafe Housing The City of Fort Collins adopted rental housing standards in Chapter 5, Article VI, Division 2 of the City Code in 1972. These standards govern the use, occupancy, location and maintenance of rental housing and supplement the City Building and Land Use Codes. The code has been amended and updated numerous times over the years. Fort Collins has always responded to rental housing complaints. Since 2012 the Building Department has been tracking rental housing inspections. From October 2012 through December 2015, the City has performed approximately 150 onsite inspections. (Attachment 3) Issues have ranged from sewage back-ups and deficient furnaces to lack of egress windows and smoke alarms. In addition to the onsite inspections, building inspectors also work over the phone with landlords and tenants to resolve minor issues. Tenants in Fort Collins can call and request a housing inspection anytime. Whether an inspection is performed is dependent upon the severity of the complaint, whether the tenant is still in the unit, and the responsiveness of the landlord. To date, the Building Department reports this process to be effective at resolving safety issues and ensuring compliance with building codes while also avoiding being drawn into a lease dispute. The ability to request an inspection is known and appropriately recommended by staff at the City and CSU, including Off Campus Life and Student Legal Services. Information is provided verbally, included on websites and in the Off-Campus Life Student Handbook, and discussed during educational programs and presentations. Staff from these departments has history of working well together. Poudre Fire Authority also performs periodic (annual to bi-annual) inspections on multifamily complexes, including common areas, entry ways, corridors, exits, mechanical areas, laundry areas, pools, clubhouses and any shared public space in these complexes. They also perform confidence tests of any fire suppression systems. Nuisance Complaints and Exterior Property Maintenance Nuisance and exterior maintenance issues are typically inspected by and routed through Neighborhood Services on both a complaint and a proactive basis. In a review of Neighborhood Services data staff reports the following: Code Compliance Violation Notices - January-December 2015 (1-year) Includes weeds, rubbish, dilapidated fences, snow, unscreened trash, inoperable vehicles, outdoor storage. Owner Occupied Properties 3482 41% Rental Properties 5049 59% Total Code Compliance Violation Notices 8531 100.0% Excludes 147 notices sent to owners of undeveloped lots. Distribution map shown in Attachment 4. 1 Packet Pg. 3 February 23, 2016 Page 3 Voluntary vs. Involuntary Compliance - January-December 2015 (1 year) Total Voluntary Involuntary Owner Occupied Properties 3482 95% 5% Rental Properties 5049 93% 7% Public Nuisance Ordinance (PNO) Cases - January to December 14, 2015 (1-year) For repeated civil violations at one address (3 violations in 2 years or 5 violations in 3 years). Includes violations for code compliance issues noted above, animal control violations, noise or nuisance violations ticketed by Police Services. Owner Occupied Properties 80 24% Rental Properties 251 76% Total PNO Cases 331 100.0% PNO distribution map shown in Attachment 5. Mediation Cases - January-December 2015 (1-year) Rental Housing Related15144% All Other Mediation Cases 196 57% Total Mediation Cases 347 100% Current Education Programs Since 2006 the City has offered an 8-hour Landlord Training program. The program covers best practices, rental housing standards, occupancy requirements, crime prevention techniques, fair housing practices, and tools and resources available for landlords. To date almost 550 local landlords have completed the training. The City also has a Community Liaison in partnership with CSU. This position focuses on educating students who live off-campus to both be good neighbors and to know their rights and be educated tenants. To achieve this, CSU provides a variety of educational opportunities to students, parents, neighbors, landlords, property managers, and apartment complexes. In addition to education programs that promote neighborhood livability the City also utilizes the following: Occupancy regulations Public Nuisance Ordinance Nuisance gathering ordinance Community Mediation Program Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation Program Neighborhood Parking Program Historical Rental Vacancy Rate data for Fort Collins 2013 Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) Date US Colorado Fort Collins, CO 2013 6.49% 5.26% 4.05% 2012 6.77% 5.69% 3.01% 2011 7.40% 5.63% 2.77% 2010 8.17% 6.72% 4.56% 2009 8.43% 8.00% 7.05% 1 Packet Pg. 4 February 23, 2016 Page 4 Date US Colorado Fort Collins, CO 2008 7.86% 7.45% 4.78% 2007 7.87% 8.63% 5.00% 2006 7.70% 8.36% 5.12% 2005 7.74% 9.35% 8.32% Like other communities nationwide, vacancy rates have varied over time but have been very low in recent years. Low vacancy rates tend to result in an increase in housing costs. Anecdotally, staff reports that tenants are hesitant to report housing issues when they are concerned about the possibility of having to find alternative housing. Neighborhood Livability Depending on the desired outcomes and focus of neighborhood livability, of a rental program, elements could range from voluntary registration to mandatory licensing with annual renewal and periodic housing inspections. Obviously, a more intensive program will require additional staff resources and would take time to fully implement. Should individual inspection of all multi-family units be included, additional staffing would be needed. PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff did minimal outreach prior to the work session in anticipation of conducting more thorough outreach once Council direction is given. Staff contacted: ASCSU Director of Community Affairs Northern Colorado Rental Housing Association Board of Realtors Staff also met with the Affordable Housing Board at its January meeting for the purpose of providing information. No formal action was requested or received. ATTACHMENTS 1. Research Matrix (PDF) 2. Owner Occupied Tract Reference Map ACS 2013 (PDF) 3. Rental Inspections (PDF) 4. Owner-Rental Code Violations 2015 (PDF) 5. Owner-Rental Public Nuisance Violations (PDF) 6. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 5 City, State University Population Rental Program/ start date What was the problem program was focused on Fees # of inspectors Occupancy addressed? Parking Addressed? Inspection required? How often? Additional info Revocation for bad behavior Notes Boulder, CO (95,000) Yes (26,000) Licensing 1996 Program was looking to address public safety issues that were associated with rental housing. Established minimum standards for equipment and facilities associated with rental properties. Yes, variable Currently considering changing fees from per building to per unit. Have also increased the fees. Currently looking into program to determine if new fees are needed. 3 for everything House inspections contracted out Inspection program is now privatized. Landlords are now responsible for hiring a City of Boulder licensed inspector. No. Complaints done through City, State University Population Rental Program/ start date What was the problem program was focused on Fees # of inspectors Occupancy addressed? Parking Addressed? Inspection required? How often? Additional info Revocation for bad behavior Notes Provo, UT (116,00) Birmingham Univ. (30,000) Rental Dwelling Licensing Program Community Development/ Zoning has jurisdiction over the program. The problem being addressed was properties that were originally being built as single-family homes were being converted into multiple units, owners did not obtain permits or inspections and units were substandard. Yes- $20 per year for one rental unit and $60 per year for multiple units. No additional fees are associated with the program. 4 zoning officers, an administrator, and 2 building inspectors Yes Yes Not required unless there are health and safety concerns or complaints. City, State University Population Rental Program/ start date What was the problem program was focused on Fees # of inspectors Occupancy addressed? Parking Addressed? Inspection required? How often? Additional info Revocation for bad behavior Notes Cedar Rapids, IA (128,000) Multiple schools Registration Program- Landlords and Properties The problem being addressed was the older housing stock and the problems attached with having older homes. Complaints were not being properly addressed by the landlords. One time landlord licensing fee of $50 (per housing structure.) Annual registration fee (single family dwelling/ Owner occupied duplex- $30, Multiple dwelling- $25, rooming unit- $8) 5 inspectors for all rental inspections, 2 inspectors for nuisance complaints. The International property City, State University Population Rental Program/ start date What was the problem program was focused on Fees # of inspectors Occupancy addressed? Parking Addressed? Inspection required? How often? Additional info Revocation for bad behavior Notes Bellingham, WA (83,000) Western Washington University (15,000) Rental Registration & Safety Inspection Program 2015 Looking to address problems associated with many renters being forced by necessity into sub- standard housing and unresponsive landlords. If the number of units owned is between: 1-20: $10 per unit 21 or more: $8 per unit. Fee is calculated on individual property basis not based on entire rental property portfolio. Plan on hiring one full-time inspector specifically for the program and using existing inspectors as necessary. ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Owner Occupied Tract Reference Map ACS 2013 (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Code Compliance Violation Notices January 1, 2015 to December 14, 2015 CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Printed: January 27, 2016 Renters Owners City Limits 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 GMA Miles Scale 1:58,408 © K:\ArcMapProjects\Neighborhood_Services\OwnerVRenterViolations\Maps\OwnerVRentalCodeViolations.mxd ATTACHMENT 4 1.4 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Owner-Rental Code Violations 2015 (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Sources: NRCAN, GeoBase, Esri, HERE, IGN, DeLorme, Kadaster TomTom, NL, Ordnance Intermap, Survey, increment Esri Japan, P Corp.METI, , GEBCO, Esri China USGS, (Hong FAO, Kong)NPS,, swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Public January Nuisance 1, 2015 to Ordinance December 14, Cases 2015 CITY GEOGRAPHIC These and were map OF not products FORT designed and INFORMATION COLLINS or all intended underlying for general data SYSTEM are use developed by members MAP for use PRODUCTS of the by the public. City The of Fort City Collins makes for no its representation internal purposes or only, warranty dimensions, as to contours, its accuracy, property timeliness, boundaries, or completeness, or placement and of location in particular, of any its map accuracy features in thereon. labeling or THE displaying CITY OF FORT COLLINS PARTICULAR MAKES PURPOSE, NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OF MERCHANTABILITY OR IMPLIED, WITH OR RESPECT WARRANTY TO THESE FOR FITNESS MAP PRODUCTS OF USE FOR OR THE UNDERLYING FAULTS, and assumes DATA. Any all responsibility users of these of map the use products, thereof, map and applications, further covenants or data, and accepts agrees them to hold AS the IS, City WITH harmless ALL from made and this against information all damage, available. loss, Independent or liability arising verification from any of all use data of contained this map product, herein should in consideration be obtained of by the any City's users having of these liability, products, whether or direct, underlying indirect, data. or consequential, The City disclaims, which and arises shall or not may be arise held from liable these for any map and products all damage, or the loss, use thereof or by any person or entity. Printed: January 27, 2016 Renters Owners City Limits 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Miles GMA Scale 1:58,408 © K:\ArcMapProjects\Neighborhood_Services\OwnerVRenterViolations\Maps\OwnerVRentalPublicNuisance.mxd 1.5 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Owner-Rental Public Nuisance Violations (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) 1 Ginny Sawyer Tom Leeson City Council Work Session February 23, 2016 Neighborhood Livability ATTACHMENT 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Questions/Direction Sought 1. What aspects of neighborhood livability should staff focus on? 2. Is there additional information Council would like to see? 3. Does Council want to pursue specific actions to increase neighborhood livability? 2 1.6 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Rental Licensing Staff focus has been on compiling data: § Researching other communities § Housing data § Rental inspection data § Nuisance code data § Public Nuisance Ordinance data § Existing educational programs § Vacancy information 3 1.6 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Peer Cities Peer City Review: § Boulder, CO § Asheville, NC - no program § Lawrence, KS § Palo Alto, CA - no program § Bellingham, WA § Santa Barbara, CA - no program § Provo, UT § Chapel Hill, NC – program ended § Eugene, OR § Tacoma, WA 4 1.6 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Peer Cities The two most common themes when asked about existing rental programs: § Programs were typically designed to address substandard, older, modified or unsafe housing. § Most programs have gone through multiple iterations with changes to costs, scope, and inspection changes. 5 1.6 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Housing § Fort Collins has approximately 25,336 rental units (includes apartments). § Represents roughly 45.5% of total housing units. § Rental housing tends to be concentrated near Colorado State University (CSU) but exists throughout the city in a variety of housing types. 2013 Census Bureau American Community Survey 6 1.6 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Rental Housing Standards § The City of Fort Collins has rental housing standards in Chapter 5, Article VI, Division 2 of the City Code. First adopted in 1972, numerous updates since. § From October 2012 through December 2015, the City has performed approximately 135 onsite rental housing inspections. § Poudre Fire Authority inspects common areas, entry ways, corridors, exits, mechanical areas, laundry areas, pools, clubhouses and any shared public space in apartment complexes. (Annual-biannual) 7 1.6 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Rental Housing Standards § Tenants can call and request a housing inspection anytime. § The ability to request an inspection is known and appropriately recommended by staff at the City and CSU, including Off Campus Life and Student Legal Services. 8 1.6 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Nuisance Complaints Owner Occupied Properties 3,482 41% Rental Properties 5049 59% Total Code Compliance Violation Notices 8,531 100.0% 9 Code Compliance Violation Notices (Jan-Dec 2015) Includes weeds, rubbish, dilapidated fences, snow, unscreened trash, inoperable vehicles, outdoor storage. 1.6 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Nuisance Complaints 10 Voluntary vs. Involuntary Compliance (Jan-Dec 2015) . Total Voluntary Involuntary Owner Occupied Properties 3,482 95% 5% Rental Properties 5,049 93% 7% 1.6 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Public Nuisance Violations Public Nuisance Ordinance Cases – (Jan-Dec 2015) For repeated civil violations at one address (3 violations in 2 years or 5 violations in 3 years). Includes violations for code compliance issues noted above, animal control violations, noise or nuisance violations ticketed by Police Services. 11 Owner Occupied Properties 80 24% Rental Properties 251 76% Total Public Nuisance Ordinance Cases 331 100.0% 1.6 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Mediation Cases 12 2014 2014 2015 2015 Rental Housing Mediation Cases 245 53% 151 44% All Other Mediation Cases 217 47% 196 57% Total Mediation Cases 462 100% 347 100% Mediation Cases 1.6 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Education & Other Programs & Tools § Occupancy Regulations § Public Nuisance Ordinance § Nuisance Gathering Ordinance § Community Mediation Program § Community Liaison Programming § Landlord Education Training § Neighborhood Enforcement Team § Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation Program § Neighborhood Parking Program 13 1.6 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Historical Vacancy Date US Colorado Fort Collins, CO 2013 6.49% 5.26% 4.05% 2012 6.77% 5.69% 3.01% 2011 7.40% 5.63% 2.77% 2010 8.17% 6.72% 4.56% 2009 8.43% 8.00% 7.05% 2008 7.86% 7.45% 4.78% 2007 7.87% 8.63% 5.00% 2006 7.70% 8.36% 5.12% 2005 7.74% 9.35% 8.32% 14 2013 Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 1.6 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Neighborhood Livability Potential options and tools: § Rental Licensing/Registration Program § More proactive enforcement § Heavier penalties for violations § Increased education & awareness § Other? 15 1.6 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Questions/Direction Sought 1. What aspects of neighborhood livability should staff focus on? 2. Is there additional information Council would like to see? 3. Does Council want to pursue specific actions to increase neighborhood livability? 16 1.6 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Powerpoint Presentation (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) DATE: STAFF: February 23, 2016 Ginny Sawyer, Policy and Project Manager Ted Shepard, Chief Planner WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Short Term Rentals. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide regulatory options for short term rentals (STRs) located within Fort Collins and update Council on work since the October 2015 work session. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council support pursuing a regulatory framework for short term rentals? If yes, Which option does Council prefer for Primary Residence STRs? Which option does Council prefer for Non-Primary Residence STR? 2. Does Council support proposed next steps? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Short Term Rental (STR) refers to residential rental agreements for less than 30 days. Short term rentals have always existed and have been a mainstay in resort communities. With the creation and growth of online commerce and savvy technical platforms, the STR market has become much more mainstream and widespread. Vacation Rentals by Owner (VRBO) and Airbnb are two of the most widely known and used companies supporting the on-line short term rental market, however, many other platforms exist. Staff and Council have been working to scope and define the potential positive and negative impacts of a growing STR market in Fort Collins over the last year. The first work session was in June 2015 and the direction following included: Utilize tools City already has in place Better define problem and problem severity Develop STR definition and conduct more outreach The second work session in October 2015 resulted in direction to: Create draft regulatory framework\ Continue public outreach Defining Short Term Rentals Through outreach, research, and discussion staff has identified the following unique characteristics of STRs: Cater to a single party at a time (not multiple parties like a B&B or hotel) STR are not open to the public (can’t walk in off the street) 2 Packet Pg. 30 February 23, 2016 Page 2 No signage No on-site employees There are also distinct differences between a STR within a primary residence and those operated in a non- primary residence dwelling. Primary residence STRs would typically have an owner on-site providing neighbors an immediate contact as well as providing the notion of safety and community that come from having a more regular or full-time neighbor. For the purpose of a definition staff is proposing including STRs that are on the same property as a primary residence as well as properties that share a property line with the primary residence. Non-primary residence rentals may have owners that are in town or out of town but who do not live in or adjacent to the STR. Regulatory Options Staff has developed three regulatory options for both primary and non-primary STRs that range from less restrictive to more restrictive. Some details remain vague for discussion. Primary Residence STR - Including unit on same parcel (i.e. carriage house, accessory dwelling unit), contiguous parcel (house next door), and, as proposed, owners only, no renters without owner permission. OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3 Pay all required taxes Subject to registration upon complaint Pay all required taxes Pay a one- time registration fee to cover: One-time safety inspection All other contact would be on a complaint basis Pay all required taxes Annual registration fee to cover: Annual (?) safety inspection One time zoning inspection Include: (options) Neighbor notification Limit to certain zones Non-Primary Residence STR - Owner may be in town or out of town OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3 Pay all required taxes Register /registration number Registration could include: Local contact Parking requirement Neighbor notification Other? No more than 3 registrations per person (must be a person) Pay all required taxes Pay a one-time registration fee to cover: One-time safety inspection One time zoning inspection (parking) All other contact would be on a complaint basis Include: (options) Local contact Parking requirement Neighbor notification Prohibit in certain zones Limit to 30+ day rentals/or certain number of rentals/month February 23, 2016 Page 3 Enforcement Enforcement policies have not been discussed. Some of the regulatory items are easier to enforce than others and staff acknowledges that occupancy would be the most difficult regulation to enforce. Staff has made contact with both VRBO and Airbnb. The City’s Sales Tax department is currently working with Airbnb to allow the site to collect and remit tax for their hosts. VRBO has indicated a willingness to relay messages to local hosts on their site. As innovation begets innovation, there are also now companies specializing in STR compliance and Fort Collins has been contacted by these representatives. Current Status As stated in previous work sessions, it is difficult to track the exact number of STR activity in Fort Collins or in any community. A best guess, based on information provided by Airbnb (Attachment 1) and through research conducted by local stakeholders, puts local STR numbers at about 275-300. This number represents less than 1% of our local housing stock. The majority of STRs are located in residential areas with a concentration in the east and west side downtown neighborhoods and in zones that do not allow B & B activity (Attachments 2.) Sales and Lodging Tax The Fort Collins tax code currently requires any lodging establishment providing services for less than 30 days to pay sales and lodging tax. Since our earlier work sessions more operators are licensed and remitting taxes (94 licenses to date.) The City has not conducted a wide scale education campaign prior to knowing if or what type of regulations may be developed. Currently, hosts on VRBO are more compliant than those on Airbnb (there are approximately 100 listings on VRBO.) In 2015, STR remittance totaled: $86,000 in sales tax $45,000 in lodging tax Scope of Problem and Public Outreach Since our initial open questionnaire on STR activity and impacts, staff has continued to engage stakeholders and attempt to define the impacts and scope of impacts. Council requested police data at the October work session. While number of calls were collected many addresses were too general (i.e., along College Ave or within a large apartment complex) and it was difficult to draw conclusions. We also did not have a data set with which to compare the call load report. Staff did a random sampling of almost 300 addresses near reported STRs and mailed those addresses a postcard asking them to take a quick survey. Each postcard contained a distinct password that expired after being entered. The very low response rate was disappointing. (Attachment 3) Staff hosted on open house on February 8, 2016 and presented preliminary options (minor changes have been made based on feedback from the meeting.) The majority of attendees were STR operators. The format incorporated live polling and reports were able to distinguish between operator and neighbor answers. When ranking regulatory elements by order of importance results showed: Neighbors 1. Limited Use and Concentration of STRs 2. Parking Requirements 2 Packet Pg. 32 February 23, 2016 Page 4 3. Registration of STRs 4. Limited Number of STRs a person may operate 5. Safety Inspections STR Operators 1. Registration of STRs 2. Safety Inspections 3. Parking Requirements 4. Limited Number of STRs a person may operate 5. Limited Use and Concentration of STRs Neighbors and owners also had opposing preferences on the regulatory options with neighbors preferring the more restrictive options and operators preferring the less restrictive options. The messages staff has heard repeatedly from stakeholders are: Neighbors (not all) don’t like the transient nature of STRs in their neighborhoods Operators support reasonable regulations Encouragement to address STRs now while the number is small Encouragement to let the market demand and the online reviewing system manage the number A desire to avoid unintended consequences Don’t create something onerous, complex and hard to enforce when the problem is relatively small compared to the City as a whole Other Communities Staff has highlighted other community actions in previous work sessions. Since October both Denver and Boulder have drafted ordinances. Boulder is in the implementation phase and they have chosen to not allow non- primary resident STRs, however, many ads are still active. Boulder application fee is $130 and they are not conducting any on-site inspections. Denver is proposing to prohibit non-primary residence STRs and they are conducting open houses throughout February. The proposed program includes a $25 annual fee and no on-site inspection. Next Steps Draft regulations based on feedback Make proposed ordinance language public for at least 4 weeks Solicit feedback and comments on draft regulations/ordinance Schedule for regular Council meeting ATTACHMENTS 1. Airbnb-Fort Collins Data (PDF) 2. STRs and Zones Allowing B&B Use (PDF) 3. Adjacent Property Survey Results (PDF) 4. Work Session Summaries- June 9, 2015 and October 27, 2015 (PDF) 5. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 33 Select a geographic area Fort Collins, Colorado, United States 200 CURRENT ACTIVE HOSTS HOSTS 54 NIGHTS HOSTED PER YEAR FOR A TYPICAL LISTING $4,000 ANNUAL EARNINGS FOR A TYPICAL HOST GUESTS 7,000 INBOUND GUESTS IN THE PAST YEAR 3.3 nights AVERAGE LENGTH OF STAY PER GUEST 13,000 OUTBOUND GUESTS IN THE PAST YEAR LISTINGS 0% 20% 40% 60% Percentage Entire Home Private Room Share Space 41% 55% 3% CURRENTLY ACTIVE LISTINGS BY TYPE The following page captures the Airbnb community in Fort Collins, Colorado, United States Overview of the Airbnb Community in Fort Collins, Colorado, Unit- ed States Note: All data above is drawn from Airbnb proprietary bookings data. Data based on the one year period preceding Novem- ber 1, 2015 40 AVERAGE HOST AGE ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Airbnb-Fort Collins Data (4131 : Short Term Rentals) j j j j j jj j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j jj j j j j j jj j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j jj ATTACHMENT 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Adjacent Property Survey Results (4131 : Short Term Rentals) 2.3 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Adjacent Property Survey Results (4131 : Short Term Rentals) 2.3 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Adjacent Property Survey Results (4131 : Short Term Rentals) 2.3 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Adjacent Property Survey Results (4131 : Short Term Rentals) 2.3 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Adjacent Property Survey Results (4131 : Short Term Rentals) 2.3 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Adjacent Property Survey Results (4131 : Short Term Rentals) 2.3 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Adjacent Property Survey Results (4131 : Short Term Rentals) ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Work Session Summaries- June 9, 2015 and October 27, 2015 (4131 : Short Term Rentals) 2.4 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Work Session Summaries- June 9, 2015 and October 27, 2015 (4131 : Short Term Rentals) City Council Work Session Short Term Rentals (STRs) February 23, 2016 ATTACHMENT 5 2.5 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Questions and Direction Sought 1. Does Council support pursuing a regulatory framework for short term rentals? If yes, Which option does Council prefer for Primary Residence STRs? Which option does Council prefer for Non-Primary Residence STR? 1. Does Council support proposed next steps? 2 2.5 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Background STRs: Airbnb and VRBO are the most common platforms Initial complaints and Council questions in 2013-14 June 9, 2015 - Council Work Session; direction: • Utilize tools City already has in place • Better define problem and problem severity • STR definition and more outreach October 27, 2015 – Council Work Session; direction: • Create draft regulatory framework • Continue public outreach February 23, 2016 – Council Work Session • Regulatory options will be presented 3 2.5 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Definitions To distinguish between B & Bs and other lodging accommodations the following STR traits have been identified: Cater to a single party at a time (not multiple parties like a B&B or hotel) STR are not open to the public (can’t walk in off the street) No signage No on-site employees 4 2.5 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Definition Proposal Separately define “Primary Residence” and “Non-Primary Residence” short term rentals: • Primary: Receive mail or other proof, includes carriage house or other accessory dwelling units, contiguous parcel dwelling. Owners only. • Non-Primary: Owner may be in town or out of town Highlight distinguishing features Adjust other definitions if necessary 5 2.5 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Proposed Regulatory Options 3 options ranging from more lenient to more restrictive Each option distinguishes between Primary and Non- primary residence units Some details are left vague for input and discussion 6 2.5 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Primary Residence Options OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3 Pay all required taxes Subject to registration upon complaint Pay all required taxes Pay a one-time registration fee to cover: One-time safety inspection All other contact would be on a complaint basis Pay all required taxes Annual registration fee to cover: Annual (?) safety inspection One time zoning inspection Include: (options) Neighbor notification Limit to certain zones 7 2.5 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Non-Primary Residence OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3 Pay all required taxes Register /registration number Registration could include: Local contact Parking requirement Neighbor notification Other? No more than 3 registrations per person (must be a person) Pay all required taxes Pay a one-time registration fee to cover: One-time safety inspection One time zoning inspection (parking) All other contact would be on a complaint basis Include: (options) Local contact Parking requirement Neighbor notification Prohibit in certain zones Limit to 30+ day rentals/or certain number of rentals/month Other? Pay all required taxes Annual registration fee to cover: Annual safety inspection One time zoning inspection Include: (options) Local contact Parking requirement Neighbor notification Limit to zones that allow B&B Other? 8 2.5 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Feedback Regulatory Priorities 9 Neighbors (some not all) STR-Operators 1. Limited Use and Concentration of STRs 2. Parking Requirements 3. Registration of STRs 4. Limited Number of STRs a person may operate 5. Safety Inspections 1. Registration of STRs 2. Safety Inspections 3. Parking Requirements 4. Limited Number of STRs a person may operate 5. Limited Use and Concentration of STRs 2.5 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Next Steps Draft regulations based on feedback Make proposed ordinance language public for at least 4 weeks Solicit feedback and comments on draft regulations/ordinance Schedule for regular Council meeting 10 2.5 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Questions and Direction Sought 1. Does Council support pursuing a regulatory framework for short term rentals? If yes, Which option does Council prefer for Primary Residence STRs? Which option does Council prefer for Non-Primary Residence STR? 1. Does Council support proposed next steps? 11 2.5 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4131 : Short Term Rentals) DATE: STAFF: February 23, 2016 Jason Licon, Airport Director Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Airport Work Plan and Financial Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to inform City Council about the Airport and to provide an update on the progress being made on the Airport Strategic Plan that was adopted by City Council in 2015. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED The goals of the work session: To give a brief overview of the Airport to City Council Provide information and accomplishment status of the adopted Airport Strategic Plan Explore the Airport’s financial forecasting model Answer questions BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Airport Strategic Plan is the product of a joint planning effort that involved regional business leaders, active Airport users and stakeholders, elected officials, and staff from the two Cities. The Airport Strategic Plan identifies action items that will help the Airport achieve a reimagined vision. The resulting strategic plan will guide airport decisions for the next five to seven years and builds upon the Airport’s existing Master Plan and Business Plan. The strategic goals that were identified are: 1. Protect against residential encroachment 2. Create a sustainable business model 3. Encourage private investment 4. Revise governance structure and authority for governing board 5. Rebrand and more productively engage the public Achievements that have been made with these goals will be shared, in addition to planned 2016 achievements. A component of the second item (Create a sustainable business model) is the need to enhance the awareness of the Airport’s financial situation. As a result staff created a financial forecast model that can be used to explore the effects of certain scenarios. The model has been used to explore scenarios involving commercial air carrier service and the addition of corporate aircraft and will be included in the presentation. ATTACHMENTS 1. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 56 1 Airport Overview and Work Plan Jason Licon, Mike Beckstead February 23, 2016 ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Study Session Goals 1. Provide an overview of the Airport 2. Review of the Airport Strategic Plan • Work completed • 2016 Strategic Plan Goals • Challenges 3. Review Airport’s financial forecasting model 4. Q & A 2 3.1 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Overview • Opened in 1965 • Federally funded development • Public use • Federally & State supported • Jointly owned & supported • 1 of 14 FAA certified commercial airports in CO • User mix is very diverse 3 3.1 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Airport Importance • The Airport is a public entity that provides services as a regional transportation resource and is also a business. • The Airport serves as a gateway for commerce in Northern Colorado • Is an employment hub • Supports economic health and emergency services • Creates a positive regional impact of approximately $129 million annually 4 3.1 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Airport Numbers • 100,000 arrivals & departures in 2015 • 1,060 acres of property / 2 runways • 750 security badge holders • 263 based aircraft (193 single engine, 45 helicopter, 13 jet) • 209 aircraft storage hangars • 30 lane miles of pavement • 8 aviation based businesses • 7 corporate flight departments 5 3.1 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Airport Strategic Plan • Adopted by Council January 2015 • Serves as the roadmap for addressing the gaps between the Airport’s current state and its vision • Identified five initiatives: 1. Protect against residential encroachment 2. Create a sustainable business model 3. Encourage private investment 4. Revise governance structure and authority for governing board 5. Rebrand and more productively engage the public 6 3.1 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Strategic Plan Achievements 1. Protect against residential encroachment • Airport Commission adopted recommendations from a white paper that identifying existing land use compatibility, planning, and protections surrounding the Airport area 2. Create sustainable business model • Created a 10-year financial model • Commercial air service market assessment update completed 7 3.1 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Strategic Plan Achievements 3. Encourage private investment • Review of large development proposal • Elite Airways • Virtual Air Traffic Control Tower 4. Revise governance structure and authority for governing board • Creation of Northern Colorado Regional Airport Commission • Adopted Bylaws and operating rules 5. Rebrand and more productively engage the public • Resource estimates and preliminary development of a work plan 8 3.1 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Governance • Airport Commission was created in 2015 to streamline decision making and increase stakeholder involvement • IGA outlines policy issues reserved for City Councils • Airport Master Plan • Federal and State Grants • Purchase and sale of real property • Approval of annual contributions to the Airport budget 9 3.1 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Governance Northern Colorado Regional Airport Commission Scope of Authority: • Airport agreement administration including standard leases and contracts • Authorize Airport activities • Adopt or revise rules and regulations including minimum standards • Develop budgets and propose capital projects • Establish rates and fees • Establish service levels • Develop and manage operating, security, & emergency plans • Direct Airport Manager in the provision of Airport services, establishing goals and objectives, and performance evaluation recommendation to the Loveland City Manager 10 3.1 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) 2016 Strategic Plan Goals • Provide clarity for the Airport’s market and potential for General Aviation • Identify opportunities • Develop a comprehensive marketing and engagement program • Rebranding • Marketing • Communications • Create a framework for development proposal review 11 3.1 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Challenges • Airport development may require additional resources • Limitations on Federal & State resources • Airport development historically has: • been constructed with just basic infrastructure support • occurred on leased property resulting in less incentive to develop high quality improvements • been influenced heavily by economic conditions • Commercial air service passenger volume has not recovered from pre- recession levels • Industry consolidation • Barriers to entry • Regulatory standards affecting supply of qualified pilots 12 3.1 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Financial Forecast Model Objectives: • Enhance awareness of Airport’s financial condition • Explore base case with two examples of future scenarios - Scenarios developed from Strategic Plan - Model serves as backboard to evaluate development proposals • Assumes the following - Current operations without Commercial Service - 3% inflation for all revenues and expenses - All capital spending is based on grant revenues, not actual needs - No operational cost increases 13 3.1 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Financial Model – Base Case 14 3.1 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Base Case Analysis • Two primary operational revenue sources • Building and land leases • Fuel & oil commissions & taxes • Expenditures • Personnel, supplies, & purchased services • Capital expenditures • Maintenance and upkeep of existing assets • Long-term implications • City contributions needed to support operational shortfall - $345k year • Federal & State grants needed to support capital 15 3.1 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Financial Model + Commercial 16 3.1 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Commercial Scenario Analysis • Commercial service has low impact to operating revenue • $63k annual fuel, and airline related revenues • Low impact on operating expenditures • Commercial service has big impact on grant revenue • Increases FAA annual contributions from $150k to $1M • Long term implications • Operating losses continue at approximately $275k • Review & evaluation of landing and parking fees • Increased Federal funding supports capital investment needed for continued operation 17 3.1 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Financial Model + Corporate 18 3.1 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Corporate Scenario Analysis • Five new corporate aircraft - impact on operating revenue • $79k fuel and land lease • No impact on operating expenditures • Assuming to no increase in snow removal, facility maintenance • Long-Term Implications: • Operating losses continue at approximately $250k • Additional Aircraft do not improve capital grant revenue • Approximately 20 new corporate aircraft required to support operational break even 19 3.1 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Financial Model Conclusions • Commercial service provides big increase in capital revenues but little increase in operating revenues • Increase in based corporate aircraft has slightly greater increase to operating revenues but has no effect to capital revenues • These scenarios reveal that a combination of commercial service mixed with approximately 20 more corporate jet aircraft would be required to support operating and capital needs 20 3.1 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) Q & A 21 Mark your calendars: Airport Open House and WWII Static Display July 15-18, 2016 3.1 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4132 : Airport Work Plan) j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j !"`$ ³I ÕZYXW ÉZYXW üZYXW E County Road 50 S County Road 5 S College Ave S Shields St S Howes St Carpenter Rd W Laurel St W Willox Ln Highway 392 S County Road 13 E Prospect Rd E Horsetooth Rd S County Road 7 W Elizabet h St W Horsetooth Rd W Harmony Rd E Ha r mony Rd W Mulberry St E Tril b y Rd Remington St E County Road 52 Laporte Ave W Drake Rd S County Road 11 E L incoln Ave N Timberline Rd N Shields St W Vine Dr N Taft H ill Rd Main St Kecht e r Rd Country Club Rd E Mulberry St W County Road 54G Buss Grove Rd W Mountain Ave Turnberry Rd E Wil l ox L n L andi n gs Dr E Vine Dr W Prospect Rd E County Road 48 County Road 42C W C o u nty Road 38E Mountain Vista Dr E Drake Rd Richards Lake Rd W Tril b y Rd S Cou n ty Road 9 E County Road 36 E County Road 34c N County Road 5 Giddings Rd S Timberline Rd S Lemay Ave N College Ave S Taft Hill Rd S Overland Trl Riversid e Ave Ziegler Rd N Lemay Ave N O verland Tr l Bo a rd w alk D r G r e g ory Rd S Mason St Short Term Rentals Allowed use by Zoning CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Printed: February 16, 2016 Legend Permitted by Zoning j Not in a Permitted Zone - 68 j In a Permitted Zone - 17 0 0.45 0.9 1.35 1.8 Miles Scale 1:53,608 © K:\ArcMapProjects\City Managers Office\Lodging Tax\Maps\VBRO_02162016.mxd ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: STRs and Zones Allowing B&B Use (4131 : Short Term Rentals) Other? Pay all required taxes Annual registration fee to cover: Annual safety inspection One time zoning inspection Include: (options) Local contact Parking requirement Neighbor notification Limit to zones that allow B&B Other? 2 Packet Pg. 31 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community City of Fort Collins Rental Inspections (10/2012 - 12/2015) CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Printed: January 27, 2016 ! Rental Inspections City Limits GMA 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Miles Scale 1:58,408 © K:\ArcMapProjects\Neighborhood_Services\OwnerVRenterViolations\Maps\RentalInspections_11x17.mxd ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Rental Inspections (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Owners have the option to use a City of Bellingham inspector or a qualified private inspector (private inspector will be required to take a training course pertaining to the program.) Occupancy is not addressed. Only time they envision occupancy coming up is if at the time of inspection they find people using spaces for bedrooms that don’t meet the requirements (however, treated as an issue of safety.) Parking is not addressed. Once every three years and on complaint basis. Rental properties containing up to 20 units, no more than 4 total units will be inspected every 3 years. For properties containing more than 20, no more than 20% of the total number of units (no more than 50 units) will be inspected every 3 years. A City of Bellingham inspection fee of $100 (per unit) is associated with the program while private inspectors maintain their own prices. When using a private inspector, the owner will be required to pay an administrative fee to the city of $41. Owners required to register their property with the city every year and post a certificate of registration in each rental unit. Exemptions (2): exempt from the entire program- units outside city limits, accommodations for transient guests, retirement and nursing homes, mobile/ manufactured homes, shelters for transitional housing exempt from the registration fee and safety inspection (registration still required)- owner occupied containing 2 units, government ownership, rentals that receive government subsidies, accessory dwelling units attached to single family units. As long as owner is living at the property, no need to register. No, but would face penalties for non- compliance. Will begin with safety inspections first in 2016 while implementing a new permitting and inspection system to replace existing obsolete and unsupported software. The city will integrate rental inspections into the new permitting software system by dividing the city into thirds. Inspections are projected to start in the 2nd quarter of 2016. After safety inspections, inspections will be fairly random to protect themselves from allegations of targeting. If registration does not occur in a timely manner, the case will be sent to Code Enforcement and financial penalties will be assessed to the rental owner. Palo Alto, CA-No program Asheville, NC-No program Santa Barbara, CA- No program 1.1 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Research Matrix (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) maintenance code addresses occupancy. Zoning department addresses parking. Currently on a 5 year cycle but want to lower it to a 3 year time frame. Have re-inspection fees of $100 and trip charges of $75 if someone does not meet them for an inspection. At the beginning of the program, all rentals were required to be registered and then it was complaint based as to which units were inspected first. Program requires a 4-hour landlord training class to help landlords be more prepared for the renting process and how to handle difficult situations. Do not outsource any of their work. Work with the local police department to create a point system. Once a certain threshold is met through specific criteria the unit becomes a nuisance property. The unit stays as a nuisance property for a year and if police have to visit the property its 94$ per officer. Enforcement: 35 days to correct violations after 1st notice. 2nd notice with 14 days period to correct. Final notice with 7 days to correct. If nothing has been done then Municipal infractions are filed and can be charged up to $750 per count. Suggestions: Make sure you are well prepared and know how you are going to enforce the program. In addition, be open to change because more than likely the program will need to change over time. Lastly, creating fees help to keep the program cost efficient. In particular higher fees around $100 annually per unit. Have started using the software EnerGov. It was expensive to change over. Try to work with all departments (Building, Police, Water, etc.). That way each department has a contact for registration. Tacoma, WA (203,000) Multiple schools Since 2004 The program was looking to address equality for both landlords and tenants. If annual gross rental income of $12,000 or greater there is an annual fee of $90, if gross rental income is less than $12,000 there is an annual fee of $25 6 inspectors total For provisional rental properties, owner is required to fix all issues and submit to the City a certificate of inspection by a qualified outside inspector. Yes Yes No, only if there is an issue between landlord and tenant. City will only inspect a property if a complaint is made to the City. If after this inspection a rental property is found to be in non- compliance then a Provisional Rental Property License is issued. The City does not actually inspect the rental properties. Residential rental property owners are required to self-certify on their business license renewal that the unit complies with the State Landlord Tenant Act. No Heavily inform the public to avoid confusion and have the program ready to address issues that emerge at the start of the program. The program is enforced through the provisional rental property license 6B.165. Use the software SAP (already had it) 1.1 Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Research Matrix (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) Do not outsource any of the work; inspections are performed by a zoning officer and a building inspector. The original program was amended by state legislation that created a law stating the program could not require any type of structural changes or certain changes that could be costly. Before, the program inspected any unit that was not being used as it was originally constructed and required each unit to be up to building code. At beginning of program, inspections were done on any property that was a conversion first (single family dwelling now being used as a duplex or multifamily.) No, but can cite owners violations which could end up as a criminal misdemeanor charge. Enforcement: Correction list is provided with completion deadline and if the deadline is not met or substantial work is not completed then a notice of violation with a deadline of two weeks is sent. If no compliance, case is sent to the legal department. Suggestions: look at other cities and take the best from each. In addition, rewarding good behavior is usually more effective than focusing on bad behavior. For example, charging an amount and reducing it if the property and owner are in good standing. Fees should mitigate the cost of the program as well. Eugene, OR (159,000) University of Oregon (24,000) Rental housing code program…no licensing, 2004 The program was created to address basic living problems and create a quicker avenue for getting problems fixed (avoid legal hassles.) Yes-annual $10 fee per rental unit (when renting out by room, each room is one unit) No other fees 2 rental inspectors City staff manages and conducts all of the work related to the program with exception of a mailing service vendor who mails out billing statements. No, city zoning code addresses occupancy- single family homes can have no more than 5 unrelated adults No, has separate parking enforcement No, complaint driven only. Owners of all known rental units were contacted when the program launched, including a registration step to correct owner/unit information and/ or provide billing party information. Inspections are strictly complaint driven. The program has gone through 2 trial run periods and is going to have a third one due to push back, the program is still not considered permanent. Centered on the 6 basic habitable living standards: Heating, plumbing, weather resistance, structural integrity, smoke detectors, security- locks, (mold indirectly- added later, have to attribute it to under the code.) No, does levy fines though (increase in fine amount with each consecutive violation.) If violations of code standards are confirmed, an Order to Correct notice is sent with a deadline (typically 10 days). If repairs take longer the owner can submit a compliance schedule. If no effort to comply, daily penalties from $40- $2,000/day. Eugene had a lot of pushback from property owners because they believed this program overstepped the authority granted to local government. Students (tenants) played an important role in pushing this program forward (their support was necessary.) 1.1 Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Research Matrix (4130 : Neighborhood Livability) zoning dept. No, n'hood parking permit program in place. With license application (every 4 years; 2 if violations) and with change of ownership. Fire and building departments start annual inspection program with fraternities. Must name a local agent. Adopted SmartRegs ordinances- requires all rental housing to meet a basic efficiency standard by 2019. Will begin licensing short- term rentals in 2016. No, Nuisance Party ordinance in place. Increase enforcement, this can be in the form of enforcement officers, (many landlords will not voluntarily take on added expenses) and implement a Quality Assurance program (performed by a third party) to ensure the inspectors are completing safety checklists fairly and accurately. Lawrence, KS (80,000) Yes, UK (27,000) Licensing 2002 The program was modified in 2014 to encompass the entire city. Looking to solve issues surrounding a lack of maintenance (both exterior and interior) and absentee landlords that did not respond to tenant’s issues. Yes, $25 per unit Licensing fee, inspection fee and a “no show” inspection fee. 2 rental inspectors Yes, on complaint basis (no more than 3) No Yes, every 3 years With the expansion of the program, phased in over a 3 year period. License by last name per month, expecting 4 last name/ business entities each year. Inspect vacant units first to make it easier on the property owner and then do the oldest units next. Goal is to inspect dwelling units that are the oldest that often have the most issues. Only homes in residential zones need to be licensed; If owner occupied no license required; Local agent recommended not required. Have made substantially different changes to the original ordinance. Old ordinance had language that stated a private inspector could be hired but was removed due to no one pursuing that option and difficulty attached to monitoring inspections completed by someone outside the city. No. Disorderly House Nuisance Ordinance Have a good idea of startup costs; consider incentives for landlords, and implementation. Chapel Hill, NC (25,000) Yes (25,000) Licensing 2003 Yes. Variable. 2 for everything Yes (no more than 4) Permits required No, complaint basis Every tenant must be provided with a Rental Duties information Sheet No longer have a rental licensing program ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: Research Matrix (4130 : Neighborhood Livability)