Owners of accessory dwelling units in Durango may soon receive citations or court summons if they fail to submit affidavits of ownership to the city.
Community Development Director Jayme Lopko provided the latest ADU outlook at a City Council study session on Tuesday, where she said 304 letters have been sent to homeowners since March reminding them to file their paperwork.
The letters are part of an overhaul of the city’s process to keep track of ADUs and ensure owners are being compliant with the city’s ADU program.
The presentation raised questions about compliance enforcement and how strictly the city should enforce requirements among councilors. It also revived conversations about balancing affordable housing opportunities offered by ADUs with the spirit and character of Durango’s neighborhoods.
Lopko said the city has not enforced the requirement for owner occupancy affidavits, which verify an ADU owner is compliant with the city’s requirement that he or she lives in an ADU or primary residence on the property housing the ADU, to the present, but the city is exploring new processes to do so.
In addition to owner occupancy, the city requires that no more than one unit on a property with an ADU is rented and affidavits must be submitted biannually. Noncompliance can result in an ADU being vacated from the property.
One hundred eight ADU owners out of 165 owners in the city are compliant, representing a compliance rate of 65%, Lopko said. The city is working with 13 property owners to reach a resolution, and 42 property owners have not responded to the city’s letters. About 30 owners have called or visited the city to inquire about the notices.
Lopko said many of the inquiring residents were unaware of the city’s requirements. Thirty-four residents said they will provide owner occupancy affidavits and they are working on those.
Concerns residents have communicated include their properties are in a trust; their renters are being displaced because of the requirements, and owners risk breaking leases to become compliant; that parents or adult children own the properties in question; and that the owner lives on an adjacent property but rents the property next door with an ADU.
“We have several that said they’ve been misled by a prior owner,” Lopko said.
Several other residents have said they are choosing to decommission their ADUs, which leads to other possible compliance problems, she said.
Councilor Jessika Loyer said the city is in a balancing act with maintaining compliance, the city’s character and its affordable housing goals.
She asked if the real impactful issues are with compliance or the regulations demanding compliance.
“Is noncompliance mostly administrative, is it intentional? What percentage are actually operating properly versus simply not putting out paperwork?” she said. “Are citations likely to improve compliance or is it simply to discourage participation?”
She said ADUs can help affordable housing, but she questioned whether requiring more than $7,000 in pro-rated ADU fees or kicking out locals because they haven’t demonstrated owner occupancy is what the city really wants to achieve with its ADU program.
Loyer said many communities have removed owner occupancy requirements. She would like to know if removing such requirements would result in more “bad landlords” or if its impact would be more positive.
Councilor Kip Koso said owner occupancy requirements create better properties and maintains the quality of a property and a neighborhood. He added neighbors deserve more consideration than someone who intends to turn a property into two rentals.
He suggested the city may be able to adjust fees and timelines for owners to become compliant.
He asked when the city will send its final notice letter to ADU owners before citations start being issued.
Lopko said the city needs to send out the third round of letters within several weeks under the current ADU program.
Reader Comments