Memorandum

City of Lawrence

Planning & Development Services

 

TO:

David L. Corliss, City Manager

FROM:

Scott McCullough, Director

Brian Jimenez, Code Enforcement Manager

Date:

June 13, 2011

RE:

Occupancy Enforcement

 

 

This memo outlines the efforts necessary to enforce the occupancy limitations of the City Code and provides ideas to strengthen the city’s efforts in this endeavor. 

 

The framework that establishes occupancy limits is found in the Development Code.  The code limits occupancy for unrelated persons in single-family and multi-family residential districts to no more than 3 unrelated persons in a dwelling in the single-dwelling districts (RS) and no more than 4 unrelated persons in a dwelling in the multi-dwelling (RM) districts.

 

The concept of limiting occupancy is derived from the authority that cities receive from the state to ensure the public health, safety, and welfare of its citizens.  Zoning districts intended to accommodate families in individual units are mainly with a certain level of traffic, activity, nuisance factors, sanitary conditions, etc.  If such a district is intensified beyond what the district can accommodate, then incompatibility can occur and several neighborhood qualities can become degraded for the district’s residents.

 

Like most enforcement related items, over-occupancy is investigated upon a complaint being received by city staff.  The typical investigation includes a review of various records showing evidence of permanent residency such as who has registered for the water service; observed and submitted evidence of vehicles at the property, and interviews with apparent occupants and property owners.  If it is determined that over-occupancy is occurring at the dwelling, a letter requesting compliance within 30 days is provided to the owner of the dwelling.

 

The majority of the valid complaints are complied with by the owner and tenants.  For those that do not comply, staff submits the file to the city’s prosecutor for prosecution.  The prosecutor’s office reviews the file sent by code enforcement for completeness and to insure sufficient evidence exists to file charges.  Evidence should include statements of witnesses, photos, interviews of the owner, tenants, and occupants, etc. to establish the number of non-related persons actually living at the residence.

 

Once charges are filed, a court date is set. Code violations are heard the 4th Tuesday of every month.

 

The following provides data between 2005 and 2010 on over-occupancy complaints handled by the Code Enforcement Division of Planning and Development Services.

 

OVER OCCUPANCY CASES FROM 2005-2010

 

Year

Number of cases

No. of addresses with multiple cases during the year

2005

19

3

2006

47

8

2007

29

10

2008

18

7

2009

18

9

2010

20

4

Total

151

 

 

During the noted time period, a total of 19 addresses were investigated more than once by staff.  Eight property owners had no less than three cases of non-compliance investigated during the time period.  One owner had six different properties investigated resulting in eleven cases being opened during the time period.

 

Of the 151 cases, thirty three (33) belonged to 8 property owners representing 22% of all cases investigated.  This indicates that there is an issue with repeat offenders in this category of code enforcement. Such repeat offenders place a strain on the limited resources of the Code Enforcement staff and on the neighborhoods that must continuously report alleged violations to the staff.

 

Out of 151 total cases for the 6 year review period, 112, or 74%, were zoned RS (Single-Dwelling Residential).  The remaining 26% of cases were located in non-RS (RM/PUD/PCD) districts.  This relatively high percentage of RS zoned cases is logical considering the following.

 

1.    Single dwelling districts contain the lowest density and are more easily identified as violations of occupancy by neighboring properties.

2.    Single dwelling districts account for a higher percentage of owner occupied dwellings, which can generate higher awareness of the occupancy regulations and thus more likely to generate calls of possible violations.

 

Rental properties located in RS districts are subject to the rental registration program and receive onsite inspections once every three years.  While occupancy is a reviewed element of rental registration, it is not always apparent that over-occupancy is occurring at the property.  The average annual number of registered rental properties during this time frame is 1700.  The average annual number of cases opened during this time frame in RS districts is 18.  This equates into approximately 1% of the registered rental properties in non-compliance with the occupancy requirement.

 

Investigating over-occupancy is a challenge in that tenant cooperation is often required and evidence gathering can be time consuming.  Proving that a structure regularly houses more than the code permits can be difficult in that tenants often have temporary guests on a regular basis that can appear to be permanent.

 

In addition, owners will typically point to the tenants, even when information suggests that the owner is knowingly leasing to more than the code permitted number of occupants.  The Development Code states that, “The Owner, tenant, or occupant of any land or Structure, shall be presumed to know of activity occurring on the Premises and thus may be charged with a violation of this code for any violation found on any Premises subject to this code.”  The city typically holds the owner responsible for compliance.

 

Current efforts to make owners and tenants aware of the regulations include general city communications (news releases, city newsletters), holding personal meetings with landlords to educate them on the regulation, and providing information to the neighborhood groups to publicize via their newsletters.

 

Items staff has identified in completing this memo that will be implemented immediately include the following:

 

1.    Bolster efforts with KU to make students aware that occupancy limits.

a.    Enhance the “Residents” tab on the website to provide additional resources and links for students and parents seeking info on student-related topics and good neighbor ordinances.

b.    Distribute flyers at KU student orientation meetings during the summer.

2.    Increase general communication efforts on this subject by including the following in a yearly communications plan:

a.    Increase use of the landlord/tenant distribution email listing by adding landlords and property managers to the list when their license is renewed each year.

b.    Increase neighborhood communication with neighborhoods and directly ask for placement in newsletters.

c.    Annual placement of information in the July Flame (utility bill insert).

 

Items staff has identified that could be pursued to improve the compliance rate if determined appropriate by the City Commission include:

 

1.    Consider revising the code to create disincentives for being a repeat offender since 22% of cases investigated resulted from property owners that should be aware of the occupancy limits for the dwelling unit that they rent.

2.    Revise the city’s application procedures to require that a form be signed wherein the owner acknowledges and ensures compliance with the occupancy limits and that violations will result in expulsion from the program.  (Program expulsion may require a code revision)

 

Staff awaits direction on this enforcement issue.