Thread by @WedgeLIVE

SRO (single room occupancy, aka rooming house) legalization is in the news this week. Here's a thread.

Minneapolis planning staff proposed a modest/weak version that doesn't live up to the concept of legalizing SROs citywide: lowest density zoning districts in the city would be exempted and, perhaps most significantly, only government entities and non-profits could run them.

On Monday, Planning Commission had a chance to modify the staff recommendation, but the only change was to tweak the lot size requirements so that 5,000 sq ft is the standard minimum for SROs across the city. (staff had proposed a 7500 sq ft min in R3 districts, 5k in all others)

The City Council will ultimately decide what is approved. The authors are Council Members Gordon, Goodman, and Schroeder. The 2040 plan, passed in 2018, called for removing barriers to single room occupancy and other "innovative housing types."
minneapolis2040.com/policies/innov…

Commissioner Chris Meyer proposed eliminating the requirement that SROs be operated by government or a non-profit, but that failed by a 5-5 vote.

yes - Baxley, Marwah, McGuire, Meyer, Olson
no - Caprini, Ford, Schroeder, Sweasy, Esmaeili

Meyer also proposed allowing SROs citywide (by eliminating the restriction in low density R1 and R2 districts - with a cap of 9 bedrooms - but that also failed by a 5-5 vote.

yes - Baxly, Caprini, Ford, McGuire, Meyer,
no - Marwah, Olson, Schroeder, Sweasy, Esmaeili

Here's Commissioner Meyer explaining the three amendments he wanted to make to staff's proposal.

Here's Commissioner Ford, who weirdly was a member of the Minneapolis City Council 50 years ago during the time when the city was fighting to eliminate rooming houses/SROs. Offers "a mea culpa for the work that we didn't do back in the 1970s" providing for well regulated SROs.

Jason Wittenberg, a planning manager at the city, said the objective with restricting SROs to government and non profits was to "wade in" to legalization slowly and revisiting in the future who is allowed to operate an SRO.

Commissioner Marwah voted for expanding beyond non-profits and government operators. Says other cities have seen demand for a range of SROs that serve a role as workforce and other types of housing, not just for those at risk of homelessness.

Wittenberg talked about the policy changes being spurred by Hennepin County repurposing hotels as housing for people experiencing homelessness.

Wittenberg: "I think there's a concern that if this does not go well, and does not have very strong oversight... that it could really jeopardize the reestablishment of this as a viable housing option" throughout the city.

Meyer: "We really need to do a lot to address the homelessness crisis. I don't think it's the appropriate time to be wading slowly." SROs an important part of the housing spectrum to help people avoid homelessness. Decades ago the city demolished many of them.

Ford supported putting them in all zoning districts citywide, but opposed the idea of opening them up to for profit operators. Compared it to the problems he sees with for-profit nursing homes.

Commissioner Baxley: "I get concerned when we start to mandate or define the idea of 'good neighbor.' So I think it's a particularly appropriate time to amp up that discussion." Supports opening it up citywide.

Ford, the 70s-era council member, said in his experience "those gradual things actually don't happen" when it comes to the low density zones of the city. His concern about not legalizing citywide: "we'll find ourselves with an economically segregated community still."

Wittenberg said it might be seen as a "bait and switch" to allow rooming houses in the parts of the city that were promised nothing bigger than a triplex under the 2040 plan. Meyer countered by suggesting a cap of 9 bedrooms (comparable to a triplex) for SROs in those districts.

Meyer: "I just wanna remind everyone about the context of the encampments... if we're expansive about it, this can be used for work housing and co-living, so I do really believe it makes the most sense to not restrict this to non-profits [and gov't]."

To reiterate: this goes to the City Council next, where it's unlikely to be made more expansive (IT'S AN ELECTION YEAR and the most reliable voters are the ones who want no part of a rooming house next door). But you can still ask your council member to support that change.