Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bloomington council approves single-room-occupancy zoning change with owner-occupancy and buffer limits
Summary
After extended debate and public comment, the Bloomington Common Council adopted Ordinance 20-25-41 to allow single-room-occupancy (SRO) uses in targeted zoning districts with use-specific standards, an owner-occupancy requirement in R1–R4, a 150-foot buffer for two years around new SROs, and other limits; an amendment to reduce occupancy to one adult per room failed.
The Bloomington Common Council on Nov. 19 adopted an amendment to the city's Unified Development Ordinance to allow single-room-occupancy (SRO) uses in specified zoning districts, including conditional allowances in single-family R1–R4 neighborhoods, after a lengthy presentation, public comment and two council amendments.
Planning staff representative Eric Gerlick told the council the change renames the existing "residential rooming house" use to "single room occupancy" and sets use-specific standards intended to expand housing options while limiting neighborhood impacts. Key provisions adopted include a maximum of three bedrooms per SRO in R1–R4 districts, a two-adult-per-bedroom occupancy cap in those districts, an owner-occupancy requirement for SROs in R1–R4, a 150-foot buffer around a new SRO that prevents another SRO from opening within that buffer for two years, and compatibility standards for new SRO buildings (roof pitch, porch dimensions and access) intended to protect adjacent properties.
Council Member Piedmont Smith moved Amendment 1 to clarify the ordinance's whereas clauses and tighten definitions; the amendment passed unanimously. Council Member Barlow's Amendment 2, which would have limited occupancy to one adult per bedroom citing HUD practice and health-and-safety concerns, failed on a roll call vote (2-6).
Supporters said the ordinance provides an incremental tool to add low-cost housing options and can be used by nonprofits or the city to create affordable SRO units. Opponents and several residents voiced concerns that owner-occupancy rules could be circumvented (for example through title changes or LLC ownership), that market-driven owners could still charge high rents, and that conditional use pathways and enforcement must be clear to avoid neighborhood destabilization.
Planning staff said conditional-use approvals will generally require public notice and a hearing before either a hearing officer or the Board of Zoning Appeals, and that staff expects to send initial cases to the BZA while implementation norms develop. Staff also noted that SROs seeking federal HUD funding would need to meet HUD occupancy limits if a developer sought that funding.
The ordinance as amended was adopted by the council following the debate and public comment. The measure includes the use-specific standards described above and leaves other districts permissive with existing standards; it also preserves the city's inspection and building-code enforcement processes.
Council members who supported the ordinance described it as a cautious, incremental change that keeps multiple guardrails in place; those opposed cited risks to single-family neighborhoods and gaps that could allow circumvention. The council directed staff to monitor implementation and signaled a willingness to return with additional refinements if problems arise.
