Rebecca Davies stated in her letter of 12/30: “There is no reason that a co-op with six unrelated people will be more disruptive to a neighborhood than a house with two adults and four children who are all related.” Most neighborhood residents would agree that a co-op with six residents could be tolerated. Unfortunately, that’s not what the ordinance that the City Council intends to pass on Tuesday (1/3) is about. The new rules would allow twelve to fifteen unrelated adult residents to occupy a house as small as 2,000 square feet – and that is certain to be more disruptive than almost anything that would normally be permitted in a residential neighborhood.
A few other widespread misconceptions about the co-op ordinance should also be corrected:
- It’s not about planned co-housing, it’s about turning houses designed for single-family living into high-occupancy boarding houses.
- It’s not about “aging in place” for senior citizens. There are other more appropriate ways to allow seniors to share housing.
- It has nothing to do with ADUs or other forms of owner-occupied rental properties.
- It’s not about affordable housing for teachers, firefighters, and the vast majority of Boulder’s thousands of in-commuters.
- It has nothing at all to do with the existing “co-ops” Masala, Ostara, and Chrysalis – these will continue to operate as they have for years regardless of whether this ordinance is passed in any form or rejected altogether.
Editor’s note: a version of this article has been published in the Daily Camera as a Letter to the Editor: Steven Meier: Correcting misconceptions about the co-op ordinance