BERKELEY — Students from UC Berkeley showed up in numbers at the City Council Tuesday evening to urge rejection of proposed standards for mini-dorms and group living accommodations that they said would accomplish little positive while discouraging victims of sexual assault from coming forward and stigmatizing students as raucous partygoers and overall troublemakers.

The proposed standards are intended to combat illegal alcohol use and sexual assault while addressing neighbors’ complaints about noise and trash and reducing the demand on police, fire and hospital emergency services by residents and guests, mostly college students.

“Mini-dorms” are dwelling units with six or more unrelated adults. Group living accommodations, or GLAs, involve multiple residents with individual leases or rental agreements.

The proposed standards would require GLAs to retain a property manager and designate a “responsible resident,” as well as impose obligations to provide contact and other information to the city and to neighbors. Many of the requirements were already imposed on mini-dorms in 2012.

There also would be limits on hours of parties and other “events” — ending at 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and at 1 a.m. Fridays, Saturdays and days preceding holidays — on the size of gatherings, generally 200 people, and on the serving of alcohol. Certain violent crimes and sexual assaults would trigger public nuisance proceedings that could involve hearings before the Zoning Adjustments Board and the City Council.

Students who spoke at Tuesday’s meeting included officials of fraternities and sororities and their umbrella organizations, as well as student senators, several of whom said that the proposed standards would discourage sexual assault victims from coming forward. Some said the rules and the penalties for breaking them would act as collective punishment on entire communities of students. Others said that the best way to address the problem would be in consultation with students, and that largely student-driven efforts over the past several years already have succeeded in reducing the frequency of emergency transports of students to hospitals.

Still others said the proposed rules are tantamount to an unconstitutional limitation on students’ right of assembly. One noted that many students are depressed and that the proposed rules would damage them by limiting their ability to socialize and bond.

Several students urged the council, if it were to adopt the rules, to at least exempt accommodations and organizations that prohibit alcohol and drugs and generally promote responsible behavior

But other residents, primarily older than student age, said drunk and noisy students are a problem of long standing in Berkeley, and that it is high time for the city to do something about it. “We sent two college-age boys back to their mothers in a box,” Yolanda Huang said, referring to recent student deaths believed linked to the aforementioned types of conduct.

She also saw a racial element to the student misbehavior and the perceived leniency toward it.

“I know that if you had 20 black boys rent a house on San Pablo (Avenue), and have parties on Friday and Saturday nights, with 200 people, with girls getting raped, with people dying from alcohol, they would be doing time in state prison, and not getting a pass for being a college student,” Huang said.

The proposed mini-dorm and GLA standards were the subject of a special 5:30 p.m. council discussion, and the council did not act on them but instead referred the matter to a future council meeting.