|Re: Communes and Survivalists||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Sharon Villines (sharonsharonvillines.com)|
|Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 07:36:52 -0700 (PDT)|
On Jul 2, 2013, at 7:34 AM, R Philip Dowds <rpdowds [at] comcast.net> wrote: > Many communities, including Cambridge and Brookline here in MA, have > experimented with the unrelated individuals prohibition. Turns out this > prohibition is virtually impossible to enforce. The only instances I know of where it has been enforced is when groups of students or young people fill a house with largely transient residents. They usually have had loud parties and affect the quality of everyone else on the block. I don't know the numbers in DC but in other places I've lived the number is quite high -- 8 unrelated people? It has been beyond the normal (or even unusual) family grouping number. Such houses become in effect not homes but wall to wall beds. And invitations to party. We had one in our neighborhood a couple of years ago. The person was advertising parties on the internet. In other instances they were in effect unlicensed nursing homes. I think the law is also a deterrent to landlords if it is on the books. The landlord has more lose when renting in violation of the law. Sharon ---- Sharon Villines Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC http://www.takomavillage.org
- Re: Communes and Survivalists, (continued)
- Re: Communes and Survivalists Sharon Villines, July 2 2013
- Re: Communes and Survivalists Richart Keller, July 6 2013
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.