were't those occupancy laws established 'back in the
day' as an attempt to make it more difficult to run
brothels, or 'houses of ill repute,' if you will?

a limit of three unrelated occupants has nothing to do
with building code or safety.  it is/was clearly an
attempt to control all living situations that did not
conform to the traditional family structure.  

if a single family cannot afford a to rent a house in
west phila, it is insane to blame the student
tennants.  if you are unhappy with the costs in the
neighborhood, i would look at causes.  penn has been
extremely heavy-handed.  

christine

--- HarvestMoon3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A landlord could do as you suggest, but it would be
> risky and foolish. Only
> those who actually sign the lease would be
> responsible for the lease. The
> others would be "visitors" or tresspassers, and
> there would be no
> landlord-tenant relationship to enforce. After one
> bad experience trying to
> enforce the lease with the non-signers, the landlord
> would say, " I've
> learned my lesson, and won't do that again".
> 
> Contrary to your assertion that it would be
> impossible to enforce occupancy
> limits, I believe it is in most cases a simple
> matter, if the resources are
> devoted to it. And, I believe (perhaps naively) that
> most landlords would
> obey the law if it were enforced and publicized.  As
> of now, there is no
> attempt at enforcement. And the law is not
> publicized at all.  It wouldn't
> be 100% enforceable, but it would change the
> landscape of  things in UC.
> 
> Neil Lifson
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dubin, Elisabeth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "HarvestMoon3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Elizabeth
> F. Campion"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:04 PM
> Subject: RE: [UC] Movie Shoot in Clark Park
> 
> 
> You can't be serious about enforcing occupancy
> limits in this way.  It would
> be almost impossible to do, and would require some
> kind of big-brother
> system.  I've lived in college towns where landlords
> would only agree to
> put, say, two people on a lease for a $2000
> two-bedroom house with a dining
> room and living room.  But that didn't mean that
> there weren't four people
> living there, in reality.  Same results, in the end,
> even though the
> landlord is legally not doing anything wrong.  This
> is barking up the wrong
> tree, it's just impossible to enforce.
> 
> 
> ELISABETH DUBIN
> hillier
> 
> ONE SOUTH PENN SQUARE, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107 TEL:
> 215.636.9999 FAX:
> 215.636.9989 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HarvestMoon3 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 11:22 AM
> To: Elizabeth F. Campion
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [UC] Movie Shoot in Clark Park
> 
> 
> I've seen ads and listings for SF houses in UC
> ranging up to $4000/mo.
> These high prices are typically paid by groups of
> 5-8 students living in the
> house. This practice (allowing more than 3 unrelated
> individuals to occupy a
> housing unit), as Liz Campion correctly points out,
> is illegal.  It is never
> enforced, however. NEVER. As Liz also correctly
> points out, it can be
> difficult to get the higher rents from young
> families.  (I think it's
> difficult to get that kind of rent on a SF house
> from "old" families or
> couples or singles, too. These rents might be
> realized in luxury apartment
> situation such as the Left Bank Apartments).
> 
> The rent structure in UC is outrageously skewed
> upward due to the city's
> lack of enforcement of the occupancy limits.  If
> these limits were enforced,
> a SF house could not / would not rent for the high
> prices that are now being
> charged. ($2500/ 5 people = $500 per person.  $2500/
> 3 people = $833 per
> person. Students will balk at this.)  It also
> probably would bring down the
> selling prices of homes in the area (at least in the
> short-term).  If
> landlords were truly prohibited from renting SF
> houses to large groups, the
> rents would fall, and many landlrods would probably
> chose to sell the houses
> (increasing the supply of SF houses on the market
> and reducing the prices).
> 
> I think this should be brought up as an issue to be
> addressed by the Mayoral
> candidates. Unequal enforcement of the law
> benefits/enriches the few, and
> those few are typically (though certainly not
> always) absentee landlords.
> The rest of us (residents) are essentially being
> indirectly taxed (higher
> rents, higher housing prices, more trash, more
> noise, etc., often  a lack of
> maintenance on the rental houses -- resulting in
> lower quality of life for
> nearby residents, etc.) This has been a major
> concern of mine for years, and
> Spruce Hill CA has attempted to deal with it
> (unsuccessfully) through L&I
> and Councilwoman Blackwell. It always simply comes
> to a dead-end. To my way
> of thinking, this is a major scandal.  Who is
> directing L&I to keep these
> regulations unenforced?
> 
> Also, Liz Campion's referal to cabbies who buy and
> sell Medalions and
> therefor have high incomes is not typical.  I don't
> know the details of
> Medalions, etc., but I know they can sell for many
> thousands of dollars
> ($50k? $100k?). A typical cabdriver, from my
> understanding, does not own a
> medalion, but must rent it.  They do not get to keep
> all the fares paid to
> them, as I understand it.  Can anyone shed some
> light on this?  We can
> always pick out some specific wealthy secretary or
> nurse or other (you name
> it), but this doesn't mean that people with those
> occupations typically have
> high incomes.  Does anyone have insight into the
> "typical" cabdriver's
> income?
> 
> Finally, David Morse (in "Hack") does not appear to
> own his cab or a
> medalion.  He's on the low end of the scale,
> certainly doesn't appear to
> have much of anything, and seems to not spend much
> time picking up cab
> fares.Call me crazy, but I don't see how he can
> afford to purchase or rent a
> SF home in UC unless he has large savings or an
> inheritance or somethng.
> This info, so far as I know, has not been offered on
> the TV show (though, I
> haven't seen all episodes).
> 
> Neil Lifson
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Elizabeth F. Campion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 9:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [UC] Movie Shoot in Clark Park
> 
> 
> 
> > I know that I was able to help one young family
> rent a home on the very
> > desirable 4600 block of Hazel for $1,800.00 /
> month for a 2003-2004
> > School Year Lease.  Folks should be aware that the
> City has a housing
> > code which limits occupancy to three or fewer
> unrelated.  It can be
> > difficult to get the higher ($2,500) rents from
> young families, but
> > neighbors who are suffering from unsupervised
> "groups" may have some
> > recourse.  And Landlords who have suffered even
> one horrendous clean-out
> > / make-ready after a bad "group" may find that
> staying within the law and
> > accepting a slightly smaller rent is more cost
> effective in the long run.
> >
> > Best!
> > Liz
> 
> ----
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to
> the
> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive
> information, see
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

Reply via email to