What is city occupany limit for 1 bedroom apartment? (Howe: rental, tax)

[PhinneyWalker]

Originally Posted by jbb303

City code enforcement typcially doesn't oversee resident policies or punish or fine individual tenants of an apartment complex.

Occupancy limits come under fire and safety, and if the property is within city limits, Code handles it instead of the Fire Marshall.

You are wrong about enforcement of occupancy limits. Tenants can be fined and force to move. What other "stick" do you think the city uses to enforce ordinances if not fines?
However, believe whatever suits you. I have better things to do than to argue about this.

[ChristieP]

Originally Posted by SnakesRcool

thanks for the info, can you tell me where that is publically posted? I want to make sure I have my sources straight if I need them.

The apartment lease had the maximum number of occupants stated in it. That's why they asked at the office, and were given 6 months grace period after the birth to move up to a 2-bedroom.

[PhinneyWalker]

Originally Posted by ChristieP

The apartment lease had the maximum number of occupants stated in it. That's why they asked at the office, and were given 6 months grace period after the birth to move up to a 2-bedroom.

Yes, because that is the law on occupancy.

[jbb303]

Whose law? A Google search leads to state law saying 3 adults per bedroom.

See here: https://texas.public.law/statutes/te...section_92.010

[johnsonkk]

Originally Posted by jbb303

Whose law? A Google search leads to state law saying 3 adults per bedroom.

See here: https://texas.public.law/statutes/te...section_92.010

This is correct.

[johnsonkk]

Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker

You need to call the city and speak to Code Compliance. They are your authority for what you can and cannot do. If you were to be cited, it would be a HEFTY fine. I am talking many hundreds of dollars. Do not risk it. It is not worth the fine and having it on your record.

This is tyranny the way it’s written. When you succumb to city or state ordinances on what you “can and can’t do” as it pertains to living, you’ve lost the spirit of America.

Forget the ten cars parked out front of a 3 bedroom house, which clearly indicates code violations for occupancy and focus on the newborn living with a young couple in a single bedroom.

In reality, most parents WANT to get that second bedroom for children when it’s possible. The issue is self assessing and rarely requires “code enforcement “ and hefty fines.

[Lillie767]

One of the dumbest practices ever.

Right up there with parents decrying the possibility that siblings might have to share a bedroom. Oh the horror!

[PhinneyWalker]

Originally Posted by johnsonkk

This is tyranny the way it’s written. When you succumb to city or state ordinances on what you “can and can’t do” as it pertains to living, you’ve lost the spirit of America.

Forget the ten cars parked out front of a 3 bedroom house, which clearly indicates code violations for occupancy and focus on the newborn living with a young couple in a single bedroom.

In reality, most parents WANT to get that second bedroom for children when it’s possible. The issue is self assessing and rarely requires “code enforcement “ and hefty fines.

The laws are written to protect all citizens from social and environmental problems. Children should not be sleeping in a room with two adults even if those adults are the parents. You do not have to think about this for long before you can start to come up with good reasons why it should not be permitted.

This likely has been a problem for millennia---people procreating without being able to financially provide for their offspring. In most cases it is generational. It is not the children's fault. So what is the solution?

The solution is simple. There should be a redistribution of wealth via the tax system. The rest of society should pay for all of it. Those people who have done family planning and who can afford to raise the children they planned for should have to take up the responsibility for financially providing for the children of those who did not plan and cannot pay to raise their children. This has to be the solution because after all, society cannot turn its back on helpless, blameless children.

In fact, the United States should not only care for these American citizen families, it also should care for immigrant and refugee families, too. They should all be housed, fed, clothed, and educated. After all, America is rich, rich, rich! It can absorb and care for everyone! It is not only the "right" thing to do, in practical terms ultimately it is the only thing to do because we will always have people procreating despite not being able to financially provide for their offspring.

Of course, there also will always be that segment of society who will rebel against common sense solutions like this one. They will complain and say "if I could plan for my own family and pay to house, feed, clothe, and educate myself and my children, then everyone else could and should do the same!" Of course, that heartless segment will be voted down because as has been said, society cannot turn its back on helpless, innocent children!

However, that heartless segment of society will respond by making it as difficult as possible for these other needy families, and they certainly will see to it that although these needy families may get housing, food, education, etc., it will be at as minimal a level as possible. Under no circumstances will they be allowed to live as comfortably as the responsible segment of society. If they are kept in "poverty," perhaps it will motivate them to stop having children they cannot afford to support. Well, maybe it will......

[Threestep2]

Originally Posted by PhinneyWalker

The laws are written to protect all citizens from social and environmental problems. Children should not be sleeping in a room with two adults even if those adults are the parents. You do not have to think about this for long before you can start to come up with good reasons why it should not be permitted.

This likely has been a problem for millennia---people procreating without being able to financially provide for their offspring. In most cases it is generational. It is not the children's fault. So what is the solution?

The solution is simple. There should be a redistribution of wealth via the tax system. The rest of society should pay for all of it. Those people who have done family planning and who can afford to raise the children they planned for should have to take up the responsibility for financially providing for the children of those who did not plan and cannot pay to raise their children. This has to be the solution because after all, society cannot turn its back on helpless, blameless children.

In fact, the United States should not only care for these American citizen families, it also should care for immigrant and refugee families, too. They should all be housed, fed, clothed, and educated. After all, America is rich, rich, rich! It can absorb and care for everyone! It is not only the "right" thing to do, in practical terms ultimately it is the only thing to do because we will always have people procreating despite not being able to financially provide for their offspring.

Of course, there also will always be that segment of society who will rebel against common sense solutions like this one. They will complain and say "if I could plan for my own family and pay to house, feed, clothe, and educate myself and my children, then everyone else could and should do the same!" Of course, that heartless segment will be voted down because as has been said, society cannot turn its back on helpless, innocent children!

However, that heartless segment of society will respond by making it as difficult as possible for these other needy families, and they certainly will see to it that although these needy families may get housing, food, education, etc., it will be at as minimal a level as possible. Under no circumstances will they be allowed to live as comfortably as the responsible segment of society. If they are kept in "poverty," perhaps it will motivate them to stop having children they cannot afford to support. Well, maybe it will......

Well Phinney, what got your craw today?

I am a supporter of "do something about your situation" not "let someone else do it for you". Look at some of the classic communist and all inclusive situations. Not too many have withstood the test of time.

[ChristieP]

Originally Posted by Threestep2

I am a supporter of "do something about your situation" not "let someone else do it for you". Look at some of the classic communist and all inclusive situations. Not too many have withstood the test of time.

I agree. I am not going to financially support the living expenses of people who are not my own family, and even supporting my own family would only be temporary.