• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

"but it's not a group home" says the owner.

My experience with the issue of overcrowding has shown that it is seldom a problem outside of upscale neighborhoods. Well I shouldn't say that it's not a problem, it's just not something that people complain about in low income areas. And if there is a complaint it usually has nothing to do with overcrowding.

Southern California has a diversity of ethnic groups that tend to congregate. The people that came here from a third world country will endure living conditions that are less than ideal. A dozen people living in a two bedroom house might be a huge step up for them. A Whittier back yard with a hundred chickens is....well they know where to get fresh chicken. Running afoul of an ordinance that limits the number of people that can live in a house is the least of their concerns....not getting shot on the way to school is a top priority.

The State has enacted liberal laws allowing additional dwelling units to be constructed as a way of maximizing the potential for housing an ever expanding population. The future will have the dozen in the two bedroom main house and a dozen more in a 1200 square foot ADU.
 
Last edited:
Not in CA but what if all these unrelated people all living there were called:

1. Live in maid
2. live in cook
3. live in 24 hr HC care giver
4. live in butler
5. live in gardener
6. live in stable boy
7. Girl/boy friend
8. Other girl/boy friend
9. girl/boy friend's sister
10. butler's wife
 
1 to 6 are employees who are supplied work force housing as part of their wage package ;)
10 is available when 1, 2 and 3 have a day off :D
 
Before you get into the problem of who resides there and who is a GUEST , I would suggest looking at this from the Code Safety aspect of the number of people who can Legally Occupy the Structure.
Any rules on the books about the number of bedrooms or 300 sf / person ?
 
ICE said:
My experience with the issue of overcrowding has shown that it is seldom a problem outside of upscale neighborhoods. Well I shouldn't say that it's not a problem, it's just not something that people complain about in low income areas. And if there is a complaint it usually has nothing to do with overcrowding.

Southern California has a diversity of ethnic groups that tend to congregate. The people that came here from a third world country will endure living conditions that are less than ideal. A dozen people living in a two bedroom house might be a huge step up for them. A Whittier back yard with a hundred chickens is....well they know where to get fresh chicken. Running afoul of an ordinance that limits the number of people that can live in a house is the least of their concerns....not getting shot on the way to school is a top priority.

The State has enacted liberal laws allowing additional dwelling units to be constructed as a way of maximizing the potential for housing an ever expanding population. The future will have the dozen in the two bedroom main house and a dozen more in a 1200 square foot ADU.
Click to expand...
Just as an anecdote to Ice's post, a non-licensed friend of mine is doing a project for an absentee owner of a single family home here in Cali: they are constructing (2) ADU units (allowed) behind a single-family residential house, which will be demolished when the ADU's are constructed and a NEW 2-story 2-family residence will be built in it's place ... and it's ALL legal. The lot that is in an older ( 1950's/1960's) single-family home neighborhood will now (legally) have FOUR rentable units. AND .. no onsite parking is required, either!
 
MtnArch said:
Just as an anecdote to Ice's post, a non-licensed friend of mine is doing a project for an absentee owner of a single family home here in Cali: they are constructing (2) ADU units (allowed) behind a single-family residential house, which will be demolished when the ADU's are constructed and a NEW 2-story 2-family residence will be built in it's place ... and it's ALL legal. The lot that is in an older ( 1950's/1960's) single-family home neighborhood will now (legally) have FOUR rentable units. AND .. no onsite parking is required, either
Click to expand...
Is the owner required to live on the property? The no on site parking is a sea change. The rule was covered parking forever and it killed many projects before they got started.
 
Last edited:
ICE said:
Is the owner required to live on the property? The no on site parking is a sea change. The rule was covered parking forever and it killed many projects before they get started.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is a requirement for owner to live onsite. I was shocked to find out that no parking onsite was required - covered OR uncovered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top