Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Homeless Thread (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby MarkJ » Sat 15 Nov 2008, 10:36:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'T')here was *suppose* to be only 3 people living in it.
You know how the story ends right?
Eventually 6 people and 1 dog would call that place home. $1,350 / 6 == $225 per person
Aside from living in the basement of your parent's house until you're 60 years old, there is NO cheaper way to put a roof over your head. :)
As the economy contracts I expect this type of living arrangement to become more common.


I rarely ever rent to more than 2 or 3 people due to wear & tear, water/sewer bills, heat/hot water bills, off-street parking, noise and quality of life issues. Some of my largest sources of complaints in the rental business are noise, parking, off-street parking and property use related complaints, (tenant vs tenant & tenant vs neighbor) These problems increase substantially with more occupants & guests.

The wear & tear and noise related complaints that a large amount of occupants create is incredible. I often advertise 3 and 4 bedroom homes & apartments as 1 or 2 bedroom since I don't want too many occupants. Often I'll box off the spare rooms and/or remove the walls and open the space to eliminate the bedrooms.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby vision-master » Sat 15 Nov 2008, 10:47:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '2')50 s ft for $760 / month.


:razz:
vision-master
 

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby GeneralGreen » Sat 15 Nov 2008, 11:15:30

This is going to get allot worse..come 2012 ...30% of Americans will be homeless or living together in home sharing.
User avatar
GeneralGreen
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Fri 04 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Europe: European Historian

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby MarkJ » Sat 15 Nov 2008, 11:44:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'Y')ou know what amazes me? How incredibly cheap a full size house rents for.


Some homes are cheaper to rent than apartments since they rent them on a month to month or short-term lease basis while they're trying to sell them. The rents often don't cover the mortgage, taxes, insurance, water/sewer bills, maintenance and repairs.

The tenants are offered below market rents in exchange for the hassles of having to move due to sale and having potential buyers and real estate agents parading through the home they're renting.

Generally speaking, tenants hate having to move, hate having buyers & real estate agents violating their privacy and hate to rent housing that's currently for sale. Often the only way to rent these properties is by offering them at a rental rate well below the current maket rate.

In my case, I rent some homes and apartments below market rate since I own them outright and don't like the hassles of tenant turnover due to pushing the rent envelope. I haven't raised rents on some units in several years since I have outstanding long term tenants.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby cube » Sat 15 Nov 2008, 15:45:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '2')50 s ft for $760 / month.
:razz:
You may remember back in college there was that 1 girl who had an "older" boyfriend.
EVERYBODY here should know what I'm talking about.

The cube version of post PO is where I stop by the college campus and use my pick up line:
"How would you like to share 250 sq ft of space with me?" :lol: :twisted:
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby ReverseEngineer » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 02:26:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GeneralGreen', 'T')his is going to get allot worse..come 2012 ...30% of Americans will be homeless or living together in home sharing.


The other 70% will be squatting in forclosed on properties and paying no rent at all.

Reverse Engineer
User avatar
ReverseEngineer
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Wed 16 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby GeneralGreen » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 05:54:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GeneralGreen', 'T')his is going to get allot worse..come 2012 ...30% of Americans will be homeless or living together in home sharing.


The other 70% will be squatting in forclosed on properties and paying no rent at all.

Reverse Engineer

I expect allot of squatters..Only problem squatters will have is the landlord has the access to the bills..electric, gas, etc...They may find themselves living in an empty house..but without electric ,heat, water etc...wont be very fun.
I can tell you if I had a home squatters were living in and couldn't sell it..it'd strip it bare..from the plumbing to the electric and take out the windows "They could come in handy for a greenhouse". I would make sure any squatter would have a very uncomfortable stay...
This ^^ will be the norm...squatters are not going going to be welcomed and it wont be a fun stay..They will hardly be better off then those in Obamavilles.
Now those squatters who bought a home on credit and wont pay the bank "This will be the majority as Obama eases paying credit on mortgages "the good people will also stop paying...I know I would why should I pay my mortgage when Joe gets off for free?" This will crash the banks..Both bad creditors and good alike just wont pay. This will lead to a run on the banks and a serve deppression..Anyway someone will still own the home even if the bank has it...a squatters life is never secure.
User avatar
GeneralGreen
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Fri 04 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Europe: European Historian
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby ReverseEngineer » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 06:25:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GeneralGreen', 'I') expect allot of squatters..Only problem squatters will have is the landlord has the access to the bills..electric, gas, etc...They may find themselves living in an empty house..but without electric ,heat, water etc...wont be very fun.
I can tell you if I had a home squatters were living in and couldn't sell it..it'd strip it bare..from the plumbing to the electric and take out the windows "They could come in handy for a greenhouse". I would make sure any squatter would have a very uncomfortable stay...
This ^^ will be the norm...squatters are not going going to be welcomed and it wont be a fun stay..They will hardly be better off then those in Obamavilles.
Now those squatters who bought a home on credit and wont pay the bank "This will be the majority as Obama eases paying credit on mortgages "the good people will also stop paying...I know I would why should I pay my mortgage when Joe gets off for free?" This will crash the banks..Both bad creditors and good alike just wont pay. This will lead to a run on the banks and a serve deppression..Anyway someone will still own the home even if the bank has it...a squatters life is never secure.


Newz Flash...The Banks ALREADY crashed.

Stripping the house bare is the same thing as abandoning the property, it would in any event be destroyed by weather with no windows to stop the water from destroying it. So since you abandoned it, you have no rights to it anymore, at which point the squatters rights would come in.

Said squatter might then negotiate for electric and gas, but since these companies will be outta biz ANYHOW, it wouldn't matter.

So anyhow, unless you are prepared to live in the house and defend it, you can pretty much kiss off any equity you have invested that you can't transport off the property before you abandon it.

Reverse Engineer
User avatar
ReverseEngineer
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Wed 16 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby GeneralGreen » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 06:36:24

OK, lets just imagine here.. You have a home you want to sell a 1,000 sq ft 3 bd "If it we me I would action it TODAY! Get rid of it at any price. But lets say your home never sells and keeps dropping in value "Think Detroit real estate..a home in Detroit is now ave of 9,000 USD...Lets say you bought the home cash and cant sell it even for 10K..Well..Lets say you have anouther place in some small town 409 miles away.
Me...I would take out all the plumbing, carpets, windows, cabinets, electric "I could get" heating...etc...and not even care to board up the home..It will look like something out of a Halloween movie. So even if squatters get it it will be very uncomfortable!
Banks have not crashed..I still have an account and can get money as I need!
User avatar
GeneralGreen
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Fri 04 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Europe: European Historian

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby ReverseEngineer » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 07:31:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GeneralGreen', 'O')K, lets just imagine here.. You have a home you want to sell a 1,000 sq ft 3 bd "If it we me I would action it TODAY! Get rid of it at any price. But lets say your home never sells and keeps dropping in value "Think Detroit real estate..a home in Detroit is now ave of 9,000 USD...Lets say you bought the home cash and cant sell it even for 10K..Well..Lets say you have anouther place in some small town 409 miles away.
Me...I would take out all the plumbing, carpets, windows, cabinets, electric "I could get" heating...etc...and not even care to board up the home..It will look like something out of a Halloween movie. So even if squatters get it it will be very uncomfortable!
Banks have not crashed..I still have an account and can get money as I need!


Definitely I would agree with this plan of action, at least if you own a Freightliner and a Flatbed to haul your plumbing, wiring, glass, insulation etc the 409 miles to your Doomstead. If you don't own one, fitting an entire house into your SUV will be a challenge, unless you have a Circus background fitting 50 Clowns into a Volkswagen Beetle.

The cost of leasing and then fueling a tractor trailer to haul the valuable house parts away, plus the cost of manpower to disassemle said house (unless you pland on doing this all yourself) will probably cost you as much as the scavenged parts are worth, and you are probably better off using said money to buy extra guns and ammo to defend your doomstead rather than hauling off the house in parts.

Anyhow, said solution might work for a person who just owns one extra house, but what of the Landlord who say owns half a dozen 2 Family hoses he rents out? How is he going to dissassemble them all and carry them all off to the doomstead in any kind of economic fashion? If he is locked down in the Doostead 409 miles away, how is he going to go collect rent from whatever tenants he might have, who probably are no longer employed and have no rent money for him to collect?

Far as the Banks not having crashed yet in practice, to an extent this is true, but not for much more than just keeping some money on deposit and paying bills with it. Getting a line of credit from a bank is close to impossible now, and I wouldn't feel too secure about keeping a whole lot of money in any bank right now either. What is keeping them open just to keep the debit system working is a massive shell game of outrageous proportions, that it has held up this long is a tribute to the genius of Henry Paulson backed up by an inexhaustible Printing Press, but it can't last forever. When it does finally give up the ghost, just how anyone will keep hold of any property they are not Physically present on backed up with a small army is an open question. Somehow I doubt Sherriffs will risk their own lives to go and kick people out of these homes. To send them WHERE?

How this part of the breakdown of the system will be handled is one of the most interesting things to watch in the short term as the economic crash progresses.

Reverse Engineer
User avatar
ReverseEngineer
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Wed 16 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 10:47:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', '
')Stripping the house bare is the same thing as abandoning the property, it would in any event be destroyed by weather with no windows to stop the water from destroying it. So since you abandoned it, you have no rights to it anymore, at which point the squatters rights would come in.

Said squatter might then negotiate for electric and gas, but since these companies will be outta biz ANYHOW, it wouldn't matter.

So anyhow, unless you are prepared to live in the house and defend it, you can pretty much kiss off any equity you have invested that you can't transport off the property before you abandon it.

You are wrong here.

What if he stripped anything valuable and deliberately destroyed (eg set alight or blown up) the rest?

Squatters would surely go emptyhanded.

I am certain that similar policies will be applied while collapse proceeds.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby MarkJ » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 10:50:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ReverseEngineer', 'A')nyhow, said solution might work for a person who just owns one extra house, but what of the Landlord who say owns half a dozen 2 Family hoses he rents out? How is he going to dissassemble them all and carry them all off to the doomstead in any kind of economic fashion? If he is locked down in the Doostead 409 miles away, how is he going to go collect rent from whatever tenants he might have, who probably are no longer employed and have no rent money for him to collect?


There's really very little worth salvaging in many rental properties here in the Northeast, unless you want to salvage lead, asbestos, plaster, lath, rotted fasteners, rotted bricks, rotted chimneys, mold, rotted boards, fire damaged lumber, fuse boxes, light gauge wiring, antique furnaces and boilers etc. Most of the older clay piping, iron piping, galvanized piping, copper piping, valves and fittings are worthless from a re-use perspective.

Since most multi-family homes are in cities, they're harder to demolish due to tougher codes/enforcement, small lots, no driveways, shared driveways, shared walls, multiple close neighbors, limited parking and limited room for vehicles, dumpsters, equipment etc. The cost of lead/asbestos abatement, demolition permits, safety compliance, labor, hauling, landfill fees and working in difficult conditions would often outweigh the value of salvaged materials.


Many landlords that own multiple rental properties are out-of-town no-show landlords. The cities often have a difficult time getting them to maintain their properties. Since many don't have construction skills and don't perform their own maintenance & repairs, they'd likely wash their hands of the property if they weren't receiving rents for an extended period of time. Even if they don't have a mortgage payment, they won't continue to pay property taxes, insurance, water/sewer, natural gas, electric, heating oil, propane, dumpster rental, garbage pick-up, property managers, maintenance people & legal fees if the cities don't prevent squatters, vandalism etc. I imagine you'd see a lot of fire sale prices and/or convenient fires long before things got real bad.

All the good salvage materials are in recent and new construction town, village, suburban and rural homes. Many of the materials are difficult to salvage due to adhesives, fasteners, amount/type of fasteners, brackets, hardware, floor coverings etc, but it's well worth the prying and cutting, hauling and storage. We salvage all sorts of valuable recent/new construction materials when we disassemble or move modern structures.


As far as hauling, you can carry a heck of a lot of lumber with a truck, ladder racks and a trailer. Trucks and SUVs can tow very large multi axle trailers capable of hauling tons of materials. Trailers are also much easier to load and unload. Many of the heavy materials in housing like drywall and multiple layers of shingles aren't worth salvaging.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby SuperTico » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 11:06:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('deMolay', 'R')oy even the illiterate part is 95% a person's own doing. N. America is awash in Libraries and free schools. But the person themselves have to want to better themselves. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him shave.

Very good !
I live in a country with extremely high literacy.
Gotta go kill a pig now
Pura Vida !
User avatar
SuperTico
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri 10 Oct 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Costa Rica
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby idiom » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 15:12:24

What sort of mind would destroy a worthless asset rather than let a homeless family live in it?

You can't rent it so you are going to destroy it? Not even give it away as a tax write-off?

That is in the same leauge as CEO's who strip their companies off assets and fly the coop. That is not even remotely capitalism.
The world ends without a tragedy,Time is melting into history
The sky is falling, Voices crying out in desperation
Hear them calling, Everybody, save yourself
User avatar
idiom
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Mon 23 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby MarkJ » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 15:50:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('idiom', 'W')hat sort of mind would destroy a worthless asset rather than let a homeless family live in it?


I believe people are talking about salvaging materials and re-using them, not intentionally destroying a property.

Health, safety, fire and local codes prevent people from living in structures without water, sewer, electric, heat and/or mechanical and structural issues.

Who's going to pay the mortgage, property taxes, back property taxes, insurance, water, sewer, heat, hot water, electric, maintenace and repairs necessary for homeless people to live in these structures?
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby idiom » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 16:07:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') would make sure any squatter would have a very uncomfortable stay...


Squatting laws function to allow an equivalent of a house bankruptcy. If you are keeping the most severe recession ever in mind as your stage with very long horizons on possible recovery, then why let destroy otherwise functional homes. Where they are broken down why prevent people from repairing them.

A lot of the new homeless know how to maintain a house and know how to work, there is simply a huge lack of paid employment. While you may not want to turn a building over to crack addicts, there are plenty of upstanding families around camping in city parks.
The world ends without a tragedy,Time is melting into history
The sky is falling, Voices crying out in desperation
Hear them calling, Everybody, save yourself
User avatar
idiom
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Mon 23 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby ReverseEngineer » Sun 16 Nov 2008, 18:22:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('idiom', 'W')hat sort of mind would destroy a worthless asset rather than let a homeless family live in it?

This kind of mind, from a previous post in this thread:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'Y')ou are wrong here.
What if he stripped anything valuable and deliberately destroyed (eg set alight or blown up) the rest?
Squatters would surely go emptyhanded.
I am certain that similar policies will be applied while collapse proceeds.

The idea here would be, "if *I* cannot make a profit off this piece of property, I will destroy it so it can't be used by others." If the market is essentially flooded with properties people can squat in, it destroys the value of any rental properties still functioning in the area also. Same idea as if you give mortgage relief to some people, why would ANYONE keep paying on their mortgage? Then the Banking system collapses! As I said in a News Flash, the banking system already collapsed, so worrying about this particular problem istrying to shut the Barn Door after all the horses have left the building.

If you willfully destroy the property by fire, this would be Arson, whether you own the property or not. To destroy it Legally, you would have to pay for workers to do it, and pay for costs involved int he cleanup of all those nasties like asbestos, lead etc.

Really, your only alternative here in a quasi-legal sense is abandonment of the property, since the people using it can't pay you anyhow what's the difference to you? You get no money out of the destruction, and the destruction would be illegal by most means which would not cost you quite a bit of money to accomplish.

As I have said before, the destruction of the monetary system fundamentally leads to a destruction of principles of ownership, these two concepts walk in lock step. When the money is made worthless either by hyperinflation or little money is available to anyone through rapid deflation, the whole system of ownership, rentals, mortgages, business loans the WORKS is quite finished as well.

Anyhow, although some people will no doubt strip their primary homes of as much valuable stuff as they can fit on a flatbed pulled by their SUV, most of the shell of these house will remain standing. With no power, but generally still better protection from the elements than a tent. The resourceful Gypsy Squatter might have his own generator and a few solar panels to mount on the roof. Of course he will have to protect those solar panems from being stolen off the roof, so he or his friends will have to be on site protecting the property, while others are out scavenging and looking for work, bartering for some gas or propane to run the generator.

You have to think about all the McMansions out there as just a bunch of Caves that exist on the planet now, the legacy of the years when Big Oil ruled the world. For as long as they remain standing, people can use them if they can protect them, but nobody is going to make a profit off them anymore.

Reverse Engineer
User avatar
ReverseEngineer
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Wed 16 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby idiom » Mon 17 Nov 2008, 00:40:59

Well you can't sell the houses and keep housing prices high.

The Government wants as many people to live in houses that are as expensive as possible. The mentality of destroying houses to keep prices up is what lead to the ploughing under of crops in the '30s to maintain the agricultural system.

The reluctance to realise the loss is going to wind up killing people. Again.
The world ends without a tragedy,Time is melting into history
The sky is falling, Voices crying out in desperation
Hear them calling, Everybody, save yourself
User avatar
idiom
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Mon 23 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby cube » Mon 17 Nov 2008, 01:37:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('idiom', 'W')ell you can't sell the houses and keep housing prices high.
The Government wants as many people to live in houses that are as expensive as possible. The mentality of destroying houses to keep prices up is what lead to the ploughing under of crops in the '30s to maintain the agricultural system.
The reluctance to realise the loss is going to wind up killing people. Again.

I think we have to make a distinction here. Not all houses should be lumped together. There are house in the city, suburb, and finally in the exurbs.
At the height of the housing boom people simply wanted a bigger house no matter how ridiculously far away and inconvenient it may be.
Right now the pendulum has completely swung the other way.
According to surveys, people now want to live in the city or at least a lot closer to it.
In other words people are willing to sacrifice square footage in exchange for being closer to jobs and shopping.
Nobody wants to live so ridiculously far out that you have to drive 15 miles to the nearest grocery store no matter how damn big the house is.
There is no longer a market demand for houses in the "exurbs" no matter how low the price.
There is no such thing as squatters in the city anymore. Granted it was that way back in 1987 when RoboCop was prowling the streets and all the cities suffered from "white flight"
Image
but now the middle class are moving back to the cities therefore the land is too valuable to be left for the poor.
The poor / squatters will get kicked out to the exurbs.
//
Like I mentioned before I'm paying $760 rent on a 250 sq ft condo.
The only way there can be squatters is if there's an abandoned building.
With rent prices like that how many "abandoned" buildings are there in Seattle? :wink:
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Families Flooding Homeless Shelters

Unread postby MarkJ » Mon 17 Nov 2008, 10:49:20

Demolishing blighted, vacant, abandoned, condemned city homes and buildings increases the value of surrounding homes. I've demolished several since I needed off-street parking for my tenants and room to expand, build garages and storage units.

I bought 4 muliti-family homes on a single street at the tax auction since they were the only bad homes on the street. Once I demolished them, it increased the value of all homes in the neighborhood. Dozens of people in the neighborhood thanked me, plus the elimination of low income rental properties took a load of the social service department, police department, code enforcement etc. The neighborhood value increased since I eliminated blight, safety hazards, over-population and crime, not because I eliminated homes on the market.

Generally speaking, multi-family homes devalue neighborhoods. I've increased neighborhood property values by converting many multi-family homes to single family homes. Fewer units equals less crime, less noise, less turnover, more parking, less traffic and fewer tenant vs tenant and tenant vs neighbor conflicts.

Blighted homes and buildings devalue other neighborhood homes which equals lower assessments, lower property tax revenue and more difficulty selling. When people can't sell it leads to more foreclosures, tax seizures, blight abandonment etc.

With lower tax revenue, cities must raise taxes and cut services to keep up with lost revenue and real-inflation since they don't have the vacant building lots, large tracts of acreage, farmland and undeveloped land necessary to increase the tax base. This causes more people to outside the cities where there's less blight, less crime, lower taxes, better school systems, large building lots & acreage, modern homes, new construction homes, housing developments, townhouses, lakefront homes, vacation homes, camps, commercial growth, suburban jobs, shopping, four seasons recreation, mountains, lakes, rivers, streams, wooded land, hiking trails, bike paths etc.

When cities don't demolish, sell or repair vacant homes, it's the perfect example of The Broken Window Principle. I've seen a ripple effect of foreclosures and abandonment in surrounding neighborhoods with a large amount of vacant homes and slumlord properties.

Even when we demolish city homes, the land is often worthless since the lots are too small and the neighboring properties are too close to build another residential structure, hence why all the growth is in the villages, suburbs and rural areas.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron