>> Where are these types of places illegal in reality?

Because eventually individual rooms start being rented by families. Next you have four families living in a single-family occupancy location and there is a huge fire hazard. I've seen this happen in NYC growing up, and its super dangerous. I also empathize with the other side -- as a poor person you may have no other option.

▲

sokoloff 3 days ago | parent [-]

Living in a car or being homeless is also super-dangerous when contrasted to living in a more typical housing arrangement.

It’s not at all clear to me that four families in a single family-intended house is worse than the alternatives. (Building more housing is the long-term solution, of course…)

▲

mothballed 3 days ago | parent [-]

Rational people tend to get the safest housing they can afford.

Therefore regulating housing is quite possible to only make things less safe, as people end up giving up money for healthy food / education / healthcare / dentistry etc to fund the trumped up "enviromental study" "planning and zoning" "code" and other requirements that might not best fit their budget.

	▲	TuringNYC 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Totally agree on all this points. The real issue is insufficient supply of housing. All these problems would go away if housing stock kept up with population. The interim regulation is addressing risks of the outcomes of poor policy, rather than addressing the poor policy in the first place.