U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-04-2009, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Twin Cities, MN
164 posts, read 440,428 times
Reputation: 166

Advertisements

How common is it in the US that a condo buyer would want to live in a building that allows no pets? Does such a policy make the unit harder to sell or otherwise lower the market value?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2009, 11:12 AM
 
5,623 posts, read 6,943,429 times
Reputation: 5000
In our situation, we own a condo and a total of 3 people out of 84 have a small pet. There are enough people without pets to fill things up.

I think agents might lose a few sales. Occasionally they might pick up clients who don't prefer pets.

All and all, I'd guess it might slow the sales a tad but not alter its value.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2009, 11:15 AM
 
22,769 posts, read 26,201,775 times
Reputation: 14558
For what its worth, I've had discussions with landlords in my area who say it is "impossible" to rent a place out without pets, here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2009, 11:59 AM
 
Location: Virginia
1,938 posts, read 6,348,353 times
Reputation: 866
I totally support the no pet rule if the original owner wants to move back into his/her home and is allergic to pets (cats for example). Otherwise, I think the no pets rule for the sake of the home is stupid. Its the owners who destroy a home, not the pets. A good pet owner will keep on top of their pets. I have seen wonderful pet owners with dogs who have beautiful yards, hard wood floors, and the same with cat owners- no signs of cat destruction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2009, 01:19 PM
 
Location: St. Croix
737 posts, read 2,247,509 times
Reputation: 756
A condo that we own says no dog (or cat) over 25 lbs. I believe this is in the best interest of the animal.

That said, when we were in the market as buyers we never looked at a condo that would not permit a small dog (we had one at the time, still have her but have since moved). So, in our case we didn't even consider looking at a property with a 'no pet' policy.

We now rent out the condo and the lease stipulates that we must approve of the pet in question before renting. I think it is really in the best interest of the pet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2009, 05:46 AM
 
Location: OK
2,743 posts, read 6,484,569 times
Reputation: 1890
I am not a typical buyer, but as far as I am concerned a "no pet" policy should make the value go down while a "no child" policy would increase the value immensely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2009, 05:55 AM
 
Location: North Texas
23,991 posts, read 32,798,789 times
Reputation: 27517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schousse View Post
I am not a typical buyer, but as far as I am concerned a "no pet" policy should make the value go down while a "no child" policy would increase the value immensely.
Unfortunately the "no child" policy would be illegal. Personally I do not have a problem with children, children are fine; but some people would rather not be disturbed by the amount of noise children make and I think it is kind of sad that those people do not have an option to live somewhere that has no children. There is "seniors only" housing, so why should there not be a "no children" policy too?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2009, 07:30 AM
 
26,590 posts, read 54,571,346 times
Reputation: 13019
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigDGeek View Post
Unfortunately the "no child" policy would be illegal. Personally I do not have a problem with children, children are fine; but some people would rather not be disturbed by the amount of noise children make and I think it is kind of sad that those people do not have an option to live somewhere that has no children. There is "seniors only" housing, so why should there not be a "no children" policy too?
The problem is that many adults who aren't seniors but don't have kids would also like to live in "No Kids" housing.

I'm in a SFH, but if I were to move into a condo, I'd definitely prefer one without kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2009, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Coastal New Jersey
56,004 posts, read 54,508,374 times
Reputation: 66349
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawoftheLand View Post
How common is it in the US that a condo buyer would want to live in a building that allows no pets? Does such a policy make the unit harder to sell or otherwise lower the market value?
I most certainly would not want to live in a place that does not allow pets. As a matter of fact, I am not yet sure if I want a condo or a stand-alone house, but that is the first question I ask about any of the townhouse/condo complexes I look at.

The problem is that some pet owners are irresponsible and they make it hard for everyone else. I just moved from a rental, and some carpet had to be replaced. I am going to pay for it, and I knew I would have to. I actually had intended to replace the carpet myself and now I'm glad I did not, because the landlord is calculating the cost based on a 10-year life of the carpet, I was there for four, so I am paying 6/10's of the cost.

To some people, life is simply about money. The animals that bring so much to our lives just don't count in their book.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2009, 08:06 AM
 
Location: Coastal New Jersey
56,004 posts, read 54,508,374 times
Reputation: 66349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schousse View Post
I am not a typical buyer, but as far as I am concerned a "no pet" policy should make the value go down while a "no child" policy would increase the value immensely.
HA, I laughed out loud but not a bad idea. I looked at a unit in one complex. There was a big plastic playground outside the window and I saw Big Wheels and other plastic kids' crap lying all over the place---I said, uh-uh, this community is NOT for me. It seems to me that often pet owners control their pets better than parents do their children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top