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.
I would move to this neighborhood in a second - and I'm an animal lover. HOWEVER, I do not like to listen to dogs barking all the time or having to step around poop.
I don't see there being a lack of interest in something like this. I think there are plenty of people out there like myself who would buy into it - assuming it was strictly enforced. Because like someone else mentioned, even apartment complexes that don't allow pets end up with someone sneaking an animal in.
This is such a loopy thread. Where the hell do you all live where there are all these incessantly barking dogs?
I have lived in city or first ring suburban neighborhoods for almost 50 years, and barking dogs have been the occasional minor irritant. They have certainly never been anywhere near the problem that loud music from nearby bars (even 3 blocks away) or neighbors have been or the asshats riding around the streets on motorcycles or in hotrods with their loud mufflers and louder base speakers. Should I mention how annoying sirens are in the middle of the night? Or garbage trucks at 5 am? Or snowplows at midnight? What about 3 or 4 little girls screaming in a swimming pool next door?
What you or I have experienced does not matter, Linda_d. The OP and some of the others on this thread do not want to live where there are dogs, for what ever reasons. So I say, just let them.
It's not clear what is motivating the anti-dog objective. Do these folks have a fear of dogs?
The funny thing is they won't be able to exclude all dogs from the subdivision regardless of what they try to force via restrictive covenants. In addition, to the extent they are enforceable they are only enforceable against people owning property in the subdivision. So if the concern is noise, they can't prevent folks outside of the subdivision from owning dogs. That's right, you can open a boarding and grooming kennel right next door. If you are in a hilly area, you don't have to be "next door" to hear animals - the sound can carry over long distances in hilly areas. Seems moot if the issue is noise considering that coyotes don't care about the restrictive covenants....
As you mentioned, that's not uncommon with condo/townhomes (even when homes are detached) with HOA fees, restrictions, and a considerably different form of ownership. When you own your own property, it's yours to do with what you want (providing you adhere to zoning restrictions, ordinances, etc.).
What you or I have experienced does not matter, Linda_d. The OP and some of the others on this thread do not want to live where there are dogs, for what ever reasons. So I say, just let them.
"Let them?" Who cares where the hell they choose to live? Instead of the OP finding an existing community with such a restriction, s/he wants to build a subdivision where people own their own property, and bar them from having dogs. Huh?
"Let them?" Who cares where the hell they choose to live? Instead of the OP finding an existing community with such a restriction, s/he wants to build a subdivision where people own their own property, and bar them from having dogs. Huh?
Gimmeabreak.
Exactly. People buy detached homes on individual lots precisely so that they can pretty much do what they want on their own property. The more restrictions on what owners can do on a residential property, the fewer people interested in purchasing it, either because they're opposed to the restrictions themselves or they realize that the restrictions will severely limit their ability to re-sell the property.
Sometimes the reason "nobody did this before" is not lack of creative thinking but the fact that it's just not a good idea. A dog-free subdivision would be a prime example.
I don't disagree with you at all. I just say encourage the OP to do what he wants with his money (it will take big buckets) and he will either succeed or fail. In any event it will be an interesting social experiment. And I repeat, I love dogs, have dogs, and can't live without them! But I don't expect everyone to want to live like I do. Out of 360 million people, 150 homes in one location without dogs is no big deal. Different strokes, as they say.
You know, something tells me the deer, raccoons, porcupines, squirrels, chipmunks, snakes, mice, rats, birds, coyotes and other animals won't bother to read your HOA restrictions.
noxious:= harmful, poisonous, or unpleasant. "Noxious" is a more apt description for an HOA than a pet.
What additional animals will you lump in as "other noxious" ? Seems like it's a purely subjective decision. Will you be in control of the fiefdom for an extended period of time? What about goats, sheep, chickens, and pot-bellied pigs?
You still won't be able to exclude service and comfort animals including dogs.
"Comfort animals" are not protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act, only service dogs. Some states have laws to give the same protections to comfort animals, as service dogs, but many do not. I don't understand your hostility towards people that prefer to live without pets, or how you fail to understand that neighboring pets can detract from the quality of life for some people.
OP, I think this is an interesting idea, but as other have mentioned, the more restrictions you place on the owners, the more you subtract from potential buyers.
Please keep us up updated if you choose to pursue this idea, I bet many people would like to know how this turns out.
Thanks stburr91. The hostility to the idea was not unexpected and serves to remind me why an exclusive development like this is needed. But there have been some good ideas posted. I have not decided yet whether to go this route, pending more research.
As I stated in an earlier post, the likelihood of fewer potential buyers might be compensated for by the greater motivation for such properties by the minority that would prefer to live in a dog-free neighborhood. The purpose of the original question was to see if anyone knew of a similar venture. Being the first and only one to do this in the US could be a plus, but until someone does it, we won't know.
I will continue to update, and appreciate any other constructive comments by City-Data.com members.
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.
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.
