For boards, having some restrictions in place as to what an owner can do with their pets is just good sense. But, with the emergence of extreme policies either pandering to pet owners, or, the yin to that yang, a police procedural television-style crackdown of dog excrement involving mandatory DNA testing, what approach to pet mollification is most effective?

First, let's take a gander at the outliers: A January 22 piece by Jane Margolies in The New York Times examined “pet spas” and various other amenities that “have sprung up in residential buildings in New York in recent years in a bid to entice renters and buyers devoted to the four-legged members of their families.” But while one may be forgiven in assuming that these pampering pet enclaves are strictly the province of the wealthy, Margolies is careful to note they are increasingly showing up in affordable housing as well. After all, the United States has seen a spike in pet ownership, especially as millennials delay marriage and procreation.

No Messing Around

On the other side of the coin, Jeff Goldman of NJ.com reported on February 16 that a West Orange condominium complex is currently debating the mandatory submission of DNA samples from all pets in residence to identify which of their owners is lackluster when it comes to...um…waste disposal. Certain residents are circulating a petition, an understandable reaction to such an extreme policy because some pet owners aren’t living up to their end of the communal bargain.

And then, of course, there are the thousands of condos and co-ops that fall somewhere in between the spectrum of Palm-Springs-type animal spa retreat and doggie Big Brother. But what tactics best embolden a community at large? And what variables factor therein?

Well, as always, a predominant influencer here is value. Especially in a condo, when spas, dog runs, pet playgrounds or any such amenity is being considered, it’s inevitably going to come out of the pockets of unit owners or shareholders. Even if the community has a critical mass of pet owners to justify these amenities, it begs the question, who’s going to care for them?

“Who’s going to maintain [the playgrounds]? You need to make sure there’s water on-hand; you need electricity to ensure that it’s safe at dusk. Oftentimes, depending on the setting, these are hard to come by,” says Robin Steiner, a property manager with RMR Residential Realty in White Plains. “In other cases, a developer just doesn’t want to install one. Plus, a playground or a pet run has to come out of the common charges, even though it only appeals to a specific demographic of owner.”

The stricter measures, such as the aforementioned DNA tests, are not without their own costs. “To implement fines for negligent owners is one thing, as they provide an alternate income for an association,” says Abdullah Fersen, CEO and founder of Newgent Management in New York City. “But in regard to that condo in New Jersey—I don’t know why they would go to such extremes. Taking DNA samples and implementing tests… how much is a condo going to pay for that?”

“We look for income opportunities, as opposed to expenses,” Fersen says. “Pets are family members to some people. We don’t want to say, ‘Get out.’ We allow people to have pets, and if they violate rules, we can make money off that; we won’t harass anyone into having their pet tested. Our way is less confrontational, it’s friendly, and we can make money for the association. Their way is just impolite.”

Despite the expense and the comical law-and-order extreme of dog poo DNA tests, one could argue it’s a legitimate alternative to a blanket No Dogs Allowed policy, which, according to Alex Kuffel, president of Manhattan-based Pride Property Management Corp., are still fairly prevalent. “Most co-ops or condos that we manage prefer to maintain a standard, acceptable, no-dog policy,” he says. “And there are hundreds of residents who buy into these buildings quite happily. They all want ongoing ‘no dog’ policy protection against barking, noise, odor, bites, etc.”

But Kuffel does acknowledge a ‘new wave’ of pet lovers moving into multifamily buildings, which could turn the tide of pet bans. “We’ve noticed that newcomers in buildings that permit dogs and pets understand that rules and regulations are important for the sake of peace and harmony, thus few are broken, and little extreme measures are taken due to an offending dog’s behavior or its owner’s negligence.”

Pampered Pets

So while pet spas and assorted on-site amenities are great if an association can afford them and the ownership shows adequate support, they still stand as more novelty than norm. Whether that will change in the future remains to be seen, but measured and steadily enforced rules that placate both pet owners and the pet-averse seem preferable to the alternative.

“The ideal way to handle pets, especially dogs, is to establish rules that focus on the dog's sociability,” says Steiner. “There should be rules against a dog defecating or urinating in a common area, the dogs have to be under control at any particular time, the dogs should be licensed, and it’s almost reasonable to require that, at least once, when you register a dog, that they’ve had all of their shots.”

Even with pets, it is possible for reason to win the day.

Michael Odenthal is a staff writer at The Cooperator.