no kids in the building

try cooper square elderly housing. great location

Try the Fair Housing Act, part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. In 1968, it prohibited discrimination based on race, etc. In 1988, it was amended to prohibit discrimination based on disabilities & family status (i.e., children). For 24 years, your question has been legally bundled alongside the level of ignorance in the question, "Are there buildings that restrict blacks & cripples?"

It's too bad there are buildings that don't allow children. I would buy there. Totally different situation than race, sex, etc.

Eumen it sounds like what you want are the senior living housing that are in suburbs or Florida or North Bergen, NJ. The only thing I've ever heard of in NYC are areas that have a high percentage of elderly. But none of them have children restricted housing except for senior citizen housing and that's income restricted and he list is really long. Don't think it exists in NYC so you have to decide what you really want. If to be around seniors with lots of planned planned activities then Florida or senior living centers are for you. If you just want to be in a building with lots of seniors then look for those "naturally occurring senior....". Don't remember the name.

downtown, why do you hate children?

Re: Are there buildings that restrict blacks & cripples?

and dentists - for the antidentites

But they are our future!

Hey, there are resorts, restaurants, shops, trips and clubs that don't allow children. The difference between disability, race etc. and having children is that one CHOSE to have children, through no fault of the populace. And not everyone has to put up with the nuisance and inconvenience some children create.

"Hey, there are resorts, restaurants, shops, trips and clubs that don't allow children. The difference between disability, race etc. and having children is that one CHOSE to have children, through no fault of the populace. And not everyone has to put up with the nuisance and inconvenience some children create. "

To quote Seinfeld again, "We live in a society!". We all have to 'put up' with each other on this planet.

"We all have to 'put up' with each other "
Right, no questions about that.
I was just pointing out the difference between a voluntary act (having children) and, say, race or disability as they apply to the discrimination laws.

I'll take a kids building over an a-hole building

"I was just pointing out the difference between a voluntary act (having children) and, say, race or disability as they apply to the discrimination laws."

People CHOOSE their religions and political affiliations, idjit. You in favor of non-Jew buildings? Of Coops that won't admit democrats?

>For 24 years, your question has been legally bundled alongside the level of ignorance in the question, "Are there buildings that restrict blacks & cripples?"

Leave it to inododo to call an elderly man a racist and somehow to equate children with a handicapped person.

>People CHOOSE their religions and political affiliations, idjit. You in favor of non-Jew buildings? Of Coops that won't admit democrats?

Even better, streeteasy's resident retard helmet wearer, Jason equates being a Democrat or Republican with having children or not.

What if you were born to parents who's religion do not believe in using contraceptives.

>What if you were born to parents who's religion do not believe in using contraceptives.

I can't wait to hear what inododo and Jason have to say about that.

The plain fact is that kids are absolutely NOT permitted in any apartment building in the City of New York. If you know of a violation, you can file a complaint with the Department of Health.

Relevant law is found in Health Code sections 161.09 and 161.21

"What if you were born to parents who's religion do not believe in using contraceptives."

Then you have dumb parents. Sorry about that.

You don't choose your parents.

My point is anti-discrimination laws cover political affiliation and religion too, which are choices also. Its silly to say its less bad to discriminate against people who choose to have kids than it is to discriminate against people who choose to be Muslim or Catholic or what have you.

"...anti-discrimination laws cover political affiliation"... What??? First off all, nobody ever asks you about your political affiliation. If it becomes an issue, it's most likely because you wear a swastika on your sleeve... Then it will be an issue, and rightfully so; would you call it discrimination? I'm yet to hear about a nazi bringing a discrimination law suit...
Also, political affiliation does not create screaming, running in hallways, overloading elevators, breaking said elevators, and much more...

I believe ATRIA (a 55 community, independent and/or assisted living depending on locale) has a location on the Westside, 86th Street?, as well as many other locations in the burbs.

Are you kidding, openhouse? The ACLU defends Nazis and all sorts of other idiots when their rights are violates:

http://www.aclu.org/aclu-history
One of the most noted moments in the ACLU’s history occurred in 1978 when the ACLU defended a Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie, Illinois where many Holocaust survivors lived. The ACLU persuaded a federal court to strike down three ordinances that placed significant restrictions on the Nazis’ First Amendment right to march and express their views. The decision to take the case was a demonstration of the ACLU’s commitment to the principle that constitutional rights must apply to even the most unpopular groups if they’re going to be preserved for everyone. Many now consider this one of the ACLU’s finest hours.

Those of you who believe that discriminating based on family status should be OK, you are entitled to your view. But the society you live in has democratically chose to make this illegal alongside race, disability, gender, etc. So until you get the law changed, you are shit outta luck.

"Inonada," I think that you need to go back to law school. The Fair Housing Act specifically allows "senior" housing to discriminate based on "family status." That's obviously what the original poster was asking about ("mature adults without kids"), before you made him or her feel unwelcome with your ill-informed, personal attack.

Yes, senior housing (55+) does have an exemption. But note the title of this thread: "No kids in the building", not "senior housing". And the text from the OP said "Mature adults with no kids". If your education has led you to believe that human maturity occurs around at age 55 rather, you should ask for a refund.

So inododo, your education is that in 2012, someone who is 55 years old has to refer to themselves as a senior citizen?

"Senior housing" are "obviously" allowed to discriminate based on "family status." That being so, the OP obviously wasn't asking about that.

Co-ops that require a high down payment, i.e. 50% or more, generally attract an older and more affluent clientele. You'll find far fewer families with children in those types of buildings compared to buildings that require 25% or less. Condos are a free-for-all and attract lots of kids.

You are dense, huntersburg. I didn't say "senior citizen", I said "senior housing". If you don't like the terminology, take it up with your government:

http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/FHLaws/yourrights
HOPA retains the requirement that senior housing must have one person who is 55 years of age or older living in at least 80 percent of its occupied units. It also still requires that senior housing publish and follow policies and procedures that demonstrate an intent to be housing for persons 55 and older.

If you don't like 55+ being the threshold for senior housing in 2012, maybe you should lobby for 65+ if you like.

This seems to be the most sensitive issue for you so far inododo.
Such extreme anger.
So many references at the ready.

My question seems to have elicited a lot of emotion which wasn’t intended.

Setting a couple things straight, first, we are not elderly. When we reached 55, the term “mature” seemed appropriate and better than “senior”, except when getting discounts. Our parents are elderly. Our kids are grown up, whether they are mature or not is subject to debate.

Second, kids. Done that. Like kids, but don’t want them screeching around the hallways or bumping our knees into strollers in the elevators. This may be a city living compromise if the only places where kids are restricted is in true senior homes. We are NO looking for senior homes. So if the answer to our question is “no”, that’s fine.

Third, racism. We are not racist. Our preference to not have kids is not the same as a racist prejudice to not be in the same building as blacks, Latinos, Asians, or Jews, Catholics, people with accents, etc. Equating the two is WRONG. And kids are not cripples. We’ve seen in our lifetime Polio and people victimized by Thalidomide. I don’t know how anyone can put this in the same thought process as our inquiry. Ok, enough of my lecture, we were merely seeking information with our question.

No one said you were a racist. You were seeking information, and you got it. The form of housing discrimination you seek (against children) is protected alongside other protected classes when it comes to housing: race, religion, disabilities, etc.

You can choose to defend your bias, or you can try to understand why our society decided to start protecting children against such biases 24 years ago.

"Like kids, but don’t want them screeching around the hallways or bumping our knees into strollers in the elevators."

Let's break that down.

1) You have taken an activity kids are more likely to be engaged in (screeching), attributed it to all kid engaging in that activity inappropriately in your hallways, and used that as reasoning for your bias. Sorta like using disproportionately higher levels of drug dealing among certain minorities / males / 18-30 year-olds, and the possibility of bringing this into your hallways, as rationale for discrimination.

2) You have taken the mobility/space requirements of certain children and used that as an excuse for discrimination. Why stop at strollers? "Like disabled people, but don’t want bumping our knees into wheelchairs in the elevators." For that matter, why not discriminate against larger-set people based on the elevator excuse? Maybe it'd be best to just cross out all races that tend to be heavier, that'd probably be easiest on your knees in the elevator.

The simple answer is to find buildings which are not conducive to family life. They exist.

On the UWS, I can think of a few buildings, they have some things in common:
1) High(er) $/sqft - stroller brigade typically looks to maximize sqft/$. Look for high barriers
to entry. For example, on the extreme end, I doubt the River House in Sutton Place has many
families with little children.

2) No family-sized apts - predominantly studio or one bedroom with few 2 bedrooms and fewer combos.

Eumendides is entitled to his/her personal bias, but had an unfortunate turn of phrase in the original post.

What is your budget? And what areas do you like? It seems to me that the right building to you might be on the UES with a very tough board.

omg

Thumbs up to Eumendides!

My husband & I are share the same thought process. Been there, done that.
Ouch! - had I posted the same thought/question, I really doubt I would ever post on this board again. Com'on give Eumendides a break.

Eumenides--I agree with NYC's approach. Just look for buildings that aren't family friendly if you want to avoid children. I know that some people in our building would like to avoid children; perhaps I can send them your list when you compile it. Ha!

However, I'm admittedly a bit creeped out by your handle. Eumenides = The Furies or the "Well Meaning Ones", who then tear guilty people to shreds. Are the guilty parties the parents for having children? Or the children for misbehaving?

i would love a list of apartments with the least percentage of kids as well. they are noisy, out of control, like tiny drunks everywhere. that drunken screech that they start their days with at 7am when school starts is worse than any dog bark. i've slept much better this summer since they are all hungover from the sun and lack of school.

i know they don't know what they are doing and are not in control of themselves and i don't wish any evil or bad to them, i just don't want them around my life until (if) i take the plunge only due to noise. i have lived in a lot of places and so far, next door neighbor's with kids younger than 7 has been 100% torture. it seems like every year there are more and more and u can't get away from them no matter how much you pay!

Certain neighborhoods are more "kid prone" than others. I would avoid the Upper West like the plague. Expensive co-ops are probably your best bet as most new families won't have the right qualifications to be admitted. A broker may be able to hint at which buildings are less child-friendly than others with a wink and a nod. Also, if you find an apartment or building you like, stake out the lobby for a few hours during high-traffic hours. It's very hard to live a child-free existence in Manhattan, but with a little diligence, other people's mistakes don't have to become your problem.

And I'd like to prevent my kids from experiencing the a-hole factor. Are there buildings were my kids can avoid the a-hole factor just in case my kid smiles and screeches with delight. I'd like them to avoid the dirty looks or responce a miserable older, "mature" person may give.

There may be some buildings like that, Brooks2, but they are probably overpriced. Fortunately, a big real estate crash is expected any day now!

Oh, my.
inonada is calling out the Eumendides. Are you trying to start an interpersonal dispute with him?

He and Mrs. Eumendides are just asking questions here.
They are not elderly but are mature adults. 55+.

They can buy in a building that has smaller studio and one-bedroom apts. Those apts formerly were the preferred residence of singles without children. When a child came into the picture, the parent(s) sold the apt.
These days, those apts may be inhabited by a couple or a single parent with a child, having a converted "bedroom". ( usually carved out of the L-shaped living room/dinette area.)

If you find a building that you'd like to live in, just avoid the kiddie mash-up by letting the elevator go and wait for the next elevator, if there are strollers inside:
the only close quarters that you may get crowded into with children.

.

Eumendides should change his? name to Euidiotinododo (Euidiotinonada).

Eumendides, the answer is no. Plan and simple. Fair housing laws prevent discrimination on the basis of Family composition. Which means you can't be denied housing because you are single, married with childern, single with child, Father with six children, two mothers, two fathers and so on. If your desire is to live in a building without children your best bet would be senior commuities. These are not assisted living but communities designed for mature people. There is a nice one just north of us in Riverdale overlooking the Hudson. Or try to find a Co-op that prefers mature residents to younger ones. I don't know of any of those off hand but I would be happy to help you with your search. I can be reached at 917-771-0673. Have a nice day.

"inonada is calling out the Eumendides. Are you trying to start an interpersonal dispute with him?"

Not really. This is a RE site. He asked about NYC buildings that engage in illegal discriminatory behavior, not know that such discrimination is illegal. I explained to him the legal standing of such discrimination. He expressed rationale for desiring such housing discrimination against children. I expressed to him some rationale for providing children with protected status, using analogies to classes he believes should be afforded protected status.

>I expressed to him some rationale for providing children with protected status, using analogies to classes he believes should be afforded protected status.

translates to

>For that matter, why not discriminate against larger-set people based on the elevator excuse? Maybe it'd be best to just cross out all races that tend to be heavier,

I'm a city person, I don't relate to your farm animal talk.

You don't get to tell me what to do or when to talk or be quiet.

You are disgusting.

That says it all.

Shut up.

Why don't you go out and milk a cow or ride a donkey or some other activity with an animal but not with a human.

Go fuck yourself.

You are gross.

You add nothing but trouble.

Fuck you

Nope, you have no say in what I do. Feel free to leave if you don't like me or what I say.

Fuck off ashole.

Eumendides, you can see how the rabid child-owners can twist and distort a pretty innocent question. They assume that imposing their misbehaving children on everyone else is a beautiful thing, and turn any attempt to be protected from them as a declaration of war. Throwing around accusations of everything but murder...
People, even a worm has children, to say nothing about rats.
Yes, a building with the least amount of children is a rare and tresured thing. Good luck!

>Fuck off ashole.

Yes, that's another way of saying, feel free to leave. So go. Shoo.

Fuck off.

Feel free to do that.

Fuck you.

You are disgusting

You already said that. However, I'm not sure your opinion mattered the first time. Certainly not to anyone here.

Fuck off

Go play with the pigs and donkeys.

Fuck. You

Pigs, donkeys and columbiacounty.

Brilliant.

Go fuck yourself

Mules, hogs and columbiacounty.

Show us more of who you really are

So 2 minutes ago you wanted me to shut up and leave. Now you want to see more of me?

Keep going.

It's working.

What happens next? Another breakdown?

You are full of shit.

Keep going, genius.

Mental breakdown coming.

I guess I'm being cruel. Shouldn't really pick on people like columbiacounty.

Get some help.

Quickly.

Cuckoo

Everyone knows.

columbiacounty, cuckoo

Wow.

Very clever.

Sorry that you're pathetic.

are you really sorry?

when is the next meltdown?

Keep spinning asshole.

It's not working.

But by all means...keep showing us your stuff

1. Cursing and demanding
2. Contradictory demands
3. Meltdown

Fuck you stupid

State 3 coming soon...

You have the unfortunate troll habit of making everything up and pretending its true just because you said it.

Keep going, asshole.

So which race do you think inododo was referring to when he said certain "races that tend to be heavier"?

fuck you.

making more shit up.

fuck you.

shut up.

So even though dodo's quote is right up on this same page, you deny it exists?

Cuckoo

keep spinning.

you're looking stupider and stupider.

and its hard to believe that its possible.

but you are.

says ___?

O.K., inonada.
In a city where there are no-pet and no-smoking buildings it would be possible to ask that question, anywhere except on streeteasy.

"Eumendides, you can see how the rabid child-owners can twist and distort a pretty innocent question. "

I don't have kids. I don't want kids. i hate kids. But EVERYONE who is not a complete idiot KNOWS that discriminating against people with kids is illegal! Pointing out that TOP is asking us to recommend buildings that systematically engage in illegal behavior does not make US the bad guys, moron!

"Protected class is a term used in United States anti-discrimination law. The term describes characteristics or factors which can not be targeted for discrimination and harassment. The following characteristics are considered "Protected Classes" and persons cannot be discriminated against based on these characteristics:

Race - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
Color - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
Religion - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
National origin - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
Age (40 and over) - Federal: Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
Sex - Federal: Equal Pay Act of 1963 & Civil Rights Act of 1964
Familial status (Housing, cannot discriminate for having children, exception for senior housing)
Disability status - Federal: Vocational Rehabilitation and Other Rehabilitation Services of 1973 & Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Veteran status - Federal Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974
Genetic information - Federal: Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act"

Apparently I was wrong about political affiliation, but I will add Veteran Status to "choice" = you choose to join the military. In addition to the above Federal protected statuses, NYS and/or NYC cover sexual orientation

>Familial status (Housing, cannot discriminate for having children, exception for senior housing)

Well there you go, it's illegal, except where it isn't illegal.

NYC says "Unlawful practices of Fair Housing in the five boroughs of New York City include: refusing to sell or rent housing; misrepresenting the availability of housing; setting different terms, conditions or priveleges for the sale or rental of housing; providing different housing services or facilities; posting discriminatory advertising or marketing that indicates a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on a protected class; for example, ads that say "no children" or "married couples only" would be discriminator..."

How TOP could be such a clueless fucking idiot to not know this is beyond me.

Jason, your retard helmet is on too tight once again.

oh, jason. Chill out.
The OP didn't know about the illegal discrimination you and others describe.
He was just asking about buildings with no children allowed rules.

So they don't exist. It is illegal. O.K.

The OP could possibly rent in Manhattan for a year or two and see if he can handle the city noise in general.
Kiddies at play (or crying) is the least of the noise annoyances.

Jason is a typical tax, spend and regulate anti-freedom liberal.

Funny all of a sudden I am a rabid "child owner" with misbehaving children. Who's assuming?
How about a parent who wants the best for his children. I'd like to prevent my innocent child from being the on the recieving end of unwanted and undeserving scowl from some miserable "mature" adult because he has to make a little room for a stroller in the elevator. I must add the 90% of the time he is sleeping in the stroller and the other 10% of the time he quietly enjoying the ride.

Is his name Brooks3?

fuck you troll

columbiacounty, the nice lady has a candy for you and then will help you go to bed.

Gotta love it.

One month, people assume that I am a childless loner for defending freedom of choice in living:
"we should pay people to have kids. without immigration we are declining in numbers. look at Japan, in about 20 years there'll be more retired people than others. how are they going to pay for social security type of payments. in fact, loners like Ino should be taxes the highest."

The next week I am a "child-owner" because I point out anti-discrimination laws that have been with us for a quarter of a century.
"Eumendides, you can see how the rabid child-owners can twist and distort a pretty innocent question."

Did you really just say "child-owner"?