# Smoke-Free Apartment Buildings. Yea or Nay? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 25, 2002, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smoke-free-apartment-buildings-yea-or-nay/120817 "2002-07-25T19:47:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smoke-free-apartment-buildings-yea-or-nay/120817/41 "2002-09-11T16:45:05Z")
> [@](#): > > My take on this is smoking is not a right, so yes, the apartment owner or management company can ban smoking. Strangely enough, you’re wrong in your first clause but right in your second. When one owns property, one has the right to do anything legal on that property, subject to nuisance and annoyance laws and applicable zoning regulations. (If I played the tuba, my neighbor cannot object to my practicing at 10 AM or 7 PM, but does have a legal objection to my practicing at 3 AM. I cannot build a 24-foot wall along the property line that cuts him off from all sunlight. If I’m in a residential neighborhood, I cannot build a convenience store on the front of my house, etc.) When one **rents** or **leases** property, the terms under which one rents or leases are in the lease or rental agreement, and may not be changed unilaterally without mutual consent. And subject to those rules, the prohibition on illegal acts (whether illegal everywhere or as applied to that property, as in zoning), and certain common-law rights of landlords (whether codified or not) such as the right of entry under certain circumstances or in emergency, I have the right to use that property as I choose. If he does not want me to have pets, or wishes to limit the number of nailholes in the wall, or needs to restrict the number of house guests at any one time due to septic system problems (all of which I’ve encountered), these things must be spelled out in writing, and agreed to, **before** he gives over possession. So yes, a landlord can require that a premises be non-smoking. By including that in a lease. But if he fails to do so, the right to smoke, or to have smoking guests, becomes a part of the property rights of the tenant, and may not be imposed _ex post facto_ by the landlord, the tenants association, or any other entity whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smoke-free-apartment-buildings-yea-or-nay/120817/42 "2002-09-11T18:24:56Z")
I have to concur with a lot of the posters up above, I’d love a non-smoking apartment building. The building I rent was built in 1898 and the ventilation system is the windows. The previous tenant was a smoker and a get the oh-so-pretty yellow ooze from the walls whenever I shower too long. I also replaced the bathroom floor because I didn’t like to look at all of the cigarrette burn marks in the floor. My building does ban smoking from the common areas and balconies, has signs but up to that affect on every floor right above the 3 foot tall ashtrays. I guess if you’re going to discourage smoking you put ashtrays around. I wonder if landlords could just insist upon a deposit from smokers or extra rent as they do for pets. Since smokers aren’t a special class I can’t see this being too problematic. ---
**Author:** ![Lao\_Tsu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e79b87/32.png) [@Lao\_Tsu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lao_Tsu)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2002, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smoke-free-apartment-buildings-yea-or-nay/120817/43 "2002-09-12T23:50:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eve \* > **Connected to—but an offshoot from—the other smokers’ rights thread in this forum. Do you feel that apartment owners or complexes should be able to designate certain buildings smoke-free if they so choose?** Sure, it’s their property, it just needs to be clearly stated in the lease. Just like Polycarp pointed out. (In fact, Poly’s points pretty well end the “debate” part of the OP.) The no smoking everywhere vs no smoking in the building issue should also be made clear. > [@](#): > > \*\* > What do you all think? I know there have been fracases (and brouhahas) about “no children” apartments; has there ever been a “smoke free” one? \*\* There are tons of smoke free apartments and apartment complexes here. It’s not a huge issue for me, but thinking about it, I don’t think I’ve ever lived in a smoking apartment, and I’ve lived in lots of apartments. If any of my roommates smoked, they smoked outside. I’m also reasonably certain this isn’t just a Utah trend. The issue of where you can and can’t smoke outside has come up on occasion, and each time it would have helped if the lease had clearly dealt with this issue. The no smoking clause is very common in apartment ads. But when you see " NO Smoking/Drinking/Pets", you know you sure as hell don’t want to live there. That’s one uptight landlord. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smoke-free-apartment-buildings-yea-or-nay/120817.md?page=2)