Residential Property Management/Proposed Investor owner/Owner occupied changes
I am on an HOA board of our condominium community. We have committed to amending our declarations to limit investor owned units to something less than the FHA 50%. We do plan on utilizing an attorney in this process. However, one of the questions that arose is that by limiting investors, property values would go down. I was always under the impression that property values were determined by many different criteria. It seems to me that too many investor owned units would do more to reduce property values. Are either of these views accurate?
I'm not sure that measure would have much of a net effect on property values. On one hand, owners would be limited to who they could sell to (and buyers would also realize this), which could limit the audience to those interested in buying in the project. This could have a negative impact on the property values. But on the other hand, FHA financing would be easier to obtain, and owner-occupants might be more comfortable knowing that at least half of the other units would also be occupied by owners. This could have a positive impact on values. I trend to think the negatives and positives would wash each other out, and have no measurable affect on values. Note that if this would be true, then the board should consider whether it's worth the cost and effort to amend the CC&R's to make this change. You should also know that this would be a very difficult provision to monitor and enforce.