From pools and saunas to game rooms and fitness centers, amenity spaces are an attractive selling point for many sites. These shared areas not only can the enhance quality of life for residents, but can also carry a range of risks that managers must navigate. These risks include health and safety concerns, potential liability from injuries, and fair housing compliance. The challenge lies in implementing amenity rules that protect residents and property without crossing the line into unlawful discrimination, particularly against families with children.

Fitness centers, in particular, offer a case study in how well-intentioned rules can create fair housing problems if not carefully framed. These facilities, which may include gyms, weight rooms, pools, Jacuzzis, saunas, and steam rooms, are among the most injury-prone amenities. Studies show that nearly one in five gym users are injured each year, with children involved in more than 16,000 of these incidents. And owners are often named in lawsuits when those injuries occur in on-site fitness centers, especially when equipment misuse is involved.

Given these risks, it’s natural to implement strict safety rules. But the problem lies in safety and sanitation rules that seem sensible or neutral, such as “children must be supervised” or “no one under 18 allowed,” can have an unintended discriminatory impact, especially under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Overly restrictive rules may unfairly limit access to shared facilities based on familial status or disability, exposing your community to legal risk.

We'll use fitness center rules to illustrate how to approach resident policies regarding amenities through a fair housing lens. We’ll start by showing how rules that appear reasonable on the surface can result in discrimination claims. Then we’ll lay out five pitfalls and show you how to avoid them by creating safety-conscious, legally compliant rules not only for your fitness center but for all common-area amenities.

How the FHA, HUD Memo Applies

The principal fair housing risk of fitness center rules is discrimination against families with children. Section 3604(b) of the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) bans discrimination “against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.” And regulations from the agency charged with enforcing the FHA, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), say it’s illegal to “deny or limit services or facilities in connection with the sale or rental of a dwelling” on the basis of family status [24 C.F.R. §100.65(a)].

The problem is that just about any kind of safety or sanitation rule regulating children’s use of fitness centers that you impose is apt to have at least some restrictive impact, even if discrimination is the furthest thing from your mind. Not surprisingly, exclusion of children from amenities has become a frequent source of familial status discrimination litigation. While most of the cases involve community swimming pools, the principles involved are equally relevant for fitness centers, recreational rooms, and other common use amenities.

HUD memo allows for reasonable health & safety rules. The first thing you and your staff need to understand is that sound safety, health, and sanitation rules for fitness centers are not only permitted but perhaps even required under other laws. In 1992, four years after Congress added family status to the list of FHA protected grounds, HUD’s general counsel issued an internal memo to the agency’s attorneys to clarify that the law doesn’t ban housing providers from imposing “reasonable health and safety rules designed to protect minor children in their use of facilities associated with the dwellings.”

If someone files a complaint alleging that rules limit the ability of families with children to use the pool or other common facilities, the memo instructs HUD lawyers to consider the facts of the specific case, including:

• The rationale for the rules;
• The degree of limitations the rules place on families with children;
• Whether the rules are mandated pursuant by a state or local requirement; and
• If so, whether those state or local requirements are reasonable.

These principles are also the basis for ensuring that your own fitness center rules are legitimate and nondiscriminatory.

Pitfall #1: Not Basing Safety Rules on Reasonable Standards

The first thing enforcement officials will consider in a discriminatory fitness center rules complaint is the owner’s rationale for the rules. They’ll look to whether the restrictions placed on families with children serve a legitimate, nondiscriminatory purpose. Health, safety, and sanitation are generally accepted as valid reasons for imposing rules but that alone isn’t enough. You must also show that the rule is reasonable in how it achieves that purpose. To demonstrate reasonableness, base your rules on objective, defensible criteria. A few key sources can help support your policies:

State or local laws. Rules grounded in state or municipal requirements such as health, building, fire, or sanitation codes tend to carry more weight. For instance, if local regulations prohibit minors from using certain equipment without adult supervision, rules reflecting that guidance are more likely to withstand scrutiny. Still, even local laws aren’t foolproof. If a law is deemed unreasonable, any rule based on it may also be challenged.

Manufacturers’ warnings and guidelines. Take equipment-specific recommendations seriously. Manufacturers often advise that their products aren’t intended for and shouldn’t be used by people under a certain age or who have certain medical conditions. Including those manufacturer guidelines in your rules can help justify them if their fairness or legality is questioned later.

Industry standards. Look to what other communities and comparable fitness facilities do. While industry standards aren’t binding, they can help establish what’s considered reasonable.

Pitfall #2: Barring Children or the Disabled from Fitness Center Use

To comply with fair housing law, fitness center rules must be narrowly tailored and no more restrictive than necessary. Even a rule that aims to protect residents’ health or safety can still be illegal if it goes too far especially if there are less restrictive ways to achieve the same goal.

A common misstep is creating blanket rules that prevent minors from accessing common areas or fitness facilities, either directly or through policies that effectively exclude them in practice. An enforcement action against an LIHTC site in Florida illustrates this point.

According to the complaint, the Department of Justice (DOJ) alleged that the site owner, management company, and staff violated the FHA by discriminating against families with children by refusing to issue key fobs to minor residents, effectively denying them access to their own building and shared amenities; prohibiting minors from entering common areas, including the gym and business center, unless accompanied by a parent or legal guardian; and misrepresenting the availability of units to families with children [United States v. Concord Court at Creative Village Partners, 2002]. Following an investigation by HUD, the parties reached a settlement that required the defendants to pay $260,000 in damages and penalties and provide fair housing training to all leasing and management staff.

This case illustrates how seemingly simple access rules such as limiting key fobs to adults or requiring parental supervision for all minors can have discriminatory effects. Enforcement agencies view such restrictions as barriers to equal access, particularly when they broadly exclude children.

Pitfall #3: Posting Overly Restrictive “Adult Supervision” Rules

Rules requiring adult supervision are one of the most common sources of fair housing complaints involving families with children especially in shared amenities like pools and fitness centers. The intent behind these rules is often safety, a legitimate concern. For example, unsupervised swimming is a known risk factor in drowning incidents involving young children. But even safety-based rules can be discriminatory if they are overly broad or based on assumptions about age and capability rather than specific risk.

HUD’s 1992 guidance makes this distinction clear. While outright bans on children’s access to amenities often raise red flags, HUD has acknowledged that requiring a responsible adult to supervise young children or requiring a written designation of an adult supervisor may be more narrowly tailored to serve health and safety goals and are generally seen as less problematic. This reasoning applies not only to pools but to fitness centers as well.

The key issue is how the supervision rule is framed and applied. A narrowly written rule focused on actual safety risks may be justified. But a broad rule, especially one that limits access based solely on age or insists on parental or adult tenant supervision across all spaces, can quickly become a liability.

Supervision requirements should be tied to a person’s ability to safely use the equipment or facility and not just their age. A treadmill, for example, can be hazardous not only for young children but also for anyone unfamiliar with its operation. Instead of assuming all minors are incapable, focus on objective criteria like proficiency and risk. You can consider these strategies:

• Require supervision for anyone—regardless of age—who can’t demonstrate safe and proper use of fitness equipment.
• If you do include age-based restrictions, consult local laws, manufacturer guidelines, and industry standards to help determine what’s appropriate.
• Offer the option of passing a safety or proficiency test for all users, not just minors, to access the fitness center.

Also be mindful of who must provide supervision. Avoid terms like “parent” or “legal guardian,” as these imply a narrow and potentially discriminatory definition of responsibility. Even the term “adult” can be problematic if it excludes 16- or 17-year-olds who may be trained and capable of safe equipment use.

Pitfall #4: Focusing Rules on Age or Status, Rather than Conduct

It’s entirely appropriate and necessary for owners to set rules that promote safety, cleanliness, and respectful use of shared amenities. In fitness centers and other common areas, restrictions on disruptive or hazardous behavior help protect both residents and your property. However, problems arise when rules target groups of people rather than specific actions. Even if the intent is reasonable, rules that single out children can lead to fair housing violations.

As a best practice, make sure your fitness center and common area rules are behavior-based and apply equally to all residents. This approach ensures fairness while still addressing real concerns like noise, cleanliness, and misuse of equipment. Examples of appropriate, behavior-focused rules for fitness areas include:

            •          No running inside the facility

            •          No use of profanity or offensive language

            •          No excessive noise or loud music

            •          No horseplay or roughhousing

            •          All users must wipe down equipment after use

            •          Only residents are allowed to use the facility unless granted permission

Remember to be especially careful with how you word rules related to toys or personal items. For example, avoid rules such as “No children’s toys are permitted in the fitness area.” Instead, you can say, “No bikes, trikes, toys, stuffed animals, balls, water pistols, bulky bags, or similar items are permitted in the fitness room.” The goal is to keep the space safe and functional for everyone without implying that certain people don’t belong. When rules are neutral, clearly worded, and based on conduct, they’re much more likely to hold up under fair housing scrutiny.

Pitfall #5: Not Posting Fitness Center Rules and the Basis for Them

Clear signage helps ensure that users are aware of safety precautions, such as health warnings about using saunas, steam rooms, or Jacuzzis. To reduce both safety risks and legal exposure, put all fitness center rules in writing and display them in locations where residents are likely to notice them. That means posting them prominently at entry points as well as near specific equipment or amenities, such as the sauna, Jacuzzi, or weight machines.

Keep the rules brief, clear, and easy to understand. You can include a short explanation at the top or bottom noting that the rules are in place solely to protect the health and safety of all users. Where appropriate, cite objective sources such as equipment manufacturer warnings, health codes, or local regulations. These will reinforce the legitimacy and necessity of the rules.