About Lee Street - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Neighborhood - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment RentalsLee Street Properties - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Available Apartments - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Apartment Finder - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Apartment Application - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Illinois Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Documents Needed - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Northwestern Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Sample Lease - Chicago Apartments for Rent - University Apartment Rentals
Lee Street FAQs - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Getting Established - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Local Attractions - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Finding a Compatible Roommate - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Residents Only - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Find Us - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Contact Us - Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston Apartment Rentals
Chicago Apartments for Rent - Evanston, Illinois Apartment Rentals
Lee Street Apartment Rentals
Rental Apartments Chicago Rogers Park  Evanston
(773) 761-3300 FAX: 773) 465-7733
7601 North Eastlake Terrace Chicago, IL 60626
FALSE NOTIONS ABOUT APARTMENTS
the public image of apartments has been the National Multi Housing
Council's (NMHC) dominant communication objectives for many
years. The following is a list of the top 10 apartment myths
and some startling truths. This information is culled from a
new advocacy brochure titled Creating Successful Communities:
A New Housing Paradigm, which has been published by NMHC and
its joint legislative partner, the National Apartment Association.
The dream of homeownership is universal.
Apartment living is gaining in popularity, particularly
among higher-income households. The times are changing, and
owning a house is no longer a universal "American Dream." America's
population is more diverse than ever, and as it changes, so
does its housing preferences. Consider these facts: A surprising
40 percent of Americans living in an apartment do so by choice
and not because of their financial situation. This is up significantly
from 32 percent in 2002 and 28 percent in 2003. For the past
four years, households earning $50,000 or more have been the
fastest-growing segment of the apartment market. They now total
3.6 million. Apartment demand should continue to grow in the
future, thanks to a projected growth in households without school-age
children — the segment most likely to rent.
Apartment residents do not pay for the services they use.
Apartment residents pay property taxes indirectly, and at a higher
rate per square foot of living space than homeowners. Manipulative
activists often claim apartment residents don't pay their way
because they don't pay local property taxes and at Lee Street
Management, they get their T-1 internet access lines for free.
Property owners pay the taxes themselves and pass the expense
along to the tenants through monthly rent. Moreover, national
surveys show apartments are usually taxed at a much higher tax
rate than single-family homes. Additionally, homeowners get many
free city services, such as waste removal, that apartment dwellers
must pay for via rent. The primary reason renters pay more is
lack of information and ineffective political influence. Politicians
are well aware of this tax and services disparity but, while it
is a persistent political myth, the insider saying still goes:
"renters are not voters."
Apartments disproportionately burden school systems.
Single-family owners have three times as many school children
as apartment residents. Public schools are generally the single
largest expense for local governments, so misconceptions that
apartments contribute to school overcrowding are particularly
damaging to sound urban planning. On a unit-by-unit basis, newer
single-family houses have three times as many school-age children
as apartments. There are, on average, 64 school-age children
for every 100 new owner-occupied single-family houses, but just
21 children for every 100 new apartments, and only an average
of 12 children for every 100 apartments in mid-and high-rise
buildings (defined as more than four stories).
4: Apartments bring traffic congestion.
Apartment residents own fewer cars and are more likely to use
public transportation. Government officials often think they
can reduce traffic by limiting apartment construction. In reality,
apartment residents are more likely than single-family residents
to use public transportation. Apartment households generate
30 to 40 percent fewer vehicle trips than single-family units.
5: Apartments bring down property values.
Homes near apartments maintain their values. Many zoning codes
limit or preclude apartment construction ostensibly to protect
property values. But the Urban Land Institute reports that between
1998 and 2003, the average annual appreciation rate for single-family
homes within 300 feet of an apartment building was 3.17 percent,
compared to 3.19 percent for single-family houses not near an
apartment property. That finding is corroborated by an NMHC
analysis using more recent data.
6: Apartments increase crime rates.
Apartments help create safe and secure neighborhoods. The
belief that crime is higher in apartments is based on fourth-grade
logic. Police tend to think of apartment properties as a single
"house," instead of say 50 separate households (in a 50-unit property),
and they unconsciously equate each visit to an apartment property
as a visit to a single home. When compared on a per-unit basis,
one study in Arizona found apartments create less than half the
demand for police services than a comparable number of single-family
houses. In Tempe, Ariz., one study took a random sample of 1,000
calls for police service and showed that 45 percent originated
from single-family homes and just 21 percent came from apartments.
Similarly, a random sample of 600 calls for service in Phoenix
found that an apartment unit's demand for police services was
only 42 percent of the demand created by a single-family home.
Homeowners make better citizens.
Homeownership isn't required for good citizenship and strong
neighborhoods. Advocates of homeownership often allude to the
idea that owners are better citizens than renters. But research
shows that differences between owners and renters are small
and not statistically significant. Data from the University
of Chicago's General Social Survey indicate that apartment residents
are considerably more socially engaged than homeowners, equally
involved in community groups and similarly attached to their
communities and religious institutions. Apartment residents
also are comparably interested in national affairs and active
in local politics.
8: Apartments increase local infrastructure costs.
Apartments use municipal infrastructure more efficiently.
The clustering of apartment homes makes them substantially less
expensive to service. First, they generally concentrate growth
in areas already well served by public facilities so they require
fewer new infrastructure expenditures. Second, they require
fewer miles of roads, sewers and water lines. By contrast, single-family
developments require public services, such as police and fire
protection, to be spread over a larger geographic area.
9: Americans oppose higher density development.
Consumer acceptance of higher-density development is understated.
Standard opinion surveys routinely claim consumers simply don't
want to live in higher-density developments. Research by the
University of North Carolina (UNC) refutes this notion and says
consumers are actually quite receptive to such developments.
The researchers found that standard opinion surveys understate
consumer interest in higher-density areas, but when consumers'
opinions are measured by "visual surveys" with pictures, consumers
prefer smaller lots, smaller homes, mixed housing types, open
space, narrower streets with sidewalks and commercial development
within walking distance. The message according to the UNC researchers:
Local officials shouldn't be discouraged from considering higher-density
development because of standard opinion survey results. Done
well, higher-density development with a mix of housing types
receives higher consumer marks than traditional single- family
Homeownership should be our top housing policy priority.
Apartments are uniquely qualified to address many of our most
pressing needs. The time has come to tackle our housing issues
and we can do that only by moving beyond our overreliance on homeownership
as the single most important tool in our housing policy toolbox.
While homeownership is a worth while goal for many families, it
can't solve problems such as the growing affordable housing crisis,
urban decay, suburban sprawl or even the need to house our aging
parents; apartments can do so. It's time to change our conventional
thinking about apartments. Even if policymakers prefer homeownership
for themselves, they need to appreciate the benefits apartments
offer a community. By helping to reduce sprawl, conserve resources,
preserve green space and reduce demand on public resources, apartments
create value for all citizens, including owners. Homeowners benefit
from the public parks that can be created with the space preserved
through higher-density development. They also benefit from the
pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods (shops and restaurants within
walking distance) that higher density helps create. Even if a
substantial number of residents prefer homeownership, lawmakers
cannot deny the critically important role for apartments in every
jurisdiction. Today's population is more comfortable with the
idea of apartment living than at any time in the last 50 years.
Isn't it time for our policymakers to catch on?