Laserfiche WebLink
1MYTH <br />FACT <br />The nature of who lives in higher-density housing—fewer families with <br />children—puts less demand on schools and other public services than <br />low-density housing. Moreover, the compact nature of higher-density <br />development requires less extensive infrastructure to support it. <br />Higher-density development overburdens public schools and other <br />public services and requires more infrastructure support systems. <br />P ublic officials across the country struggle to afford the infrastructure need- <br />ed to support sprawling development. A recent study analyzing the costs <br />of sprawl estimated that more than $100 billion in infrastructure costs <br />could be saved over 25 years by pursuing better planned and more com- <br />pact forms of development.6 The issue has transcended political parties and ideolo- <br />gies and has become an issue of basic fiscal responsibility. California’s Republican <br />Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has criticized “fiscally unsustainable sprawl,”7 <br />while Michigan’s Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm has noted that sprawl <br />“is hampering the ability of this state and its local governments to finance public <br />facilities and service improvements.”8 <br />Myth and Fact 9 <br />NUMBER OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN <br />PER 100 UNITS OF NEW HOUSING <br />NUMBER OF CHILDREN <br />TYPE OF HOUSING <br />80 <br />70 <br />60 <br />50 <br />40 <br />30 <br />20 <br />10 <br />0 <br />Mid- to <br />High-Rise <br />Apartments <br />19 <br />Garden <br />Apartments <br />21 <br />Owner- <br />Occupied <br />Single-Family <br />Homes <br />64 <br />Source: 1999 American Housing Survey (Washington, D.C.:U.S. Bureau of the Census and U.S. Department of <br />Housing and Urban Development, 1999).