DeKalb Housing information Project

DeKalb Housing information ProjectPrepared for

city of DeKalb, illinois & northern illinois university

final rePort December 2014

Prepared by

the center for governmental studies at northern illinois university

DeKalb Housing information Project

The Center for Governmental Studies would like to acknowledge the following organizations and individuals for their invaluable assistance in the development and analysis of the DeKalb Housing Information Project:

City of DeKalb Divisions/Departments of Administration Code Enforcement, Fire, Information Tech-nology and GIS, Community Development, Police and Water; Northern Illinois University’s (NIU’s) Departments of Registration and Records, Off Campus Student Affairs, and Parking Services; NIU Division of Outreach, Engagement and Regional Development.; DeKalb Township; DeKalb County Chief County Assessment Office; and the Housing Authority of the County of DeKalb.

The DeKalb Housing study is an example of on-going inter-governmental collaboration beginning with the joint planning and funding for the study by the City of DeKalb and NIU. The partnership received continued support from the offices of the DeKalb County Chief County Assessment Office, DeKalb Township Property Tax Assessor, DeKalb County Housing Authority and the United States Postal Service. DeKalb CUSD 428 also participated in the Year 2 Study, enabling aggregated data on public school students’ residential location to be added.

Project teamPersonnel from Northern Illinois University’s Center for Governmental Studies (CGS) staffed this project. The project was directed by Dr. Shannon Sohl and Mim Evans who were also primary report authors. The team responsible for project design, data collection and data analysis included CGS re-searchers Chia-Pao Hsu, Thomas Kazmierczak, Liang Tang, and DeSheng “Ben” Xu and NIU College of Liberal Arts and Sciences research.

about cgsThe Center for Governmental Studies (CGS) at Northern Illinois University (NIU) provides expertise that helps decision-makers implement efficient, sustainable and cost-effective approaches to social, economic, and information management issues. Founded in 1969, CGS assembles interdisciplinary teams to work with government at all levels, non-profit organizations, school districts, community colleges, park districts, library districts, land conservation districts, land developers, health care agencies and utilities. CGS projects focus on five outcomes:

• Reinvigorating local economies

• Supporting local governments

• Promoting balanced communities

• Informing sound decision-making

• Reskilling the workforce

acKnowleDgements

iDeKalb Housing information Project

executive summaryIn the spirit of “Communiversity,” the City of DeKalb (the City) and Northern Illinois University (NIU) agreed to continue their partnership to update and expand upon housing information originally captured in the Year 1 DeKalb comprehensive housing database and related analytical and report-ing tools originally produced in the spring of 2013. NIU’s Center for Governmental Studies (CGS) assembled a multi-disciplinary team with many of the original data team members to perform the data collection, database development and analysis. This Year 2 report of the DeKalb Housing Infor-mation Project presents a description of data captured in the updated DeKalb Housing Information System. It is intended to capture change over time in DeKalb’s housing stock. Year 2 updates include the variables found in the Year 1 study and the following key enhancements:

• Added a new “on-campus” neighborhood (neighborhood 24) to the 23 neighborhoods includ-ed in Year 1.

• Included NIU student, student housing, and incidents data aggregated at the neighborhood level.

• Used the City’s rental database to capture actual rental information.

• Incorporated DeKalb CUSD 428 student data aggregated at the neighborhood level.

Year 2 information excludes some analyses that are more appropriately updated every three to five years, depending on significant changes taking place within the community and university. Those elements reserved for future analysis include:

• Stress Factor Analysis• Over and Under Supply• Exterior Condition (“Windshield Surveys”)• University Communities Comparisons

One of the major deliverables is a housing database with information describing the existing housing stock (i.e., number, size, geographic location, value and exterior condition) and selected demand-side information focusing on the characteristics of residents. Because certain housing data is only available by its parcel identification number (PIN), and other housing data is only available by its address, the housing database created through this project integrated both parcel-based and address-based data. This enabled data on property valuation, typically available by PIN, to be linked to address level data about housing characteristics such as foreclosed properties, properties for sale, and location of crime incidents. This also allowed data to be assessed using the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS).

Year 2 updates and enhancements provide for two key deliverables:

1. A database with Year 1 and Year 2 housing and housing related data2. A descriptive report summarizing the DeKalb Housing Information Database contents, con-

taining a a. Housing synopsis discussing key variables collected, and b. Set of profiles (study area and 24 individual neighborhoods) inclusive of DeKalb’s and NIU’s

housing stock and housing related concepts.

The information produced through the DeKalb Housing Information Project (the Study) is designed to help decision-makers make cost-effective and sustainable housing and neighborhood develop-ment policies and investments. It also serves as a tool to assess the impact of specific programs and interventions and to measure change over time in DeKalb’s housing stock.

DeKalb Housing information ProjectiiDeKalb Housing information Project

Housing synoPsisBased on the data collected for and synthesized in the housing database, the following key findings are provided to describe DeKalb’s housing profile.

Housing comPosition• DeKalb’s housing stock consists of 56% rented and 44% owned dwelling units with an additional

capacity to house over 7,500 people in group quarters. This group quarters capacity includes 4,984 on-campus residence hall units not included in the Year 1 study.

• Of the rented units, approximately 69% are traditional multi-family units, 24% are single-family and the remaining 7% are mixed use and rooming houses.

• The owned dwelling units consist of mobile homes (5%) and non-mobile homes (95%). Mobile homes are all located within one neighborhood.

• Although the majority of all dwelling units are rented, the highest concentrations of rented units (neighborhoods where rental units comprise 50% or more of the total dwelling units), are found in 10 neighborhoods (nine neighborhoods if NIU campus is excluded; the NIU campus is predominantly group quarters). Alternatively, 14 neighborhoods contain predominantly owned dwelling units.

Housing relateD trenDs• On a citywide basis, average monthly vacancy rates declined in Year 2 (3.5%) compared to

Year 1 (4.2%).

• Foreclosures increased by six units (from 88 in Year 1 to 94 in Year 2), yet the number of neighborhoods with foreclosures decreased by four (from 21 neighborhoods in Year 1 to 17 neighborhoods in Year 2).

• While the assessed values of owned dwelling units have decreased (Year 1 study area median Fair Market Value (FMV) was $158,355 compared to $129,473 in Year 2), the market appears to be improving. In comparing Year 2 to Year 1, about 200 more properties were sold and the average number of days on the market dropped by seven days. Furthermore, MLS listings were up by 91 in Year 2 and the average list price was approximately $7,200 higher.

• Irongate, a development located on the north end of the City, is scheduled for the construction of high-end homes in the near future. CGS has drawn the boundaries on the study area map to indicate the location of this proposed development.

iiiDeKalb Housing information Project

neigHborHooD cHaracteristics• Both population and dwelling unit density tend to be higher in neighborhoods that have mostly

rented dwelling units. The densest neighborhoods are adjacent to NIU and in the City center.

• Median dwelling units per acre was 3.1 for the study area but differed greatly between neighborhoods. Eight out of 10 neighborhoods that were predominantly rentals were above the study area’s median compared to four out of fourteen predominantly owned neighborhoods. Neighborhood 24 has the lowest dwelling units per acre due to the large amount of open space on campus.

• Median population density for the study area was 6.6 persons per acre. Population density followed a pattern similar to dwelling unit density. Eight of 10 predominantly rental neighborhoods were above the median while four of 14 predominantly owned neighborhoods were above the median.

• As one might expect, neighborhoods with the youngest residents and lowest median household income are either on, adjacent to or near the university. Conversely, neighborhoods with residents who have higher median ages and higher median household incomes are located to the north and south.

• More than one-half of all subsidized dwelling units are concentrated in one neighborhood. Housing choice vouchers are distributed more widely, but nearly half of the vouchers are used in only two neighborhoods. The highest concentration of housing assistance is found in the neighborhoods close to NIU.

• Just over 1% of residential properties were foreclosed in 2013. Additionally, the foreclosures were fairly dispersed throughout the study area with higher concentrations in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of owned units.

• The average list price of residences for sale across the study area was $138,739 but varied from a high of $223,132 in neighborhood 5 to a low of $73,864 in neighborhood 14. Number of days on the market ranged from a high of 244 (neighborhood 1) to a low of 60 (neighborhood 20). The median listing period was 146 days. The number of days on the market does not appear to be related to the sales price or exterior condition.

• The top three quality of life threats (suspicious activity/person/vehicle, audible disturbances and disorderly conduct/house) represent almost half of the total incidents reported in 2013. The top three personal safety threats (domestic issues, battery and phone threats/harassment) represent nearly two-thirds of the personal safety incidents reported. Quality of life and personal safety threats were reported most frequently in the neighborhoods adjacent to NIU and in the City center.

• NIU students who reported a DeKalb address appear to be concentrated most heavily on-campus and then decline in numbers as neighborhoods get farther from the campus center. Those neighborhoods with a high concentration of NIU students tend to have more rented dwelling units, a lower median age and lower median household incomes.

• DeKalb CUSD 428 students reside throughout the study area but are most concentrated in the neighborhoods near the NIU campus or south of the City center. However, not all grade levels are equally represented in all neighborhoods. The youngest students (grades Pre-K through 5) are heavily represented in neighborhood 3, while older students (grades 6-12) are heavily represented in neighborhoods 4 and 16.

• The option for free or reduced-price lunches is utilized by over half of students in the study area (57%). However, the percentage of students receiving this assistance varies greatly from one neighborhood to another. Nearly all students (96%) in neighborhoods 3 and 22 receive assistance while in four neighborhoods (4, 5, 19 and 20) a quarter or fewer receive this form of assistance.

• Some neighborhoods experience a high number of students leaving and/or entering District 428 schools. There were a combined 713 student movements across the study area. Nearly 20% of these movements occurred in neighborhood 3.

DeKalb Housing information ProjectivDeKalb Housing information Project

geograPHic PatternsThe following patterns have been identified due to frequency of geographic occurrence but have not been tested for causality. Additional research is necessary to understand the reasons behind the patterns described here.

• Neighborhoods adjacent to NIU (neighborhoods 2, 3, 15, 22 and 23): The five neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the university contain nearly one-third of the study area’s population residing in a little more than one-third of the dwelling units. These neighborhoods contain 62% of all rented dwelling units, which indicates a high concentration of rented units in each neighborhood. One of these neighborhoods - neighborhood 3 - has the second highest concentration of group quarters in the study area (contains all Greek organization housing and University Plaza, a privately-owned student residence hall ) as well as the highest reported number of students living off campus (outside of neighborhood 24) and the highest number of Pre-K-12 students. Of all NIU students residing off campus, 75% reported an address in this area adjacent to NIU. With regard to housing assistance, approximately 33% of housing choice vouchers and 65% of subsidized units are found in these neighborhoods. Residents in this area also have the lowest median ages and median household incomes except for neighborhood 24 (NIU campus). Despite the large number of dwelling units located in this area, there was only one foreclosed residential property. Finally, approximately half of the study area’s quality of life threats (46%) and personal safety threats (52%) are reported in this area.

• Neighborhoods in the City center (neighborhoods 11, 12, 13, 14 and 17): The five neighborhoods in this area consist of 17% of all dwelling units and 17% of the population. The mix of rented to owned dwelling units is approximately even at 50% each. However the mix varies from a high of 60% owned to a low of 16% owned. The owned units have fair market values lower than the median for the overall study area and approximately one-third (34%) of the foreclosures are found here. Additionally, about one-fifth of the quality of life threats and personal safety threats are in this central part of the City. Housing choice vouchers here account for approximately 19% of the vouchers in the study area. While approximately 13% of all subsidized units in the study area are found in the City center, they are located exclusively in neighborhood 17. Median household incomes are similar to that of the overall study area with two neighborhoods slightly lower and three higher.

• Far north neighborhoods (neighborhoods 5 and 6): Median fair market value for these two northern neighborhoods is the highest in the study area and more than $50,000 higher than the study area median. Not surprisingly, average list price is also the highest in the study area. These two neighborhoods contain only 5% of the study area population and dwelling units. Accordingly, population density is also low. Housing density is low in neighborhood 5 but in the mid-range for Neighborhood 6. The two neighborhoods also differ in median age with neighborhood 5 close to the average for the study area at 33.1 years and neighborhood 6 the highest in the study area at 46.8 years. Median household income is nearly 70% higher than the study area median. Approximately 7% of all foreclosures occurred in this area. Both quality of life and personal safety threats are low. The new Irongate subdivision, a gated community with high-end homes, is planned for development in this area.

• NIU Campus (neighborhood 24): On-campus housing is not directly comparable to housing in the rest of the study area because it is limited almost entirely to NIU students and consists almost completely of group quarters. Furthermore, all housing on campus is owned and managed by the University unlike “off-campus” neighborhoods where rentals are privately owned and managed. The campus contains a high proportion of the study area population and acreage. Median age is the youngest in the study area, as would be expected. Quality of life incidents are similar to the study area as a whole and personal safety threats are somewhat lower. The monthly rate for a residence hall room is considerably higher than average fair market rents in the rest of the study area even when differences in lease length and meal plans are considered.

vDeKalb Housing information Project

concluDing remarKsThis study represents an important milestone in the City of DeKalb’s ability to make evidence-based decisions, and in the history of collaboration between the City and NIU. With respect to the former milestone, the DeKalb Housing Database and the various analyses undertaken for this study pro-vide timely and relevant housing-related information that will deepen the City’s understanding of its neighborhoods and its housing stock. The latter milestone is significant in that it reinforces the mutual dependence that exists between the City of DeKalb and NIU. Each brings unique assets to the table that can only be fully realized with the support of the other.

The data presented in this report provides an in-depth “snapshot” and benchmark of housing char-acteristics in DeKalb. As an update to the Year 1 study, the database will enable the City and NIU to compare housing data over time. The addition of NIU’s on-campus housing provides a more complete picture of the status of housing in DeKalb. Going forward, data included in the Housing Synopsis should be updated annually to allow for comparison and trend analysis as well as to measure the impact of programmatic and policy changes. Some trends will require a longer time period to be meaningful, such as conversions from owner occupied to renter occupied units or single family homes to rooming houses. Exterior condition, stress factors and over- and under-supply analysis should be updated every five to 10 years based on market conditions. Furthermore, the City of DeKalb should ensure data collected by its various departments is consistent with the design of the database. The rental database used in this study is a useful addition to the City’s sources of housing data. This database should be reviewed and possible additions or modifications made to further increase the usefulness of the data collected in future years. For example, it would be very beneficial and cost-effective to capture fair market rent information and vacancy rates as part of the rental registration. Also, by incorporating other City service data with a geographic identifier, the City can continue to expand the usefulness and application of the database. Caution should be taken when utilizing the data presented in this report as the detailed and supplemental data is contained in the database. It is the hope of the CGS team that the information generated through this study will inform continued discussions among the City, NIU and other DeKalb stakeholders regarding how to invest, plan for, develop, monitor and sustain mechanisms that meet existing and future housing needs.

DeKalb Housing information ProjectviDeKalb Housing information Project

viiDeKalb Housing information ProjectDeKalb Housing information Project

table of contents

Project overview ............................................................................................................... 1Background ............................................................................................... 1

Scope ........................................................................................................ 2

Limitations ............................................................................................... 4

Housing synopsis ..............................................................................................................5General Housing Terms ............................................................................ 5

Housing Composition ................................................................................ 6Group Quarters......................................................................................................6Dwelling Unit Distribution ....................................................................................8Rented Dwelling Units ...........................................................................................8Owned Dwelling Units ....................................................................................... 10

Neighborhood Characteristics ................................................................. 11Population Density ............................................................................................. 11Student Data ...................................................................................................... 13Housing Density ................................................................................................. 23Median Age and Median Household Income ...................................................... 24Housing Assistance ............................................................................................. 26Housing Market Conditions ................................................................................ 29Age of Housing Stock .......................................................................................... 34Foreclosures ......................................................................................................... 35Exterior Condition .............................................................................................. 36Quality of Life Threats and Personal Safety Threats .......................................... 36

Study Area Profiles .........................................................................................................39

Neighborhood Profiles ................................................................................................... 40

conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 65

aPPenDices

appendix a: 2013 DeKalb Housing information Database (DHiD) Documentation ........a1

Appendix B: Study Area and Neighborhood Profiles Sources ................................... b1

1DeKalb Housing information Project

Project overviewbacKgrounDA series of events prompted the initial inquiry into the City of DeKalb’s (referred to as the City) state of housing: a national housing crisis; various crime related concerns raised in the community; a proposed housing development adjacent to the DeKalb High School; and, a general lack of analytical mechanisms for decision-making surrounding housing, particularly at the neighborhood level. In response to these issues, the City and Northern Illinois University (NIU), a regional university with its main campus in DeKalb, partnered to develop a multi-year, two phased approach to developing housing supply and demand information and related analytical and reporting tools. NIU’s Center for Governmental Studies (CGS) assembled from among its staff of researchers a multi-disciplinary team with expertise in hous-ing policy and related fields, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and informatics, or the collection, integration, analysis, and modeling of data. Both supply-side information describing the available housing stock (i.e., number, size, geographic location, value and exterior condition) and demand-side information focusing on the demographic characteristics of residents were assessed. Aligning the two data sets identified potential imbalances or gaps between housing demand and supply.

In the base year (referred to as Year 1 going forward), Phase 1 of the DeKalb Housing Information Project (the study) produced a DeKalb Housing Information Database (the database) that compiled reliable data on the housing stock from a variety of sources. Also in Year 1, Phase 2 involved conducting an exterior condi-tion assessment of residential structures and producing trend and comparative analyses. Housing data was geo-coded and entered into the database. Subsequently, Phase 1 data was updated with current data and enhanced to incorporate additional data sources for a more holistic approach to assessing housing, particularly the consumers of housing. In Year 2 NIU housing and students were incorporated in the database along with DeKalb CUSD 428 student information.1 Additionally, the City began tracking rental information in 2013. This information replaced rental estimates derived from the Assessor’s file in Year 1.

The value of the database to assist decision makers in taking action is already being realized as evidenced by the identification of specific neighborhoods experiencing significant stress (largely located adjacent to NIU), leading to community revitalization efforts in that area. The overall benefits of the housing study include:

evidence-based Decision making

optimized technology

collaboration

• Increased knowledge base of housing supply and demand in DeKalb

• Ability to integrate housing information with strategic planning and budgeting

• Ability to leverage data collected to populate the City’s GIS database

• Enhanced data sources and established collection mechanisms to sustain the data for future analysis

• Continued dialogue between the City , NIU and their community partners regarding housing decisions

• Optimized solutions for maintaining healthy housing balances

1 NIU students, student housing, and incidents as well as DeKalb CUSD 428 student information is only included in the DeKalb Housing Information Database at the aggregate level by neighborhood but is discussed in more detail within this report.

DeKalb Housing information Project2DeKalb Housing information Project

scoPeThe Year 2 updates and enhancements were based on information compiled in the Year 1 DeKalb Housing Information Project with the exception of those few analyses that are not conducive to an-nual updates (i.e., stress factor analysis, exterior condition assessments and university community comparisons along with the analysis of over- and under-supply of housing). While the Year 1 housing database is comprehensive, the scope was expanded in Year 2 to include important enhancements, including adding NIU’s campus boundaries in a newly created neighborhood (neighborhood 24); integrating NIU’s incidents, housing and student information; utilizing the City’s rental registra-tion information; and incorporating DeKalb CUSD 428’s student data. As part of the deliverables, the housing and housing related information collected is compiled in a geo-coded, parcel-based database accompanied by this report which describes the data within the Housing Synopsis; Study Area Profile, and the 24 individual Neighborhood Profiles.

Database

Year 2 updates focused on collecting and organizing data on the characteristics of housing in the City from a variety of sources including:

• Housing tenure (owner or renter)

• Housing assistance

• Residential real estate sales data

• Residential foreclosures

• Group quarters capacity

• Senior or rehabilitation units within group quarters

• NIU housing

Additionally, demographic information for NIU students and DeKalb CUSD 428 (the District) stu-dents was collected. Quality of life and personal safety threats, potential influences of perceptions about housing quality and desirability, were also collected. Year 1 exterior condition assessments or “windshield survey” data were retained for a comprehensive portrait of housing.

The database was designed and built to organize this information so it may be overlaid and cross-tabulated to provide a detailed understanding of housing stock and patterns. Year 2 updates build on data collected in Year 1. It is recommended the database continue to be updated and expanded by integrating additional data, such as physical infrastructure, zoning, land use characteristics, commercial and industrial parcel data and other useful information with a geographic identifier.

Study Area

The City originally defined 23 neighborhoods for the study and added neighborhood 24 (NIU Campus) in Year 2. Factors considered in determining neighborhood boundaries included physical features, major roadway patterns, age of development, and types of structures. Four neighborhoods (3, 5, 6 and 9) in the study map below include properties that are outside the city limits. While every effort was made to include data from the portions of these neighborhoods that are outside of the City, data collected from external sources was not as detailed as that available for areas within DeKalb’s municipal boundaries. Each neighborhood is described in detail in Appendix B: Neighborhood Profiles. Taken together, the 24 DeKalb neighborhoods comprise the housing study area.


figure 1 city of DeKalb Housing study area


limitationsThe purpose of this study was to provide the City with a comprehensive housing database and a descriptive portrait of DeKalb’s housing stock and other relevant attributes. Developing program or policy recommendations was not within the scope of this study. CGS collected data from a variety of public and proprietary sources. While every effort was made to clean, validate, and integrate these data sets, it is likely that further refinement of the data may be required over the next few years. For example, foreclosure data used for this study pertains to those residential properties that received a legal judgment, whereas future assessments might also include short sales of properties if additional impact analysis is desired.

Housing data from a variety of sources was collected and prepared to form the DeKalb housing database. A detailed methodology can be found in Appendix A: Housing Database Methodology. The data contained within the DeKalb housing database IS the foundation for this study. The database is populated with the most current sources of information so that it may be updated regularly.

Because certain housing data is only available by its parcel identification number (PIN), and other housing data is only available by its address, the DeKalb housing database integrates parcel-based and address-based data related to dwelling units. Data associated by PIN is important because it links to property valuation, such as equalized assessed value, property tax and property sale information. Address level data were also essential to identify housing characteristics and include foreclosed properties, properties for sale, and location of crime incidents. As a result, the DeKalb housing database links all data collected on various housing types to its geographic location. This is particularly helpful for the City since the database can be imported into and assessed via the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS).


Housing synoPsisBased on the data collected for and synthesized in the housing database, the following discussion describes DeKalb’s study area profile. The study area is an aggregation of the data for DeKalb’s 24 neighborhoods.2 All data presented and discussed in this section pertains only to the study area, with the exception of vacancy trends (reported citywide).3

general Housing termsTerms used in this housing profile are defined below.

Dwelling unitA habitable space designed and intended for occupancy by one household.

Each of the following examples represents a single dwelling unit (DU): a one-bedroom apartment, a two-bedroom townhouse and a four-bedroom detached house.

owneD Dwelling unitA residential structure intended for occupancy by an individual holding record title to the subject property. The DeKalb County Assessor provides an annual file containing parcel based information. CGS first distinguishes parcels based on residential, commercial, industrial and other uses. Next all residential parcels are adjusted to exclude rental units contained in the City’s rental database, leav-ing the remaining balance of owned dwelling units.

renteD Dwelling unitA residential structure intended for occupancy under some form of leasehold by an individual not hold-ing record title to the subject real property. Rooming houses in DeKalb are counted as rented dwelling units. The City maintains a rental database which serves as the basis for rental dwelling units.

vacancyA dwelling unit that is unoccupied and suitable for habitation. The vacancy rate was based on the records of the United States Postal Service (USPS) regarding dwelling units to which mail was not delivered. USPS provided the number of units it classified as vacant for a six month period from May 2014 through October 2014. During this time period, the monthly vacancy rate averaged 3.5%, less than the Year 1 monthly average vacancy rate of 4.3%. Vacancies varied little from month to month and did not seem to be overly influenced by the NIU academic calendar. A summary is shown in graph below.

Chart 14.26%

3.48%

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

3.50%

4.00%

4.50%

Citywide Vacancy Rate

2012

20143.53%

3.46%

3.56%

3.45%

3.46%

3.42%

3.35%

3.40%

3.45%

3.50%

3.55%

3.60%

May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14

CitywideVacancy Rate

2 Individual neighborhood profiles appear beginning on page 41.

3 Citywide statistics are not applicable to the study area and thus were not used or reported in this section of the report; vacancy stats, the only exception to study area level data, are highly relevant to housing information but only available from the USPS at the citywide level.


Housing comPositionThe DeKalb study area is comprised of approximately 16,300 total dwelling units and has the capacity to house over 7,500 additional people in group quarters, as identified in Table 1. While Table 1 shows a comparison of Year 1 and Year 2 data, it should be noted that data sources for the two years differed and this may have impacted some of the totals for different types of housing.

grouP Quarters Group quarters represent residential structures available for occupancy by more than one individual not defined as a household. Group quarters typically house students, the elderly, persons with a disability, or the homeless. As the occupants of group quarters do not consist of households, this housing type does not consist of and is not itself considered a dwelling unit. Within the study area, DeKalb can house up to 7,564 persons in group quarters.4 Year 2 updates distinguished group quarters capacity by traditional units (i.e., students in dorms and fraternity or sorority houses and homeless or other shelters) and units within senior or rehabilitative residential facilities. Although the primary housing type is dwelling units (owned and rented), group quarters have the capacity to house nearly 20% of the study area’s total population. This high group quarters capacity is largely attributable to NIU residence halls.5

Approximately 91% of individuals in these two categories reside in traditional dwelling units with the balance (9%) residing in senior or rehabilitative facilities located in four neighborhoods (3, 6 , 17 and 18).6

4 The study did not assess the vacancy rate of group quarters. The capacity shown assumes one person per room, unless the capacity of the facility was provided.

5 NIU dorms (nearly 5,000 units) were not added until Year 2, accounting for most of group quarters capacity as well as the reason for the large variance when compared to Year 1.

6 University Plaza, a private residence hall serving NIU students, had a capacity of 1,100 residents in 2013. The property is being converted to approximately 300 multi-family rental units planned for occupancy in 2015. Capacity will be reduced to just under 500 residents. This property will then change categories from group quarters to multi-family rental.

table 1 study area Housing composition

tyPe of Housing

Dwelling units (Dus) current year %

to categorycurrent year %

to total Dusyear 1 year 2Group Quarters Capacity 2,499 7,564 100%

Traditional NA 6,890 91%

Senior or Rehabilitative NA 674 9%

Rented Dwelling Units 8,894 9,108 100% 56%

Mixed Use (Commercial/Renter) 95 97 1% 1%

Mixed Use/Rooming House 8 8 0% 0%

Rooming House 448 525 6% 3%

Single-family Units 2,326 2,228 24% 14%

Traditional Multi-family Units 6,017 6,250 69% 38%

Owned Dwelling Units 7,000 7,214 100% 44%

Mobile Homes 327 327 5% 2%

Non-mobile Homes 6,673 6,887 95% 42%

Total Dwelling Units, Excluding Group Quarters 15,894 16,322 100%Source: Housing Database


figure 2 group Quarters capacity (units)


Dwelling unit DistributionOf the nearly 16,300 dwelling units, approximately 9,100 (56%) are rented and the other 7,200 (44%) are owned. Figure 3 illustrates the relative concentration of dwelling units by intended occupancy (tenure).

renteD Dwelling unitsRented units comprise a large proportion of dwelling units and merit a discussion of the rental composition to provide some added insights into DeKalb’s housing stock. As depicted in Table 1, there are five types of rented dwelling units within the study area: mixed use (commercial/renter), mixed use/rooming house, rooming house, single-family and multi-family.

Mixed Use

Mixed use housing has a use other than residential on the primary floor and residential on the floor(s) above. This is most likely to be found in the Central Business District (neighborhood 13) but does occur in a few other locations as shown in Figure 3. The dwelling units in mixed use structures represent only 1% of the total rental stock.7

Rooming House

A rooming house is defined as “a building in which sleeping accommodations and/or meals are provided for compensation (pursuant to previous arrangements for definite periods and not open to the public or transients),” according to Article 3 of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). UDO further defines rooming houses by the number of unrelated individuals and location. Rooming houses are located in the neighborhoods adjacent to NIU (2, 3, 15 and 23). The dwelling unit count was based on the City’s licensed number of bedrooms per rooming house, which represents 6% of the total rental stock.

Single-family Dwelling Unit

For the purpose of this study, a single-family dwelling unit is any dwelling unit classified as agricultural or improved residential (property class of 11 or 40, respectively) by the County Assessor that waives the homeowner exemption. This definition of single-family does not coincide with the City’s zoning classifications, as the study did not examine the dwelling unit’s proximity to another dwelling unit. A rented single-family dwelling unit in this study may include detached units as well as attached, such as townhouses and duplexes. This housing type is located in most neighborhoods and represents 24% of the rented dwelling units and 14% of the total dwelling units in the study area.

Multi-family Dwelling Unit

Any dwelling unit that did not fit into one of the other categories of rental was considered a multi-family dwelling unit. Generally speaking, this housing type consists of apartment complexes with more than six dwelling units. Again, this definition does not coincide with the City’s zoning clas-sifications. This housing type contains the majority of the rented dwelling units (69%) and accounts for 38% of the total housing stock in the study area. Multi-family dwelling units can be found in all but five neighborhoods.

7 The data available to determine the number of units within each mixed use structure was not complete. There may be more dwelling units in the mixed use structures that have not been accounted for.


figure 3 city of DeKalb Percentage of units owner or renter occupied by neighborhood


Rented Dwelling Unit Distribution

Rental housing exists in all neighborhoods within the study area but the most prevalent rental unit type varies by location. Most highly concentrated multi-family rentals are immediately adjacent to NIU. The areas with the next highest concentration of multi-family units are primarily along the commercial corridors (Lincoln Highway and Sycamore Road). Along the edges of the City are where the highest concentrations of single-family rental units exist. Note that the neighborhoods with the greatest concentrations of multi-family rentals are also located along public transportation routes.

Additionally, most of the neighborhoods that have the highest concentration of multi-family rentals also have the highest concentrations of rental units (ranging from 80% to 100% of the housing stock in each of the neighborhoods). The predominance of multi-family rentals in these neighborhoods contributes to the high concentration of rental units.

owneD Dwelling unitsThere are only two categories of owned dwelling units for the study area: mobile homes and non-mobile homes.

Mobile Home

A mobile home is a transportable residential structure suitable for year-round occupancy by a single household. Unlike the City’s UDO, mobile homes are counted as dwelling units in this study. The 327 mobile homes are located in neighborhood 16 and comprise 5% of the owned dwelling units.

Non-mobile Homes

Any dwelling unit that claimed a homeowner exemption on its property tax bill was counted as a non-mobile home. The predominant owned unit type is non-mobile homes, comprising over 95% of the owned dwelling units.

Owned Dwelling Unit Distribution

There is at least one owned dwelling unit in each neighborhood, with the exception of neighborhood 24.8 The areas with the highest concentrations of owned dwelling units are located primarily on the edge of the City, as shown in Figure 3. There are six neighborhoods in which between 75% and 100% of the neighborhood housing stock is owned dwelling units. One of those neighborhoods with the highest concentrations of owned units contains the mobile homes, wherein 43% of the owned housing stock consists of mobile homes.

8 To protect anonymity, the neighborhoods that only have one owned unit have been excluded from certain analyses and reporting.


neigHborHooD cHaracteristics In addition to the housing profile, thirteen neighborhood characteristics are important to consider when evaluating housing in this study. Taken together and coupled with supplemental data, they provide a comprehensive overview of DeKalb’s housing stock. Several of these variables are paired in the following discussion and are considered in the following order:

• Population Density

• DeKalb CUSD 428 Students and NIU Students

• Median Age and Median Household Income

• Housing Density

• Housing Assistance

• Housing Market Conditions

• Age of Housing Stock

• Foreclosures

• Exterior Condition

• Quality of Life and Personal Safety Threats

As mentioned previously, exterior conditions and stress factors are recommended for evaluation every five to 10 years. Therefore data on these two characteristics was not collected for this study.

PoPulation DensityPopulation density is calculated by dividing the number of residents living in a specific geography by the land area. Neighborhoods with high rental concentrations (50% or more) also have higher population and dwelling unit densities, as seen in Figure 4. The average population density in neighborhoods with rental concentrations is twice that of neighborhoods with concentrations of owned dwelling units (12 as opposed to 6 people per acre, respectively. Housing density is presented in Figure 14).


figure 4 Population Density


stuDent Data

DeKalb School District 428 Pre-K through 12 Students

The majority of students in DeKalb CUSD 428 are located within the study area. These students attend 8 of the District’s 11 schools, although not all 8 are within the study area. Two location-al notes of significance are that DeKalb High School is located just outside of the study area and the Pre-K program is housed at Huntley Middle School. About half of the District’s stu-dents are in grades Pre-K through 5. More than half of the students (57%) in the study area receive free or reduced priced lunches. Statewide, 52% of students receive free or reduced price lunches. Additionally, in the 2013/2014 school year, the District experienced a net transfer out of 319 students with 235 (74%) of the net transfers out taking place in the study area. It is important to note that the District has experienced an increase for the current school year (2014/2015). Students enrolled in the district increased by 67, for a total of 6,335 enrolled in the 2014/2015 school year. Of the 67 increase, 34 students were enrolled within the study area.

DeKalb cusD 428 District total % to total stuDy area

% to total

outsiDe stuDy area

% to total

Students 6,268 4,849 1,419

Pre-K Through 5 3,179 51% 2,463 51% 716 50%

Middle School 1,374 22% 1,061 22% 313 22%

High School 1,715 27% 1,325 27% 390 27%

Receiving Free or Reduced Priced Lunches

3,445 55% 2,756 57% 689 49%

Transfers In and Out of District 428

937 713 76% 224 24%

Net Transfers In/(Out) of District 428

(319) (235) 74% (84) 26%

table 2 DeKalb cusD 428 student information


Neighborhoods with the highest concentration of students include neighborhoods 1, 3, 4, 18 and 21.

figure 5 city of DeKalb Pre-K - 12 students by neighborhood


According to the following maps, there is a higher concentration of Pre-K through 5 students in neighborhoods 1,3,18 and 21; a higher concentration of middle school students in neighborhoods 4, 16, 18 and 21; and, a higher concentration of high school students in neighborhoods 4, 18 and 21.

figure 6 city of DeKalb Distribution of elementary school students (Pre-K - 5) by neighborhood


figure 7 city of DeKalb Distribution of middle school students (6 - 8) by neighborhood


figure 8 city of DeKalb Distribution of High school students (9 - 12) by neighborhood


Students entering or leaving the District are most concentrated in neighborhood 3. Neighborhoods 1, 21, 17 and 18 also are high both in students coming in and leaving the District. Neighborhoods 7, 13, 19, 20 and 24 are the most stable with few students either entering or leaving.

figure 9 city of DeKalb outgoing Dist 428 students by neighborhood


figure 10 city of DeKalb incoming Dist 428 students by neighborhood


Students receiving free or reduced price lunch reside in every neighborhood of the study area with the lowest percentage in neighborhoods 19 and 20 (14% and 16% respectively) and the highest percentage in neighborhoods 1, 3, 11 and 22 (80%, 96%, 84% and 96% respectively). There does not seem to be any pattern indicating that students in certain grade levels or neighborhoods with more students moving in or out are consistently more likely to receive free or reduced price lunch.

figure 11 DeKalb cusD 428 free or reduced-Priced lunches


NIU Students

NIU students reside in every neighborhood of the study area but are concentrated on campus (neighborhood 24) and in the neighborhoods adjoining campus (neighborhoods 2, 3 and 22).9 The Concentration of NIU students is shown in the map below.

9 Students included here are those who have reported a DeKalb address. There may be additional students living in DeKalb who are currently reporting their parents or guardians’ addresses outside of DeKalb. The University is currently assessing mechanisms to increase reporting accuracy of “local addresses” going forward.

figure 12 city of DeKalb share of niu student Population by neighborhood


In terms of the largest number of students living in DeKalb, neighborhoods 3 and 24 are highest, followed by 2, 15 and 22. With the exception of 24 which is nearly 100% undergraduates, this pattern is similar for both undergraduate and graduate students reporting an off-campus DeKalb address. Approximately 550 NIU students reside in sorority or fraternity houses. All of these Greek houses are located in neighborhood 3. Neighborhoods located farther from campus have relatively few students.

figure 13 city of DeKalb niu student Population by neighborhood


Housing DensityDensity may also be calculated by dividing the number of dwelling units by the acreage of a particular geographic area. As with population density, the average housing density in neighborhoods with high rental concentrations is greater than those with higher concentrations of owned dwelling units. For instance, neighborhoods with higher rental concentrations have an average housing density of over five dwelling units per acre, whereas high owned concentrations result in densities of less than three dwelling units per acre. The one exception is neighborhood 13 (a highly rental concentrated neighborhood in the downtown area) which has a housing density slightly lower than the median. It should be noted that neighborhood 24 was not included in the calculation of housing density because of its unusual configuration. Neighborhood 24 consists of high density residence halls surrounded by low density common areas and athletic facilities, thus having a very low housing density of less than one unit per acre. Figure 14 depicts the study area’s housing densities.

figure 14 Housing Density


meDian age anD meDian HouseHolD income

Median Age

The median age for the study area is 24.1 years. NIU students have a great influence on this age. Neighborhood 24 (on-campus) has a median age of 18.0. Neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the university also have relatively young median ages. Neighborhood 6 in the northeast quadrant of the City has the oldest median age (46.8) as it also includes Oak Crest Retirement Center.

figure 15 median age


Median Household Income

Similar to median age, the lowest median household incomes are on campus or in the neighborhoods adjacent to the university. However, median household income for students is difficult to determine since many are dependents in their parent’s households. The neighborhoods with the highest median household incomes are to the north and to the south of the center of the City as depicted in Figure 16. Generally speaking, the neighborhoods north and south of the City’s center have residents with relatively high median ages and median household incomes.

figure 16 city of DeKalb median Household income by neighborhood


Housing assistanceTwo forms of housing assistance are included in this study: place-based and tenant-based.10

Place-based Subsidy

The primary form of housing assistance identified in this study is a place-based subsidy, in which a property owner or developer receives a financial incentive from the government to subsidize the rent of some or all dwelling units to low-income tenants.11 The subsidy stays with the unit, as opposed to tenant-based subsidies that stay with the householder.

There are 1,249 subsidized dwelling units within the study area, representing approximately 14% of the rented units. Only 180 subsidized units are publicly managed. The rest are privately managed and represent 12% of the rental stock and nearly 7% of the total housing stock. Although subsidized units are located in six neighborhoods, more than half of the total subsidized units are concentrated in one neighborhood 3.

Tenant-based Subsidy

FA tenant-based subsidy is housing assistance given to the head of a household to offset the cost of renting a market rate unit. The householder keeps the subsidy in the event that the household moves. For the purpose of this study, tenant-based subsidies are referred to as Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs).

As of June 2013, there were 336 HCVs in use, which represents 2% of the total number of households in the study area. Due to the portability of the vouchers, there is a greater distribution of housing choice vouchers (HCVs), but nearly half of the vouchers are being used in only two neighborhoods (neighborhoods 1 and 3).

10 The level of subsidies received was not part of the scope of this study. Note, however, that subsidies may differ greatly (e.g., as little as $25/month or up to nearly all the rent being subsidized) so no assumptions can be made regarding the level of need being met by the subsidies.

11 The eligibility requirements may vary, but generally tenants would have to pay about 30% of their adjusted household income for rent.


figure 17 city of DeKalb subsidized Housing by neighborhood


figure 18 city of DeKalb Housing vouchers by neighborhood


Housing marKet conDitions

Fair Market Value

The fair market value (FMV) of an owned dwelling unit is the price at which real property would change hands between a willing and informed seller and a willing and informed buyer. Neighborhood 3 has only two owned units and is excluded from the FMV calculation. The median FMV in the study area is $129,473. Figure 19 indicates the median FMV by neighborhood. Neighborhoods with the highest FMVs are located at the northern edge of the study area, whereas the neighborhood with the lowest FMVs is the same neighborhood where nearly half of its owned dwelling units are mobile homes.

figure 19 median fair market value


Fair Market Rent

Fair market rent (FMR) is the rental value a dwelling unit can command in an open market and in the absence of any form of subsidy. Prior year Fair Market Rent calculations were grossed up by 2 percent per Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Consumer Price Index (CPI) estimates for housing in class D for Midwest cities having less than 50,000 populations. Of the market rate dwelling units, approximately half are multi-family and have an estimated average rent of $643 per month. Figure 20 reflects the estimated average multi-family rental rate for each neighborhood. Neighborhoods reflecting a rate of $0 do not have any market rate multi-family units, which may not necessarily mean that there are no multi-family units in the neighborhood. The single-family market rate units represent 26.2% of the total market rate units with an estimated average rent of $1,400.

figure 20 estimated fair market rent


Multiple Listing Service Data

The Multiple Listing Service provides data on the number of home sales, the number of home list-ings, average list price and average number of days on n the market for each neighborhood in the study area. Average list price across the study area was $138,739 but varied from a high of $223,132 in neighborhood 5 to a low of $73,864 in neighborhood 14. Number of days on the market ranged from a high of 244 (neighborhood 1) to a low of 60 (neighborhood 20). The median listing period was 146 days. The number of days on the market does not appear to be related to the list price or exterior condition.

Figure 21 shows homes sales by neighborhood. While neighborhood 21 has much higher home sales than any the median or any other individual neighborhood, it also has the highest number of units. In general, neighborhoods with more sales had more owned units. Figure 22 shows the num-ber of listings by neighborhood. While it is similar to the map of sales, there are some differences. Neighborhood 14 fell into the highest category for sales but was in a lower category for listings and neighborhoods 4, 11 and 19 had high numbers of listings but were in lower categories for sales. Average list price (Figure 23) was highest in the far north neighborhoods (1, 5 and 6) at $210, 879. No clear pattern emerged for the number of days on the market, as shown in Figure 24.

figure 21 mls sales


figure 22 mls listings


figure 23 mls average list Price


age of Housing stocK The average age of the housing stock in the study area is more than 50 years old. The average age of the owned dwelling units is 48, whereas rented units have an average age of nearly 60 years. When evaluating the rented unit types, however, it is apparent that the single-family rentals are much older than the multi-family units (average age of 73 as compared to 39).12 In fact, of the 23 neighbor-hoods identified in this study, four have more than 50% of their housing stock built prior to 1940.13

12 The average ages of dwelling units were based on the 94% of owned units, 93% of single-family rented units and 29% of multi-family units that reported the year built.

13 1940 is the generally accepted year in which housing construction methods were greatly improved and a higher standard was set for building codes.

figure 24 mls average Days on market


foreclosuresA foreclosure is the termination of “legal and equitable interests in real estate” as defined by the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law, 735 ILCS 5/.

There were 94 foreclosures in 2013, which represents 1% of all dwelling units (in addition to the 94 foreclosed dwelling units, there was one foreclosed vacant lot located in neighborhood 10). Figure 25 illustrates that the foreclosures occurred in all neighborhoods but were more concentrated in neighborhoods 14, 16, 17 and 21. These four neighborhoods account for nearly half of all foreclosures in the study area.

figure 25 city of DeKalb share of total foreclosures by neighborhood


exterior conDitionAn exterior condition assessment of residential structures was conducted to provide the City of DeKalb with a greater understanding of the general condition of its housing stock. A random sampling technique was used to select a representative cross-section of DeKalb’s rented and owned residential structures. Assessments were conducted during the fall of 2012 by CGS team members trained to identify deterioration of fixed features on residential properties from the public right of way. Con-dition was assessed through a series of questions about the physical appearance of residential and accessory structures. Residential structures surveyed were scored individually and then compiled into a neighborhood score. The neighborhood condition score was also used to calculate neighbor-hood stress factors. The assessments were performed on 1,140 of the 8,386 residential structures (13.6%) within the study area. A map depicting the surveyed locations and a detailed methodology for the exterior condition assessment is provided in Appendix A: Housing Database Methodology.

Seven of the neighborhoods were found to have very few issues with exterior condition (score of 1); four of the neighborhoods had a moderate number of condition issues (score of 2), seven of the neighborhoods had a high number of issues (score of 3), and five of the neighborhoods had a very high number of issues (score of 4) with exterior condition.

Neighborhoods located primarily in the center of the City have the highest number of issues related to the exterior condition of their residential structures. Neighborhood 4 contained a large number of issues related to poor roof conditions which received significant weight in scoring. Neighborhood 11 had the highest number of incidences related to the exterior condition of the residential stock. In general, neighborhoods on the periphery of the study area have the fewest exterior condition incidences.

Quality of life tHreats anD Personal safety tHreatsYear 2 updates builds upon the data collected in Year 1. In Year 2, however, there were a few impor-tant modifications, including:

• Incorporating the University’s personal safety threats

• Excluding any incidents reported at the new police station’s address (incidents reported at the former police station address were excluded in Year 1 and Year 2 as well).

• Including serious driving related incidents as well as DUI related incidents given these incidents potential to create safety issues in the neighborhoods.

Quality of Life Threats

A quality of life threat is a visual or audible disturbance to neighbors or the neighborhood that reduces the desirability of a neighborhood. Quality of life threats can be a factor in perceived lack of safety, deteriorating housing stock (age and condition), and/or declining home values.


In 2013, almost 10,400 combined (reported by the City and the University) quality of life threats, or about 256 quality of life threats per 1,000 residents, were reported in the study area. The top three quality of life threats were suspicious activity/person/vehicle, audible disturbances and disorderly conduct/house. Together these three threats consist of nearly half of the total incidents reported (19%, 15% and 14%, respectively). The overall threat rates by neighborhood are depicted in Figure 26.

It should be noted that incidents other than those counted as quality of life threats can affect the quality of life in a neighborhood. For example, the DeKalb Fire Department reported that it responds to a high number of non-fire related assistance calls in neighborhood 3. The frequent presence of emergency vehicles using sirens could impact the quality of life in that neighborhood.

figure 26 Quality of life threats


Personal Safety Threats

A personal safety threat is a crime against a person or persons that is physical and violent and in which someone uses force or threaten to use force to negatively affect another person’s health, life or liberty, and crimes related to significant drug activity (delivery and manufacturing).

There were nearly 1,900 combined (reported by the City and the University) personal safety threats, or about 47 threats per 1,000 residents, reported in the study area in 2013. The majority of the personal safety threats were domestic issues at 28% of the total. The next two most prevalent categories of threats were battery and phone threat/harassment, representing 19% and 17% of the total personal safety threats respectively. The top three personal safety threats represent almost two thirds of the total incidents reported. Figure 27 shows the overall rate of personal safety threats per 1,000 people.

figure 27 Personal safety threats

39DeKalb Housing information ProjectDeKalb Housing information Project

stuDy area ProfileCollectively, the housing composition and neighborhood characteristics make up the Study Area Profile presented in Table 3. Data is presented in a consistent manner as Year 1 - total figures are reported unless indicated as median, average or a rate. Individual profiles and source information are also reported in similar fashion as Year 1, with the exception of the new NIU campus neighborhood (neigh-borhood 24 has a slightly different format) and are included in Appendix B: Neighborhood Profiles.

DeKalb stuDy area Profilevariable stuDy areaTotal Acres 5,480

Park Acres 440

Public Schools (PK-12) 8

Total Population 40,324

NIU Students 8,145

PK-12 Students 4,849

Pre-K through 5 2,463

Middle School 1,061

High School 1,325

Median Age 24.1

Median Household Income $39,153

Households 14,331

Students on Free or Reduced-Priced Lunches 2,756

Voucher Holders 336

Quality of Life Threats 10,338

Quality of Life Threats per 1,000 People 256

Personal Safety Threats 1,885

Personal Safety Threats per 1,000 People 47

Total Dwelling Units (DUs), Excludes GQ 16,322

Density (DUs/Acres) 3

Owned DUs 7,214

% Owned DUs 44%

Median FMV $129,473

Properties Listed for Sale 369

Average List Price $138,739

Properties Sold 352

Average Number of Days on the Market 146

Rented DUs 9,108

% Rented DUs 56%

Average FMR (Single-family) $1,400

Average FMR (Multi-family) $643

Subsidized DUs (2013) 1,249

Foreclosures 94

Group Quarters Capacity (2014) 7,564

Percentage of DUs Built Prior to 1940 16.3%

Exterior Condition Score (Conducted 2012) 2.4Notes: 1. Refer to page B1 for the variable time frames and sources2. Refer to Appendix A: Database Methodology for description and methodology of individual variables3. Exterior condition scores: 1 = Minimal; 2 = Moderate; 3 = High; 4 = Very High4. Sales data © 2013 Midwest Real Estate Data LLC

table 3 study area Housing composition


neigHborHooD ProfilesMany variables influence the reality and perception of a good neighborhood environment. The following neighborhood profiles are based solely on objective data and, as a result, do not capture the intangible assets that also create a sense of neighborhood, such as a shared history or relationships among residents. They also represent a specific point in time and cannot capture the evolving neighborhood dynamics. For these reasons, it is recommended that the City update this data periodically to identify changes within and across DeKalb’s neighborhoods over time.

Neighborhoods have been arbitrarily assigned a number by the study team for purposes of analysis and discussion. Key findings for each neighborhood are presented in the individual neighborhood profiles.


Profile neigHborHooD 1

Description

general & Demographic

safety & Quality

Housing

Neighborhood 1, consisting of nearly entirely residential properties, is relatively small with very few acres of park land. Although the dwelling unit density is about average, this neighborhood has a slightly higher than aver-age population density. This neighborhood is home to a majority of rented DUs, in which many renters either live in a subsidized unit or receive a HCV.

variable neigHborHooD neigHborHooD average stuDy areaTotal Acres 77 211 5,480

Park Acres 3 18 440Public Schools (PK-12) 0 0.3 8.0Population 925 1,569 40,324

NIU Students 47 339 8,145PK-12 Students 303 202 4,849Pre-K through 5 165 103 2,463

Middle School 63 44 1,061High School 75 55 1,325Median Age 33.1 - 24.1

Median Household Income $61,990 - $39,153

% of Students in NH on Free or Reduced-Priced Lunches 80% - 57%

Voucher Holders 79 14 336

Quality Of Life Threats per 1,000 People 139 242 256

Personal Safety Threats per 1,000 People 62 49 47

Total Dwelling Units (DUs), Excludes GQ 282 680 16,322

Density (DUs/Acres) 4 4 3

Owned DUs 59 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 21% 51% 44%

Median FMV $163,803 - $129,473

Rented DUs 223 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 79% 49% 56%

Average FMR (Multi-family) $0 - $643

Subsidized DUs 92 54 1,249

Share of Foreclosures 0.0% 4.3% 100.0%

Residential Properties Listed 3 17 369

Average List Price $207,300 - $138,739

Residential Properties Sold 7 15 352

Average Number of Days on the Market 244 - 146

Group Quarters Capacity 0 315 7,564

Percentage of DUs Built Prior to 1940 0.0% 17.5% 16.3%

Exterior Condition Score 2.0 - 2.4

Notes: 1. Refer to page B1 for the variable time frames and sources2. Refer to Appendix A: Database Methodology for description and methodology of individual variables3. Exterior condition scores: 1 = Minimal; 2 = Moderate; 3 = High; 4 = Very High4. Sales data © 2013 Midwest Real Estate Data LLC

Legend and Zoning Categories

City Limits Major Roads Neighborhoods TIF District “2” TIF District “Central” Rail Lines Kishwaukee River Open Space/Park Commercial Residential University


neigHborHooD 2ProfileNeighborhood 2 is relatively small, predomi-nantly residential and borders the university. It is home to young residents with low median household incomes. It has the highest popula-tion density (24 people per acre) due to its low acreage and high population. Additionally, Neighborhood 2 has the most dwelling units per acre; it contains the second highest number of total dwelling units, nearly all of which are rented (97%). Quality of life threat rates are higher than average and personal safety threat rates are close to average. Neighborhood 2 has a high level of exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 10 18 440

Public Schools (PK-12) 0 0.3 8.0

Population 3,338 1,569 40,324

NIU Students 878 339 8,145

PK-12 Students 67 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 29 103 2,463

Middle School 15 44 1,061

High School 23 55 1,325

Median Age 22.6 - 24.1






Total Dwelling Units (DUs), Excludes GQ 1,450 680 16,322


Owned DUs 42 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 3% 51% 44%

Median FMV $129,369 - $129,473

Rented DUs 1,408 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 97% 49% 56%











Notes: 1. Refer to page B1 for the variable time frames and sources 2. Refer to Appendix A: Housing Database Methodology for specifics on individual variables 3. Exterior condition scores: 1 = Minimal; 2 = Moderate; 3 = High; 4 = Very High 4. Sales data © 2013 Midwest Real Estate Data LLC




neigHborHooD 3ProfileNeighborhood 3 is predominantly residential with some commercial in the central and southern part of the neighborhood. Located adjacent to the university, it is home to young residents with low median household incomes. With the most DUs and the highest population, it has the second highest densities (population and housing). Neighborhood 3 is one of two neighborhoods with all units rented and has a very high concentration of housing assistance (largest number of subsidized DUs and second largest HCV holders). Excluding NIU’s campus, the majority of all group quarter units are located here as well. Quality of life and personal safety threat rates in this neighborhood are the third highest. Finally, this neighborhood has a high number of exterior condition incidents. The second largest number of DeKalb CUSD 428 students resides in this neighborhood; close to three fourths are PK-5 students.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 5,162 1,569 40,324

NIU Students 1,024 339 8,145

PK-12 Students 497 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 360 103 2,463











Owned DUs 2 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 0% 51% 44%

Median FMV X - $129,473

Rented DUs 2,128 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 100% 49% 56%




Residential Properties Listed X 17 369

Average List Price X - $138,739


Average Number of Days on the Market X - 146

Group Quarters Capacity 2,114 315 7,564




Note: University Plaza consists of two structures with a total capacity of 1,008 (with only one structure currently in use). In 2014, it planned to be converted to private dorms with a new capacity of 496.




neigHborHooD 4ProfileNeighborhood 4 is a large neighbor-hood in size, population and total dwelling units. It is predominantly residential and borders the university with very few acres designated as park land. The majority of the homes here are owned. Compared to the midpoint of the study area, this neighborhood has a high median age and household income along with a high fair market value of its owned units. This neigh-borhood has a very high number of exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 5 18 440


Population 2,184 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 321 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 132 103 2,463











Owned DUs 733 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 93% 51% 44%

Median FMV $160,575 - $129,473

Rented DUs 55 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 7% 49% 56%











Notes: 1. Refer to page B1 for the variable time frames and sources 2. Refer to Appendix A: Database Methodology for description and methodology of individual variables 3. Exterior condition scores: 1 = Minimal; 2 = Moderate; 3 = High; 4 = Very High 4. Sales data © 2013 Midwest Real Estate Data LLC




neigHborHooD 5ProfileNeighborhood 5 is a large neighbor-hood that includes a relatively large park space resulting in low densities of population and housing. The majority of dwelling units here are owned ver-sus rented. Median fair market values of the owned dwelling units are much higher than the midpoint of the study area. This neighborhood had a slightly higher share of foreclosures. Exterior condition incidents in this neighbor-hood are low.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,145 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 197 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 86 103 2,463











Owned DUs 420 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 92% 51% 44%

Median FMV $186,516 - $129,473

Rented DUs 37 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 8% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 6ProfileNeighborhood 6 has about twice the acreage of the average neighborhood in the study area yet con-tains less than the average number of residents and dwelling units, resulting in very low population and dwelling unit density rates and much higher than average park acreage. Of the total dwelling units, a very high percentage is owned. Residents here have the highest median age and have median household incomes that are higher than most. This neighbor-hood’s median fair market value of owned units was also the highest. Moderate levels of housing assistance, some group quarters, a significantly low quality of life and personal safety threat rate and less than 1% of dwelling units built prior to 1940 further characterize this neighborhood. Finally, neighbor-hood 6 received a low exterior condition score.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,031 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 128 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 51 103 2,463











Owned DUs 363 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 84% 51% 44%

Median FMV $210,746 - $129,473

Rented DUs 69 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 16% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 7ProfileNeighborhood 7 is quite small with respect to acre-age (fewest acres of all neighborhoods), population and total dwelling units. This neighborhood is fully contained in a tax increment financing (TIF) district and encompasses some commercial properties. No park land is found in this neighborhood. Additionally, it is surrounded largely by industrial and commercial properties. More than half of the dwelling units are owned and have low fair market values compared to others in the study area. Almost no housing as-sistance, significantly low quality of life and personal safety threat rates, higher than average share of foreclosures along with no dwelling units built prior to 1940 further characterize this neighborhood. It has a low number of exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 0 18 440


Population 563 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 28 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 21 103 2,463











Owned DUs 217 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 67% 51% 44%

Median FMV $114,504 - $129,473

Rented DUs 106 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 33% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 8ProfileNeighborhood 8 is fairly small with respect to acreage, population and total dwelling units and is predomi-nantly residential with some industrial properties located at the southern tip of the neighborhood. Very little park land is found in this neighborhood. More than half of the dwelling units are owned and have median fair market values that are lower than most, yet this neighborhood’s multi-family rented units have the second highest median fair market rental rate in the study area. This neighborhood has moder-ate housing assistance with about an average quality of life threat and personal safety threat rate. It has a moderate number of exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 6 18 440


Population 837 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 182 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 98 103 2,463





% of Students in NH on Free or Reduced Priced Lunches 57% - 57%






Owned DUs 310 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 59% 51% 44%

Median FMV $107,319 - $129,473

Rented DUs 212 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 41% 49% 56%

Average FMR (Multi-family) $1,136 - $643














neigHborHooD 9ProfileNeighborhood 9 is larger than average in all respects (acreage, population and total dwelling units) yet has a population and DU density rate much less than the average. Park acreage within this neighborhood is by far the highest of all neighborhoods. This neighbor-hood’s median age and median household income is much higher than the midpoint of the study area. Almost two-thirds of all dwelling units are owned and have a median fair market value close to the study area’s midpoint. Additionally, multi-unit rentals here have a very low median fair market rental rate. It has a high number of exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,725 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 214 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 95 103 2,463











Owned DUs 532 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 67% 51% 44%

Median FMV $124,184 - $129,473

Rented DUs 268 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 34% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 10ProfileNeighborhood 10 is mid-sized and contains mostly residences. Approximately two-thirds are owned and have a lower median fair market value than the midpoint of the study area yet median household incomes are higher than most. Additionally, its multi-unit rentals have a very low median fair market rental rate. A large portion of the dwelling units were built prior to 1940. This neighborhood adjoins a large area of park land creating an environment of lower population and dwelling unit densities. Exterior con-dition incidents are very high in this neighborhood.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,100 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 240 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 108 103 2,463











Owned DUs 367 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 67% 51% 44%

Median FMV $111,906 - $129,473

Rented DUs 182 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 33% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 11ProfileNeighborhood 11 contains mostly resi-dential, a stretch of commercial and a few industrial properties. This is an older neighborhood with the major-ity of its dwelling units built prior to 1940 and the median fair market rent of its multi-unit rentals much lower than most. The share of dwelling units owned versus rented was similar and the rentals in this neighborhood are predominantly single family homes. The quality of life and personal safety threat rates are slightly higher than av-erage. This neighborhood experienced a very high level of exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 1 18 440


Population 1,327 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 279 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 149 103 2,463











Owned DUs 221 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 47% 51% 44%

Median FMV $111,251 - $129,473

Rented DUs 248 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 53% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 12ProfileNeighborhood 12 is older (more than half of the homes built prior to 1940) and somewhat densely populated. It is fairly small with respect to acreage, population and total dwelling units and is predomi-nantly residential with some industrial and commer-cial properties mostly concentrated at the southern section of the neighborhood. The median household income (MHI) is higher than the study area’s MHI, yet the median fair market value of owned dwelling units is lower than the midpoint of the study area. The number of rented units compared to owned units is about the same and foreclosures are higher than average. The quality of life and personal safety threat rates are slightly below average. Exterior condition incidents are high.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 1 18 440


Population 1,045 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 170 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 78 103 2,463











Owned DUs 259 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 53% 51% 44%

Median FMV $113,238 - $129,473

Rented DUs 227 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 47% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 13ProfileNeighborhood 13 is unique in that it is domi-nated by commercial and industrial properties with the second lowest number of dwelling units, excluding on-campus dwelling units. There is a significantly high concentration of rented dwelling units as well as a high per-centage of homes built prior to 1940. This neighborhood has the highest quality of life and personal safety threat rates. The property composition and low population may be con-tributing factors to these rates. The median fair market value of the owned dwelling units contained in this neighborhood is much less than the study area’s median FMV. However, of its multi-family rented units, the median fair market rent rate is higher than study area average. This neighborhood has a very high number of exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 4 18 440


Population 430 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 38 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 19 103 2,463











Owned DUs 33 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 16% 51% 44%

Median FMV $96,024 - $129,473

Rented DUs 170 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 84% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 14ProfileNeighborhood 14 is an average sized neighborhood with regard to its acre-age, population and dwelling units. This neighborhood is a part of one of the city’s tax increment financing (TIF) districts. More than half of the dwelling units were built prior to 1940 and a majority of the dwelling units are owned units with a median fair market value (FMV) much less than the study area’s median FMV. This neighborhood experienced a higher than average rate of quality of life and personal safety threats and had a much higher share of the city’s foreclosures. Its exterior condition score is slightly lower than the average.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,680 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 273 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 133 103 2,463











Owned DUs 396 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 60% 51% 44%

Median FMV $95,733 - $129,473

Rented DUs 267 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 40% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 15ProfileNeighborhood 15 contains an his-toric district, tax increment financing (TIF) and is bordered by two main roads (buffered by commercial prop-erties) and the Kishwaukee River. There is a high rental concentration and the highest number of rooming houses. Residents here are young and the neighborhood’s median house-hold income (MHI) is slightly lower than the study area’s MHI. About two-thirds of the dwelling units in this neighborhood were built prior to 1940. Quality of life and personal safety threat rates are similar to the study area’s average, and the inci-dence of exterior condition issues is high.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,644 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 67 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 34 103 2,463











Owned DUs 163 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 18% 51% 44%

Median FMV $155,067 - $129,473

Rented DUs 736 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 82% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 16ProfileNeighborhood 16 is long and narrow and is bordered by industrial properties on the east side. About one-third of the dwelling units in this neighborhood are mobile homes. On aver-age this neighborhood has more acres, residents and dwelling units than the other neighbor-hoods. The median age is much higher than the midpoint of the study area, yet median household incomes are fairly comparable to others in the study area. Most dwelling units are owned and the median fair market value (FMV) in this neighborhood is much less than the study area’s midpoint. Foreclosures in this neighborhood are also higher than average. It has lower levels of quality of life and personal safety threat rates, housing assistance, and homes built prior to 1940. Exterior condition incidents are high in this neighborhood.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,815 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 300 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 140 103 2,463











Owned DUs 760 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 88% 51% 44%

Median FMV $87,702 - $129,473

Rented DUs 101 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 12% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 17ProfileNeighborhood 17 is a predominantly residential area within a tax increment financing (TIF) district. It is bordered by commercial properties to the north. Ap-proximately half of the dwelling units are rental of which more than half are single family homes. Median fair market values of owned units are less than the study area’s midpoint. Its share of foreclosures as well as its share of housing assistance is higher than average but quality of life and personal safety threat rates are slightly below the mean of the neighborhoods. Additionally, almost half of the dwelling units were built prior to 1940 and the presence of exterior condition incidents found here is very high.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 2,341 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 290 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 153 103 2,463











Owned DUs 495 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 43% 51% 44%

Median FMV $111,732 - $129,473

Rented DUs 664 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 57% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 18ProfileNeighborhood 18 consists almost entirely of resi-dential properties built after 1940. Most units are owned with a median fair market value higher than the study area’s midpoint. This neighborhood also has more park land than average. The median age and median household income is higher than the midpoint of the study area. A minimal level of housing assistance is found in this neighborhood. Quality of life and personal safety threat rates are significantly lower than the mean. There were fewer than average exterior condition incidents here.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,786 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 346 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 166 103 2,463











Owned DUs 630 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 84% 51% 44%

Median FMV $146,144 - $129,473

Rented DUs 124 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 16% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 19ProfileNeighborhood 19 runs along Interstate 88 and is a smaller neighborhood with fewer acres, residents and dwelling units and population and DU density rates than average. This neighborhood has the second highest volume of park acres than the other neighborhoods. All dwelling units here were built after 1940 and over 90% are owned. The median fair market value of owned homes is higher than the study area’s midpoint. Very low quality of life and personal safety threat rates, no foreclosures, and no housing assistance further characterize this neighborhood. Its exterior condition incidents are minimal.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 832 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 146 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 47 103 2,463











Owned DUs 294 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 92% 51% 44%

Median FMV $150,713 - $129,473

Rented DUs 25 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 8% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 20ProfileNeighborhood 20 is predominantly residential with some commercial properties concentrated mainly in two areas of the neighborhood. It has the fewest residents and dwelling units, excluding NIU’s campus. Despite the absence of park land, it’s relatively large land area contributes to its very low population and dwelling unit densities. The majority of dwelling units here are owned with a median fair market value (FMV) lower than the study area’s median FMV. Foreclosures were higher than average. This neighborhood’s median household income is much higher than the midpoint of the study area. Low quality of life and personal safety threat rates, no housing assistance and no dwelling units built prior to 1940 further characterize this neighborhood. It has minimal exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 0 18 440


Population 314 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 44 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 26 103 2,463











Owned DUs 114 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 74% 51% 44%

Median FMV $116,886 - $129,473

Rented DUs 41 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 26% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 21ProfileNeighborhood 21 is a very large neighborhood and consists mainly of residences of which approximately two-thirds are owned. The majority of rented units are single family homes. Excluding NIU’s campus, it has the most acreage with much park land and has the third highest number of residents yet has lower than average population and DU densities. This neighborhood’s median household income is much higher than the study area’s midpoint and its multi-family rented units have one of the highest median fair market rental rates in the study area. Although this neighborhood had the highest share of foreclosures, it also has minimal exterior condition issues as well as quality of life and personal safety threat rates that were lower than average. The largest number of DeKalb CUSD 428 students resides in this neighborhood; almost half are PK-5 students.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 2,762 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 547 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 258 103 2,463











Owned DUs 707 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 69% 51% 44%

Median FMV $158,007 - $129,473

Rented DUs 318 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 31% 49% 56%

Average FMR (Multi-family) $1,389 - $643














neigHborHooD 22ProfileNeighborhood 22 is unique because residences are found in pockets within a large area of park land and commercial properties. This neighborhood also borders the university and the Kishwaukee River runs through it. This neighborhood’s median household income is much lower than the study area’s midpoint. All dwelling units are rented and are predominantly multi-family units: more than 10% are subsidized. Its multi-family unit rentals have a fair market rent rate lower than the study area average. This neighborhood has almost double the amount of dwelling units than the average of the neighborhoods and higher than average housing density. It has the second highest quality of life and personal safety threat rates. There are minimal exterior condition incidents.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing




Population 1,137 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 105 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 74 103 2,463











Owned DUs 0 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 0% 51% 44%

Median FMV N/A - $129,473

Rented DUs 1,152 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 100% 49% 56%




Residential Properties Listed X 17 369

Average List Price X - $138,739


Average Number of Days on the Market X - 146








neigHborHooD 23ProfileNeighborhood 23 is quite small with regard to acreage, population and dwelling units. It is comprised solely of residences and borders the university. It has a high concentration of rented units and no park land. Residents are young and the median household income is lower than the study area’s midpoint. A little more than 10% of its dwelling units were built before 1940. Quality of life and personal safety threat rates are low and the FMV is higher than average (FMR of rented units is comparable to the average of the study area). A high level of exterior condition incidents were found here.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Park Acres 0 18 440


Population 975 1,569 40,324


PK-12 Students 57 202 4,849

Pre-K through 5 35 103 2,463











Owned DUs 97 301 7,214

% Owned DUs 30% 51% 44%

Median FMV $144,297 - $129,473

Rented DUs 227 391 9,108

% Rented DUs 70% 49% 56%















neigHborHooD 24ProfileNeighborhood 24 consists entirely of the NIU campus (“on-campus”) and is very large in comparison to the other neighborhoods “off-campus.” All NIU owned student housing is located in this neighborhood, and the residents are young (median age is 18) college-aged students. NIU Campus also contains the Northern View Community Apartments which contains 120 dwelling units available to students who are 20+ years old or two full years post high school, or any student who has a dependent and/or a partner or spouse. This neighborhood also contains several non-residential buildings, including the NIU’s teaching facilities, recreational fields and the Convocation Center. While there are no single family units or owned units, population and dwelling unit densities are low because of the large amount of open space on- campus. Quality of life and personal safety threat rates are close to average for the study area.

Description


safety & Quality

Housing


Population 4,226 1,569 40,324

Group Quarters (GQ) Population 4,012 78 5,804

Residents in Apartments (Northern View) 210

NIU Students 4,203 339 8,145

% Undergraduate Students 99% - -

% Graduate/Post Graduate Students 1% - -

Non-NIU Students (Children & Partners) 19 - -


Median Household Income $18,629 $39,153



Total Number of Structures 26 - -

Rented DU's 120 391 9,108

Group Quarters Capacity 4,984 315 7,564

Avg Room Costs (Neighborhood); Avg FMR (Study Area) $1,160 - $643

Notes: 1. Refer to page B1 for the variable time frames and sources2. Refer to Appendix A: Database Methodology for description and methodology of individual variables3. Total Number of Structures include Northern View (5), New Hall (2), Gilbert (1), Grant (4), Stevenson (4), Neptune (2), Douglas (4), Lincoln (4) and excludes 38 staff

apartments as well as buildings devoted to community space.




conclusionThis study builds on the Year 1 DeKalb Housing Information Project completed in 2013. It represents a continuation of the City of DeKalb’s commitment to make evidence-based decisions, and the desire of the City and NIU to collaborate in planning for the future of the entire DeKalb/NIU community. The Year 2 study updates the DeKalb Housing Database and the various analyses undertaken in Year 1, enabling the City and University to continue to have timely and relevant housing-related information as they consider the City and University neighborhoods and housing options. The Year 2 study expands on the prior study by including the NIU campus as an individual additional neighborhood and incorporates data on NIU students and their housing options and choices. The Year 2 study also includes DeKalb CUSD 428 student data, further enhancing the value of the data base.

As in Year 1, caution should be taken when utilizing the data presented in this report format as the detailed and supplemental data is contained in the database. It is essential to emphasize the importance of continuing to maintain update, and expand the DeKalb Housing Database. Updating the data will enable important trends and emerging issues to be identified. Further, by incorporating additional city service data with geographic identifiers, the City can continue to expand the usefulness and application of the data base. Improvements to the City’s Rental Housing Data Base and the University’s collection of off-campus addresses for students living in DeKalb could yield valuable additions to the data base.

a1DeKalb Housing information Project

aPPenDix a: 2013 DeKalb Housing information Database (DHiD) DocumentationCGS created a Master Address File (MAF) in Year 1 as well as Parcel-based Analytical Files (PBAF) for Year 1 and Year 2. Information from a variety of sources is linked together via these files within the DeKalb Housing Information Database.

Data Processing

DeKalb Housing Database

Analytical Capacity

Reports and Pro�les

DeKalb CUSD 428 Data

Other Data Sources

Aggregated data Detailed Data

Analy�cal data

NIU Student Housing Info

DeKalb Housing Data

Year 2 data updates, for the most part, follow the Year 1 methodologies described in Year 1’s Appendix A. Those variables where methodologies were modified or methodologies were added to accommodate new data sources for updating the DHID in Year 2 are summarized below.

Dwelling Units

The 2013 Parcel Based Analytical File (PBAF) is still based on the 2013 Countywide Tax Assessment Parcel-based file. Newly added, deleted, merged, or changed parcels have been examined, and any new development/construction or residential DUs have been confirmed (by Township and City) in order to determine any changes on the properties or DU counts. However, subsequent to implementing the DHID, the City initiated a rental database which became the new source for rental dwelling units in Year 2. While the data sources are predominantly based on 2013 in order to match the county as-sessor’s data, the rental data and city’s Rooming House/Group Quarter List were snapshots of data as of July through August, 2014. Thus, there are timing differences with these files.

The following tasks were completed and rules applied to identify the various types of dwelling units:

1. Captured rooming houses, group quarters and unit counts from the City’s Rooming House and Group Quarter list. Note - rooming house counts are reported in terms of units, whereas group quarters are reported based on capacity.

2. Cross-checked the Housing Authority subsidized housing file and assisted living and rehabilita-tive facilities data as well as other sources to validate counts.

3. Defined “rented units” and unit counts from DeKalb’s Rental Database then cross-matched property addresses with parcel-address relationships within the DHID.

4. Defined mobile homes from the Year 1 Mobile Home list (confirmed with City that the parcels and unit counts for mobile homes have not changed)

5. Checked mixed use property from Year 1 data, confirmed with City’s rental database and ap-plied changes to the PBAF.

DeKalb Housing information Projecta2DeKalb Housing information Project

6. Added NIU campus (neighborhood 24) rental and group quarter counts (Northern View consists of rental units; NIU dorms are classified as group quarters).

7. In Year 1, if a parcel had a property class of Improved Residential (40) or Farm with Residence and/or Farm Buildings (11) and claims homeowner exemption (or senior exemption), then the parcel was identified as an owned dwelling unit. In Year 2, CGS defined an owned dwelling unit as a property in the assessor’s file having a property class code of 40 or 11, and this property is not flagged as a rental unit in the City’s rental database. Thus, if the parcel with a property class as Improved Residential (40) or Farm with Residence and/or Farm Buildings (11) is identi-fied in City’s rental database, then the residential parcels are classified as single-family rental properties and could include duplexes, townhouses or condos.

Fair Market Value (FMV)

The Year 1 methodology was used for computing FMVs of owned units (owned properties having an assessed value greater than $10,000 were multiplied by 3).Mobile home values have a FMV cal-culated on an aggregated basis. This estimated FMV of the 327 mobile-home units is then blended with the remaining non-mobile home dwelling units to develop an estimated FMV rate for each neighborhood and the overall Study area FMV rate. In Year 2, CGS used a source of mobile home sales prices which were more specific to the Midwest in order to estimate the FMV for the mobile homes base. The source used in Year 2 for mobile homes was obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau’s survey sponsored by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Fair Market Rental Rate (FMR)

The Year 2 Study uses the Year 1 methodology for calculating FMR. This methodology is based on a reversal of the income approach. The aggregate FMV for all rental units excluding group quarters, rooming houses and units where the rent was restricted, was calculated based on the Assessor’s files. A reversal of the income approach was then applied to develop a representative rental rate for rental units in each neighborhood within the study area. Single-family houses for rent were distinguished from multi-family units. Year 2 also grossed up Year 1 balances by 2% to account for a cost of living increase. The 2% rate is based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Consumer Price Index (CPI) estimates for housing in class D/LT 50K population Midwest cities.

Quality of Life and Personal Safety Threats

In Year 2, NIU provided incidents data which was categorized, geo-coded and aggregated to the neighborhood level for integration in the DHID.

Incidents data received from NIU were submitted as 12 monthly reports in 2013; some of the months don’t have the same format as the others. After combining the 12 months’ reports, there were 1,970 incidents in 2013. Once duplicate records were removed as well as incidents without the charge description or incidents without an incident location, there were 1,957 incidents.


The City provided four data files: RMS file (21,009 counts), CAD file (19,417 counts), PM code viola-tion file (311 counts), and Fire file (92 counts) for a total of 40,829 records of which six were blank for a net balance of 40,823 records. The CAD and RMS data contain Quality of Life and Personal Safety incidents, whereas the PM code violations and the Fire files contain only Quality of Life incidents.

1. DeKalb provided data to CGS from the DeKalb’s Police Records Management System (RMS) for all incidents reported in this system from 01/01/2013 through 12/31/2013 [01/01/2013 through 04/23/2013 – per Looking Glass System and 04/24/2013 through 12/31/2013 – per OSSI system].DeKalb Police also included CAD incidents not captured in RMS in a separate file called “CAD calls minus report part 2013” to capture additional items that did not make it in to RMS. Policy changes in the DeKalb Police Department collection of data and treatment of events resulted in an increase in reported incidents. The system conversion, policy changes and lapse of two years (2013 compared to 2011) account for some of the variation across specific types and categories of incidents. However, there were also incidents that incurred actual in-creases or decreases due to non-systemic changes. Finally, the police station relocated in 2013 from Neighborhood 13 to a location not captured in any of the study area’s neighborhoods. this change had little impact on the data since most incidents captured at the station (with the station listed as the address of the incident) were predominantly excluded due to being more information related versus incidents requiring responses CGS receives files from NIU (CIS) and DeKalb (CAD and RMS) and creates a comparison of all incidents received by type of incident with their respective counts, categorized using the base year’s methodology. One incident with multiple citations will have multiple records in the data file. However, if one incident in the PM code violation file has multiple code violations for the same location and the same incident number, the incident will only be counted once.

2. Anomalies are reviewed for special treatment due to changes such as system conversions, policy changes or correction of the prior year (i.e., reclassifying excluded items to particular categories).

3. CGS forwards incident(s) to agencies where addresses need correction in order to properly as-sign to neighborhood(s).

4. Police staff reviews police station data for NIU and DeKalb’s respective data- those items with the station’s address - and notify CGS of any items that are reportable at the neighborhood level along with the address of the incident or the neighborhood. This will allow CGS to properly update the impacted neighborhood with the incident that was originally classified as a police station incident. In 2013, there were no incidents with the police station address re-classified to an impacted neighborhood.

5. The corrected, citywide file is resubmitted to the agencies with their respective data for review and agreement. Note, each entity NIU and the City, will only receive the detailed incidents for their own organizations. Incidents data are only shared across entities at the aggregate level, by neighborhood (i.e., total personal safety threats in neighborhood 15 = X).

6. CGS geo-codes the data and categorizes the data by neighborhood.

7. A neighborhood summary file is created and sent to both entities, jointly, for them to review aggregated incidents by neighborhood and by contributing entity (DeKalb and NIU).

DeKalb Housing information Projecta4DeKalb Housing information Project

categorization of tHe inciDents The categories used to analyze Public safety and Quality of Life threats are based on the City of DeKalb Safe and Quality Housing Task Force Statistical Analysis of Crime and Nuisance Offenses in DeKalb (2011). All public safety threats are derived from police incidents. Quality of life threats combine police, fire and code-related incidents or violations. Due to changes in certain code classifications made by the City and the removal of traffic incidents (DUI, Parking, Speeding, Hit-and-Run, etc.) in the 2010 and 2011 police incident files received for this project, the counts in the City’s Safe and Quality Housing Task Force will differ from the counts reported here.

Based on discussions with representatives from the DeKalb Police Department, CGS made further refinements to modify the existing master category. The 2013 updates are listed below:

a. Move “Air Gun Violation No Arrest” and “Air Rifles” from “Audible Disturbances” to “Disorderly Conduct/House” in QL.

b. Move “Accident Hit & Run” in QoL to “Serious Driving Related” in PS.

c. Move “Speeding Over Limit,” “Speeding Radar,” and “Speeding Too Fast For Conditions” to exclusion list from QoL since these traffic related incidents don’t contribute much to the qual-ity of life or personal safety to specific neighborhood. It was explained traffic related incidents depend on staffing availability or special enforcement operations, so not all offenders through-out the City are identified unlike other incidents where there is a correlation between a call for assistance and a response.

d. Move “DUI “and “DUI Drugs” to “Serious Driving Related” in PS.

e. Move “DUI Over .08” to the exclusion list; it is already a component of the “DUI” incidents.

f. Move “ATV Complaint,” “Mini Bike Complaint,” and “Snowmobile Complaint No Arrest” to an “ATV/Snowmobile/Off-highway Vehicle Disturbances” from “driving-related” in QoL.

g. Move “Parking On Private Property,” “No Parking On Parkways,” “Sidewalks, Driveways, Park-ing Lots And Private Streets,” “Obstructing Streets, Sidewalks, Etc.,” to “Parking-related” from “Driving-Related” in QoL.

h. Move “placarding” to “Other” from “driving-related” in QoL.

i. Move “Meth Manufacturing,” “Meth Possession/Delivery Precursor,” and “Meth Unlawful Disposal Of Manufacturing Waste” to “ Major Drug Activity” in PS

j. Move “Drug activity,” “Drug offenses” to “Suspicious Activity/Person/Vehicle” from exclusion list.

k. Move “Drugs Calculated Cannabis Conspiracy” and “Drugs Criminal Drug Conspiracy” to “Illegal Substance Use Or Possession” from exclusion list.

l. Move “Juvenile Offenses” to ““Disorderly Conduct/House” in QoL.

m. Move “Ordinance Violation”, and “Other Ordinance Violation” to “Other” in QoL.

n. Move “Domestic Dispute” to “Non Violent Domestic Trouble” in QoL.


NIU Students and Student Housing

CGS received NIU student and student housing information from the Division of Student Affairs and Enrollment Management as of the last day of the fall semester in 2013. First, students residing in Northern View or one of the residence halls were classified as neighborhood 24 (campus) residents. Next, students not living in neighborhood 24 who reported either a local address or permanent ad-dress in DeKalb were geo-coded and counted in one of the other 23 “off campus” neighborhoods. A few students reported a DeKalb address that was not located within the boundaries of the study area.

DeKalb CUSD 428 Student Data

One of the changes from Year 1 to Year 2 was the addition of DeKalb CUSD 428 student data. The District provided data on the number of students by grade level residing within each neighborhood, the number of students receiving free or reduced price lunch, and the number of movements of stu-dents into or out of the District. All data provided was for the 2013-14 school year d was received in a format aggregated at the neighborhood level and excluded the students’ personal identification information (i.e. names).

Recommendations for Future Enhancements

Within DeKalb’s rental database, most of the rental property counts are based on addresses of the properties as opposed to parcels. Also, some properties listed the City’s rental database are aggregated to an address or owner instead of the parcel. These scenarios make it difficult to assign dwelling units to neighborhoods, since dwelling units are mapped to neighborhoods by parcel. For instance, dwell-ings that are aggregated to a property owner could potentially consist of multiple parcels located in different neighborhoods. While total counts are accurate, there is potential for some dwelling units to be misclassified across neighborhoods. The net impact was not material but should be addressed in future updates to the rental database for continuous improvement. CGS recommends that the City collect rental unit counts by parcel or at a minimum also collect each rental dwelling unit’s ad-dress to enable a more detailed analysis.

Additionally, rental rates are not captured in the City’s rental database which would be the best mechanism for determining fair market rental rates. The existing reporting of FMRRs requires a detailed computation based on various underlying assumptions such as lending rates, types of units, operating costs and profit margins. In Year 2, CGS grossed up the Year 1 rates by 2 percent for a housing cost of living increase. A more precise method would be to capture the data at the time the landlord reports information in the rental database. Measures should also be taken to only share this sensitive information at an aggregate level.

Finally, some NIU students who reported a local or permanent address other than DeKalb are most likely living in DeKalb given certain factors about their status, course load and the distance they would be commuting on a regular basis. NIU is assessing their processes and systems to strengthen students’ reporting of their current addresses.

b1DeKalb Housing information Project

aPPenDix b: stuDy area anD neigHborHooD Profiles sources

stuDy area variables source anD time frameTotal Acres 2013 City of DeKalb

Park Acres 2013 City of DeKalb

Public Schools (PK-12) 2013 NAVTEQ

Total Population 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection

Group Quarters Population 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection (NHs 1-23); NIU Student Housing (NH 24)

NIU Students 2013 NIU Student Enrollment Data File (Fall Semester)

PK-12 Students CUSD 428

Pre-K through 5 CUSD 428

Middle School CUSD 428

High School CUSD 428

Median Age 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection

Median Household Income 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection

Households 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection

Students on Free or Reduced-Priced Lunches CUSD 428

Voucher Holders 2013 Housing Authority of the County of DeKalb (HACD)

Quality of Life Threats 2013 City of DeKalb

Quality of Life Threats per 1,000 People Calculated: City of DeKalb's police, fire and code incident data / (population / 1,000)

Personal Safety Threats 2013 City of DeKalb police incident data

Personal Safety Threats per 1,000 People Calculated: City of DeKalb's police incident data / (population / 1,000)

Total Dwelling Units (DUs), Excludes GQ Housing Database

Density (DUs/Acres) Calculated: Total DUs / Acres

Owned DUs Housing Database

% Owned DUs Calculated: Owned DUs / Total DUs

Median FMV Housing Database

Properties Listed for Sale 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Average List Price 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Properties Sold 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Average Number of Days on the Market 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Rented DUs 2014 Dekalb Rental Database

% Rented DUs Calculated: Rented DUs / Total DUs

Average FMR (Single-family) Housing Database

Average FMR (Multi-family) Housing Database

Subsidized DUs (2013) 2013 Illinois Housing Development Authority, Housing Authority of the County of DeKalb (HACD) and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Foreclosures 2013 Record Information System, Inc. (RIS)

Group Quarters Capacity 2014 City of DeKalb

Percentage of DUs Built Prior to 1940 2013 DeKalb Township

Exterior Condition Score (Conducted 2012) 2012 Exterior Condition Assessment

Appendix B: Study Area Profile Sources

DeKalb Housing information Projectb2DeKalb Housing information Project

stuDy area variables source anD time frameTotal Acres 2013 City of DeKalb

Park Acres 2013 City of DeKalb

Public Schools (PK-12) 2013 NAVTEQ

Population 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection

NIU Students 2013 NIU Student Enrollment Data File (Fall Semester)

PK-12 Students CUSD 428

Pre-K through 5 CUSD 428

Middle School CUSD 428

High School CUSD 428

Median Age 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection

Median Household Income 2013 Business Analyst Online Projection

% of Students in NH on Free or Reduced-Priced Lunches CUSD 428


Students on Free or Reduced-Priced Lunches CUSD 428


Quality of Life Threats 2013 City of DeKalb

Quality of Life Threats per 1,000 People Calculated: City of DeKalb's police, fire and code incident data / (population / 1,000)

Personal Safety Threats 2013 City of DeKalb police incident data

Personal Safety Threats per 1,000 People Calculated: City of DeKalb's police incident data / (population / 1,000)

Total Dwelling Units (DUs), Excludes GQ Housing Database

Density (DUs/Acres) Calculated: Total DUs / Acres

Owned DUs Housing Database

% Owned DUs Calculated: Owned DUs / Total DUs

Median FMV Housing Database

Rented DUs 2014 DeKalb Rental Database

% Rented Dus Calculated: Rented DUs / Total DUs

Average FMR (Multi-family) Housing Database

Subsidized DUs 2013 Illinois Housing Development Authority, Housing Authority of the County of DeKalb (HACD) and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Foreclosures 2013 Record Information System, Inc. (RIS)

Share of Foreclosures Calculated: RIS NH foreclosures percent to study area foreclosures.

Residential Properties Listed 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Average List Price 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Residential Properties Sold 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Average Number of Days on the Market 2013 Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Group Quarters Capacity 2014 City of DeKalb

Percentage of DUs Built Prior to 1940 2013 DeKalb Township

Exterior Condition Score 2013 Exterior Condition Assessment: Conducted in Year 1

NH 24 Structures 2013 NIU Student Housing

NH 24 Avg Room Costs 2013 NIU Student Housing

Appendix B: Neighborhood Profiles Sources

Documents

DeKalb Housing information Project