County discusses ending talk, taking action on housing

Friday, May 29, 2009

"These conditions didn't occur overnight," said commissioners' Vice President Edith J. Patterson (D) earlier this week. "We've given voice, but no action. Before the end of the year I'd like to have moved forward in a positive way."

Last week's work session between the commissioners and staff on the issue of affordable housing ended with homework assignments for the county's planning and community services departments, and a renewed effort to provide residential options to the most disadvantaged county residents.

The scattering of impoverished residents around Charles County — notably concentrated in Nanjemoy — ranges from homeowners in need of new roofs, to people who survive without stable walls or running water.

"The challenge is to remain rural, and to do that you have to work with the neighbors," Patterson said.

These areas in Southern Maryland find themselves between a rock and a hard place, as zoning codes restrict development to a certain degree outside the village center and guidelines for community character must be followed if building does occur.

The county identified 21 villages within its boundaries, including Nanjemoy, Hughesville and Tompkinsville. All 21 communities are classified as priority funding areas and qualify for state funding.

Single-family dwellings and commercial apartments are permitted under rural zoning, and nonresidential uses are generally limited to post offices, country stores and emergency services buildings.

One of the efforts the county will pursue is the consideration of the current zoning of the rural areas to see what kind of housing would benefit those looking for new homes or an alternative shelter while their homes are being rehabilitated, Patterson said.

The speed and efficiency of the home review process has also been listed as something to study in the coming summer months.

County staffers have also been asked to address the development of workforce housing projects and promote public awareness about this type of community.

The Housing Commission of Charles County has recognized the state guidelines which declare that homes that can be purchased by those making between 60 and 120 percent of the median family income for the county are considered workforce housing.

According to the county's department of economic development, that number is about $83,000, and puts Charles County at the No. 20 spot on the list of median family incomes across the country.

The number is annually calculated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

To understand the necessity for affordable and workforce housing, the county's Economic Development Director George L. Robertson suggested looking at the price tags for Charles County homes.

The county works with three pricing tiers, less than $200,000; between $300,000 and $400,000; and more than $400,000. Of those three groups, Robertson said most homes priced at less than $400,000 are not on the market for very long, while the more expensive houses can take months to sell.

In the past, builders were finding success catering to residents with higher incomes, and so the middle of the housing range was being ignored until real estate prices dropped.

Within the sale of homes, there are a growing number of owners who have jobs that pay well above minimum wage. But for every manager or director, there is a handful of workers living in the county who needs homes.

The question is how to put affordable roofs over everyone, relative to each income.

The commissioners also expressed an interest in the recommendation to repeal or revise minimum-square-footage legislation and consider the measurement based on density.

"We set this as a top priority, and we're still talking about it," said commissioners' President F. Wayne Cooper (D).

"We have a lot of moving parts," said Commissioner Reuben B. Collins II (D). "The key is putting all these pieces together."

msomers@somdnews.com