LEONARDTOWN, Md. — St. Mary’s County planning leaders opened a months-long overhaul of their 2050 comprehensive plan Friday by zeroing in on housing costs, with several commissioners warning that nurses, firefighters and other essential workers are being priced out of the local market.

During a Nov. 14, 2025, work session, the St. Mary’s County Planning Commission began reviewing draft “framework” chapters on housing and growth management that will shape the first full draft of the “St. Mary’s 2050” comprehensive plan.

“This is not even a first draft,” said Jessica Andritz, director of the Department of Land Use and Growth Management. “We’re still working with more of the skeleton of the comprehensive plan.”

Andritz said the county and its consultants, Clarion Associates, plan five work sessions with the commission over the coming weeks, then will pull together an initial draft over Christmas and January. That draft is tentatively set for release in February, followed by a 45-day public comment period and a series of community workshops across the county.

“The public isn’t being left out,” she said. “Believe it or not, we’re just not there yet.”

One commissioner pointed to figures in the housing framework showing an area median household income of $114,580 alongside steep declines in homes priced below $300,000.

She said that even after setting aside the highest and lowest income brackets, roughly 35% of county residents — including young families and critical employees — fall into ranges that struggle to buy a home locally.

“Thirty-five percent of our young people — nurses, firefighters, you name it — can’t afford to buy a home here,” she said, adding that some now commute from King George County in Virginia. “We’re losing tax base. We’re losing families that want to stay.”

The draft notes that the share of homes priced under $300,000 has dropped sharply. The commissioner estimated that “maybe 2%” of the housing stock is realistically affordable to that group.

“I’ve only been on this board since January,” she said. “We’ve approved nothing that’s not in the upper $300,000s and low $400,000s. We’re not hitting the mark.”

Commissioners also questioned terms such as “workforce housing,” “missing middle” and “gentle density,” and how those labels intersect with residents’ concerns about subsidized housing or Section 8.

“We just need to be clearer on our terms and where we incentivize people,” the commissioner said.

“It’s not necessarily talking about workforce housing. It’s not necessarily talking about affordable housing,” she said. “It’s acknowledging that everyone should be able to get the housing that they need and want.”

Consultants outlined a focus on “missing middle” housing — duplexes, townhouses and small-scale multifamily buildings that fall between traditional single-family homes and large apartment complexes. Those forms, common in older neighborhoods, became less prevalent as zoning and car-oriented development patterns took hold.

“Minimum lot sizes, setbacks, parking requirements, open space and maximum densities often negate the possibility for anything but large, expensive single-family units or very large multifamily projects,” Andritz said.

The draft housing goal calls for supporting “modern attainable housing choices,” including missing-middle units, senior housing, accessory dwelling units and manufactured housing converted to permanent real property, as required under a recent state law.

Commission Chair James “Howard” Thompson and others said parking remains a flashpoint in local development reviews.

“Until St. Mary’s County changes enough to have more public transportation, we’re a transportation county,” Thompson said. “To do anything, you’re going to get in the car.”

Several members said most households have more than two vehicles and warned that buyers are unlikely to accept only one usable parking space per home.

After discussion, staff agreed to clarify that any change would focus on undeveloped open-space requirements in growth areas — not playgrounds or other amenity spaces — and to remove the reference to reducing parking from that particular bullet.

Commissioners also signaled interest in allowing more clustered development and lowering undeveloped open-space minimums in designated growth districts in exchange for smaller, more attainable homes. They asked staff to bring back simple site sketches showing how many units could be built on a sample parcel under current 50% undeveloped open-space rules versus lower percentages.

“It would help us to visualize,” one commissioner said.

Several commissioners questioned whether that threshold is too high to reach the 35% of residents now squeezed out of the market.

“That still is a market-rate house,” one member said, noting that many recent workforce-branded products in the county are still “upper $300,000s and low $400,000s.”

Deputy County Attorney John Sterling Hauser urged caution about locking in a new percentage before a separate housing study — being discussed in partnership with Leonardtown — can be completed.

“If in the final comprehensive plan you pick a number — 110%, 100%, 80% — we are stuck with that number until there’s an amendment,” Hauser said. “If the study comes back and contradicts it, I’m stuck having to write and enforce a code that uses that number.”

Commissioners also floated using density bonuses or partial TDR relief for intra-family conveyances, allowing parents, siblings or children to create modest homes for relatives on family land, with covenants to keep those units affordable over time.

Department of Aging and Human Services Director Lori Jennings Harris said the intent was less about large complexes and more about making it easier to permit ramps, wider doorways and other accessibility upgrades that help older adults remain in their homes.

“Timing is important for perhaps an older population,” she said, suggesting the language be rewritten to focus on aging-in-place improvements rather than entire projects.

Commissioners also began, but did not finish, a discussion on a goal to encourage maintenance and upkeep of existing housing stock. Hauser outlined the county’s blight and livability codes, which apply to exterior conditions and rental properties respectively, but said limited funding constrains the county’s ability to step in and fix problem properties.

Members asked staff and consultants to return with more information on existing local and state programs — including work by the St. Mary’s County Housing Authority — and on what incentives might be available to support rehabilitation of aging homes.

The commission plans to resume its review of the housing and growth management frameworks at its next work session, scheduled for Friday, Nov. 21, at 2 p.m.

Watch the full meeting below:

---

Got a tip or photo? Text us at 888-871-NEWS (6397) or email news@thebaynet.com. 

Join The BayNet Membership for exclusive perks and zero ads. 

Don’t miss a story—sign up for our newsletter!