By Scott Tate President & CEO
Why St. Charles County needs the right housing, in the right places, and at price points residents and workers can afford
Apartment construction has become one of the most debated development issues in St. Charles County.
Over the past several years, new apartment communities have been proposed or constructed throughout the county. Many of these developments are marketed as luxury apartments, offering modern amenities, upgraded finishes, pools, fitness centers, and other features designed to attract residents willing and able to pay higher rents.
In response to the pace and type of development, some local governments have decided to pause additional multifamily construction while they review their plans, regulations, infrastructure, and future housing needs.
Dardenne Prairie instituted a one-year moratorium on new multifamily housing developments. More recently, St. Charles County approved a temporary moratorium on new apartment buildings in unincorporated areas of the county.
These decisions reflect real concerns. Residents and public officials are asking reasonable questions about traffic, road capacity, stormwater, utilities, emergency services, school enrollment, neighborhood compatibility, density, and the pace of development.
They are also asking whether the apartments being built are meeting the county’s most pressing housing needs.
Those questions deserve thoughtful answers.
However, the conversation should not be reduced to a simple choice between supporting apartments and opposing them. The larger issue is whether St. Charles County is creating the range of housing choices needed to support its residents, employers, workforce, and continued economic growth.
Housing is a business issue
Employers throughout St. Charles County regularly identify workforce as one of their greatest challenges. Businesses need employees, and employees need places they can afford to live.
Housing availability affects whether young professionals remain in our community, whether families can purchase their first home, whether older residents can downsize, and whether workers can live reasonably close to their jobs.
When housing options are limited or priced beyond the reach of the local workforce, employers feel the consequences. Businesses may have greater difficulty attracting workers, employees may face longer commutes, and young people who grew up in St. Charles County may decide they cannot afford to build their lives here.
That makes housing more than a development issue. It is also a workforce, talent attraction, economic development, and regional competitiveness issue.
More apartments do not always mean more attainable housing
Apartments serve an important role in a healthy housing market.
They provide options for young adults beginning their careers, employees relocating to the area, people saving to purchase a home, residents going through life transitions, and older adults who no longer want the responsibilities of homeownership.
Renting is not always a permanent destination. For many people, it is one step along the path toward homeownership. For others, it is simply the housing option that best fits their lifestyle or financial circumstances.
However, the type of apartments being constructed matters.
Many recently built or proposed communities are positioned at the upper end of the rental market. While these projects may meet demand from some residents and contribute to the overall housing supply, their monthly rents may still be out of reach for many teachers, first responders, hospitality workers, healthcare employees, entry-level professionals, service workers, and others who help keep our economy operating.
Luxury apartments can be part of the housing mix, but they should not be mistaken for a complete affordability strategy.
Increasing the total number of housing units may help relieve some market pressure over time, but it does not automatically create housing that is attainable for the workers our businesses depend upon today.
A balanced housing strategy must consider not only how many units are being built, but also who will realistically be able to afford them.
We also need a path to homeownership
County Executive Steve Ehlmann has raised another important part of this conversation: St. Charles County needs more homes that young people and first-time buyers can afford.
One proposal is to permit smaller residential lots in selected areas. Reducing the amount of land attached to each home can help lower development costs and create opportunities for smaller, more attainable houses.
That idea deserves serious consideration.
For many years, new construction has often focused on larger homes, larger lots, and higher price points. Those homes remain an important part of the market, but they do not meet every household’s needs or budget.
A young professional, newly married couple, single parent, retiree, or first-time buyer may not need—or be able to afford—a large home on a large lot.
Smaller homes, cottage-style developments, townhomes, condominiums, duplexes, and thoughtfully designed smaller-lot neighborhoods could help fill the gap between higher-priced apartment living and traditional single-family homeownership.
Smaller lots alone, however, will not guarantee affordable homes. Construction materials, labor, interest rates, infrastructure, government requirements, development fees, and land prices all contribute to the final cost.
Creating more attainable housing will require communities, builders, developers, lenders, employers, and policymakers to examine the entire development process.
A pause should lead to a plan
A temporary moratorium can provide a community with an opportunity to step back, study growth patterns, examine infrastructure, and update development standards.
But a pause is valuable only if it leads to a clearer plan.
During these moratoriums, local leaders should ask important questions:
What types of housing will our residents and workforce need during the next 10 to 20 years?
Are we building primarily for the upper end of the market, or are we also creating options for middle-income workers, first-time buyers, seniors, and young families?
Where can greater residential density be supported by roads, utilities, public safety, and other infrastructure?
What standards will ensure that multifamily developments are attractive, well-maintained, properly managed, and compatible with surrounding neighborhoods?
How can communities encourage starter homes, smaller homes, townhomes, condominiums, senior housing, and other alternatives?
What steps can be taken to preserve existing neighborhoods while still allowing the housing market to respond to changing demographics and demand?
The result should not simply be a new set of barriers. It should be a more thoughtful and predictable framework for housing development.
Developers need clear expectations. Residents deserve transparency. Local governments need the ability to plan for infrastructure and services. Employers need confidence that their current and future workers will have places to live.
One county, many decision-makers
Housing planning is especially complicated in St. Charles County because development decisions are divided among the county government and numerous incorporated municipalities.
The county controls zoning only in unincorporated areas. Each city makes its own decisions about development within its boundaries.
Those jurisdictions may have different priorities, but the housing market does not stop at municipal boundaries. People live in one community, work in another, shop in another, and travel throughout the county every day.
A development decision made in one municipality can affect traffic, schools, employers, public services, and housing demand beyond that city’s borders.
That is why greater communication and coordination are needed. Local control remains important, but communities should also understand how their individual decisions contribute to the county’s overall housing supply, housing costs, and economic future.
The right housing in the right places—and at the right price points
St. Charles County should continue to grow, but growth should be responsible, strategic, and supported by appropriate infrastructure.
We do not need apartments everywhere. We also should not assume that apartments belong nowhere.
We do not need every apartment development to target the highest end of the rental market. We also should not expect one type of housing to meet every need.
We do not need every new subdivision to consist of the smallest possible lots. We also should not require every new home to sit on land that places it beyond the reach of a first-time buyer.
What we need is balance.
A healthy housing market should include rental apartments at a variety of price points, townhomes, condominiums, smaller starter homes, traditional single-family neighborhoods, larger homes, senior communities, and opportunities for residents to age in place.
Different people need different housing at different stages of life.
The goal should be to provide those choices while protecting neighborhood quality, planning responsibly for infrastructure, and maintaining the characteristics that make St. Charles County an attractive place to live and invest.
The current debate gives us an opportunity to move beyond arguments about one particular type of development and begin a broader conversation about the future of housing in our county.
The question is not simply whether we need more apartments.
It is whether the apartments and homes being built reflect the needs and incomes of the people who live and work here.
The more important question is whether we are creating a community where workers, young adults, growing families, first-time buyers, seniors, and longtime residents can all find a place to call home.
Our future economic success may depend on the answer.