Harnett County updates UNC‑affiliated affordable‑housing initiative; a toolkit and final report due in spring
Loading...
Summary
County participants in an 18‑month UNC School of Government program presented midterm findings and an asset inventory; presenters reported about 27% of Harnett households are cost‑burdened and asked the board for direction on next steps and toolkit implementation.
County staff and program partners updated the Harnett County Board of Commissioners on an 18‑month affordable housing initiative administered through the UNC School of Government and regional partners.
Coley Price led the presentation and said the program provides technical assistance, peer learning, and a toolkit the county can adapt to address workforce, attainable and affordable housing. Price and other presenters (named in the packet as Barry and Sarah) said the initiative is halfway complete and will return to the board in early spring with a final report and recommended implementation steps.
Sarah (presenter) summarized housing affordability metrics for Harnett County: approximately 27% of households are cost‑burdened (paying more than 30% of income for housing); the burden is concentrated among renters (about 42%) versus homeowners (about 21%); and a number of typical local occupations — e.g., childcare workers and some firefighters — fall short of income needed to afford fair‑market rent. Presenters contrasted local median sale prices (presenter cited $339,000 for Harnett in 2025) with median incomes and discussed statewide trends (median first‑time buyer age ~38 years, national median home price cited in presentation as $415,000).
Commissioners raised questions about specific program elements, the county's ability to shape housing supply amid strong market forces (including out‑of‑area buyers and institutional purchasers), and what tools the county can legally use. Staff said the toolkit will define terms (affordable vs. attainable vs. workforce housing), list preservation and production strategies, and highlight partnerships (regional councils, neighboring counties, and model toolkits such as Chatham County's).
Ending: Staff requested direction from the board on preferred next steps; presenters said they would present a final toolkit and recommendations in early spring and continue fostering partnerships and implementation planning.
