Consolidated Plan for HOUSING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

City of Bowie, Maryland

Consolidated Plan FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

The Community Development Block Grant Program July1, 2008-June 30, 2013

City of Bowie, Maryland

Consolidated Plan FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development The Community Development Block Grant Program July1, 2008-June 30, 2013

Mayor: G. Fredrick Robinson Mayor Pro Tem: Todd Turner Council: James Marcos, Dennis Brady, Diane Polangin, Isaac Trouth, Geraldine Valentino-Smith City Manager: David J. Deutsch

City Hall: (301) 262-6200 FAX: (301) 809-2302 TDD: (301) 262-5013 WEB: www.cityofbowie.org

Table of Contents

RESOLUTION ...... i Executive Summary...... iii Community Profile ...... iii Demographics ...... vii Strategic Plan for Community Development...... xii I. Five Year Strategic Plan...... 1 Summary...... 1 Time Period...... 2 A. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT...... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 3 BOWIE HOUSING & DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ANALYSIS FOR THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN 2009-2013...... 9 Table 1 ...... 9 City of Bowie Racial and Ethnic Population Change 1990-2000 ...... 10 Table 7 ...... 17 Housing Price Points Relative to % of Bowie Median Household Income (MHI) ...... 36 Homeownership Affordability Analysis...... 37 Multifamily Rental Properties in Bowie...... 38 Table 24 ...... 40 Properties for Rent in Single Family Subdivisions...... 40 HOUSING GAP ANALYSIS...... 44 Table 26 ...... 47 Gap in Housing Need for Homeowners...... 47 (Available/Affordable Units vs. Homeowners who are cost burdened)...... 47 Unmet Renter Housing Need (Renters who are cost burdened)...... 48 Table 28 ...... 49 Gap in Renter Housing Need...... 49 (Available/Affordable Units vs. Renters who are cost burdened)...... 49 Housing Strategy...... 73 Affordable Housing Strategy (HUD 215 Goals) ...... 74 Public Housing Strategy ...... 75 B. HOMELESSNESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 76 Nature and Extent of Homelessness ...... 76 Special Needs Populations...... 79 Homelessness Priorities ...... 80 Special Needs Populations Priorities ...... 80 Homelessness Strategy ...... 80 C. NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEEDS ASSESSMENT...... 82

Public Infrastructure ...... 82 Public Facilities ...... 82 Senior Center ...... 83 Parks and Recreational Facilities...... 83 Public Services...... 83 Senior Services ...... 84 Recreational Services...... 86 Services for the Disabled Persons...... 86 Substance Abuse Prevention Services ...... 86 Employment Training...... 87 Child Care Services ...... 87 Educational Outreach...... 87 Youth and Family Services...... 88 Accessibility...... 92 Historic Preservation...... 92 Economic Development...... 93 Commercial Rehabilitation...... 93 Capital Improvements for Commercial Property...... 94 Small Business Development ...... 94 Grants and Loans ...... 96 Institutional Structure ...... 98 Energy Efficiency ...... 99 Lead-Based Paint Hazards...... 100 Code Enforcement ...... 100 Planning ...... 101 Non-Housing Community and Economic Development Priorities ...... 103 Non-Housing Community and Economic Development Strategy...... 106 Strategic Vision for Change...... 106 Anti-Poverty Strategy ...... 109 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy...... 110 Non-Housing Community Development Objectives...... 112 Monitoring ...... 113 Benchmarks ...... 113 II. Consolidated Action Plan ...... 116 Fiscal Year ‘09...... 116 Project Title...... 116 Geographic Distribution ...... 116 Project Description ...... 116 Locations...... 117 Timeframe...... 120 Objectives ...... 120 Benchmarks ...... 120 Contingency...... 120

Monitoring ...... 120 Homeless and Other Special Populations ...... 121 Needs of Public Housing ...... 121 Anti-Poverty Strategy ...... 121 Lead-Based Paint Hazards...... 121 Urgent needs ...... 122 Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Other Actions...... 122 Sources of Funds...... 122 Appendix A...... 125 Consolidated Planning Process...... 125 Appendix B...... 127 Citizen Participation Plan ...... 127 Appendix C...... 129 Community Needs Survey...... 129 Appendix D...... 130 Results of Community Needs Survey...... 130 Appendix E ...... 131 Legal Notices ...... 131 For Publication: Bowie Blade News 7/3/08 ...... 132 Bowie Star 7/3/08 ...... 132 Appendix F ...... 133 Community Meetings ...... 133 Appendix G...... 134 OpenDoor Housing Fund Letter ...... 134 Appendix H...... 135 Articles...... 135 Appendix I ...... 136 Certifications...... 136 Specific CDBG Certifications ...... 140

R-51-08 RESOLUTION

OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOWIE, MARYLAND ADOPTING A CONSOLIDATED PLAN FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution R-40-02 on May 20, 2002 authorizing the City to become an Entitlement Community under the rules and regulations of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; and

WHEREAS, as an Entitlement Community the City must adopt a Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development; and

WHEREAS, as part of this Consolidated Plan, the City must conduct a Housing Needs Assessment, a Homeless Needs Assessment and a Non-Housing Community and Economic Needs Assessment; and

WHEREAS, from these assessments, the City must determine priority community needs which meet one of three national objectives, and define CDBG eligible activities which it will implement over the next five years to address the priority needs; and

WHEREAS, the City has conducted this analysis and determined that Senior Housing Rehabilitation is the community's priority need that will achieve a benefit to presumptive low and moderate income residents of the City in the senior citizen population; and

WHEREAS, this proposed expenditure of CDBG funds is consistent with the rules and regulations proffered by HUD for the CDBG Program; and

WHEREAS, the requirements of the Citizen Participation Plan have been adhered to regarding the development of this Consolidated Plan and that a Public Comment Period of at least 30 days prior to adoption has been provided for citizen review.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Bowie does hereby approve the Consolidated Plan attached as Attachment 1 to this resolution; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to submit this plan to the Department of Housing and Community Development for their review and approval.

INTRODUCED AND PASSED by the Council of the City of Bowie. Maryland at a Regular Meeting on August 4, 2008.

Attest: THE CITY OF BOWIE, MARYLAND

______Pamela A. Felming G. Frederick Robinson City Clerk Mayor

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Community Profile

The City of Bowie receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development through an entitlement1. The City of Bowie’s Consolidated Action Plan for Housing and Community Development, Fiscal Year 2009-2013 consists of an analysis of housing, human services, and non-housing community development needs throughout the City, identify and prioritize community needs, and includes a strategy to address those needs. The Five-Year Consolidated Plan is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for all Entitlement Communities receiving HUD funding.

The Plan is also the means to meet federal funding requirements for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The City of Bowie is a HUD Entitlement Community and as such must develop funding priorities that address at least one of three National Objectives. CDBG projects must benefit low-moderate income persons, eliminate slums and blight, or fulfill an urgent need. This program allows communities to carry out a wide range of community development activities directed toward revitalizing neighborhoods, economic development, and providing improved community facilities and services.

The City of Bowie has participated in the CDBG Program for several years. Prior to 2003, the City participated as a “sub-recipient” by requesting funds from the Prince George’s County Department of Housing and Community Development for various projects. Almost all of these requests were for street improvement projects in the Huntington (Old Town Bowie) section of the City. The City spent over $2.1 million of CDBG money in Huntington on these projects during this period. According to the 2000 census, the City’s population became large enough to qualify as an Entitlement Community and it was able to receive CDBG funding directly from HUD without going through the County. In its FY2003-2008 Consolidated Plan filing with HUD, the City once again established “Street Improvement Projects” in Old Town Bowie as its priority and created programs for paving streets, gutters, curbs, and sidewalks for the community. This designation directed approximately $800,000 to this project for the period 2003 – 2008.

These projects were as follows:

• 7th Street (Maple Ave. to 330 feet west) • 8th Street (Maple Ave. to 257 feet west) • 13th Street (Chestnut Ave. to 280 feet east) • Elm Ave. (10th Street to 9th Street)

1 CDBG funds are appropriated annually by the U.S. Congress and distributed on a formula basis to local jurisdictions. Municipalities are entitled to receive HUD funds directly when the City’s population exceeds 50,000 residents.

iii

• Maple Ave. (9th Street to 200 feet north) • Park Ave. • Elm Ave. (10th Street to 11th Street) • 10th Street • Myrtle Ave. • Brady Ave. (9th Street to AMTRAK Station) • 5th Street (FY09)

The city has completed all of the projects cited above, except 5th Street which will be completed in FY09. HUD has provided favorable audits and assessments of the City’s management of its CDBG projects to-date and the City has entertained a site visit from the District Office Director, District Community Planning & Development Director and Deputy Director, and the District CDBG Representative to the City of Bowie. The HUD District Office has expressed a desire to see the City move away from infrastructure projects, which have been dedicated to the same community for over 20 years, and begin to move toward housing-based initiatives.

As stated previously, all CDBG programs must be meet at least one of the following HUD National Objectives:

• Benefit Low/Mod Income persons, • Prevent or Eliminate Slums and Blight, or • Meet an urgent need

Any projects and/or activities designed to meet these National Objectives must also conform to the requisite regulations and statutes governing “eligibility”. The City of Bowie, as well as the majority of all “Entitlement Communities” adopt the “Low/Mod” National Objective because all housing programs fall under this category and it is the least restrictive on qualifying recipients and project administration, oversight, and cost. The Low/Mod designation carries the overarching HUD/CDBG requirement that programs must use 70% of its funds for this population and 51% of any designated area/community must be Low/Mod. The options provided under Low/Mod include

• Area Benefit • Limited Clientele • Housing • Jobs

HUD has advised the City, as stated earlier, that twenty years of paving the same streets in the same community would be looked at very closely for any future applications from the City. Since CDBG funds are supposed to be spent on projects derived from “Community Needs” assessments and municipal priorities, it is not a specific community that drives the

investment, but rather a set of needs for the entire City population that meets the HUD income guidelines and programs that satisfy the HUD regulations and statutes.

In order to determine the types of projects an Entitlement Community will submit to HUD for funding under the CDBG Program, HUD requires that the Entitlement Community must, at a minimum, do the following:

Develop a Citizen Participation Plan Conduct a Community Needs Assessment Assess current demographic conditions Analyze changes in demographic conditions Develop municipal priorities

The City developed a planning process to achieve these objectives (See Appendix A). On October 15, 2007 the City Council approved the FY09-13 Citizen Participation Plan (See Appendix B) and it was filed with HUD on October 18, 2007. This document detailed the approach to solicit citizen input. In September 2007 the City distributed over 2,800 “Community Needs” survey forms (See Appendix C) to all households in the City and to all businesses in the City through the Bowie Spotlight, the Bowie Chamber of Commerce, and Homeowner Associations. The survey requested that respondents rank their responses by “High Need”, “Moderate Need”, “Low Need”, or “No Need”. The response level was very good and the survey results (See Appendix D) produced the following top ten “High Need” issues:

Crime Awareness/Prevention Medical Services Energy Conservation/Efficiency Education Senior Services Street Lights Transportation Crosswalks/Markings Youth Services Youth Centers Libraries

The City also retained a consultant, Dennison Associates, a HUD training firm, to update the census data for the City and provide an analysis of the City’s demographics including comparisons with the County and the State consistent with HUD’S requirements for the Consolidated Plan. A significant finding and assessment of the report is the following:

Age of Population

Bowie’s elderly population (i.e., persons 65 years and older) is growing faster than those

of either Prince George’s Co. or the State of Maryland. Between 1990 and 2000 Bowie’s elderly population grew 97%; this was four times faster than the 23% growth in elderly population in Prince George’s County’s, and six times faster than the State of Maryland’s 11% growth. In the year 2000, the overall ratio of older persons living in Bowie to the total population was 9%. This elderly population ratio was close to that of Prince George’s County’s older population of 8%, and slightly less than the State of Maryland’s 11%.

Age of Populations Bowie, Pr. George’s, & Maryland: 1990 - 20002 % of % % of % % of % Age Bowie pop change Maryland pop change PG pop change 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 <5 2,963 3,782 8% 28% 357,818 353,393 7% -1% 55,409 57,940 7% 5% 5 - 24 9,841 12,637 25% 28% 1,309,796 1,453,701 27% 11% 117,471 240,008 30% 104% 24 - 44 13,611 17,565 35% 29% 1,677,104 1,664,677 31% -1% 272,474 264,497 33% -3% 45 - 65 8,790 11,579 23% 32% 919,268 1,225,408 23% 33% 133,571 177,119 22% 33% 65 > 2,384 4,706 9% 97% 517,482 599,307 11% 16% 50,343 61,951 8% 23% Total 37,589 50,269 4,781,468 5,296,486 629,268 801,515

Between 2000 and 2006, the elderly became the fastest growing population segment for Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland.3 Although 2000-2006 Bowie population data is not yet available for Bowie, it is reasonable to expect the city’s elderly population to increase at rates similar to the percentage increases experienced in Prince George’s Co. where the elderly population grew 18% and the State of Maryland where this group increased 11%.

Conclusion

The growth of the elderly population in Bowie will likely increase market demand for affordable rental housing. Currently, Bowie has 1,595 multifamily apartments units, only 445 of which are senior designated apartments. The anticipated growth of the elderly population indicates a need to assess ways of meeting the demand for decent affordable rental housing for the elderly so that as persons age they will have greater housing choices so that they can remain in the city.

On May 5, 2008 City Council adopted the findings of the surveys and the results of the demographic data and analysis, and approved Resolution R-28-08 directing staff to design programs to accommodate the CDBG Entitlement funds the City receives from HUD for the new Consolidated Plan for the period July 1, 2008 - June 30, 2013 to provide certain housing rehabilitation services for the elderly consistent with HUD’S regulations and statutes.

2 U.S. Census 2000 Table DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics 3 Source: U.S. Census General Demographic Characteristics – 2006 population estimates.

Demographics

With a total land area of 17.24 square miles, there are more than 2,950 people per square mile. It is the largest municipality within Prince George’s County, and the fourth largest incorporated jurisdiction in the state of Maryland. The population for the City has exceeded 50,000. This increase in population results from new housing construction as well as major annexations.

Population Growth

Bowie’s population grew by 34%, between 1990 and 2000, but slowed to a 6% growth rate between 2000 and 2006. Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland also experienced a slowing of overall population growth. Between 1990 and 2000, overall population growth in Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland was 27% and 11% respectively. Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland are estimated to have experienced a growth rate of less than 6% between 2000 and 2006. 4

The parallels between the City of Bowie, Prince George’s County, and the State of Maryland are particularly evident in the growth of various racial and ethnic groups. While minority populations for Bowie, Prince George’s County, and the State of Maryland (specifically African Americans and Hispanics) has grown, Caucasians have trended down in numbers. The Caucasian population declined between 1990 and 2000 by –8 percent in Bowie, –31 percent in Prince George’s County, and –1.0% in Maryland. Between 1990 and 2000, the African American and Hispanic populations grew respectively 623% and 77% in Bowie, 36% and 90% in Prince George’s Co., and 24% and 82% in Maryland. Asian populations grew 76% in Bowie, 10% in Prince George’s County and nearly 71% in the State of Maryland.

Change in Racial & Ethnic Populations Bowie, Pr. George’s & Maryland 1990 - 2000

Race Bowie % change Maryland % change PG % change 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 White 34,341 31,492 -8% 3,393,964 3,391,308 -0.1% 314,516 216,729 -31% Black 2,144 15,500 623% 1,189,899 1,477,411 24% 369,791 502,550 36% Hispanic 828 1,468 77% 125,102 227,916 82% 29,983 57,057 90% Asian 854 1,499 76% 139,719 238,406 71% 28,255 31,032 10%

4 According to the U.S. Census mid-term estimate of population growth.

vii

9% in Prince George’s Co. and nearly 9% for Maryland. Asians increased 3.5% in Prince George’s Co. and 27% for the entire State. Although 2000-2006 racial population data is not yet available for Bowie, it is reasonable to expect that Bowie’s population trends will follow those of Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland.

Age of Population

Bowie’s elderly population (i.e., persons 65 years and older) is growing faster than those of either Prince George’s Co. or the State of Maryland. Between 1990 and 2000 Bowie’s elderly population grew 97%; this was four times faster than the 23% growth in elderly population in Prince George’s County’s, and six times faster than the State of Maryland’s 11% growth. In the year 2000, the overall ratio of older persons living in Bowie to the total population was 9%. This elderly population ratio was close to that of Prince George’s County’s older population of 8%, and slightly less than the State of Maryland’s 11%.

Age of Populations Bowie, Pr. George’s, & Maryland: 1990 - 20005 % of % % of % % of % Age Bowie pop change Maryland pop change PG pop change 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 <5 2,963 3,782 8% 28% 357,818 353,393 7% -1% 55,409 57,940 7% 5% 5 - 24 9,841 12,637 25% 28% 1,309,796 1,453,701 27% 11% 117,471 240,008 30% 104% 24 - 44 13,611 17,565 35% 29% 1,677,104 1,664,677 31% -1% 272,474 264,497 33% -3% 45 - 65 8,790 11,579 23% 32% 919,268 1,225,408 23% 33% 133,571 177,119 22% 33% 65 > 2,384 4,706 9% 97% 517,482 599,307 11% 16% 50,343 61,951 8% 23% Total 37,589 50,269 4,781,468 5,296,486 629,268 801,515

Other age groups in Bowie grew somewhat evenly at between 28% and 32%. Comparatively, Prince George’s Co. and Maryland experienced significant variations in growth among all age groups. For example, Prince George’s County experienced a 104% increase in persons 5-24 years of age, whereas persons 24-44 years of age decreased by - 3%. Maryland’s 5-24 year olds grew by 11%, whereas persons 24-44 years of age decreased by -1%. Maryland’s very young population under 5 years of age, decreased by - 1%, whereas the 45-64 year old population grew by 33%.

Between 2000 and 2006, the elderly became the fastest growing population segment for Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland.6 Although 2000-2006 Bowie population data is not yet available for Bowie, it is reasonable to expect the city’s elderly population to increase at rates similar to the percentage increases experienced in Prince George’s Co. where the elderly population grew 18% and the State of Maryland where this group increased 11%.

5 U.S. Census 2000 Table DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics 6 Source: U.S. Census General Demographic Characteristics – 2006 population estimates.

viii

Household Income

Median Household income in Bowie for the year 2000 was $72,778, compared to a median household income for Prince George’s County of $55,256 and $52,868 for the State of Maryland. Although Bowie is comparatively affluent it has a significant number of households (3,444) that could be classified as low-income (i.e., either extremely low- income or very-low income) for purposes of receiving housing assistance from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Another 2,458 households could be classified as low-moderate income, and are eligible for certain federal housing assistance because they earn less than 80% of the median household income for the metropolitan area. Bowie’s low-income households represent 32 percent of total households. By comparison 48% of Prince George’s County’s and 41% of the State of Maryland’s households are low-income. Most (61%) of Bowie’s low-income households are single and/or non-family households.7

Low-income households would be expected to create demand for more affordable housing. Currently, the supply of affordable rental housing and homeowner housing is very limited in the City of Bowie. The average price of for-sale housing in Bowie in the year 2006 was $328,609. There are approximately 1,965 owner occupied housing units costing less than $200,000; however, only a small percentage of these units are for sale at any given time. Bowie’s affordable housing stock tends to be comprised of older units that are primarily townhomes, condominiums, and zero lot line homes. Affordable rental housing is particularly limited in Bowie for both elderly and non-elderly households.

The Maryland Department of Human Resources Annual Report on Homelessness in Maryland, Fiscal Year 2007 states that there were 1,943 people from Prince George’s County sheltered in FY 2007, representing 7.1% of the state’s total number of homeless. The majority were families with children. No data is currently available on how many of these households are, or were residents, of Bowie.

The levels of homelessness in the City remains low, however, current mortgage foreclosure issues and general economic conditions are exerting exceptional strains on household budgets. The City continues to meet and work with churches, community groups, and other care providers to assess the extent of this problem and to craft solutions. Prince George’s County does assess County homelessness needs regularly, and concentrates its services in more urbanized communities where the need for such services proves to be consistently higher. The City does not have a Housing Authority or Social Service division that tracts homelessness in Bowie, and census data does not include such data specific to Bowie. Presently, the local service providers do not have the capacity to efficiently or uniformly tract client information.

7 Two types of householders are distinguished: a family householder and a non-family householder. A family householder is a householder living with one or more people related to him or her by birth, marriage, or adoption. The householder and all people in the household related to him are family members. A non-family householder is a householder living alone or with non-relatives only.

The Homeless Services Partnership (HSP) implements the objectives of the Prince George’s County Continuum of Care Strategy. The Partnership, a coalition of human service providers, meets monthly to educate the public, evaluate client needs, plan and review strategies, define specific roles and responsibilities of partners and collaboratively establish timelines for implementation of strategies. The City, through the Bowie Emergency Aid Fund, participates in this partnership.

The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) was implemented in fiscal year 2003 by the Prince George’s County Department of Human Services. The system allows service providers to capture unduplicated case management information that will in turn provide a count of homeless individuals. The Bowman Internet System Service Point was selected to allow participating service providers to input information using a web browser, generate customized reports, ensure privacy to protect customer confidentiality, and track services, referral history and gaps in service. The software is intended to coordinate data collected by service providers working with homeless persons. It is especially meant to prevent the duplicate input of client information. Software and training sessions are available for members of the Partnership.

The Bowie Interfaith Pantry and Emergency Aid Fund provides food and financial assistance to clients. The Client Intact Information indicates the following activity for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007.

Total Client Visits 833 Total Clients served 707

Disabled (Includes head of household or dependent 29

Race (of head of household)

African American 428

Caucasian 215

Mixed race 14

Asian 11

Residence Status

Homeowners 674

Homeless 33

Male 173

Female 534

Assistance Provided:

Financial Assistance: $42,242

Food Assistance $118,551

Municipal public services address the health and safety concerns of citizens, particularly those with low income and vulnerable populations. Resources are focused on special needs populations that include the elderly and frail elderly, persons with disabilities, and youth and families. Services reflect community needs that include literacy training, health, transportation, crime awareness, employment training, and youth services. Emergency housing services within the City include St. Matthews Housing Corporation, which provides 18 transitional beds. The Volunteers of America has 24 Alternative Living Facilities (ALF) in Bowie that provide housing and services for chronically mentally ill persons. These are the only facilities located in the City that assists persons who are not homeless but who require supportive housing. Staff from the City’s Youth Services Bureau also provide family, group, and individual counseling; information and referrals; informal counseling, crisis intervention and suicide intervention services. The Youth Services Bureau sponsors 14 alcohol and drug free programs during the year.

Several Bowie faith-based congregations provide overnight shelter, case management and meals for approximately 50 homeless persons each night during the winter months. The Bowie Emergency Aid Fund (it receives funding assistance from, but is not operated by, the City of Bowie) receives inquiries and referrals, interviews clients, and provides cash assistance. The County operates the Emergency Food Assistance Program to distribute Federal surplus foods to emergency food pantries and needy households. Bowie’s Ascension Catholic Church coordinates food distribution in the City. Through the District of Columbia Emergency Food Program, emergency food providers purchase food for needy individuals and families. Attempts are underway to shift the program to the Maryland Emergency Food Program; Prince George’s and Montgomery Counties are the only counties in the State that are not allowed to use this program.

The City continues its relationship with the Bowie Emergency Aid Fund and Community Food Pantry to better coordinate with County services available to City residents and to acquire client intake software that will provide the City, as well as the County, with realistic figures on homelessness in Bowie. The City of Bowie, through this partnership, will participate in the implementation of Prince George’s County Continuum of Care strategy.

The City’s Bureau of Youth and Family Services also provides limited assistance and counseling to residents. A full report on the nature and volume of these services is available for review at City Hall, Bureau of Youth and Family Services; “Annual Report FY 2007, Youth Services Bureau, Bowie Youth and Family Services”.

Strategic Plan for Community Development

The goal of all Bowie community development activities is to enhance the living environment and expand economic opportunities for residents. The City of Bowie has embarked on a comprehensive plan for economic development, community stabilization, and an enhanced quality of life for senior citizens throughout the City. The goals for the senior population are consistent with HUD’S policies and as well as its goals for the Energy Star Program as follows:

1. Removing constraints on mobility 2. Reducing total household expenses 3. Improving indoor air quality 4. Reducing health hazards 5. Increasing comfort 6. Increasing property value 7. Improving outlook on life

In implementing this plan, the City has recently accepted grant funds from OpenDoor Housing Fund (ODHF) of Silver Spring, Maryland to add “Energy Efficiency” and “Green” technologies to the housing rehabilitation program for senior citizens. ODHF is a private investment fund (a merger of a fund created by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and a fund created by the Universalist Church). We propose to incorporate, to the extent practical, energy efficient, renewable resources in each project as we proceed to

1. Replace old and poorly maintained HVAC systems 2. Repair structural damage, leaks, and decay 3. Eliminate insufficient and poorly installed insulation 4. Correct leaky and poorly installed ducts 5. Replace inefficient and/or leaky windows and doors 6. Provide new roofs 7. Renovate bathrooms to provide access for indigent and handicapped seniors

Given the nature of the demographics and growth in the senior population in Bowie, and the existence of successful public services addressing County wide public services needs, the City intends to focus CDBG Entitlement funding on senior housing rehabilitation

xii

services throughout the City over the next five years. Over the last seventeen years, the City of Bowie has invested $2,115,701 dollars of federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds into infrastructure improvements in order to manage stormwater drainage and improve vehicular and pedestrian mobility in Old Town Bowie. This new City-wide approach to providing a much needed service for our most vulnerable population is a major shift for the City and its management.

The Five Year Action Strategy consists of approximately $1,000,000 worth of housing rehabilitation services. CDBG project activities will consist of

1. A formal application and intake process 2. Detailed program specifications 3. Program qualifications 4. Selection standards and guidelines 5. List of licensed contractors 6. Program “Contracts” for participants 7. Program rules and regulations 8. Project monitoring 9. Contract closeout procedures

xiii

I. FIVE YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN

Summary

In a study conducted by Dennison and Associates, Inc. for the City of Bowie it states in- part:

The study also points out that

Between 2000 and 2006, the elderly became the fastest growing population segment for Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland.8 Although 2000-2006 Bowie population data is not yet available for Bowie, it is reasonable to expect the city’s elderly population to increase at rates similar to the percentage increases experienced in Prince George’s Co. where the elderly population grew 18% and the State of Maryland where this group increased 11%.

The study goes on to add that

8 Source: U.S. Census General Demographic Characteristics – 2006 population estimates.

The results of the City’s own survey (September 2007) of all residents and businesses found the need for “Senior Services” to be in the top ten (number four) “High Need” requirements of the local population. The top three requirements of the citizenry were:

1. Crime Awareness/Prevention 2. Medical Services 3. Energy Conservation/Efficiency Education

The City’s response to these needs is covered in a variety of ways through its budget allocations, regional partnerships, other grant resources, and local strategic alliances. However, the City has chosen to specifically address the “High Need” requests for “senior services” and “energy conservation/efficiency education” with its CDBG funds, as supplemented by other City resources and grant funds, over the next five years. This will be a city-wide initiative that will require a well-designed outreach and counseling program, as well as good program monitoring and follow-up procedures.

Time Period

The City of Bowie intends to implement activities outlined in this Consolidated Plan between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2013.

A. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT

The City of Bowie commissioned a study of the housing characteristics and demographic data for as an update to the data provided in the 2000 census. The City retained Denison Associates, Inc. of Washington, D.C., a well-known national consultant to HUD, to conduct this study and analysis. The results are as follows:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Population Growth

Change in Racial & Ethnic Populations Bowie, Pr. George’s & Maryland 1990 - 2000

9 According to the U.S. Census mid-term estimate of population growth.

Between 2000 and 2006, this trend in racial population changes continued with the Caucasian population decreasing –26% in Prince George’s Co. and –0.5% for the State of Maryland. During the same period, the Hispanic population grew dramatically (+234%) in Prince George’s and nearly 40% in the State of Maryland. African Americans increased 9% in Prince George’s Co. and nearly 9% for Maryland. Asians increased 3.5% in Prince George’s Co. and 27% for the entire State. Although 2000-2006 racial population data is not yet available for Bowie, it is reasonable to expect that Bowie’s population trends will follow those of Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland.

Age of Population

Age of Populations Bowie, Pr. George’s, & Maryland: 1990 - 200010 % of % % of % % of % Age Bowie pop change Maryland pop change PG pop change 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 <5 2,963 3,782 8% 28% 357,818 353,393 7% -1% 55,409 57,940 7% 5% 5 - 24 9,841 12,637 25% 28% 1,309,796 1,453,701 27% 11% 117,471 240,008 30% 104% 24 - 44 13,611 17,565 35% 29% 1,677,104 1,664,677 31% -1% 272,474 264,497 33% -3% 45 - 65 8,790 11,579 23% 32% 919,268 1,225,408 23% 33% 133,571 177,119 22% 33% 65 > 2,384 4,706 9% 97% 517,482 599,307 11% 16% 50,343 61,951 8% 23% Total 37,589 50,269 4,781,468 5,296,486 629,268 801,515

10 U.S. Census 2000 Table DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics

Between 2000 and 2006, the elderly became the fastest growing population segment for Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland.11 Although 2000-2006 Bowie population data is not yet available for Bowie, it is reasonable to expect the city’s elderly population to increase at rates similar to the percentage increases experienced in Prince George’s Co. where the elderly population grew 18% and the State of Maryland where this group increased 11%.

Household Income

11 Source: U.S. Census General Demographic Characteristics – 2006 population estimates. 12 Two types of householders are distinguished: a family householder and a non-family householder. A family householder is a householder living with one or more people related to him or her by birth, marriage, or adoption. The householder and all people in the household related to him are family members. A non-family householder is a householder living alone or with non-relatives only.

townhomes, condominiums, and zero lot line homes. Affordable rental housing is particularly limited in Bowie for both elderly and non-elderly households.

Household Characteristics

In the Year 2000 Bowie had a high ratio of homeowners (83%) compared to Prince George’s County (59%) and the State of Maryland (62%). The great majority (72%) of Bowie’s housing structures are single-family detached compared to 50% for Prince George’s County and 51% for the State of Maryland. Bowie’s housing is comparatively new with 41% of housing structures built before 1970 compared to 50% pre 1970 housing in Prince George’s County and 49% pre-1970 housing for the State of Maryland.

Only 8% of the housing in Bowie is multi-family (i.e., 5 or more units). Multifamily housing in Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland comprises 31.5% and 21% respectively of total housing.

The U.S. Census Bureau indicates that less than 1% of Bowie’s housing is substandard and only 2% is vacant. Most (71%) of Bowie’s homeowner households consist of small families with between 1-3 persons in the household; most homeowner households (53%) consist of 2-3 persons. A larger percentage of rental households are smaller in size, with 78% comprised of 1-3 person households. Most renter households (61%) consist of 1-2 persons.

Thirty-two percent of Bowie’s households (5,877 households) had incomes low enough to be eligible for low income housing assistance in the year 2000.

Housing Market Analysis

Bowie has 1,595 multifamily rental housing units, 445 of which are restricted to the elderly, leaving 1,150 rental units for the rest of the rent seeking population. The vacancy rate for these units is extremely low (less than 2%), which means that fewer than 25 rental units could become available for rent during any 12-month period. Many of the non-elderly rental units have rents above $1,200 for a one-bedroom unit, with three bedroom units in the $1,675 - $2,000 range. Bowie has approximately 1,669 additional rental units located in single-family subdivisions, with rents ranging form $900 for a one-bedroom unit13 to $4,000 monthly rent for a 4 bedroom single-family detached home.

13 Only 4 non-elderly units identified at this price in 2006 at the Westview subdivision.

There are a total of 1949 households in Bowie that would be considered paying an excessive amount of there household income for housing costs (i.e., more than 30% of gross income for monthly mortgage or rent payments). However the most acute housing need is for those low-income households paying 50% or more of their gross income for housing. There are a total of 874 low-income households in Bowie paying 50% or more of their gross income for housing. Six hundred and fifty seven of these households are homeowners and 217 are renters. The greatest need exists among small 1-2 person extremely low and very low-income families and extremely low and very low-income elderly households.

Approximately 332 small 1-2 person low-income households pay more than 50% of their gross income for housing. Most of these households (279) own their homes, and 53 are renter households. Approximately 208 elderly households pay more than 50% of their gross incomes for housing. Most of the low-income cost burdened elderly households (121) are renters, and 87 own their homes. The majority of the elderly cost burdened households (113) are extremely low-income earning less than 30% of the median household income for the metropolitan area. In addition there are approximately 334 non-elderly low-income households in need of housing.

To meet this need the City of Bowie would need to provide housing financial assistance to a minimum of 208 very low-income elderly households, 332 very-low income small- related non-elderly households, and 334 large and other unrelated households. Housing assistance could take various forms including renovating and/or refinancing existing housing, providing rental financial assistance to tenants, the provision of home purchase down payment assistance to low-income homebuyers, and the construction of new affordable housing (both rental and homeownership).

The following table shows a break down of the most acute housing needs for low income households in the City of Bowie and the population groups most impacted by the need for affordable owner and rental housing.

All Cost Burdened Households City of Bowie Total Units Ext Total Cost Burdened Owner Renter by Group re Small related households 671 185 856 mel y Elderly 234 213 447 Cos Large related & other t households 487 159 646 Total 1392 557 1949 7

Burdened Households City of Bowie 50% or more Cost Total Units Burdened Owner Renter by Group Small related households 279 53 332 Elderly 87 121 208 Large related & other households 291 43 334 Total 657 217 874 Conclusion

At the same time, a significant segment of the city’s non-elderly population also cannot afford to buy new or existing homes, nor can they afford market rate rents. Bowie’s non- elderly low-income populations are comprised of small and large families in significant numbers. This would imply a need for a variety of housing types, in terms of cost, design and size to accommodate different age groups, family sizes and household incomes.

BOWIE HOUSING & DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ANALYSIS FOR THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN 2009-2013

The 2000 Census reported that Bowie’s total population was 50, 597 people.14 Table 1 shows that between 1990 and the year 2000, the city of Bowie’s population increased by 34 percent, from a 1990 population of 37,589 to 50,269 in year 2000. Since the year 2000 Bowie’s population has grown by 6.08 percent. This is a slightly faster rate of increase than Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland, where the population increased by 5.15 percent and 5.53 percent respectively.

Table 1 Population Change 2000-2006 Bowie, Prince Gr. Co. & Maryland Percent Percent Percent Change Change Change Location 1990 2000 2003 2006 1990-2000 2000-2006 2003-2006 Bowie 37,589 50,269 53,660 53,325 34% 6.08% -0.62%

Pr. George's Co. 629,268 801,515 835,159 842,764 27% 5.15% 0.91% Maryland 4,781,468 5,296,486 5,508,909 5,589,599 11% 5.53% 1.46% Bowie data source: U.S. Census 2006 Population Estimates - Table T-1.

Prince George’s & Maryland: Maryland Dept. of Planning, Planning Data Services – based on Census 2000 Modified Race data. 2003 data from Census Table 1 Annual Est. of Population for Counties of Maryland.

Over the decade ending in 2000, the relative proportions of Bowie’s racial and ethnic groups changed significantly. Table 2 below shows that the percentage of the population identified as white fell from 68.3% to 62.6%, a net decrease of 2,849 people. The African- American population increased by 623 percent, from 2,144 persons in 1990 to 15,500 in 2000. In 2000, African-Americans made up 30.83% of the population of Bowie. During the same period, the Asian and Hispanic/Latino populations increased by 76% and 77% respectively to a total of 2,797 people, and combined represent 6% of the population.

Table 3 provides an illustration of what Bowie’s 2006 populations would resemble if the racial and ethnic percentages maintained the same proportions as in the 2000 Census. Since there is no available data on the racial/ethnic population changes in Bowie since 2000, the table is an estimate of Bowie’s racial/ethnic composition. The table also shows actual

14 The 2006 population estimates published by the Bureau of the Census for the City of Bowie is 53,325.

changes in the composition of racial and ethnic populations in Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland between 2000 and 2006. Between 1990 and 2000, minority populations grew at a faster rate than the white population in the county and the State as a whole. This trend is consistent with the 1990-2000 population changes for Bowie and suggests that there is likely to be a continuing trend in this direction.

Table 2 CITY OF BOWIE RACIAL AND ETHNIC POPULATION CHANGE 1990-2000 Race/Ethnic Group 1990 Percent of 2000 Percent of Percent total total Change 1990- 2000 White 34,341 68.31% 31,492 62.65% -8% Black or African American 2,144 4.27% 15,500 30.83% 623% American Indian, Eskimo or Aleut 114 0.23% 150 0.30% 32% Asian or Pacific Islander 854 1.70% 1,499 2.98% 76% Hispanic or Latino 828 1.65% 1,468 2.92% 77% Other 136 0.27% 160 0.32% 18% Total 37,589 50,269 34% Source: U.S. Census 1990 & 2000 General Population & Housing Characteristics

Figure 1 City of Bowie Racial and Ethnic Population Change 1990-2000 36000 34000 32000 30000 28000 26000 Population 24000 22000 20000 1990 18000 16000 2000

14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Race/Ethnic White Black or American Asian or Hispanic or Other Group African Indian, Eskimo Pacific Islander Latino American or Aleut Race/Ethinicity

Between 2000 and 2006, the Hispanic population increased by 59 percent in the county and 40 percent for the State. Asians increased by 3.38 percent in the county and 27.34 percent for the state. The African American population increased 8.61 percent in the county and 8.96 for the State of Maryland. The White population declined by -26.28 in the county, and grew less than one percent for the State as a whole.

Table 3

Est. Percent Change in Race of Population Bowie, Pr. George’s Co. & State 2000 - 2006 Race/ Bowie Bowie est.% Pr. Geo. Pr. Geo. % Maryland Maryland % Ethnic 2000 2006* Change 2000 2006 Change 2000 2006 Change Group 2000-2006 2000- 2000- 2006 2006 White 31,492 33,408 6.08% 216,729 159,347 -26.48% 3,286,547 3,303,365 0.51% Black or African American 15,500 16,440 6.06% 502,550 545,805 8.61% 1,477,411 1,609,842 8.96% American Indian, Eskimo or 150 160 6.67% 2,795 2,097 -24.97% 15,423 14,144 -8.29% Asian or Pacific Islander 1,499 1,589 6.00% 31,479 32,574 3.48% 210,929 268,606 27.34% Hispanic or Latino 1,468 1,557 6.06% 27,078 90,510 234.26% 227,916 318,331 39.67% Other 160 171 6.88% 20,884 12,431 -40.48% 78,260 75,311 -3.77% Total 50269 53,325 6.08% 801,515.00 842,764.00 5.15% 5,296,486.00 5,589,599.00 5.53% Source: U.S. Census Modified Race data, August 2007,obtained from Maryland Department of Planning, Planning Data Service; *Bowie estimate based on multiplier of prior decade growth of population by race as a percent of actual 2006 Census estimate. Total Hispanic population for 2000 in Prince Georges Co. (all races) was 57,057 and is spread among various racial categories. The “Other” category consists primarily of Hispanics in combination with White or African American.

Table 4 shows changes in population by age groupings between 1990 and 2000 for the City of Bowie relative to Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland. The most significant population contrasts are noted among the very young, where persons under age five living in Bowie increased by 28% compared to 5% in Prince George’s County and a 1% decrease in the State of Maryland. The elderly population 65 years an older increased by 97% in Bowie compared to 23% in Prince George’s County and 16% for Maryland. Persons between the ages of 25- 44, the prime home buying age for starter homes, increased by 29% in Bowie while actually declining in the County and the State.

Table 4 Age of Population City of Bowie, Pr. George’s Co. & State 1990 & 2000 Pop. by Bowie Bowie Pr. Geo Pr. Geo State Age 1990 2000 % +/- 1990 2000 % +/- 1990 State 2000 % +/- Under 5 yrs. 2,963 3,782 28% 55,409 57,940 5% 357,818 353,393 -1%

5-24 yrs. 9,841 12,637 28% 117,471 240,008 104% 1,309,796 1,453,701 11%

25-44 yrs 13,611 17,565 29% 272,474 264,497 -3% 1,677,104 1,664,677 -1%

45-64 yrs 8,790 11,579 32% 133,571 177,119 33% 919,268 1,225,408 33% 65 and older 2,384 4,706 97% 50,343 61,951 23% 517,482 599,307 16%

Total 37,589 50,269 34% 629,268 801,515 27% 4,781,468 5,296,486 11% Source: Census 1990& 2000 Table DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics

Figure 2 City of Bowie Age of Population Change 1990-2000 20,000

18,000

16,000 Population 14,000

12,000 Bowie 1990 10,000 Bowie 2000 8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0 Under 5 yrs. 5-24 yrs. 25-44 yrs 45-64 yrs 65 and older Age

Figure 3 Prince Georges County Age of Population Change 1990-2000 300,000

250,000 Population 200,000

Pr. Geo 1990 150,000 Pr. Geo 2000

100,000

50,000

0 Under 5 yrs. 5-24 yrs. 25-44 yrs 45-64 yrs 65 and older Age

Figure 4 State of Maryland Age of Population Change 1990-2000 1,800,000

1,600,000

1,400,000

n Populatio 1,200,000

1,000,000 State 1990 800,000 State 2000

600,000

400,000

200,000

0 Under 5 yrs. 5-24 yrs. 25-44 yrs 45-64 yrs 65 and older Age

Table 5 shows data on changes in the age of the population (2000-2006). The data for Prince George’s Co. and the State of Maryland are taken from the U.S. Census 2006 estimate of population growth. The Bowie data is estimated based on past growth trends as a percentage that each age range represents of the total population.

Bowie’s total population grew by a net 3056 people (6%) between 2000 and 2006, a somewhat slower rate of growth than exhibited between 1990 and 2000. Based on Bowie’s

past trends, strong growth is likely to continue among middle age adults in their prime home buying stage of life (25-44) and persons 65 years of age and older. Persons 65 and older create more demand for affordable rental housing, particularly retirement communities and senior designated apartment complexes.

Between 2000 and 2006, young people less than 24 years of age grew at a faster rate in the State of Maryland than in Prince George’s County or Bowie. In Prince George’s County, persons under age 24 grew just 3 percent between 2000 and 2006, whereas this group grew 104% between 1990 and 2000. Persons 65 and older grew at twice the rate between 2000 and 2006 in Prince George’s County (17.6%) than in the State (8.6%).

Since there is no official 2006 estimate of population by age group for places with a population of 60,000 or less, this information is not available for Bowie. However, if it is assumed that Bowie’s population age groups continued to account for the proportionate share of the total population growth they represented between 1990 to 2000 the under 24 population would have grown less than 3 percent and the 65 and older population would have grown at a rate of approximately 12 percent.

These trends have significant implications for housing demand since young families tend to create a need for more rental apartment living than any other age group, whereas middle- aged adults will create a demand for sale homes. As previously mentioned, persons beyond the age of 65 would increase the demand for senior living apartments as well as other types of senior living communities.

Table 5 Age Group of Population 2000-2006 in Prince George’s Co. & State of Maryland

Prince Prince Georges Georges % State of State of % City of City of % Age of County County change Maryland Maryland change Bowie Bowie change persons 2000 2006 +/- 2000 2006 +/- 2000 est. 2006 +/- Persons Under 5 yrs. old 57940 60365 4.19% 353393 368199 4.19% 3782 3979 5.21% Persons Under 24 yrs. old 297948 307111 3.08% 1807094 1893554 4.78% 14455 14853 2.75% Persons Under 25 - 54 yrs. old 374548 374992 0.12% 2419709 2461719 1.74% 24517 25890 5.60% Persons over 65 yrs. of age 61951 72841 17.58% 599307 650568 8.55% 4706 5266 11.90% Total Population 801,515 842,764 5.15% 5,296,486 5,589,599 5.53% 50,269 53,325 6.08% Source: U.S. Census General Demographic Characteristics (2006 population estimates). Source City of Bowie: Census 2000 Table DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics. Bowie 2006 estimates based on prior growth rates for each population grouping.

HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS

The Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission’s (M-NCPPC) forecast of housing growth is shown in table 6. Housing stock in Bowie is projected to grow by 44 percent between 2000 and 2020. Bowie’s projected housing growth rate is more than twice that of the county and almost twice the growth for the State as a whole. Table 6 also shows that for the interim periods, 2000-2005 and 2000- 2010, that the percentage housing growth projected for Bowie is substantially greater than for the county or the State.

However, the M-NCPPC’s forecasts are tempered by comparisons to actual building residential permits reported for the period between 2000 and the second quarter of 2007 by the Prince George’s County Department of Environmental Resources (DER) and the Permits Office of the City of Bowie’s Department of Community Services.

Table 6

Projected Growth in Dwelling Units 2000-2020 Bowie, Prince Georges Co. & Maryland Percent Change 2000- 2000 - 2000 - 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2005 2010 2020 Bowie 18,622 23,549 24,520 25,558 26,809 26% 32% 44% Prince George's Co. 286,610 303,375 314,375 324,925 338,625 6% 10% 18% Maryland 1,980,859 2,108,975 2,244,200 2,361,700 2,462,225 6% 13% 24% MNCPPC Forecast Source: 2005-2020 MNCPPC Forecast: 2000 household counts from U.S. Census 2000

Table 7 shows the actual new residential building permits issued for Bowie, Prince George’s County, and the State of Maryland. Based on actual permits issued as of the second quarter of the year 2007, fewer housing units were created than projected for all three jurisdictions two years beyond the projected targets. In 2007, there were 19,391 units in the City of Bowie vs. the 23,549 units projected by the M-NCPPC for 2005, an over projection of 4,158 units. In the county there were actually 294,679 units by the 2nd quarter of 2007 versus the 2005 projected number of 303,375 units; 8,696 fewer units than projected. The State’s 2007 housing units fell short of the M-NCPPC 2005 projections by 64,605 units reaching a total of only 2,044,370 versus the 2,108,975 projected units.

Table 7 New Housing Units Authorized for Construction 2000 - 2007 Total new Percent permits as Total units Increase Year 2000 Single Family Multifamily & of 2nd qtr. in 2nd qtr. in total Units detached condos* 2007 2007 units Bowie 18,622 546 223 769 19,391 4% Prince George's Co. 286,610 7,833 236 8,069 294,679 3% State of Maryland 1,980,859 51,638 11,873 63,511 2,044,370 3% Maryland Department of Planning & City of Bowie Dept. of Community Services (Permits Office). * Separate data on multifamily units and condos were not available.

Single-family detached homes are the predominant housing type in the City of Bowie, and represent 72% of all housing stock. By contrast, 50% of Prince George’s County’s and 51% of the State of Maryland’s occupied housing is single-family detached.15

Table 8

15 Source: DP-4. Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics: 2000 Data Set: Census 2000 SF-3

Housing Units in Structure Bowie, Prince George’s Co & Maryland Units in Structure Bowie % Prince George's % Maryland % County 1 detached 13,386 71.9% 151,888 50.2% 1,097,673 51.2% 1 attached 3,556 19.1% 45,366 15.0% 451,411 21.0% 2 units 24 0.1% 1,634 0.5% 45,775 2.1% 3 - 4 units 124 0.7% 6,755 2.2% 63,110 2.9% 5 + units 1,494 8.0% 95,162 31.5% 445,229 20.8% Other type 38 0.2% 1,573 0.5% 42,085 2.0% Total 18,622 302,378 2,145,283 Source: Census 2000 DP-4 Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics-Units in Structure Summary File 3

Forty-one percent of Bowie’s housing was built prior to 1970, compared to 50% of Prince George’s County’s housing stock and 49% of the State of Maryland’s housing stock. Housing built in Bowie prior to 1960 comprises just 3% of its housing stock compared to 25% in Prince George’s County and 34% for the State. Multifamily housing in Bowie represents only 8% of the total housing stock, versus 31.5% for Prince George’s County and 21% for the State of Maryland.

Table 9 Age of Units in Bowie vs. Prince George’s County and State Prince George's State of Year Built Bowie % Co. % Bowie Maryland %

1999-March 2000 964 5% 5,122 2% 964 42,423 2%

1995-1998 2,512 13% 17,720 6% 2,512 137,305 6% 1990-1994 2,430 13% 24,144 8% 2,430 179,323 8% 1980-1989 3,040 16% 49,936 16% 3,040 367,969 17% 1970-1979 1,935 10% 59,307 19% 1,935 368,974 17% 1960-1969 6,962 37% 75,733 25% 6,962 323,089 15% 1950-1959 434 2% 43,068 14% 434 287,020 13% 1940-1949 179 1% 20,087 7% 179 170,613 8% 1939 or earlier 166 1% 13,261 4% 166 268,567 13% Total 18,622 308,378 18,622 2,145,283

Source: Census 2000 QT-H4. Physical Housing Characteristics – All Housing Units Year Structure Built Summary File 3

Table 10 shows the age of Bowie’s Housing stock by tenure. Most of Bowie’s owner housing (57%) was built prior to 1980, with the majority (52%) built between 1960 and 1979. By contrast 68% of Bowie’s rental housing stock was constructed after 1979.

Table 10 Age of Structures in Bowie by Tenure Year Built Owner Units Percentage of Renter Percentage of All Units Units All Units 1999-March 2000 451 386 3% 14% 1995-1998 1,870 536 12% 20% 1990-1994 2,106 14% 278 10% 1980-1989 2,304 15% 685 25% 1970-1979 1,675 11% 239 9% 1960-1969 6,375 41% 531 19% 1950-1959 388 3% 34 1% 1940-1949 146 1% 33 1% 1939 or earlier 140 1% 11 0% Total 15,455 2,733 18,188 Source: Census 2000 Table QT-H7 Year Structure Built and Year Summary File 1

Table 11 shows housing units in Bowie, Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland that is either overcrowded or lack complete plumbing and/or kitchen facilities. Data is available for 2005 for Prince George’s County and the State. Bowie’s 2005 overcrowded and substandard units are estimated to have decreased along with the decrease in crowded and substandard units in the county.

Table 11 Occupancy Characteristics City of Bowie Pr. George's State of Maryland Census 2000 Data Sets Co. Maryland

Overcrowed Households 68 10,490 30,200 Housing Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 52 1,368 9,033 Housing Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities 51 881 8,223

Total with Housing Problems 171 12,739 47,456 Estimated Overcrowed Households 2005* 30 4,589 32,636

Percent Change 2000 - 2005 N/A -56% 8% *Overcrowded households are households having 1.51 persons or more per dwelling unit. Source County and State data: 2005 American County Survey. Bowie 2005 estimates not available.

As Bowie’s housing ages, it will experience more substandard housing problems. Many owner units are likely in need rehabilitation since approximately 7,000 units are nearing 40 years of age and approximately 700 units are nearing 50 years of age. Although the housing stock is aging, Bowie had a relatively small number of substandard units in 2000. The 2000 census data counted 103 units lacking complete plumbing and/or kitchen facilities. Overcrowding is generally an indicator that persons must double up to be able to afford housing

The tables below show housing tenure for Bowie, Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland. Bowie has a high homeownership rate, with 85% of all occupied units being owner occupied. By comparison the homeownership rates in Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland are 62% and 68% respectively.

Table 12 Tenure of Housing Units in Bowie, Prince George’s Co. & State of Maryland Housing Units Bowie % of Pr. Geo. % of All State % of All 2000 All 2000 Units Units 2000 2000 Units Units Units Units 2000* Owner-Occupied 15,455 177,177 1,341,751 83% 59% 63% Renter-Occupied 2,733 109,433 639,108 15% 36% 30% Total Occupied 18,188 286,610 1,980,859 98% 95% 92% Vacant 434 2% 15,768 5% 164,424 8% Total 18,622 302,378 2,145,283 Source: Census 2000 Tables QT-H1 General Housing Characteristics *Rounding of percentages resulted in a greater than 100% result for State of Maryland.

Figure 5 Tenure of Housing Units in the City of Bowie Renter-Occupied Vacant 15% 2%

Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Vacant

Owner-Occupied 83%

Figure 6 Renter-Occupied Tenure of Housing Units in Pr. George’s County 36% Vacant 5%

Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Vacant

Owner-Occupied

59%

Figure 7 Tenure of Housing Units in the State of Maryland Vacant Renter-Occupied 8% 30%

Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Vacant

Owner-Occupied 62%

Household sizes in the City of Bowie range from one to seven persons, with 2- person households representing 33% of all households. Seventy percent of all owner-occupied homes have between 2 and 4 occupants. One to 3-member households comprises 70% of all rental occupants.

Table 14 shows tenure by the age of heads of household as a percentage of total occupied housing units for Bowie, Prince George’s County, and the State of Maryland. Persons 65 years and older head 15% of Bowie’s occupied housing. This percentage is slightly lower than the State of Maryland where the percentage is 19%, and slightly higher than the ratio of older households in Prince George’s County where the percentage is 13%. Households headed by persons between 25 and 44 years of age (the prime age for families with young children) comprised 47% of all households in Bowie, which is comparable to the 46% this group represents in Prince George’s County. By contrast this group represents 41% of Maryland households.

Table 13

Size of Households in Occupied Housing - City of Bowie

% of Owner Rental % of Rental No. of Occupants Owner Units Units Units Units 1-person household 2,721 18% 861 32% 2-person household 5,142 33% 802 29% 3-person household 3066 20% 461 17% 4-person household 2,700 17% 336 12% 5-person household 1,188 8% 179 7% 6-person household 439 3% 61 2% 7-person household 199 1% 33 1% Total 15,455 2,733 Source: U.S. Census 2000 Table QT-H2 Summary File 1

Table 14 Tenure by Age of Householder – Prince George’s Co. & Maryland Pr. Geo. State's Age of % of All Occupied % of All Occupied % of All Householder Bowie Units Units Units Units Units

15-24 years of age 287 2% 13,665 5% 80,711 4%

25-34 years of age 3,114 17% 56,250 20% 338,800 17%

35-44 years of age 5,499 30% 74862 26% 482664 24%

45-54 years of age 3,985 22% 64,532 23% 427,425 22%

55-64 years of age 2,634 14% 40,238 14% 277,879 14% 65 and older 2,669 15% 37,061 13% 373,370 19%

65-74 years of age 1,700 9% 22,694 8% 199,735 10%

75-84 years of age 832 5% 11,754 4% 136,853 7% 85 and older 137 1% 2,613 1% 36,782 2% Total 18,188 286,608 1,980,849 Source: U.S. Census 2000 Table QT-H1General Housing Characteristics Summary File 1

Table 15 shows tenure by age of householders in Bowie as a percentage of homeowner and renter occupied housing units. Owner households have a higher percentage of older occupants than renter households. Householders between 35 and 54 years of age head 54 percent of owner households. By contrast householders between 35 and 54 years of age head 45 percent of rental units. Only 16 percent of owner-occupied units are headed by persons less than 35 years old, compared to 36 percent of renter-occupied units headed by persons under age 35.

Table 15 Tenure by Age of Householder – Bowie Occupied Housing

% of % of Number of Owner Number of Rental % All Age of Householder Units Units Units Units All Units Units

15-24 years of age 135 1% 152 6% 287 2% 25-34 years of age 2,294 15% 820 30% 3,114 17% 35-44 years of age 4718 31% 781 29% 5,499 30% 45-54 years of age 3,542 23% 443 16% 3,985 22% 55-64 years of age 2,435 16% 199 7% 2,634 14% 65 and older 2,331 15% 338 12% 2,669 15% 65-74 years of age 1,566 10% 134 5% 1,700 9% 75-84 years of age 685 4% 147 5% 832 5% 85 and older 80 1% 57 2% 137 1% Total 15,455 2,733 18,188 Source: U.S. Census 2000 Table QT-H2 Summary File 1

HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS

Housing Affordability

Table 16 groups households in Bowie, Prince George’s County, and the State of Maryland into five income categories (extremely low-income, very low-income, low-income, middle income and higher income). The three lowest income categories meet U.S. Department of Housing an Urban Development criteria for receipt of federal rental housing assistance. The last two groupings are middle and upper-income households that exceed the HUD income limits. The U.S. Census Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics Census

(Summary File 3 ((SF3)) of family income was used to approximate the number of households that fall into each income group.

Table 16 Household Income Distribution in 2000 & 2005

2000 2000 2005 Bowie Prince 2000 Prince 2005 city, % of George's % of State of % of George's % of State of % of Maryland Total Co. Total Maryland Total Co. Total Maryland Total Extremely Low Income Households (0 to 30%) Less than $10,000 265 1% 14,683 5% 137,199 7% 14,210 5% 121,376 6% $10,000 to $14,999 134 1% 8,246 3% 83,328 4% 11,131 4% 90,851 4% $15,000 to $19,999 266 1% 10,398 4% 88,739 4% 10,112 3% 90,708 4% $20,000 to $24,999 321 2% 12,758 4% 99,365 5% 8,273 3% 74,216 4% Sub-Total 986 5% 46,085 16% 408,631 21% 43,726 14% 377,151 18% Very Low Income Households (31% to 50%) $25,000 to $29,999 461 3% 15,395 5% 102,595 5% 14,993 5% 101,247 5% $30,000 to $34,999 655 4% 16,783 6% 109,540 6% 9,996 3% 82,838 4% $35,000 to $39,999 671 4% 16,717 6% 105,811 5% 15,744 5% 99,516 5% $40,000 to $44,999 671 4% 16,499 6% 104,613 5% 13,945 5% 90,986 4% Sub-Total 2,458 14% 65,394 23% 422,559 21% 54,678 18% 374,587 18% Low Income Households (50% to 80%) $45,000 to $49,999 670 4% 15,315 5% 95,563 5% 15,296 5% 93,831 4% $50,000 to $59,999 1,763 10% 29,020 10% 187,711 9% 33,743 11% 216,346 10% Sub-Total 2,433 13% 44,335 15% 283,274 14% 49,039 16% 310,177 15% Middle Income Households (81% to 100%) $60,000 to $74,999 2,787 15% 38,350 13% 239,469 12% 26,514 9% 177,071 8% $75,000 to $99,999 4,282 24% 43,778 15% 268,558 14% 46,734 15% 296,720 14% Sub-Total 7,069 39% 82,128 29% 508,027 26% 73,248 24% 473,791 23% Higher Income Households (100% or more) $100,000 to $124,999 2,334 13% 24,569 9% 151,573 8% 53,421 18% 182,509 9% $125,000 to $149,999 1,416 8% 11,910 4% 78,712 4% 15,949 5% 149,326 7% $150,000 to $199,999 1,086 6% 8,525 3% 69,102 3% 6,899 2% 115,576 6% $200,000 or more 373 2% 3,704 1% 59,917 3% 6,899 2% 102,185 5% Sub-Total 5,209 29% 48,708 17% 359,304 18% 83,168 27% 549,596 26% Grand Total* 18,155 100% 286,650 100% 1,981,795 100% 303,859 100% 2,085,302 100%

Source: Census Summary File 3 Sample Data –QT-P32 Income Distribution 1999. Source: U.S. Census 2005 estimates. *Note: Total unit count in census table SF 3 is slightly different than SF-1 table above.

Figure 8 shows that approximately 32 percent of Bowie households were classified as extremely low-income, very low-income or low-income in the year 2000.

Figure 8 City of Bowie, 2000 Household Income Distribution Extremely Low Income Very Low Income Households Households 14% 5% Extremely Low Income Households (0 to 30%) Higher Income Households 29% Very Low Income Households (31% to 50%)

Low Income Households (51 to 80%)

Middle Income Households (81% to 100%)

Higher Income Households (>100%)

Low Income Households Middle Income Households 39% 13%

By contrast, 54 percent of County households and 56 percent of Maryland households fell into low-income categories (Figures 9 and 10).

Figure 9 PG County, 2005 Household Income Distribution Very Low Income Households Higher Income Households Extremely Low Income 28% 14% 18%

Extremely Low Income Households (0 to 30%) Very Low Income Households (31% to 50%)

Low Income Households (51 to 80%)

Middle Income Households (81% to 100%)

Higher Income Households (>100%)

Middle Income Households Low Income Households

24% 16%

Figure 10 State of Maryland, 2005 Household Income Distribution

Extremely Low Income Very Low Income Households

2% 21% Higher Income Households 32% Extremely Low Income Households (0 to 30%) Very Low Income Households (31% to 50%)

Low Income Households (51 to 80%)

Middle Income Households (81% to 100%)

Higher Income Households (>100%)

Middle Income Households Low Income Households 27% 18%

Five percent of Bowie households were extremely low income in the year 2000, representing 986 households. By contrast 16 percent of County households and 21 percent of Maryland households were extremely low income. Extremely low-income households typically experience cost burdens, over crowding, and deferred maintenance problems more than other income groups.

Although 2005 household income data is not available for the City of Bowie, the 2005 distribution of household income in Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland show an overall decline in the number of extremely low income households, while experiencing an increase in the number of higher income households. Overall the percentage of low-income households for all categories declined from 54 to 48% in the county and from 56 percent to 51 percent for the State as a whole. The ratio of higher income households increased from 46 percent to 51 percent in the county, and from 44 percent to 49 percent for Maryland.

Availability of Affordable Owner Housing

Table 17 shows a recent snap-shot of homes for sale in Bowie in the month of July 2007. Only five homes out of sample of 348 listings were priced at or below $250,000.

Table 17

Price Range No. of Housing Units For Sale Yr. July 2007 less than $175,000 0 $175,000 - $199,000 1 $200,000 - $249,000 5 $254,999 - $294,900 31 $310,000 - $349,999 87 $350,000 - $399,999 129 $400,000 - $449,900 10 $450,000 - $499,999 11 $500,000- $550,000 19 $551,000 - $599,999 28 $600,000 - $650,000 15 $651,000 - $699,900 7 $700,000 + 6 Average Price $407,985 348 Source: www.Realtor.com

Overall home values have increased for Prince George’s County since 2000. They have also increased for the City of Bowie. Table 18 shows the change in housing values in Bowie and Prince George’s County between 2000 and 2005. Although these values do not reflect current market realities, they provide a benchmark for contrasting the change in housing values over the five-year period as reported in the U.S. Census. Both Bowie and Prince George’s County show a marked decline in lower priced homes, while the number of homes in the higher price ranges increased.

The Washington Metropolitan Area is classified as a high cost area by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Federal Housing Administration’s mortgage limit for the Washington MSA is 120% of the national level ($561,411). A family of four earning the 2000 median household income for the City of Bowie of $76,778 16 will be able to afford a home costing approximately $300,000.

This mortgage would require a monthly principle and interest payment of approximately $1,922, provided the overall household debt ratios fall within acceptable lender underwriting limits, and an interest rate of 6.63%.17 Using the same interest rate, a family earning 80% of the median area household income would have difficulty affording a home above $250,000, which would require a $1,601 monthly mortgage payment. Lower income families would have fewer choices for purchasing a home in Bowie.

16 Bowie’s Census 2000 median household income was $76,778 compared to the median household income for Prince George’s Co. of $55,256.00. Bowie’s median family income for 2000 was $82,403. As a point of reference the estimated U.S. Census 2005 area median family income for the metro area was $74,767. 17 Monthly principal and interest payments based on Fannie Mae’s interest rate on July 17, 2007 of 6.63% for a 30 year fixed rate mortgage.

Table 18 For Sale Housing Owner Occupied Units Bowie Pr. Geo. Pr. Geo. Value Bowie 2000 2006* change +/- 2000 2005 change +/- Less than $50,000 41 0 -41 1,485 1187 -298 $50,000 to 99,000 212 0 -212 15,907 6545 -9,362 $100,000 to 149,999 5,658 72 -5,586 70,654 16192 -54,462 $150,000 to $199,000 5,675 1893 -3,782 48,877 26575 -22,302 $200,000 to $299,000 2,641 9403 6,762 19,822 57887 38,065 $300,000 to $499,000 473 6624 6,151 3,869 66625 62,756 $500,000 to $799,000 7 1031 1,024 419 15073 14,654 $800,000 or more 7 0 -7 247 661 414 Total count 14714 19023 4,309 161280 190745 29,465 Bowie 2000 data source: Table QT-H14 Value Mortgage Status & Selected Conditions. Bowie2006 data source: Extrapolated from City of Bowie Neighborhood Housing Survey 2006. Prince George’s County 2000 data source: U.S. Census Selected Housing Characteristics. Prince George’s Co. 2005: Estimated Housing Characteristics Data Set 2005.

Bowie Neighborhood Housing Survey of Owner-Occupied Housing

A November 2006 Neighborhood Housing Survey (hereinafter referred to as the housing survey) conducted by the Bowie Department of Planning provides a current profile of the City’s housing market, and establishes a reliable barometer of the affordability and availability of for sale and rental housing in the City of Bowie.

The results of the Bowie Department of Planning’s housing survey reflect a highly diverse housing market with a fairly wide range of housing prices in neighborhoods evenly distributed throughout the city. The average value of the housing units in the 2006 Housing Survey inventory is $328,609.

Table 19 Bowie Housing Characteristics – 2006 Neighborhood Housing Survey Neighborhood House Mean Year Total Mean Lot Mean Bldg Mean Max. Sales Amber Meadows I SFD 1973 172 12,649 1534 $154,863 $267,000 Amber Meadows II SFD 1993 57 13,923 2097 $215,875 $410,000 Belair Greens SFD 1987 87 11,748 2122 $205,281 $355,000 Belair Town Homes TH 1969 298 2,759 1303 $101,710 $168,500 Bowie Forest TH 1992 96 1,657 1446 $139,796 $216,000 Bowie Station SFD 1989 10 15,816 2058 $205,052 $355,000 Buckingham R-55 1963 595 12,847 1646 $159,458 $320,000 Chapel Forge R-80 1998 69 65,327 3350 $345,603 $535,000 Collington Manor RA/RR 1966 544 12,215 1674 $282,800 $535,000 Collington Station R-R 1995 525 14,588 2479 $244,908 $410,000 Covington TH 1998 511 1,409 1439 $144,238 $246,000 Covington Manor SFD 1998 232 7,780 2041 $217,644 $400,000 Derbyshire R-R 1989 62 13,806 2364 $228,621 $411,500 Devonshire Estates R-R 1997 186 13,509 2693 $254,224 $355,000 Enfield Chase TH 1985 132 1,978 1254 $106,426 $165,000 Enfield Chase Zero lot 1987 156 6,155 1447 $150,918 $239,500 Enfield Chase P 1988 54 6,086 1344 $143,245 $227,900 Enfield Chase Z Zero lot 1987 156 6,155 1324 $150,918 $239,500 Ensleigh TH 1995 40 1,918 1435 $162,066 $260,000 Essington TH 1991 106 2,084 1432 $156,959 $221,225 Evergreen Estates TH 1989 201 1,702 1200 $130,436 $221,000 Fairview R-R 1985 83 18,588 2710 $235,465 $380,000 Fletchertown SFD 1950 20 85,529 865 $116,406 $325,000 Forest Hills SFD SFD 1992 10 149,771 1854 $206,893 $218,000 Foxhill SFD 1963 308 12,006 1565 $152,354 $274,900 Glen Allen R-R 1995 397 12,502 2544 $246,472 $440,000 Glenridge SFD SFD 1969 22 13,892 1671 $158,345 $227,000 Grady's Walk SFD 1985 78 19,048 2123 $235,599 $375,000 Grovehurst R-R 1995 140 21,759 2573 $266,134 $412,500 Heather Hills SFD 1965 330 12,804 1574 $156,630 $259,900 Highbridge Park TH 1993 204 2,349 1420 $165,833 $251,900 Highbridge Park SFD 1993 170 8,787 2089 $204,172 $360,750 Huntington SFD 1938 555 12,932 737 $92,513 $310,000 Huntington Crest SFD 1993 76 13,577 1776 $194,127 $309,900 Idelwild SFD 1966 223 12,870 1650 $153,537 $265,000 Kenilworth SFD 1963 1007 12,188 1532 $151,568 $277,000 Lake Village Manor TH 1982 235 1,825 1160 $106,663 $169,900 Long Ridge R-80 1962 113 20,598 2410 $201,742 $305,500 Longleaf R-R 2000 239 12,677 3057 $293,445 $469,300

Table 19 continued Bowie Housing Characteristics – 2006 Neighborhood Housing Study Neighborhood Type Built Dwelling Area Area Assessed Price Meadowbrook SFD 1964 973 11,604 1635 $154,751 $275,000 Mitchellville SFD 1963 8 63,169 1351 $192,842 $170,000 Mitchellville East SFD 1986 107 13,611 1881 $184,399 $325,000 Northbridge TH 1994 342 2,920 1618 $171,461 $334,000 Northridge SFD 1996 510 11,782 2333 $253,840 $410,000 Northview SFD 1977 610 12,184 1398 $150,733 $272,900 Oak Pond TH 1984 562 1,780 1205 $111,247 $185,000 Oak Tree SFD 1985 193 12,971 1576 $169,878 $328,500 Old Chapel Estates R-R 1996 24 20,183 2645 $278,724 $425,000 Old Stage SFD 1989 251 11,968 2246 $214,487 $360,000 Overbrook SFD 1966 276 11,930 1620 $153,749 $269,000 Palisades TH 1995 136 2,016 1312 $149,424 $231,000 Pointer Ridge SFD 1971 1274 13,511 1574 $148,880 $278,900 Princeton Square TH 1985 329 1,385 1235 $120,483 $200,000 Ridgeview Estates TH 1985 490 12,830 1605 $155,011 $267,000 Rockledge SFD 1967 126 12,547 1684 $185,357 $330,000 Rolling Hills SFD 1988 322 1,789 1122 $113,112 $186,000 Saddlebrook R-R 2001 295 13,190 2747 $282,865 $557,765 Somerset SFD 1962 842 11,599 1656 $159,551 $315,000 Somerset Condos Condos 1983 72 10.15 acres N/A $105,000 $107,000 Stewart's Landing SFD 1996 79 12,978 1931 $215,793 $330,000 Summerfield Condos Condos 1997 196 20.9 acres 1350 $136,719 $183,000 Sumner Chase SFD 1994 27 20,651 2135 $257,215 $424,000 Tall Oaks Crossing R-R 1992 315 12,526 2450 $222,760 $435,000 Ternberry SFD 1995 44 10,231 1929 $196,199 $349,900 Ternberry TH 1995 121 2,826 1613 $163,029 $249,900 Tulip Grove SFD 1964 520 12,599 1546 $152,713 $265,000 Victoria Heights SFD 1967 75 12,397 1587 $156,779 $265,000 Vista Condos Condos 1988 140 N/A N/A $104,333 $184,000 Westview SFD 1993 139 13,749 2383 $229,280 $370,000 Whitehall SFD 1966 499 13,561 1681 $156,691 $269,900 Woodland Lakes Conds Condos 2000 262 N/A N/A $152,375 $207,000 Woodmore Highlands R-E 1996 123 39,388 3634 $374,399 $555,000 Yorktown SFD 1966 242 13,401 1659 $156,648 $282,000 19,023 Total Units/Average Price $328,609 S ource: City of Bowie Housing Inventory by Neighborhood: Bowie Dept. of Planning and Economic Development, Nov. 2006

The Bowie housing survey numbered 19,023 existing housing units in 68 subdivisions. The price of these units ranged from $107,000 (Somerset Condominiums) to $557,000 (Saddlebrook single-family homes). The survey numbered 11,562 housing units in 39 separate subdivisions having a maximum sale price under $300,000 and 4,269 housing units (23 subdivisions) with prices of $250,000 or less. Homes priced below $250,000 are most accessible to families earning at or below 80 percent of the area median household income.

Based on the Bowie housing survey, the affordable homeowner units in Bowie tend to be the older housing stock built between 1963 and 1977; however a significant number of the affordable units were built on or after 1988. Fourteen of the affordable developments representing 3,253 units are town home developments. Condominiums, small patio units, and zero lot line homes comprise 904 of the affordable housing units.

Affordability Analysis

The affordability assumptions used in Table 20 are that a family pays not more than 33 percent of their gross 2000 median household income for housing expenses and that they receive a 6.63 percent 30-year mortgage.18 The purpose of the table is to show how much a family needs to earn, as a percentage of the median area income, to be able to afford a mortgage or to rent a home at gradually increasing price points in the City of Bowie.

Table 20

18 Although a number of lenders allow more flexible under writing standards and mortgage terms such terms are not typical and cannot be relied upon in the future. Fannie Mae’s July 17, 2007 published mortgage rate was 6.63%.

Housing Price Points Relative to % of Bowie Median Household Income (MHI) 19

Bowie Median Household Income 2000 $76,778 Monthly Housing Affordable Sales Percent MHI Annual Wage Monthly Wage Payment Price 10% $7,677.80 $640 $192 $29,970 20% $15,355.60 $1,280 $384 $59,940 30% $23,033.40 $1,919 $576 $89,910 40% $30,711.20 $2,559 $768 $119,880 50% $38,389.00 $3,199 $960 $149,850 60% $46,066.80 $3,839 $1,152 $179,820 70% $53,744.60 $4,479 $1,344 $209,790 80% $61,422.40 $5,119 $1,536 $239,760 90% $69,100.20 $5,758 $1,728 $269,730 100% $76,778.00 $6,398 $1,919 $299,543 110% $84,455.80 $7,038 $2,111 $329,513 120% $92,133.60 $7,678 $2,303 $359,483 130% $99,811.40 $8,318 $2,495 $389,453 140% $107,489.20 $8,957 $2,687 $419,423 150% $115,167.00 $9,597 $2,879 $449,393 160% $122,844.80 $10,237 $3,071 $479,363 170% $130,522.60 $10,877 $3,263 $509,333 180% $138,200.40 $11,517 $3,455 $539,303 190% $145,878.20 $12,157 $3,647 $569,273 200% $153,556.00 $12,796 $3,839 $599,243 210% $161,233.80 $13,436 $4,031 $629,213 220% $168,911.60 $14,076 $4,223 $659,183

Table 21 shows actual home prices in Bowie in 2006 and 2007 for the lowest and highest priced as well as for median priced homes in the city and Prince George’s County. The amount of taxes and insurance a family would need to pay increases the household income needed to afford a home. The annual income needed to afford the lowest priced home of $191,000 with principal, interest, taxes and insurance (PITI) is approximately $53,548. The median priced home found in the Bowie Department of Planning’s Neighborhood Housing Survey was $328,000, which would require a household income of $87,997. The

19 Bowie’s Census 2000 median household income was $76,778 compared to the median household income for Prince George’s Co. of $55,256.00. Bowie’s median family income for 2000 was $82,403. As a point of reference the estimated U.S. Census 2005 area median family income for the metro area was $74,767.

highest priced home in the City of Bowie sold for $889,000, and would require an annual income of $250,580.20

Table 21 HOMEOWNERSHIP AFFORDABILITY ANALYSIS Housing Market Analysis Area Median Income 2000 $76,778 Homeowner Housing Annual Wage (and % AMI) and Down Payment Needed to Buy Various Priced Homes (at 6.63% interest rate for a 30 year mortgage). Indicators of Downpayment Est. Total Various Home (assumes min. Principal & Monthly cost w. Annual Prices and Value/Sale 5% of sale Interest. Mortgage taxes & Income Values Price price) Pmt. at 6.63% insurance Needed % of AMI Lowest Home priced in Bowie July 2007 $191,000.00 $9,550.00 $181,450.00 $1,217.00 $1,338.70 $53,548.00 70% Median Home Value County 2006 $273,600.00 $13,680.00 $259,920.00 $1,665.00 $1,831.50 $73,260.00 95% Median Value of Existing Homes Bowie 2006 $328,609.00 $16,430.45 $312,178.55 $1,999.95 $2,199.95 $87,997.80 115% Median for sale price Bowie July 2007 $407,985.00 $20,399.25 $387,585.75 $2,483.00 $2,731.30 $109,252.00 142% Highest Home priced in Bowie July 2007 $889,000.00 $44,450.00 $844,550.00 $5,695.00 $6,264.50 $250,580.00 326% 1. Source: Lowest home price in Bowie July 2007: www.Realtor.com 2. Source: Median Home Value Prince Georges:2006: U.S. Census American Community Survey 3. Source: Median Home Value of Existing Homes in Bowie 2006: Bowie Dept. of Planning 2006 Neighborhood Housing Survey 4. Source: Median Sale Price Bowie July 2007: www.Realtor.com 5.Source: Highest home priced in Bowie July 2007: www.Realtor.com

20 Incomes needed to afford a home are calculated by using a mortgage calculator to determine principle and interest payments required for a given home’s value and then dividing that number by 30% (standard percentage of income allowed for principle & interest) and multiplying times 12 to arrive at annual income.

Availability of Affordable Rental Housing

One measure of the affordability of rental housing is whether a jurisdiction’s local market rents are in line with Federal Fair Market Rents (FMRs) established for the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. These are the rents that HUD pays landlords under contract to lease privately owned units to eligible low-income families. The following table shows the maximum 2007 rents for households receiving rental assistance through HUD’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program.

Table 22 HUD 2007 Fair Market Rents Washington MSA Efficiency 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4 BR 5 BR 6 BR

$995 $1,134 $1,286 $1,659 $2,171 $2,497 $2,822

U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development Effective Date April 28, 2007

The table below shows the seven multifamily apartment communities in Bowie. The first four are properties designated for seniors.

Table 23 Multifamily Rental Properties in Bowie Property Dwelling Mean Minimum Maximum Bedroom Units# Year Built Rent Rent Size. Bowie Commons (Seniors) 36 1980 $22 $985 1 bdrm Pin Oak Village Senior Apts. 220 1996 $865 $1,015 1-2 bdrm Evergreen Senior Apts. 110 1999 $992 $1,583 1-2 bdrm Willows Senior Apts. 79 2004 $1,095 $1,605 1-2 bdrm Archstone Bowie Town Center 348 1997 $1,150 $2,000 1-3 bdrm Archstone Governor’s Green 478 1999 $1,205 $1,900 1-3 bdrm Heather Ridge Apts. 324 1988 $1,210 $1,675 1-3 bdrm Source: City of Bowie Housing Survey by Neighborhood, Bowie Dept. of Planning & Economic Development, Nov. 2006

Scattered Site-Rental Housing in Single-Family Subdivisions

In the City of Bowie, there are a number of rental units scattered throughout single-family neighborhoods. In these neighborhoods the percentage of rental units ranges from one percent in Collington Manor to 65% in the Fletchertown subdivision. Table 24 shows a partial list of rental units located in single-family neighborhoods and the rents charged for a

sample of these units. The sample rents range from $900 per month at the Westview subdivision for a 1 bedroom-1 bath unit, to $4,000 for a 4-bedroom 3-bath unit at Collington Manor.21

21 Source: Realtor.com

Table 24 Properties for Rent in Single Family Subdivisions Property Housing Units No. of % Rental Year Sample of Unit Type Rental Units Built Rents Asked

Amber Meadows I 172 12 7% 1973 N/A N/A Amber Meadows II 57 2 4% 1993 N/A N/A Belair Greens 87 6 7% 1987 N/A N/A Belair Town Homes 298 72 24% 1969 N/A N/A Bowie Forest 96 8 8% 1992 $2,100 3brm -2.5bath Buckingham 595 42 7% 1963 N/A N/A Chapel Forge 544 38 7% 1966 $2,250 3brm -2.5bath Collington Manor 69 1 1% 1998 $4,000 4brm -3bath Collington Station 525 26 5% 1995 N/A N/A Covington 511 31 6% 1998 $1795-2000 3brm -2.5bath Covington Manor 232 9 4% 1998 N/A N/A Covington Townhomes 511 20 4% 1998 $1800-$3350 3brm-3bath Derbyshire 62 2 3% 1989 N/A N/A Devonshire Estates 186 17 9% 1997 N/A N/A Enfield Chase 132 15 11% 1985 N/A N/A Enfield Chase 156 11 7% 1987 N/A N/A Enfield Chase 54 5 9% 1988 N/A N/A Ensleigh 40 1 3% 1995 N/A N/A Essington 106 12 11% 1991 N/A N/A Evergreen Estates 201 20 10% 1989 $1,800 3brm -2.5bath Fairview 83 2 2% 1985 N/A N/A Fletchertown 20 13 65% 1950 N/A N/A Forest Hills SFD 10 2 20% 1992 N/A N/A Foxhill 308 18 6% 1963 $1859-1985 4brm -3bath Glen Allen 397 12 3% 1995 N/A N/A Glenridge SFD 22 1 5% 1969 N/A N/A Grovehurst 140 7 5% 1995 N/A N/A Heather Hills 330 30 9% 1965 $1,750 2brm -2bath Highbridge Park 204 14 7% 1993 $1,650 3brm -1bath Highbridge Park 170 7 4% 1993 $1795-2800 4brm -2bath Huntington 555 261 47% 1938 N/A N/A Idelwild 223 16 7% 1966 N/A N/A Kenilworth 1007 81 8% 1963 $2,095 3brm -2.5bath Lake Village Manor 235 45 19% 1982 $1,375 3brm -1bath Long Ridge 113 5 4% 1962 N/A N/A Longleaf 239 10 4% 2000 N/A N/A

N/A – Not Available (from the source utilized & at the time data was collected)

Table 24 Properties for Rent in Single Family Subdivisions continued

Property Housing No. of % Rental Year Sample Unit Type Units Rental Built Rents Units Asked Meadowbrook 973 58 6% 1964 $1,895 4brm-2.5bth Mitchellville 8 5 63% 1963 N/A N/A Mitchellville East 107 3 3% 1986 N/A N/A Northbridge 342 14 4% 1994 N/A N/A Northridge 510 26 5% 1996 $1995-2200 3brm-3bth Northview 610 0 0% 1977 $1850-2000 4brm-2.5bth Oak Pond 562 84 15% 1984 N/A N/A Oak Tree 193 10 5% 1985 N/A N/A Old Chapel Estates 24 1 4% 1996 N/A N/A Old Stage 251 8 3% 1989 N/A N/A Overbrook 276 17 6% 1966 N/A N/A Palisades 136 12 9% 1995 N/A N/A Pointer Ridge 1274 89 7% 1971 $1750-$1850 4brm-2.5bth Princeton Square 329 39 12% 1985 $1,900 4brm-4.5bth Ridgeview Estates 490 88 18% 1985 N/A N/A Rockledge 126 9 7% 1967 $1,650 4brm-2bth Rolling Hills 322 23 7% 1988 N/A N/A Saddlebrook 295 21 7% 2001 $2500-3000 4brm-3.5bth Somerset 842 59 7% 1962 $1,850 4brm-4.5bth Somerset Condos 72 6 8% 1983 N/A N/A Stewart's Landing 79 5 6% 1996 N/A N/A Summerfield Condos 196 35 18% 1997 N/A N/A Tall Oaks Crossing 315 13 4% 1992 N/A N/A Ternberry 44 11 25% 1995 N/A N/A Ternberry 121 16 13% 1995 N/A N/A Tulip Grove 520 42 8% 1964 $1,750 2brm-2bth Victoria Heights 75 2 3% 1967 N/A N/A Vista Condos 140 29 21% 1988 $1800-2200 3brm-2bth Westview 139 4 3% 1993 $900 1brm-1bth Whitehall 499 25 5% 1966 $1,900 4brm-2.5bth Woodland Lakes Conds 262 21 8% 2000 $1,950 3brm-2bth Woodmore Highlands 123 9 7% 1996 N/A N/A Yorktown 242 17 7% 1966 N/A N/A Total 1669 Source: City of Bowie Housing Inventory by Neighborhood: Bowie Dept. of Planning and Economic Development, Nov. 2006 {Rents charged based on data provided by Realtor.com}.

Table 2A below is the priority housing needs summary table from HUD’s Comprehensive Housing Affordability Survey (CHAS) showing the number of low-income families with

housing problems.22

22 Source: 2000 HUD CHAS Data – Housing Problems Output for Low and Moderate-Income Households. Note: “Any housing Problems” is defined as housing with cost burdened greater than 30% of income and/or overcrowding and/or without complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. Number of households takes into consideration rounding of percentages.

HOUSING GAP ANALYSIS PRIORITY NEEDS SUMMARY TABLE 2 A23 Name of Jurisdiction: Source of Data: Data Current as of: Bowie City (CDBG), Maryland CHAS Data Book 2000 Renters Owners

Small Large Small Large Elderly Related Related All Total Elderly Related Related All Total Total (5 or 1 & 2 (2 to 4) more) Other Renters 1 & 2 (2 to 4) (5 or more) Other Owners Households

Member Households Member Households

Household by Type, Income, & Housing Households households Problem (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) (J) (L)

1. Household Income <=50% MFI 209 144 34 105 492 418 387 75 128 1,008 1,500 2. Household Income <=30% MFI 131 28 0 57 216 113 71 10 63 257 473 3. % with any housing problems 89.3 64.3 N/A 75.4 82.4 45.1 80.3 100 55.6 59.5 70 4. % Cost Burden >30% 89.3 64.3 N/A 75.4 82.4 45.1 80.3 100 55.6 59.5 70 5. % Cost Burden >50% 86.3 64.3 N/A 75.4 80.6 29.2 74.6 100 23.8 43.2 60.3 6. Household Income >30% to <=50% MFI 78 116 3448 276 305 316 65 65751 1,027 7. % with any housing problems 87.2 84.5 100 100 89.9 39.3 90.8 78.5 72.3 67.2 73.3 8. % Cost Burden >30% 87.2 84.5 100 100 89.9 38 90.8 78.5 72.3 66.7 72.9 9. % Cost Burden >50% 10.3 22.4 0 70.8 24.6 13.8 55.1 44.6 50.8 37 33.7 10. Household Income >50 to <=80% MFI 38 102 5084 274 311 416 161 2491,137 1,411 11. % with any housing problems 47.4 67.6 9295.2 77.7 21.5 79.6 81.4 87.1 65.6 68

12.% Cost Burden >30% 47.4 67.6 64 95.2 72.6 21.5 78.6 78.9 87.1 64.9 66.4 13. % Cost Burden >50% 0 9.8 0 0 3.6 3.9 12.5 6.2 41.8 15.7 13.3 14. Household Income >80% MFI 94 915 212 624 1,845 1,806 7,504 1,550 2,291 13,151 14,996 15. % with any housing problems 25.5 9.9 13.7 8.8 10.8 8.9 14.6 11.1 26.6 15.5 14.9

16.% Cost Burden >30% 25.5 5.6 13.7 4.8 7.3 8.9 14.2 8.9 26.6 15 14 17. % Cost Burden >50% 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 1.6 1.3 2.2 1.6 1.4

18. Total Households 341 1,161 296 813 2,611 2,535 8,307 1,786 2,668 15,296 17,907

23 Note: Table 2A does not follow sequential table numbering in the document because it is a standard CHAS Data table that has a designated number for the HUD Consolidated Plan.

19. % with any housing problems 66.6 23.8 36.8 27.8 32.1 15.7 21.3 20.4 34 22.5 23.9 20. % Cost Burden >30 66.6 20.3 32.1 24.7 29.1 15.6 20.9 18.3 34 22 23 21. % Cost Burden >50 35.5 4.7 0 9.5 9.7 4 4.8 3.9 7.6 5.1 5.7

Data from Table 2A – HUD CHAS Data is summarized below to ascertain the cumulative number of extremely low-, very low-, and low-income renter and homeowner households that are cost burdened or have other housing problems. Data was then taken from the above tables to derive the number of for rent and for sale housing units available and affordable to each of these income groups. The difference (i.e., ‘gap’) between the number of housing units that are available/affordable and the number of households that are cost burdened or have other housing problems is the number of households needing housing assistance in the form of units, rental subsidies, down payment assistance or rehabilitation of existing housing.

Homeowner Housing Gap Analysis

Table 25 shows that there are approximately 1,392 Bowie households with housing problems that are in need of housing assistance. There are 671 small-related households comprising 48% of all owner households with housing problems. These households need housing assistance in the form of grants or loans to make their existing homes affordable, or to purchase an affordable home or to rehabilitate their existing homes. A significant number of these homeowners are low-income elderly households (234), who may require housing rehabilitation assistance, a reverse mortgage, or assistance accessing affordable rental housing.

Table 25 Unmet Homeowner Housing Needs Category by Household Total in Percent > 30% Unmet Percent > 50% Unmet Total Income Grouping City Cost Burdened Need Cost Burdened Need Unmet w. Housing w. Housing Need* Problems Problems Owner Small Related 0-30 71 80.30% 57 74.60% 53 57 Owner Small Related 31-50 316 90.80% 287 55.10% 174 287 Owner Small Related 51-80 416 78.60% 327 12.50% 52 327 Owner Large Related 0-30 10 100.00% 10 100.00% 10 10 Owner Large Related 31-50 65 78.50% 51 44.60% 29 51 Owner large Related 51-80 161 78.90% 127 6.20% 10 127 Owner Elderly 0-30 113 45.10% 51 29.20% 33 51 Owner Elderly 31-50 305 38.00% 116 13.80% 42 116 Owner Elderly 51-80 311 21.50% 67 3.90% 12 67 Owner All Others 0-30 63 55.60% 35 23.80% 15 35 Owner All Others 31-50 65 72.30% 47 50.80% 33 47 Owner All Others 51-80 249 87.10% 217 41.80% 104 217 Total 2145 1392 567 1392 * Unmet need from Table 2A is the total number of low-income households either paying too much for housing (i.e., cost burdened) and/or living in substandard housing and not receiving housing assistance. Total unmet need = 30% cost burdened because persons paying >50% of income for housing is included in the no. of persons paying >30%.

Table 26 provides an estimate of the number of for sale affordably priced housing units (i.e., $250,000 or less) over the five-year period of the Consolidated Plan 2009-2013. The estimate was determined by multiplying the total number of housing units in the Bowie Neighborhood Housing Survey (19,023) times 0.84 percent, which yielded 160 units.24 This is the estimated number of for sale affordable housing units for one year. If an average of 160 affordable units were placed on the market annually for five years there would be approximately 800 total affordable units. The Bowie Housing Survey had 72 units priced below $150,000, which is 1.69% of the total affordable units (4,269) in the survey. This percentage was multiplied times 800 to obtain an estimate of 14 units that could conceivably be sold at or below $150,000.

24 0.84 was determine by taking the reported number of for sale housing units in the 2000 Census that listed for less than $250,000 and dividing that number by the total housing units. (159/18,166).

TABLE 26 GAP IN HOUSING NEED FOR HOMEOWNERS (AVAILABLE/AFFORDABLE UNITS VS. HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE COST BURDENED) Category by Total low- Unmet Need Unmet Total Estimated Gap Household Income income > 30% Cost Need > Unmet Affordable Grouping households Burdened 50% Cost Need* Units 2009-13 in City Burdened All Owner Households 0-30% MHI 257 153 111 153 0 -153 All Owner Households 31-50% MHI 751 501 278 501 14 -487 All Owner Households 51-80% MHI 1137 738 178 738 786 48 Total 2145 1392 567 1392 800 -592 *Unmet need is explained above under table 25.

It should be noted that for sale units priced below $190,000 were not found in the actual listing of for sale housing in Bowie. The above estimates are rough approximations of the number of affordably priced housing units that might be placed on the market over a five- year period. The actual number of for sale units cannot be accurately predicted given the normal fluctuation in housing market prices. Additionally, a forecast of homes that might be placed on the market within a given period of time is a function of future economic forces, which impact the housing market. The Bowie housing market is expected to experience continued change and volatility for an indefinite period.

Rental Housing Gap Analysis

The minimum rents of the senior apartments surveyed in Bowie (Table 22) are within the range charged for HUD’s Fair Market Rents (FMR). The maximum rents charged for the two bedroom units are within the FMR for two of the senior complexes (Bowie Commons and Pin Oak), but are higher than the FMR in the Evergreen and the Willows senior properties. None of the family apartment developments surveyed (Table 23) have rents within the FMR ranges, although the one-bedroom units at the Archstone Bowie Town Center apartments and the two bedroom units at Heather Ridge apartments are only slightly above the FMR.

Although rental data was only available for a fraction of Bowie’s rental units in single- family subdivisions (Table 24), enough data was provided to draw a general picture of the rents charged. Eighteen properties have rents within the HUD Fair Market Rent limits. Only two properties (Westview and Lake Village Manor) posted rents low enough to be affordable to a family at 80% of median income.

Table 27 uses the 2000 U.S. Census estimate of available low-income rental units. There is no estimate of the future availability of affordable rental units. However, it is likely that fewer affordable rental units would be available in the future. Therefore the 2000 estimate offers a conservative estimate of the maximum potential availability of rental units.

Table 27 UNMET RENTER HOUSING NEED (RENTERS WHO ARE COST BURDENED) Category by Household Total in Percent at 30% Unmet Percent at Unmet Total Income Grouping City Cost Burdened Need 50% Cost Need Unmet Burdened Need* Renter Small Related 0-30 28 64.30% 18 64.30% 18 18 Renter Small Related 31-50 116 84.50% 98 22.40% 26 98 Renter Small Related 51-80 102 67.60% 69 9.80% 10 69 Renter Large Related 0-30 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0 Renter Large Related 31-50 34 100.00% 34 0.00% 0 34 Renter large Related 51-80 50 64.00% 32 0.00% 0 32 Renter Elderly 0-30 131 89.30% 117 86.30% 113 117 Renter Elderly 31-50 78 87.20% 68 10.30% 8 68 Renter Elderly 51-80 38 47.40% 18 0.00% 0 18 Renter All Others 0-30 57 75.40% 43 75.40% 43 43 Renter All Others 31-50 48 95.20% 46 0.00% 0 46 Renter All Others 51-80 84 4.80% 4 0.00% 0 4 Total 766 547 218 547 *Note: Persons paying >50% of income for housing is included in the no. of persons paying >30%.

The 2000 U.S. Census reported 162 affordable units available for rent. The Bowie Department of Planning’s housing survey indicated that four apartment complexes for the elderly contained 445 units. However, only approximately 256 of these units fell within HUD’s Fair Market Rent limits. No affordable family units were listed in the survey. Other scattered site rental units in single-family developments contained approximately 559 rental-housing units with moderate HUD FMR level rents. However, the availability of units for extremely low and very low-income family households is virtually non-existent.

Table 28 shows that there is a need for 603 affordable rental-housing units.25 Extremely low-income households have the greatest need, with a shortfall of 300 affordable rental units. Most of these households (230) are elderly. Very low-income renter households between 31-50% of the median income have the second highest need, where there is a shortage of 183 rental units for this income group. Most of these families are small-related households (124). The third highest priority need is for rental housing for low-income households earning between 51%-80% of Bowie’s median household income where there is a need for 120 rental housing units. Small related households (79 units needed) and large family households (32 units needed) make up the largest share of this group.

TABLE 28 GAP IN RENTER HOUSING NEED (AVAILABLE/AFFORDABLE UNITS VS. RENTERS WHO ARE COST BURDENED) Category by Total in Unmet Unmet Total Estimated Gap Household Income City Need - Need - Unmet Affordable Grouping 30% Cost 50% Cost Need Units 2009-13 Burdened Burdened

All Renter Households 0-30% MHI 216 178 174 352 52 -300 All Renter Households 31-50% MHI 276 246 34 280 97 -183 All Renter Households 51-80% MHI 274 123 10 133 13 -120 Total 766 547 218 765 162 -603

25 An alternative is to provide rental vouchers and/or tenant based rental assistance to supplement the rent that a low income family is able to pay for existing rental housing.

Conclusion

The data analysis is based in part on recent housing data from various sources including the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission, the Prince George’s County Department of Environmental Resources, the City of Bowie Planning Department and recent real estate data (homeowner sales and rentals) from Realtor.com. However, recent age of population data is not available for Bowie. The recent growth of Bowie’s population by age group is estimated based upon pass growth trends from 1990 – 2000 and patterns in how age groups have grown in Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland since the year 2000. This analysis is in part based on the rationale that Bowie’s population could be expected to continue to reflect past growth trends across all age groups and to continue to demonstrate strong growth among population groups that are also growing in Prince George’s County and the State of Maryland.

The data in this analysis indicates that the City of Bowie is growing in population among all age groups. Bowies’ population is diverse with regard to race, ethnicity, age and income. This diversity translates to a strong demand for housing of varying types (i.e., single-family detached, semi-detached townhomes, zero lot-line condominiums, and multifamily rental apartments for seniors and non-elderly households).

In the past, there has been a concentration of housing development for single-family detached housing with very little new rental housing being developed. This has future implications, especially for low-income elderly persons. The elderly population continues to grow faster than other population age groups. A significant portion of the elderly have fixed incomes that fall below the median income for the metropolitan area; as a result a significant number of the elderly will increasingly need affordably priced multifamily rental housing. This would be housing where there is an adequate social support structure so that the elderly can age in place.

Non-elderly population groups also comprise a significant number of low-income families. A significant number are small related households, large related households, and other unrelated households of varying sizes. Bowie already has a significant inventory of for sale housing that is affordable and that could be acquired by low to moderate income persons with some financial assistance.

The private housing market heretofore has not provided affordable for sale housing to meet this need. However, there are various ways that could be explored to assist Bowie residents to purchase existing homes. The State of Maryland and Prince George’s County administer programs that assist first-time and other low-moderate income homebuyers. There are also financial institutions (such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Housing

Administration and the Federal Home Loan Bank) that partner with local commercial banks and thrift savings banks to make affordable home purchasing possible.

As a significant segment of Bowie’s housing stock ages (and as the elderly ages out of these homes to seek senior apartment living) it would be reasonable to expect an increase in older existing homes for sale. These homes could offer an opportunity for younger households to purchase their first home. Many of these homes may require rehabilitation which can be supported by federal funding received by the city, provided the purchaser (or renter) earns at or below 80 percent of the median income for the metropolitan area.

The need for affordable housing presented by the data in this analysis provides a basis for how the city might allocate available federal resources to address community needs. As the City of Bowie begins to deliberate its priorities for how to address its housing and community development conditions, the need for specific types of affordable housing can now be better incorporated into that planning process.

Colts Neck

d Saddlebrook oa R n er ev S Rolling Hills am h L an a L u

d ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls ay w C igh o H lli on ng ans t H on Longleaf hn R Jo o City of Bowie ad Maryland Robert Crain Highway Crain Robert Population Density Mount Oak Road C

Per Acre h u

r c Less than 1 h

a 1 to 5 d Ashleigh 5 to 10 Hopkins 10 to 20

More than 20 nue Central Ave

source: 2000 U.S. Census Block-level data

101MilesWoodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d Saddlebrook oa R n er ev S Rolling Hills m ha L n a La u

ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls ay Co City of Bowie hw Hig lli n ng so t an on Longleaf n H R oh o Maryland J ad

Extremely Low Income Population as % of Total Population (0 to 30% of median income)

None Highway Crain Robert

Less than 1% Mount Oak Road

C 1 to 5% h u

r c h

5 to 10% R

o a Ashleigh More than 10% d Hopkins so ur ce : 200 7 HUD In come Esti mates

ral Avenue 101Miles Cent

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck d oa R n Saddlebrook er ev S m ha Rolling Hills an L L

d ad Ro olis nap An

City of Bowie y Old Stage Knolls wa gh C Hi o on lli ns ng Ha to hn n Longleaf Maryland Jo R o ad

Low Income Population as % of Total Population (0 to 50% median income)

None

Less than 10% Highway Crain Robert Mount Oak Road 10 to 20% C

h 20 to 30% u r c h

More than 30% R o

a d Ashleigh

sour ce: 2007 HUD Income Esti mates Hopkins

nue Central Ave 101Miles

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa R Saddlebrook n er ev S am Rolling Hills nh L a a

L u

ad Ro olis nap An

City of Bowie y Old Stage Knolls wa gh Co Hi on lli ns ng Ha t Longleaf hn on Maryland Jo R o ad Moderate Income Population as % of Total Population (0 to 80% of median income)

None Highway Crain Robert

Less than 10% Mount Oak Road 10 to 20% C h

r c 20 to 30% h

o More than 30% a d Ashleigh

so ur ce : 200 7 HUD In come Esti mates Hopkins

nue 101Miles Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa R Saddlebrook n er ev S m Rolling Hills ha n L La a u

d ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls ay hw Co City of Bowie ig l H li on ng ns t Longleaf Ha on hn R Jo o Maryland ad

White Population as % of Total Population

Less than 20% Robert Crain Highway Crain Robert 20 to 40% Mount Oak Road 40 to 60% C

60 to 80% r c h

More than 80% R o

a d Ashleigh Hopkins source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block Group-level data

nue 101Miles Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa Saddlebrook R n er ev S Rolling Hills am nh L La a u

d ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls City of Bowie ay Co w gh Hi lli n ng so t an on Longleaf n H R oh o Maryland J ad

African American Population as % of Total Population

Less than 20% Robert Crain Highway Crain Robert 20 to 40%

40 to 60% Mount Oak Road C

h 60 to 80% u r c h

More than 80% R o

a d Ashleigh

source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block Group-level data Hopkins

101Miles nue Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa R Saddlebrook n er ev S m Rolling Hills ha n L La a u

d ad Ro olis nap An

City of Bowie y Old Stage Knolls a hw Co Hig n lli so ng an t Longleaf n H on h R Maryland Jo o ad

Hispanic Population as % of Total Population

Less than 1% Highway Crain Robert

1 to 2% Mount Oak Road 2 to 5% C h

r c More than 5% h

a d Ashleigh Hopkins source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block Group-level data

101Miles nue Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck d oa R n Saddlebrook er ev S m ha Rolling Hills n L La a u

d ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls ay City of Bowie hw g C Hi o on lli ns ng Ha t Longleaf hn on o R J o Maryland ad

Asian Population as % of Total Population

None Highway Crain Robert

0 to 5% Mount Oak Road 5 to 10% C h

r 10 to 15% c h

R More than 15% o a d Ashleigh

source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block Group-level data Hopkins

nue 101Miles Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa R Saddlebrook n er ev S m Rolling Hills ha L an a L u r

ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls ay City of Bowie hw Co Hig n lli so ng an t n H on Longleaf h R Jo o Maryland ad

Hawaiian & Pacific Islander as % of Total Population

Less than 1% Highway Crain Robert

1 to 2% Mount Oak Road C More than 2% h u

r c h

o source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block Group-level data a d Ashleigh Hopkins

101Miles

nue Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa R Saddlebrook n er ev S m Rolling Hills ha L an a L u r

ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls ay City of Bowie hw Co Hig n lli so ng an t n H on Longleaf h R Jo o Maryland ad

Native American and Alaskan Native as % of Total Population

Less than 1% Highway Crain Robert

1 to 2% Mount Oak Road

More than 2% h

r c h

R source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block Group-level data o a d Ashleigh Hopkins

101Miles

nue Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa R Saddlebrook n er ev S am Rolling Hills h L an a L u

ad Ro olis nap An

Old Stage Knolls y wa City of Bowie gh Co i H lli on ng ans t Longleaf H on hn R Jo o Maryland ad

Other Race Population as % of Total Population

Less than 1% Highway Crain Robert

1 to 2% Mount Oak Road 2 to 5% C h

r More than 5% c h

o a Ashleigh d source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block Group-level data Hopkins

101Miles nue Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Colts Neck

d oa Saddlebrook R n er ev S Rolling Hills am h L an a L u

ad Ro olis nap An

y City of Bowie Old Stage Knolls wa gh Co Hi on lli ns ng Ha to Longleaf hn n Jo R Maryland oa d

Senior Population Per Acre Seniors (62 years + ) Robert Crain Highway Crain Robert None

0 to 1 Mount Oak Road C 1 to 5 h u

r c h

5 or More R

a source: 2000 U.S. C ensus Block-level data d Ashleigh Hopkins 101Miles

nue Central Ave

Woodmore at Oak Creek

Fair Housing

The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (WASH COG) unanimously adopted in 1997 the regional Analysis of Impediments (AI) originally contracted by and for Prince George’s County. Prince George’s County then adopted a local Fair Housing Analysis of Impediments. City of Bowie housing data was considered in the development of this Analysis. A plan that includes remediation measures pertaining to the impediments was developed as part of the County’s FY 1998 CDBG Annual Action Plan.

Several County nonprofit organizations have housing components that address housing counseling, fair housing counseling, housing legal assistance, affordability and accessibility: CASA of Maryland, Inc., Housing Initiative Partnership, Inc., Independence Now, Inc., Korean Community Center, Inc., Mission of Love, Inc., Spanish Catholic Center, Inc., Spanish Speaking Community of Maryland, Inc., United Communities Against Poverty, Inc. and Boys and Girls Homes, Inc.

Prince George’s Department of Housing and Community Development’s (DHCD), Housing Development Division has an active affirmative marketing program. The County requires property owners and developers to comply with fair housing laws including posting of signs and symbols notifying clients of fair housing practices; providing verbal and written instructions to employees and informing applicants on DHCD waiting lists of available properties and vacancies. The County’s Rental Assistance Division carries out a number of fair housing activities. These include:

Landlord Initiatives

Through this initiative, landlords are encouraged to make rental units handicapped accessible, to join the Regional Opportunity Counseling (ROC) and to maintain tight Housing Quality Standards (HQS).

Regional Opportunity Counseling

The Regional Opportunity Counseling (ROC) Program provides housing opportunity counseling to families participating in the Section 8 Program in order to move out of neighborhoods of concentrated poverty.

Section 8 Home Ownership Program

The Section 8 Home Ownership Program (SHOP) is an educational counseling incentive to encourage clients to graduate from Section 8 assistance, to resolve credit problems, and to pre-qualify individuals for various homeownership programs.

Family Self Sufficiency

Family Self Sufficiency (FSS) helps Section 8 families remove reliance on all forms of public assistance, and become economically self-sufficient by developing a five- year "contract” that maps out a strategy to secure stable employment.

Welfare to Work Initiatives

The Family Self-Sufficiency Resource Initiatives for Self Empowerment (FSS-RISE) Program, which is the first formal link between welfare and housing assistance.

Criminal Background Checks

In 1997, the Housing Authority of Prince George's County adopted a Policy Resolution on Criminal Background Checks (CBCs). In Prince George's County, CBCs are obtained for all persons 18 years of age and older prior to acceptance into housing assistance programs to determine eligibility for program participation and/or program continuation.

Housing Strategy

Decent and affordable housing is amply available in Bowie. However, current instability in the housing market is presenting several challenges for homeowners through the City. While foreclosures in the City are few, other economic conditions are causing extreme pressures to be exerted on other household expenditures. With some visual improvement to the core area of the Old Town Bowie community, and the addition of retail services, some economic vitality has been restored to the retail and housing market over the past four years. Commercial and residential units are being encouraged through financial incentive programs to renovate Old Town Bowie properties. Reviving the general visual character of Old Town Bowie has helped to create much needed incentive for homeowners and businesses owners to relocate.

The City believes that improving the current housing stock occupied by senior citizens will help stabilize communities throughout the City. The addition of “Energy Efficiency” and “Green” technologies to the housing rehabilitation program will also produce much- needed cost savings for this large and rapidly expanding population.

Affordable Housing Strategy (HUD 215 Goals)

The City of Bowie has no zoning authority, and neither owns nor funds the construction or rehabilitation of housing. The City is not a participating jurisdiction in the federal Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME), and does not plan to use its federal CDBG funds for affordable housing projects. Therefore, its affordable housing goals for low and moderate-income households rely upon the County’s goals.

The 2006 Census Bureau data states that 5,266 (11.90 % increase since 2000 Census) of Bowie’s population is 65 and over. The City has encouraged developers to provide senior housing that meets various income brackets and needs. These housing units include independent living, congregate care, and assisted living housing. City staff intends to continue working with developers to ensure that senior housing will be available for low and moderate-income households to meet the needs of seniors projected to be living in Bowie over the next 10 years.

The 1996 "A Preliminary Report on Senior Housing for the City of Bowie", prepared by the City of Bowie Planning Department, states that, “if the trend of aging in place holds true, and the trend toward migrating to warmer climates does not increase, the number of senior and elderly remaining in the City will warrant the development of all of the types of senior housing identified in this report.” These include independent living, congregate care, assisted living and skilled nursing facilities. In addition, continuing care or life care facilities will be needed to provide an array of services from independent living to full medical care. Based on this data, the following recommendations represent the core of the City’s senior housing goals:

1. Work with developers who will provide a range of senior projects to ensure that senior housing will be available for various income levels.

2. Assess every two years the success of the work of private developers in providing housing to seniors.

3. Work with the staff of the M-NCPPC to review and bring about County zoning changes that would permit more flexibility in developing senior housing.

4. Identify and recommend a balanced mix of housing to meet the needs of seniors projected to be living in the next 10 years.

The percentage of people living under the poverty level is increasing. It is expected that the characteristics of the low and moderate-income population assisted with federal and state funds through County and State-sponsored programs will continue to reflect an increasingly diverse City population. While 74

Table 2A indicates a high priority for very low and low-income cost burdened homeowners, the City finds these figures to be overstated. Therefore, the City will continue to encourage the development of a wide range of housing choices and ensure compliance with the housing objectives as stated in the City's Development Review Guidelines document.

The number of homeless individuals and families in the City will continue to be reflected in the County’s totals for permanent and transitional housing. The number of housing units produced for extremely low, low and moderate income renters and home owners using federal funds will also be reflected by Prince George’s County in its report, the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER).

Public Housing Strategy

The City of Bowie does not provide publicly assisted housing. Bowie Commons, however, provides 32 federally subsidized assisted senior housing units. There are 396 units of public housing administered by Prince George’s County Government, none of which are within City limits. Of these, 296 are reserved for elderly and 80 are available for families. The County’s Housing Authority also owns 16 family townhouse units in Capitol Heights and 11 single family homes in Upper Marlboro. Very low income Bowie residents are able to apply for these units. No displacement of public housing tenants in Bowie due to CDBG activities is anticipated.

The County administers 4,590 Housing Choice Vouchers, and there are another 4,300 units of assisted housing in the private market. In addition, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments 2001 Housing Data Survey reports that there are 2,682 project-based multi-family housing units in the private market. These units are in the HUD-insured inventory of properties or have been assisted with low income housing credits. Another 7,800 units have been assisted with tax-exempt bond financing and are set-aside for lower income households.

The County lost 350 units of assisted housing in 2001. It is expected that several hundred additional units of assisted housing will be lost over the next five years as individual property owners pay off their mortgages and convert to all private market housing. This is especially true if rents in the Washington Metropolitan Area continue to rise and the overall vacancy rate continues to fall. These losses are expected to occur in inner Beltway communities, and residents of Bowie will not be affected. In addition, approximately 350 units of rental housing will be lost in the Suitland Manor complex.

B. HOMELESSNESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Nature and Extent of Homelessness

The Maryland Department of Human Resources Annual Report on Homelessness in Maryland, fiscal year 2007 states that there were 1,943 people from Prince George’s County sheltered in FY 2007, representing 7.1% of the state’s total number of homeless. The majority were families with children. No data is currently available on how many of these households are or were residents of Bowie.

Prince George’s County has implemented a Continuum of Care strategy. The City of Bowie’s Grants & CDBG Administrator is the current Co-Chair of the County’s Homeless Services Partnership. Working through the Homeless Services Partnership, a coalition of over 30 public and private agencies, the county is implementing and expanding services and programs that assist homeless individuals and families. The City of Bowie supports the efforts of the Homeless Services Partnership and refers city residents to County services and facilities. Countywide agencies provide outreach, intake and assessment, prevention, emergency shelter, transitional housing, permanent housing and supportive services.

The Christian Community Presbyterian Church contributed funds and the City of Bowie provided a grant of $25,000 to the Bowie Pantry in FY07. In a crisis situation, when no County or nonprofit agency is able to house a family or individual who becomes homeless, these funds may be used to provide hotel rooms. There were 707 clients who received services form the Bowie Emergency Pantry between June 2006 and July 2007. This data was not self-reported. The data in the chart below was collected based on the caseworker's perceptions of the clients.

Bowie Emergency Pantry Client Information FY06 FY07 FY08 African American 52 428 - Asian 1 11 - Hispanic 0 0 - Native American 0 0 - Caucasian 40 215 - Mixed Race 3 14 - Other 4 4 - Veteran 0 0 - Handicapped 29 29 -

The following is a list of homeless facilities in the county, which are available to residents of Bowie. Only St. Matthews Housing Corporation is located within the City and provides 18 transitional beds for individuals and families.

There are three County facilities that provide emergency shelter for families:

• The Family Emergency Shelter for 16 families with children in apartment-based shelters at University Garden Apartments, Langley Park.

• Shepherd’s Cove, Capitol Heights, serving 700 persons annually, primarily families with children.

• Family Crisis Center, Inc., offering 26 beds for abused and/or homeless women with children. Services include resource referral for housing, physical and mental health care, education, training, employment services, and case management.

County emergency and transitional services and shelters for individuals:

• Prince George’s House, Capitol Heights, a transitional shelter for 16 men.

• Thirty-three church-based shelters, including five in Bowie, in the Warm Nights program during the winter months.

• Job training, job search assistance and placement services contracted by the county with Jobs for Homeless People, Inc., serving 150 formerly homeless people annually.

• Health Department, a transitional shelter with 40 residential treatment beds for persons with substance abuse.

• Department of Family Services, a transitional shelter with 20 beds for long term housing of ex-offenders with mental illness.

• Department of Family Services, providing 10 beds for transitional housing for youth leaving residential rehabilitation.

As there is no available data on homelessness specific to Bowie, the Homeless and Special Needs Population Table 1 A indicates mostly the existing County facilities and services to which City staff refers people. Given the lack of pertinent information, it is impossible to determine the unmet need. However, it can be assumed, due to the demographics of the City of Bowie and the prevalence of County and private programs and services that the unmet needs for additional facilities and services for homeless and special needs population in Bowie is low.

Table 1A Homeless and Special Needs Population

Estimated Current Unmet Relative Need Inventory Need / Priority Gap Individuals Example Emergency Shelter 115 89 26 M

Emergency Shelter 75 33 42 M Beds / Units Transitional Housing 150 75 beds 75 M Permanent Housing 15 0 15 Total 240 108 132 M Job Training 4 2 2 M Case Management 4 0 4 M Estimated Substance Abuse Treatment 60 40 beds 20 M Supportive Mental Health Care 60 20 beds 40 M Services Housing Placement 25 0 25 M Slots Life Skills Training 50 2 48 M Other Chronic Substance Abusers 30 10 20 M Seriously Mentally Ill 25 10 15 M Estimated Dually - Diagnosed 10 5 5 M Sub- Veterans 15 3 12 M populations Persons with HIV/AIDS 150 125 25 M units Victims of Domestic 30 20 10 M Violence Youth 50 10 beds 40 M Other: Housing for people 150 103 47 M with disabilities. units

Special Needs Populations

The 2000 Census indicates that the city has 3,251 households with a family member that is 65 years or older. This represents nearly 6.5% of all Bowie households. The majority of Bowie’s senior citizens reside in privately owned housing. Four senior citizen apartment residences are located in Bowie:

1. Bowie Commons has 32 units of federally subsidized housing. The operator of the facility leases the property from the city.

2. Pin Oak Village has 220 housing units reserved for senior citizens.

3. Somerset Park has 59 market rate mixed rental apartments and owner townhouse units.

4. Evergreen Senior Apartments has 110 market rental apartments units located in the Bowie Town Center.

A new 79-unit, market rate senior apartment residence building has been approved on Enfield Chase Court in the Bowie Town Center adjacent to the Evergreen Senior Apartments, to open in 2003. Additionally, there are 295 frail elderly housed in nursing homes in the City, and 32 non-elderly with special needs in nursing homes.

In addition to the senior citizen complexes in the City of Bowie, there are more than 30 private market rate senior residences in the County with over 3,000 housing units. There are 622 units of elderly housing in the County that were constructed with federal Section 202 funds that are set-aside for very low and low-income seniors. The County provides nearly 1,000 units of federally assisted housing (Housing Choice Vouchers) for elderly residents and 296 units of public housing. The Priority Needs Summary Table indicates that elderly renters have a very low unmet need for housing in the City because both the private and public markets offer sufficient housing opportunities to meet their needs.

The Volunteers of America has 24 Alternative Living Facilities (ALF) in Bowie that provide housing and services for chronically mentally ill persons. These are the only facilities located in the City that assists persons who are not homeless but who require supportive housing. It ensures that persons returning from mental institutions receive appropriate supportive housing. It is a countywide program, not limited to Bowie residents.

Many nonprofit agencies in the County provide an array of supportive housing services for the elderly and frail elderly, persons with disabilities, persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, and persons with HIV/AIDS. Through the federal Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS, the County provides housing for 125 individuals or families with HIV/AIDS. There are also 103 units of housing in scattered site group homes in the Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program. The exact number and demographics on the special needs populations residing in Bowie are not currently available.

Homelessness Priorities

The city’s faith-based community and the Bowie pantry (funded in-part by a grant from the City) provide the bulk of the assistance and services for the homeless. The City supports the Prince George’s County Homeless Services Partnership and currently serves as its Co-Chair. The Partnership engages in the following activities:

Expansion of housing (Permanent and transitional) Educational support for youth Job counseling for adults Supplying food and medical services Job placement services Counseling in financial literacy Life skills training

Special Needs Populations Priorities

The City of Bowie offers supportive services to its senior population through an array of programs coordinated through the Bowie Senior Center. These programs include classes, educational programs, trips, and information and referral services for seniors, families and caregivers of senior citizens. In addition, there is transportation for adults 55 and older and individuals with disabilities within the city limits of Bowie. The Bowie Senior Center offers both congregate and home delivered meals Monday through Friday. The Nutrition Program is sponsored by the County’s Department of Family Services. The Senior Citizens Program also provides a liaison service for the Bowie Senior Center Advisory Board, the Bowie Senior Citizen Clubs, and the seniors and Law Enforcement Together (SALT) council.

Homelessness Strategy

In the lack of specific demographic data on the city’s homeless population, the age, household composition, gender and ethnicity of Bowie’s homeless families are presumed to reflect those of Prince George’s County. The State of Maryland’s 2007 survey data indicates that 72% of the County’s homeless population is comprised of families with children. The largest age category of people served is children between 0-17 years old; 56% of the homeless are male and 44% are female. There were 2,176 African Americans, 203 whites, 115 Hispanics, and 86 others who were in homeless shelters in the County during 2007.

The City of Bowie refers people in need to Prince George’s County, as the County has 282 emergency shelters beds and 397 transitional shelter beds. These facilities are available to Bowie residents who become homeless. The County’s Department of Social Services organizes 33 faith-based congregations to provide overnight shelter, case management and meals for approximately 50 homeless persons each night during the winter months. Several Bowie churches participate in this Warm Night program including Sacred Heart Catholic Church, St. Pius X Catholic Church, the Christian Community Presbyterian Church and St. Matthew’s United Methodist Church. In addition, St. Matthew’s Housing Corporation in Bowie provides 18 transitional housing beds for homeless families. Staff from the City’s Youth Services Bureau also provide 80

family, group, and individual counseling; information and referrals; informal counseling, crisis intervention and suicide intervention services. The Youth Services Bureau sponsors 14 alcohol and drug free programs during the year.

The County’s Emergency Shelter Grant program provides apartments for families while Shepherd’s Cove and Prince George’s House provide emergency shelters for women with children, and single men. The County also leases apartments in Greenbelt for transitional housing for families.

There are approximately 10 countywide nonprofit agencies and faith-based organizations that offer emergency and transitional housing throughout the year for homeless families with children and individuals. The Community Crisis Center Services, Inc., operates the Homeless Hotline and handles approximately 1,300 calls per month representing 400 households Countywide. About 100 households are referred to emergency shelters monthly, according to the Community Crisis Center data.

The County’s Department of Social Services implements welfare initiatives through the Maryland Family Investment Program. Bowie residents in need may qualify for food stamps, public assistance, Temporary Cash Assistance for Needy Families, child care vouchers, job development programs, transportation assistance, homeless services, energy assistance, evictions prevention assistance, summer meals for children and after- hour phone service for abuse complaints.

The County operates the Emergency Food Assistance Program to distribute Federal surplus foods to emergency food pantries and needy households. Bowie’s Ascension Catholic Church coordinates food distribution in the City. Through the Maryland Emergency Food Program, emergency food providers purchase food for needy individuals and families. The Statewide Nutrition Assistance Program funds the purchase of capital equipment for emergency food pantries and food banks. Home delivered food and nutrition counseling also are available for persons with HIV/AIDS.

C. NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEEDS ASSESSMENT

The city currently focuses on two areas for non-housing community and economic development: Old Town Bowie and the area on Rte. 450 that the City refers to as Main Street. Old Town Bowie has been a commercial district since the City's founding; as times changed and the City grew, the district slumbered and almost died. In the early 1990s the first effort to revitalize began with a major state bridge construction and road realignment project. Subsequently the City commissioned a redevelopment study, which resulted in a Master Plan that the city is now implementing. The City dubbed the Route 450 area Main Street again in the early 1990's as it came to grips with changing retail customs and new land use patterns. Once the shopping and city center of "Levitt" Bowie, the retail centers along Route 450 have faltered in the face of competition from newer centers on other highways, and from the changing nature of and consolidation in retail.

Public Infrastructure

In 1998, the County Council created a Biennial Growth Policy Plan to provide the framework for future growth management and planning. The Smart Growth Initiative is linked to the development of a sound infrastructure. Planners and elected officials recognize that as the County enters the 21st century, the health and safety of communities and neighborhoods are essential to the efficient use of the existing infrastructure.

Street improvements, accessibility improvements, rehabilitation, acquisition and demolition have been among the chief capital projects the County has financed with CDBG funds over two decades. The City of Bowie has participated in the County’s CDBG program for the last 17 years conducting improvements to Old Town Bowie’s aging infrastructure.

The 8,040 Levitt built homes in the 1960’s were tied into the public water and sewer system. Most of the City streets were constructed after 1960. The City’s Public Works Department has an annual street maintenance program, which keeps roads operable. Prior to 1958, the City consisted of Old Town Bowie. Over the years, storm drains and public water and sewer lines were installed in Old Town Bowie.

Public Facilities

The City of Bowie owns and maintains 15 buildings, which includes five public museums, a gymnasium, a public playhouse, and eight parks, one of which is the 65-acre Allen Pond Park surrounding the 10-acre pond and boathouse. The City maintains 22 miles of hiker/biker trails. There are 9 County operated schools in Bowie, and three community centers, some of which even have computer labs, operated by Maryland- National Park and Planning Commission. The Bowie Public Library is centrally located on Rte. 450 Main Street next to Bowie High School. The Metro runs 10 lines and services 193 bus stops in Bowie. The MARC station, formally located at the Bowie Train Depot in Old Town Bowie, is now located at Bowie State University, just north of Bowie.

Bowie Health Center is an emergency care and surgical outpatient facility serving the Bowie/Crofton area and surrounding communities. It is a member of Dimensions Healthcare System, the largest not-for-profit provider of healthcare services in Prince George's County. Larkin Chase Rehabilitation and Nursing Center is a long-term care facility located on the campus of Bowie Health Center in Bowie, Maryland.

Senior Center

The new, state-of-the-art 29,000 sq. ft Bowie Senior Center offers opportunities for social, educational, and physical activities, as well as local and out-of-town trips for adults 55 years of age and older. The Senior Center includes seven classrooms, computer lab, fitness room, exercise room, billiards room, large multipurpose room, library, lounge, and a health and counseling suite.

Parks and Recreational Facilities

The Parks and Grounds Division maintains 75 recreational fields, 64 acres of parkland and flowerbeds, 22 miles of bike trails, throughout the City. There are an additional 22 M-NCPPC parks in Bowie. The City also constructed a 27,400 sq. ft. Municipal Gymnasium two years ago, which provides recreational programs and facilities for Bowie residents in addition to the three Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, (M-NCPPC), Community Centers, which also provide recreational provisions for residents.

A one million dollar addition/renovation has been under construction at the Ice Arena, which will contain locker rooms, showers, meeting space, and expanded areas for a food concessionaire and a pro shop. The Ice Arena provides a recreational program of indoor ice-skating for community residents. The majority of the available ice time is devoted to public skating sessions, group lessons, ice rentals (hockey and figure skating). The arena will open for its sixth summer in 2003. Summer activities include: learn to skate day camps, clinics for hockey and figure skating as well as public sessions, group lessons and other ice rentals. There will be dry floor activities in the facility in May and June, including the Bowiefest Home show and the Battle of the Bands.

Public Services

Public services address the health and safety concerns of Bowie citizens, particularly those low income and vulnerable populations. Resources are focused on special needs populations that include the elderly and frail elderly, persons with disabilities, and youth and families. Services reflect needs that include literacy training, health, transportation, crime awareness, employment training, and youth services.

The Department of Community Services provides programming for recreation, youth and families, and senior citizens. Neighborhood preservation services include Animal Control, Code Compliance, Building Permit and Rental Licensing. The Solid Waste Division is responsible for the collection and disposal of the City's solid waste. This includes special metal pickup, recycling, yard waste and twice weekly household refuse pickup. 83

The Public Works Department is responsible for the collection and treatment of raw sewage. The Bowie Waste Water Treatment Plant, (WWTP), was the first in the United States to utilize Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR). This is a natural treatment process that reduces the need for chemicals while improving effluent quality. Bowie’s WWTP has won major environmental awards from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Maryland Municipal League. Scores of plants along the Atlantic Coast have now adopted this BNR process.

The plant processes approximately 2.2 million gallons of sewage on a daily basis and serves the same areas of the City as does the Water Plant: Bowie Forest, Buckingham, Chapel Forge, Derbyshire, Foxhill, Glenridge, Gradys Walk, Heather Hills, Idlewild, Kenilworth, Long Ridge, Meadowbrook, Overbrook, Rockledge, Somerset, Tulip Grove, Victoria Heights, Whitehall, and Yorktown. All other areas of the City utilize the services of Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) for wastewater treatment.

The City's Water Plant serves approximately half of the residents of Bowie. With a few limited exceptions, this system does not expand into newly developing areas. The Levitt Corporation constructed the system in the early 1960's. This division is responsible for the production and purification of the water supply for its customers.

The City draws its water from six wells from aquifers of the Magothy, Patapsco, and Patuxent Rivers at depths of up to 1,000 feet. The Water Plant is staffed seven days per week. The plant, which serves approximately 25,000 residents, processes and distributes an average of 2.3 million gallons of water per day. All other areas of the City obtain their water from the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC).

Senior Services

The Bowie Senior Citizen Program is a comprehensive, multifaceted service providing referrals to senior citizens, families, and caregivers of senior citizens. This program operates from the new state of the art Bowie Senior Center. The Senior Center, Gymnasium, Health Center, multiple senior apartment complexes and assisted living centers, and the Bowie Town Center, are all within walking distance to one another, and linked by paved hiker/biker trails and sidewalks.

The Bowie Senior Center has 120 active volunteers who donate their time in a variety of jobs. Meals are served at the Center, Monday through Friday at 11:45 a.m. The meals are provided through the Prince George’s County Department of Family Services, Aging Division for seniors 60 and over. Participants are asked for a donation. Participants age 55 – 59 pay full price for the meal. In addition, the Nutrition Program provides homebound meals. City Senior Transportation system delivers the meals to Bowie residents. In addition, the Food and Friendship Program provides both congregate and home delivered lunches to the senior citizen population.

The Senior Center also serves as a referral center for programs and activities provided by other county, state, and private agencies and groups.

Programs offered at the Senior Center are: • Classes through the Prince George’s Community College Senior Program, with City funded instructors, or volunteer instructors. • Day Trips: local and out of town • Seminars and Lectures on issues of interest to seniors, i.e., health, financial etc.

Services offered at the Senior Center are: • Monthly Health Check provided by Prince George’s County Health Department • Weekly Blood Pressure Check through Bowie Health Center, Prince George’s County Health Department and volunteer nurses. • Prince George’s County Department of Family Services, Aging Division Services include:

1. Information & Assistance worker to assist seniors with locating appropriate services.

2. Mental Health Services (monthly). Individual counseling and group sessions.

3. Hearing Screening provided by Hearing Professionals, Inc. or Bowie Hearing Center.

Support Groups:

Hearing Impaired Aging Issues Support NAMI Parent Support (National Alliance for the Mentally Ill) Diabetes Support Parkinson’s Support Weight Management

Other senior services available to residents include:

Tax Counseling--Trained volunteers through the Tax Counseling for the Elderly (TCE) program will help low to middle income seniors in Prince George's County in preparing their tax returns. Volunteers are available to help senior residents at the Bowie Senior Center through the tax season.

Bowie Senior Computer Classes—Computer classes are taught at the technology lab at the Bowie Senior Center. Courses taught range from Beginners, to Adobe Photo Shop, to Genealogy.

Bowie Senior Transportation Services—This program offers curb-to- curb transportation for Bowie senior citizens age 55 and older to the Senior Center, medical appointments, scheduled shopping days, Senior Clubs, and other trips on a priority basis. Transportation within the City limits is offered to seniors. Curb-to-curb transportation is also provided for non-senior Bowie residents with disabilities for medical appointments and other trips within the City limits. A lift-equipped van is available for those in need.

There are approximately 100 health services provided Countywide by the public and private sector including Home Health (nursing, physical therapy, nutrition, etc.), hospitals, clinics, dental, vision, mental health, respite, hospice service, discount pharmacy and medical equipment.

Recreational Services

The City of Bowie sponsors several special events and concerts throughout the year. Of special interest is Bowiefest, held on the first Saturday in June at Allen Pond Park. This is a "community day" at which the various organizations, service groups, churches, interest groups, scouts and non profit groups assemble with crafters for a daylong celebration of the community that includes a variety of food and entertainment.

On July 4 annually, the City sponsors a Fireworks Display that includes a variety of foods and entertainment during a daylong celebration at Allen Pond Park.

In autumn, the Arts and Expo fair held at Allen Pond Park features upscale artists selling a variety of artwork. This is complemented by all day entertainment and music with wine tasting from Maryland wineries.

Services for the Disabled Persons

Please refer to Senior Transportation section above.

Substance Abuse Prevention Services

Of the 32,948 adults estimated in need of substance abuse treatment in the County, only about 2,000 are in treatment each year. The County provides extensive outpatient drug treatment for adolescents, women and children.

The City of Bowie’s Youth and Family Services (BYFS) provides substance abuse prevention programming for youth. BYFS meets annually with guidance staff, principals and Parent Teacher/Student Associations to conduct comprehensive planning with area elementary, middle and high schools. Substance abuse prevention awareness education for students and for parents and teachers is conducted in each school. Seven public elementary schools are assisted with Red Ribbon Month (October) drug & alcohol abuse programs. They are offered the Project Save program, a reading reinforcement and substance

abuse risk factor reduction program, for early elementary grades 1 through 3. Sixth graders are offered a Decision Making course in a group setting at three of the seven schools each year. Two local private schools have participated in the Red Ribbon Campaign and the Project Save Program.

Benjamin Tasker Middle School is provided assistance and facilitators for their Red Ribbon Substance Abuse Prevention Program each year. Four prevention- oriented events are conducted for middle school children each year. In addition, the Maryland Assistance Program is now in its third year at Tasker, which consists of a multidisciplinary intervention team providing drug and alcohol risk screening and referral services to students and their parents.

Bowie High School is in their fifth year participating in the Maryland Assistance Program. Substance abuse prevention activities are most active at the high school level, with the sponsoring of at least twelve drug and alcohol-free events. These events are designed by youth for youth and are conducted in part by youth.

In addition, the Community Prevention Network assists with events at community-based venues throughout the year. To conduct and promote these events this year, they partnered with M-NCPPC, the Bowie Town Center, the Prince George’s County Police Department, Outback Steakhouse, Target, Borders Books, the Bowie Baysox, Bowie Elks, and the Greater Bowie Chamber of Commerce.

Employment Training

The County has several programs to assist those people who have been out of the work force for an extended period and have complex problems like chronic illness, substance abuse, and severely limited education and work experience. The Prince George’s County Department of Social Services (DSS) administers national welfare reform or Welfare to Work, known in Maryland as the Family Investment Program. In 1999, DSS developed a Family Investment Program Plan for the years 2000 to 2002 to emphasize the expectation of employment while preserving the self-esteem of participants. Please refer to the Economic Development needs section below for further details on City and County employment training services.

Child Care Services

The City of Bowie does not provide childcare services for residents. Inquiries regarding childcare provisions in Bowie are referred to the County’s Child Care System called LOCATE. The County provides residents with a list of licensed day care providers in their area.

Educational Outreach

Between 1997 and 2002, the City of Bowie offered a free drop-in tutoring program for students of all ages. The program was offered for two hours on Thursdays while public schools were in session. During the fall of 2002

Huntington Community Center in Old Town Bowie received funding to offer free tutoring services four days per week. City resources (volunteers and materials) were redirected to support their tutoring program. The City does offer other outreach services to the community, however. These services include:

Help Increase the Peace Program, HIPP, is a program that empowers youth to reduce violence and strengthen cross-racial and cross-cultural understanding. In cooperation with Bowie High School, BYFS conducts basic and advanced workshops. Students are trained to become group facilitators.

Decision-making and Diversity for Sixth Graders began as a pilot program in 2000 and is now being offered in two elementary schools. BYFS staff works in the schools with the school counselors and conducts six-week groups for small groups of sixth graders. By the end of the academic year, all sixth graders in these schools will have participated in this program.

Maryland Student Assistance Program is a Prince George’s County School Board program. BYFS staff was instrumental in establishing this worthy endeavor in Bowie High School and Benjamin Tasker Middle School. Students who may be at risk for drug or alcohol abuse are reported to a committee within the school. After ascertaining that a problem may exist and getting parental approval, BYFS staff assesses the student for substance use. Referrals and treatment recommendations are then made to the parents.

Youth and Family Services

The Bowie Youth Services Bureau, (BYFS), is jointly sponsored by the State of Maryland, Prince George’s County, and the City of Bowie. The primary goals are to promote youth development, prevent juvenile delinquency, and reduce family tension and conflict. The staff provides direct services in formal counseling (family, group and individual), information and referral, informal counseling, crisis intervention, suicide intervention, substance abuse prevention, community consultation, drug and alcohol-free events, school intervention programs, and court and school liaison. Services and programs offered are:

Counseling

• Family Counseling • Parenting Education Groups • Groups for Parents & Children Groups for Teens • Educational/Support Group

Outreach Programs

• Drug/Alcohol-free Community Events • Teen Mentoring Program • School Collaboration

Information & Referral

• Teen Job Bank • Community Resources and Referrals

Crisis Intervention

• Suicide Intervention • Child Abuse

The total BYFS operating budget is $818,800. A matching state grant of $113,365 and approximately $20,000 come from other grant sources. All counseling services are confidential and provided on a cost-free basis. However, the City has adopted a fee schedule, which would be implemented only if state matching funds fall below $100,000.

FY07 Number of adults receiving counseling 199 Number of youth receiving counseling 235 Total number of formal counseling cases 434 Persons receiving informal counseling 253 Persons receiving referrals 373 Persons receiving suicide/crisis intervention 69 Persons receiving substance abuse assess. /referral 137 Number of groups/workshops conducted in office 0 Persons served in groups/workshops in office 0 Number of groups/workshops in schools 1443 Youth served in group/workshops in schools 308 Number of alcohol/drug-free events for youth 0 Youth served in alcohol/drug-free events 0

To enhance the City’s mission to children and their families, BYFS staff is involved in numerous outreach programs. These programs include:

The Community Prevention Network

Involving many facets of the greater Bowie community, this group was developed to meet and shape projects, plus share ideas on how our community can best meet the needs of our youth. This is an evolving group and all community members, including parents, businesses, civic organizations, schools and religious leaders, are encouraged to participate.

BYFS also facilitates group sessions as the need arises and there is sufficient interest from the community.

Active Parenting Educational groups for parents with children of different ages -- toddlers, 6- to 12-year-olds, and teenagers. The focus is on learning practical skills to develop self-esteem, cooperation and responsibility in their children. Parents learn to improve communication with their children and practice new approaches to discipline.

“My Family and Me” Separation/Divorce Two simultaneous groups to help parents and their children, ages 6½ - 11, through the separation and/or divorce process. The adult group explores solutions to common problems and is given an opportunity to learn active listening and problem-solving techniques. Children learn to identify feelings and thoughts using games, crafts, discussion, and other activities, helping them develop ways to handle the transition.

ADHD Education Two simultaneous groups focus on the “art of survival” when a child has a diagnosis of Attention Deficit Disorder, with or without hyperactivity -- one for parents and a separate group for the child. Adults learn about ADHD, new ways to help their child, and how the disorder in a child affects the whole family. The children’s group focuses on the improvement of social skills.

Girls Count An exploration for teen girls to learn how to nurture their true selves, share ideas about everyday issues, and learn about making important choices and decisions. Each eight-week session focuses on a theme such as self- image, assertiveness, decision-making, peer pressures, etc.

Parenting Through Play This group helps children ages 2 - 10, cooperate more and have more confidence. This parent/child group focuses on strengthening their bond through play. Parents learn to help their children increase self-esteem, express themselves effectively, and cooperate in new ways in a safe and nurturing environment.

Accessibility

The City of Bowie was asked to participate in the Civic Access Review in 2000, by the United States Department of Justice, on the 10th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). City-owned facilities where public programming was offered were inspected for compliance with ADA. Recommendations were made and the City has implemented those modifications to the municipal facilities cited. A subsequent follow- up review was conducted in 2002 to assure ADA compliance. No additional recommendations were offered to the City by the Justice Department on that occasion, as inspected sites met all basic requirements for program accessibility.

Although it was not required by the Justice Department, the City of Bowie installed approximately 600 ADA ramps throughout the City to further assure handicap accessibility to City streets and sidewalks.

William Levitt, as mentioned previously, was a developer who very efficiently constructed post World War II tract housing in the 1960’s. Many of the Levitt homes built north of Route 50 were one-story structures making them easily accessible to people with orthopedic disabilities. South of Route 50 also includes some Levitt built homes. However, most new development in this area happened within the last twenty years, the majority of which has occurred specifically in the last five years, assuring ADA compliance. The older, and in some cases historic, homes in Old Town Bowie, many of which are two story Victorian houses, do not generally meet ADA standards.

Historic Preservation

The City of Bowie has invested in preserving its cultural resources and now operates five historic museums, one of which is the Bowie Railroad Museum. The circa 1910 Pennsylvania Railroad depot, control tower and passenger shelter are joined by a 1922 Norfolk & Western Railroad caboose to portray Bowie’s rail history. Together, they comprise the Bowie Railroad Station Museum. The Bowie Railroad Station Museum has new exhibit panels planned. They will detail the homes, schools, businesses, and churches of Old Town Bowie, as well as panels relating to the Bowie Race Track, Bowie State University, the railroad, and the Washington, Baltimore, & Annapolis trolley.

Four City-owned properties have Maryland Historic Trust Preservation Easements. The Bowie Railroad Museum is one of these protected historic properties. Belair Mansion, the restored plantation home of the colonial Governor Samuel Ogle, is another. The City of Bowie acquired the Belair Stables in 1968, and has invested $700,000, ($40,000 of which is State funding), restoring the historic building to be used as the Maryland Thoroughbred Racing Museum. In 1985, the City purchased the Harmel House in an effort to prevent development. Originally, the house served as the storekeeper’s residence. Today, the facility operates as a Radio and T.V. History Museum through a cooperative agreement with the Radio History Society, Inc.

The City has also created a Historic Town of Bowie Self Guided Tour map, which included locations and descriptions of 42 historic properties in Old Town Bowie. There are nine historic sites within Bowie on the State’s registry for historic sites. As 92

development seems to be the main threat to historic sites in the area, acquiring such national and state designation is vital to historic preservation.

There are several citizen advisory groups, which participate in guiding the City’s Museums Division. Huntington Heritage Society, Friends of Belair Estate, and Historic Old Bowie Merchants Association (HOBMA) and the Revitalization Committee have been invaluable to the preservation of these historic properties.

Economic Development

Commercial Rehabilitation

The City’s need for commercial rehabilitation is mainly in Old Town Bowie. Old Town Bowie has suffered economic decline since its boom at the turn of the twentieth century. It is an older urban neighborhood that has fallen into disrepair, as well as economic stagnation. Although it has potential to be a vibrant place to live and work, there are serious obstacles to the redevelopment of Old Town Bowie.

The mass of the City’s population is located three miles southeast of Old Town Bowie. The residents of Old Town Bowie are connected to the City only by a geographic “umbilical cord”. Although, Old Town Bowie was once the center of commerce and social activity, it is now virtually a satellite community, separated from the City, connected to the rest of the City by only a roadway. Furthermore, the MARC station was relocated to Bowie State University a few miles away. This has contributed significantly to the drastic decline in the community’s vitality.

However, since the city became an Entitlement Community in September 2003, CDBG and other resources have helped to revitalize the community and bring new businesses, new investments, and improved vehicular and pedestrian mobility. Property values in Old Town Bowie have improved. Properties that had shown signs of neglect have been restored through a City-run grant program for façade improvements. Real estate transactions have increased and several commercial properties have been sold.

The City has invested over $900,000 in grant funds in the Old Town Bowie community in the past four years. These funds are in addition to the CDBG funds provided by HUD which were spent on infrastructure improvements (street paving, curb & gutter construction, and sidewalk construction). These infrastructure improvements have significantly reduced the stormwater drainage problems in the community. Most of these grant funds were provided by the Maryland Department of Housing Department of Housing and Community Development, Community Legacy Program. The projects covered activities such as

New decorative/ornate street signs Trail construction New commercial area parking lot 93

Studies on trail linkages between the community and the local State college (Bowie State University) New decorative curb cuts

The City has introduced several financial incentive programs intended to address the visual appearances of properties in Old Town Bowie. Please refer to the Grants and Loans section below for more detail on these programs.

There are approximately thirty property owners in the commercial district. The City, State, County and other public entities own much of the study area including the City park, the County owned community center and fire station, including significant State Highway Administration, (SHA) holdings around the bridge. Much of the land is in the form of unimproved rights of way for roads laid out in the original plat. It is important to note that Old Town Bowie has rather confused records on lot boundaries due to conflicting plats used during the initial improvements and sales. Ownership and property lines will need to be carefully investigated during revitalization.

A high percentage of the original lots and roads remain undeveloped, some due to water drainage issues. Many landholders own several land parcels that have been clustered together to make a larger unit, providing easier assembly of parcels for larger developments as well as opportunities for infill development in lower density areas. Parcels along the south side of Ninth Street were not divided into long, narrow lots. Instead, they vary greatly in size. Many have small buildings sited near the street edge with empty land behind. Vacant land within block interiors provides opportunities for parking and pedestrian-oriented alley shopping.

Capital Improvements for Commercial Property

The City has recently initiated two new funding opportunities intended to facilitate the much needed capital improvements for commercial properties in Old Town Bowie: the Old Town Bowie Façade Program and the Old Town Bowie Loan Program. Please refer to Grants and Loan section below for more details.

Small Business Development

A workforce Partnership Network has been formed to coordinate all of the employment and training opportunities offered through community colleges, government agencies and nonprofit organizations in the County.

The Workforce Services Corporation (previously the Private Industry Council) is the primary service provider with offices located in Landover. Services include:

• Vocational training • GED Training • Job readiness training and counseling • Access to information about job openings

• Training programs for specific retailers including CVS, Giant Food and Safeway • Employment Referral

The City works with the Workforce Services Corporation (WSC) to provide business referrals for job placements of Welfare-to-Work clients. Through the leveraging of resources and collaborations in the public and private sectors, WSC also offers affordable housing, dental care, clothing and metal health counseling in addition to jobs and training.

Grants and Loans

The City provides multiple financial incentives and technical assistance for small business development and increased economic vitality in Old Town Bowie, as well as through the City. These programs include:

Small Business Growth Fund:

The Financial Services Corporation administers the Small Businesses Growth Fund. The fund provides financial assistance to for-profit companies with 25 or fewer employees. It was designed primarily to assist existing businesses in their expansion efforts. Start-up businesses are considered on a case-by-case basis. Loan amounts range from $25,000 to $250,000 and are guaranteed by the United States Small Business Administration under its 7 (a) program.

Small Business Association 504 Loan Program:

The Small Business Association, (SBA), Washington Metropolitan Area District Office, has implemented a new marketing initiative under SBA’s Community Express and SBAExpress loan guaranty programs. This initiative combines financial and technical assistance to enable small and home-based business owners to access business loans instead of consumer loans. Participants in this program receive training on completing a loan application during these sessions. This program provides existing, viable small businesses with long-term below market rate financing for the acquisition of land and buildings, machinery and equipment, construction and renovation which result in job creation.

The Prince George’s County Financial Services Corporation administers this program and determines the ability of small business to secure and repay loan proceeds. Only creditworthy firms are eligible for assistance under the 504-loan program.

Old Town Bowie Facade Grant Program:

Recognizing that visual and aesthetic improvements are the basis for enhancing Old Town Bowie's marketability and viability as a commercial center, the City of Bowie developed and now implements the Old Town Bowie Façade Grant Program. This matching grant program is for business owners or property owners in the Revitalization Plan Area, as designated in the September 1999 Master Plan for Redevelopment of Old Town Bowie, to do facade improvement work. The City has prepared a list of owners eligible for the program. Owners who are subject to an Order of Abatement issued by the District Court in connection with the

96 issuance of municipal infractions issued by a City of Bowie or Prince George's County Code Compliance Officer are NOT eligible for a matching grant.

The desired visual qualities this program hopes to achieve in the revitalized Old Town Bowie will accentuate the current architectural style of the existing building, and recreate the positive visual qualities of Huntington, the railroad town of the 1880's through the 1920's in the design and construction of new buildings.

For the purposes of this Old Town Bowie program, façade is defined as any part of the exterior of a building or its grounds that is visible to someone looking from outside the building or grounds. Façade components include the visible exterior elements that affect perception by the viewer, such as fundamental architectural details (e.g. siding, trim, moldings, windows and doors, etc.), secondary details (such as shutters, awnings, signage, etc.), finish treatments (such as paint, stucco or brick veneer, etc.), landscaping elements of an enduring nature (such as ornamental fencing, planter boxes, etc.), and any other design or functional element as approved by the consultant.

The City will provide limited architectural consultant services to each building owner or business owner to ensure the owners' ideas and plans fit with the overall design theme for Old Town Bowie.

Old Town Bowie Grants and Loan Program:

This grants and loan program is for business owners or property owners in the Revitalization Plan Area, as designated in the September 1999 Master Plan for Redevelopment of Old Town Bowie. The City will prepare a list of owners eligible for the program.

The City will provide limited architectural consultant services to each building owner or business owner to ensure the owners' ideas and plans fit with the overall design theme for Old Town Bowie.

Loan applications will be accepted from owners to fund exterior improvements to commercial buildings consistent with an approved design theme when the cost exceeds $10,000 or when the owner does not have the money needed for a matching grant; to fund interior improvements to commercial buildings; to fund reconstruction or remodeling of existing commercial buildings consistent with an approved visual design theme; or, to fund construction of new commercial buildings consistent with an approved design theme.

For both grant programs, the property owner is responsible for having the work done. A business owner must have the written permission of the property owner to do the work.

Entrepreneurship Program:

The Entrepreneurship Program is a partnership between the Capitol Region Small Business Development Center and the City of Bowie to provide training for citizens who operate small businesses or who want to start their own business. Two components currently exist: a monthly SBDC Day and a twice a month Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) Loan Initiative information and training sessions.

“Smart Start – Entrepreneur 101” is an informative class that has been developed to help the budding entrepreneur in Bowie understand all the “in’s and out’s” of starting a new business venture. An attorney, accountant, SBDC counselor and SBA representative provide a wealth of information to help participants understand such topics as: the legal forms of business structure, how to register a business in the State of Maryland, accounting considerations and what lenders look for when applying for a loan. Valuable business resources are also introduced to help the entrepreneur get started. The SBDC conducts a business plan workshop at no charge to the business owner. The workshop provides professional guidance on developing a plan that gets results.

Technical Assistance:

The Workforce Services Corporation provides job readiness training and counseling. The Financing and Business Assistance Division of the Prince George’s County Economic Development Corporation help entrepreneurs use Angel Capital Electronic Network online service. The Angel Capital Electronic Network is an Internet-based securities listing service that makes it possible for small business owners to identify investors of equity financing in the $250,000 to $3 million range. Entrepreneurs can reach accredited investors (called “angels”) with a net worth exceeding $1 million or annual income greater than $200,000. The Financing and Business Assistance Division of the Prince George’s County Economic Development Corporation help entrepreneurs use the online service and register for the program.

Institutional Structure

City Manager’s Office will be responsible for overall program compliance to federal CDBG regulations. The City of Bowie’s Department of Community Services will provide linkages to the senior citizen community since it operates the City’s state-of-the-art 98

Senior Center. The City’s Finance Department will conduct the financial management of the CDBG funds. The Grants & CDBG Administrator, under direct supervision of the City Manager’s Office, will complete required evaluation reporting, and ensure overall project compliance with the Approved Citizen Participation Plan, the Approved Consolidated Plan, and federal regulations.

All capital projects conducted by the City of Bowie are also in compliance with local codes, ordinances, master plans, and community development guidelines as indicated below.

Energy Efficiency

The City of Bowie complies with the Maryland Building Rehabilitation Code, called "Smart Codes" which encourages investment in existing neighborhoods through the rehabilitation and reuse of existing buildings. The Smart Codes Program is a component of Maryland's Smart Growth initiative that focuses on the new Maryland Building Rehabilitation Code, which establishes the constructions code requirements for work on buildings over one year old, renovations, and historic preservation. Existing historic preservation standards already incorporate considerations for authenticity as well as environmental concerns, especially in regards to the removal of lead paint. A more environmentally conscious approach to design and construction is encouraged through these established Smart Codes.

The City of Bowie is committed to identifying, conducting, and promoting energy conservation, and the utilization of renewable energy where and whenever feasible as is evident through the recent partnership with Maryland Energy Administration in the Rebuild America Program. In order to further emphasize the City’s commitment to resource conservation, the City Council adopted an innovative policy (Resolution 15-03) which requires all municipal construction, renovation, and deconstruction projects to incorporate sustainable development principles and practices whenever feasible. The federal and state governments have adopted similar legislation. City staff will continue to promote energy efficiency through public demonstration projects and workshops, as well as through the development of a Sustainable Development page on the City’s web site.

Through the adoption of Resolution 15-03, the first few capital improvement projects which the City conducts will invariably serve as highly visible demonstration projects modeling renewable energy usage, Sustainable Design and “Green” Construction, Low Impact Development (LID) as an alternative to storm water management ponds, and Conservation Landscaping. The City will work in collaboration with zoning officials to revise the existing building codes to allow for feasibility of similar projects that may encourage small residential projects as well as large-scale projects implemented by developers.

The City received a special grant from OpenDoor Housing Fund to encourage the use of “Energy Efficient” resources and “Green” technologies in the senior housing rehabilitation program.

Lead-Based Paint Hazards

The City of Bowie performs all historic preservation and renovation in accordance to Maryland Building Rehabilitation Code and preservation standards. As the City owns and operates five historic museums, one of which is located in Old Town Bowie, such capital improvements happen regularly.

The City contains 397 housing units constructed prior to 1960. Prior to 1958, when the Belair Estate was annexed, the City consisted only of Old Town Bowie. Between 1960 and 1970, 8,040 new homes were constructed, the majority of which were Levitt homes. Therefore, the majority of lead paint hazards would be found in the 397 older homes of Old Town Bowie. According to census data, there is a concentration of low-moderate and very low-income families living in Old Town Bowie. It is furthered estimated that the majority of residents living in these older homes are long time residents who are now elderly, rather than children.

The County has established a broad-based community effort to ameliorate health risks associated with lead-based paint hazards. Some very low-income families with children are living in 30 to 40-year-old housing and are the most vulnerable to lead hazards. The County has identified three target areas for a concentrated lead-based paint reduction program over the next several years. Bowie is not one of these target areas. There are other programs addressing lead paint hazards to which City staff may refer residents. These agencies include: the Maryland Department of Environmental Resources, Maryland Department of Environment, Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development, and the National Center for Lead Safe Housing.

Code Enforcement

As a governmental agency, the City of Bowie encourages the implementation of building codes that promote Smart Growth initiatives by incorporating environmentally sensitive, “green” design, methods, or materials into the re/development review process. This commitment is evident in the Bowie Development Review Guidelines, and the City’s Environmental Wildlife Habitat Management Guidelines. These City documents are in line with Prince George’s County’s Preliminary General Plan, the Department of Environmental Resources’ Total Water Management Technical Report, and the Chesapeake Bay 2000 Agreement.

Although much of Bowie, due to its demographics, does not qualify for many of the Smart Growth initiatives, it has participated in programs for which it qualified. Rte 450 Main Street is a phased project that was initiated under Main Street Maryland. Through the Neighborhood Business Development Program, Old Town Bowie was one location within City limits designated to qualify. The City

100 of Bowie has applied previously through the TEA-21 program, as well as Maryland Department of Transportation’s Recreation Trails Program, for sidewalk retrofit projects for Old Town Bowie.

Bowie’s Office of Code Compliance, which inspects rental property annually, has not identify any rental housing units in Bowie as structurally unsound or unfit for human habitation. The historic Old Town Bowie, however, is the area most likely in need of property rehabilitation, as many properties show obvious signs of neglect, and many may not meet current building, or health and safety codes.

Planning

The City of Bowie does not control major land use, zoning, subdivision, or site plan decisions within its municipal boundaries, as this authority is given to Prince George’s County under the State of Maryland’s Regional District Act. A Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (MNCPPC), the agency that administers planning and zoning regulations in Prince George’s County, gives the City the right to review and comment on all major development applications within the City limits, as well as the areas within one mile of the City limits. The City does, however, have authority to review and act on departures and variances from the Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance for projects within the City limits. The Prince George’s County Council granted this authority to the City in October 1998.

The following plans identify needs and provide guidance for the Bowie area's growth and development: The 1991 Bowie-Collington-Mitchellville and Vicinity Area Master Plan; the County General Plan; the County Biennial Growth Plan; the County Public Safety Master Plan; the County Master Plan of Transportation; the County Historic Sites and Districts Plan. In addition, the City's own principal planning documents include: City Development Review Guidelines and Policies; Forest Mitigation Sites Inventory and Policies; Environmental Wildlife Habitat Guidelines; Citywide Trails Plan; Senior Housing Study; Master Plan for the Redevelopment of Old Town Bowie; and, Recreation Master Plan. The City also conducts an annual assessment of transportation needs and priorities, which are documented in the Transportation Priority List.

The City of Bowie has, for years, exhibited exemplary efforts in promoting Smart Growth Initiatives by implementing and/or supporting preservation, conservation, mitigation and restoration initiatives. In 1989, as a neighboring municipality, the City endorsed the federal level land transfer and acquisition by the United States Department of the Interior for 9,000 surplus acres from the Department of Defense. As a result of the federal land transfer, the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center included the land in their holdings, primarily for purposes of wildlife habitat preservation and research. The Patuxent Wildlife Research Center recently worked in partnership with the City of Bowie in order to map wildlife species and habitats in and around the City. Scientists provided the City's Information Technology Department wildlife data that in conjunction with City’s data was used to create GIS maps. This information will be used to depict trends and

101

species density. The lab does not have the resources or expertise to map this information. This project is still in process.

In 1992, the City received the Maryland Municipal League (MML) Award for Excellence for its Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Program participation. The City’s Waste Water Treatment Plant was the first in the nation to serve as the testing ground for scientists from Virginia Polytechnic Institute, eager to use the BNR technology. In the mid-1990’s, the City participated in the Patuxent Estuary Demonstration (PED) grant, administered by the Patuxent River Commission, and staff from the Maryland Departments of the Environment (MDE) and Planning (MDOP). A Citywide public awareness campaign was conducted to make residents aware of non-point pollution sources and their impact on the Patuxent River’s water quality. The City’s participation in the PED grant resulted in the conversion of a passive park site into Quiet Meadow Park, an “Environmental Demonstration Area.”

Also in the mid-1990’s, the City entered into a three public agency partnership with the State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MNDR) and the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) to acquire the 500+ acre Seton Belt Woods property, immediately adjacent to the City of Bowie. Public acquisition of the pristine Seton Belt Woods property is a prime example of the City’s commitment to the preservation of wildlife habitat for endangered species and ecosystems. The City invested $500,000 in the public acquisition process. Since the site was publicly acquired, it has been designated by the State of Maryland as a ‘Wildlands’ site, and recently identified as a ‘hub’ in the State’s “Greenprint” Program.

In the mid-to late 1990’s the City was involved in reviewing the M-NCPPC’s Patuxent Rural Legacy Program. The City commented on the M-NCPPC program proposal to the State of Maryland, from a two-pronged approach: first, as a neighboring municipality in close proximity to the Patuxent Rural Legacy Program area; and second, as a property owner within the then proposed rural legacy program area. The City provided a position in support of the M-NCPPC program proposal.

In 1997, the inaugural year of the Chesapeake Bay Partner Community Program, the City was one of four local jurisdictions across the State of Maryland to receive the Chesapeake Bay Partner Community Gold Award for its outstanding conservation programs. Award-winning communities had to demonstrate environmental initiatives, and program participation was based on population size. Since the City received this distinction, the City Council has adopted a Forest Mitigation Policies and City-owned Sites Inventory, intended to complement both the Maryland Forest Conservation Act (FCA) and the Prince George’s County Woodland Conservation/Tree Preservation Ordinance.

In 1998, the City was awarded a grant from the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay in their Small Watershed Restoration Program. The City established a public partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Chesapeake Bay Field Office) BayScapes Program staff. The City conducted an awareness campaign

102

about the importance of using native plants in the landscape. The campaign focused on the environmental benefits of conservation landscaping techniques to Bowie residents, local businesses and the development community. BayScapes demonstration gardens were planted behind City Hall to serve as a model for others. As a result of the City’s participation with BayScapes, the City later participated in the Celebration 2000 Program. Shortly after the construction and opening of the City’s Senior Center, a MaryLandscapes garden was planted at the site, to further promote the use of native plants across the state.

The City was a full participant in and strong supporter of the Commission 2000 Task Force and its recommendations that developed a framework for limiting and directing growth in Prince George's County. This will direct growth to designated "centers, corridors and redevelopment areas" and severely restrict growth from existing rural areas and environmentally sensitive areas.

Non-Housing Community and Economic Development Priorities

The goal of all Bowie community development activities is to enhance the living environment and expand economic opportunities for residents. The non-housing and economic development priorities of the City’s population, as expressed in the City’s recent survey of all households and businesses are as follows:

Streetlights Transportation Street Improvements Traffic Signals Parks and Recreation Facilities Social Services

The City addresses these needs through its budget process on an annual basis and prioritizes the implementation of specific projects based on need and available funds. This year the City has approved the largest budget in its history to accommodate the requirements of a new Police Department (Crime Awareness/Prevention was No.1 on the citizen’s “High Need” list resulting from the survey), a new City Hall, increases in energy prices, and the cost of other government services.

103

Table 2B Community Development Needs

Priority Dollars to Address Unmet Priority PRIORITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS Need Level Need High, Medium, Low, No Such Need PUBLIC FACILITY NEEDS (projects) H 0 Senior Centers H 0 Handicapped Centers L 0 Homeless Facilities M 0 Youth Centers H 0 Child Care Centers M 0 Health Facilities L 0 Neighborhood Facilities M 0 Parks and/or Recreation Facilities M 0 Parking Facilities L 0 Non-Residential Historic Preservation L 0 Other Public Facility Needs L 0

104

Table 2B Community Development Needs

Priority Dollars to Address Unmet Priority PRIORITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS Need Level Need High, Medium, Low, No Such Need INFRASTRUCTURE (projects) L 0 Water/Sewer Improvements L Driveway Aprons 0 Curb $ Gutter 0 Earth Work 0 Storm Drains and Drainage Structures 0 Street Improvements L 0 Sidewalks L 0 Solid Waste Disposal Improvements L 0 Flood Drain Improvements L Included with Water/Sewer Improvements Other Infrastructure Needs L Stamped Sidewalk and Crosswalks 0 Street Lighting 0 Design, Etc. 0 Landscaping 0 Utility Adjustments 0 PUBLIC SERVICE NEEDS (people) L 0 Senior Services L 0 Handicapped Services L 0 Youth Services L 0 Child Care Services L 0 Transportation Services L 0 Substance Abuse Services L 0 Employment Training L 0 Health Services L 0 Lead Hazard Screening L 0 Crime Awareness L 0 Other Public Service Needs L 0

105

Table 2B Community Development Needs

Priority Dollars to Address Unmet Priority PRIORITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS Need Level Need High, Medium, Low, No Such Need ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT L 0 ED Assistance to For-Profits (businesses) L 0 ED Technical Assistance (businesses) L 0 Micro-Enterprise Assistance (businesses) M 0 Rehab; Publicly- or Privately-Owned L 0 Commercial/Industrial (projects) C/I* Infrastructure Development (projects) H See Above Other C/I* Improvements (projects) L 0 PLANNING M 0 Planning M 0 TOTAL ESTIMATED DOLLARS NEEDED: 0 * Commercial or Industrial Improvements by Grantee or Non-profit

Non-Housing Community and Economic Development Strategy

In 1999, the City of Bowie adopted the Master Plan for Redevelopment of Old Town Bowie that addresses the community economic stagnation, and present actions which the City can contribute to the revitalization of Old Town Bowie. Subsequently, the City initiated sidewalk, curb, and gutter installation. A new traffic plan was developed and sent to Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) for their review. The “Amtrak” lot was paved and landscaped, and ornamental lighting was installed. The local park has undergone improvements as well. Recently, the City of Bowie installed decorative streetlights, provided local businesses with promotional flags, and erected banners along the main traffic corridor in Old Town Bowie. Ongoing funding is made available for festivals and holiday events promoting the area. The Bowie Railroad Museum is being expanded.

Strategic Vision for Change

Bowie adopted the updated Development Review Guidelines and Policies: Standards for Creating a Quality Living Environment in 2002. This document has been reviewed and amended several times in the last decade. Several factors contributed to the need for the City to have such guidelines. Rapid growth, an outdated Bowie-Collington-Mitchellville and Vicinity Area Master Plan (1970), (referred to as the Master Plan), and the City Council’s limited ability to regulate

106

development due to the lack of planning and zoning authority within its jurisdiction gave rise to the need for development policies that guide growth within and around the City. The original Bowie Development Policies document (1989) was formulated after many hours of deliberation and Council consideration of direct input from area residents, and was used as the framework for the City’s position in the updating of the Bowie-Collington-Mitchellville and Vicinity Area Master Plan in 1991. Since that time, the guidelines have been updated several times, with the last formal update occurring in 1999. City staff is currently participating in the revision of the Bowie-Collington-Mitchellville and Vicinity Area Master Plan.

The major goal of the Development Review Guidelines and Policies is to encourage and promote a carefully planned community and sensitively designed development sites. The guidelines and policies seek to discourage unwelcome development that might ruin the open space and quality of life enjoyed by residents. Bowie’s Development Review Guidelines and Policies are intended to:

• Encourage an equitable distribution of well-designed and efficient development which reflects appropriate relationships between land uses, continuity between neighborhoods, availability of public facilities, and a sensitivity to the natural environment;

• Enhance the environment and provide guidance for site development within, and immediately adjacent to, the City; and

• Promote orderly, quality development and a higher quality of life for the citizens of Bowie and its surrounding areas.

These guidelines and policies work in conjunction with County laws governing development, the 1991 Master Plan, the Bowie Advisory Planning Board, as well as valued citizen input, to promote the best possible development for Bowie’s future. All proposals are subject to a Public Stakeholders Meeting, which not only provides the developer an opportunity to discuss the proposal in general, but also provides for very early input from Bowie residents.

An effort to integrate economic, physical, environmental, community, and human development, the City’s Guidelines provide information on Residential, Commercial, Environmental, and Transportation development issues. Site Design is the process by which the principles and standards of good planning are put into practice. The bulk of the City’s development review policies deal with design considerations. In many cases, the guidelines used by the City in the past have become County standards or regulations (e.g. townhouse standards). It is important to have a balanced, reasonable set of standards to describe what the community wants itself to look like and to guide prospective builders and developers, including builders of public and civic buildings, in site layout and design. 107

Residential development makes up the largest single land use category in the City. In fact, the City is well known for its reputation as a bedroom suburb of Washington D.C. As the City becomes more diverse, its housing needs are also changing. It is important to provide a wide range of housing opportunities in the community and to guarantee that new subdivisions are designed with an identity and can be integrated into the City’s existing neighborhoods. Residential land use policies not only address the provision of housing, but also give guidance on how residential projects should develop.

The environment is one of our most precious resources. Without proper guidance and management, development sprawl can overcome and destroy the community’s irreplaceable natural assets. Monitoring natural ecosystems, such as 100-year floodplain, steep slopes, wetlands, and critical habitat areas on a watershed wide basis, establishment of performance standards, and preservation of significant open space and forested lands through conservation efforts demonstrate a commitment to the protection and enhancement of the natural environment. As development is inherently detrimental to environmental protection, the Bowie Guidelines address specific environmental concerns and objectives. For instance, new, planned residential neighborhoods should have landscape plans associated with their monumental entrances and overall sites that include the provision of a minimum of 80% native plants in their plant schedules. When practical and applicable, these thresholds should be exceeded for the preservation/conservation of high priority forest areas, including specimen trees and areas of critical habitat, rather than the minimum threshold being met. Trees of national or historical significance, including Champion trees, should be considered a high priority for retention. In this process, preservation/conservation thresholds should preferably be met on-site. To further ensure environmental protection within City limits, the City developed and adopted the Wildlife Habitat Management Guidelines in November of 2001.

The area’s transportation system is one of the most critical elements of infrastructure needed to sustain the quality of life as well as accommodate growth and development both within the City and in the region. The transportation needs of the planning area are multi-modal. Regional access must be facilitated, but not to the detriment of existing or planned neighborhoods. Overall transportation systems planning and adherence to sound engineering principles should guide review of development proposals to ensure safe and efficient access and circulation. Disruptive impacts of future improvements to the existing transportation network and quality of life should be minimized. The integrity of non-highway transportation facilities must be protected and enhanced. The City’s transportation guidelines pertain mainly to crosswalks, street lighting, median landscaping, and sidewalks with primary focus on noise and light pollution reduction, public safety, and community beatification. These measures provide residential, recreational, and commercial areas that are attractive, inviting, and functioning communities within the City.

108

The City provides and maintains recreation facilities and parks for its residents. These facilities are in addition to, and not a substitute for, those facilities needed by the community, which are provided by Maryland National-Capital Park and Planning Commission, (M-NCPPC). Having a wide variety of recreational opportunities for all age groups and providing parkland for passive recreation or open space preservation adds significantly to the quality of life and attractiveness of the City.

Furthermore, the City’s Adequate Public Facilities Policies supports adequate public facilities (APF) laws in Prince George’s County. The timely provision of necessary facilities programmed in the County’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) or State’s Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP), or those funded by developers in accordance with the County’s adequate public facilities ordinance, is essential to keeping pace with growth in the community. According to City policies, 100% of the construction funding for such facilities should be committed for a facility to be considered in any APF test, and projects should be staged to coincide with the actual availability of the services those facilities provide.

Public water and sewer facilities are essential to support new growth, as well as the needs of existing development. The City operates its own wastewater treatment plant and water system within the Levitt sections of Bowie. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, (WSSC), provides such services elsewhere. The Prince George’s County Ten-Year Water and Sewer Plan is a development management tool, which establishes a timing mechanism for providing such service within the County to assure that water, and sewer facilities are not overburdened. Amendments to the Plan must be approved to initiate project development dependent upon public water and sewer facilities. The City makes recommendations on proposed amendments, based upon the City’s development review policies, the Master Plan, and County criteria. The provision of public water and sewer greatly influences the development character of an area.

Anti-Poverty Strategy

The key to the City’s anti-poverty strategy is job creation through the promotion of economic development activities. By working with the growing number of commercial developers in the City, Bowie is enhancing job opportunities and housing for all economic levels. The growing number of businesses in the city makes it a more attractive and livable place to raise a family. With completion of the Bowie Town Center, the City has become a major employer within the County and State with the addition of 1,100 retail jobs alone. The Federal Commercial Building Loan Fund, administered through the County’s Redevelopment Authority, created 57 jobs with the development of a nearby Honda dealership. The City also sponsors seasonal job fairs, offering employment opportunities for persons interested in parks and recreation.

109

The City encourages coordination with programs and services with a number of County, State and local organizations:

The County’s Financial Services Corporation (FSC), a private nonprofit corporation affiliated with the Economic Development Corporation that provides financial assistance to businesses, and administers the Small Business Growth Fund and the Small Business Administration 504 Loan Program.

The County’s Workforce Development Partnership, addressing the workforce development needs of existing and potential employers. It represents collaboration among the University of Maryland at College Park, Prince George’s Community College and the Prince George’s County Public Schools.

Bowie State University, a leader in seeking HUD funds for Historically Black Colleges and University to enhance its entrepreneurship programs, developing capacity among small business owners, non-profit and housing advocates. Bowie State University also works with communities around the County, including the City, to establish small business information centers at local libraries in collaboration with the Economic Development Corporation and the County library system.

Organizations that sponsor community forums on issues related to revitalization and community needs.

Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy

The entire City is a Priority Funding Area, and Old Town Bowie and the commercial district along Main Street/Rte 450 are Designated Neighborhoods as determined by the State of Maryland’s economic development programs.

The City of Bowie has embarked on a comprehensive plan for economic development and revitalization in the Old Town Bowie area. Revitalization goals for Old Town Bowie are: to expand employment opportunities for residents, retain and expand established businesses, attract new businesses, and achieve higher rates of entrepreneurship. The plan represents a collaborative effort between the public and private sectors, including residents, government representatives, business owners, and nonprofit community-based organization. The strategy will create greater private sector employment, retain and strengthen existing commercial businesses, and make better use of excess commercial space.

The Bowie Hiker/Biker Trails Master Plan recommends several trail linkages in Old Town Bowie. It has long been staff’s desire to see a City trail linkage to the Washington, Baltimore, and Annapolis Trail, (WB&A). This would further assist implementation of the County, and State’s trail plan.

110

Also proposed is the establishment of a Development District Overlay Zone, (DDOZ). This legislation would provide flexible parking requirements for new business that are unable to accommodate on-site parking required by the County Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the DDOZ would also define architectural guidelines for infill development.

While it will never again be the center of city life it once was for Bowie, Old Town Bowie’s unique history, scale, and character provide it with many opportunities to reestablish itself as a distinctive, attractive village center positioned in the middle of a dynamic and growing region. It has remained a small intact village surrounded by sprawling suburbia. At a time when neo- traditional neighborhood design is gaining popularity, Old Town Bowie’s quaint small-town design provides the opportunity for the City of Bowie to restore its economic viability as an attractive destination. The Victorian architecture and village layout is conducive to creating a charming, pedestrian friendly main street style-shopping district. Old Town Bowie represents a prime opportunity for urban neighborhood redevelopment.

Several initiatives and programs in the City promote economic development and revitalization. The strategy is to direct services and incentives to stabilize the community and attract new investment. Economic development projects are aimed at the already existing focus areas of Old Town Bowie, the Rte 450 "Main Street" corridor, and the Maryland Science and Technology Center (MSTC). The incentive programs that have been developed by the City to encourage redevelopment in Old Town Bowie consist of: the Old Town Bowie Façade Grant Program, the Commercial Building Loan Fund, the Small Business Growth Fund, the Small Business Association-504 Loan Program, (described in the Grants and Loan section above). The Prince George’s County High Technology Growth and Development Incentive Package, Job Training and Placement Services, and the Angel Capital Electronic Network Program were also resources mentioned previously.

Prince George’s County High Technology Growth and Development Incentive Package

Prince George’s County has about 900 high technology companies that employ more than 33,500 highly trained workers. Most of these companies are located in the Prince George’s County High Technology Triangle, in the northern half of the County. The County designed an incentive package to encourage the private sector to relocate within the Triangle.

The incentive package consists of:

111

o Real Property Tax Credit: The tax credit may be granted on real property constructed or substantially improved by, or for expanding or relocation, high technology companies. The credit decreases over five years.

o Personal Property Tax Exemption: Companies are offered a 100 percent tax exemption from personal property tax for certain property used in research and development.

o Fast-Track Commitment: The County offers a “Fast-Track Site Development Plan Process” which expedites approval of site development plans for qualified high technology projects.

Non-Housing Community Development Objectives

Proactive economic development assumes a strategy that provides a suitable living environment for residents of all income levels and ethnic backgrounds. The City has established that street infrastructure improvements in Old Town Bowie remain the highest Non-Housing Community Development priority and will achieve this overall strategic goal. CDBG funds have been used for improvements to the aging infrastructure of Old Town Bowie streets for the last 17 years. The City of Bowie has spent approximately $2,900,000 of CDBG funds in the Old Town Bowie area from 1986 to 2008. Street improvements, accessibility improvements, rehabilitation, acquisition and demolition have been among the chief capital projects the City has financed with CDBG funds. CDBG funds have been, and will continue to be leveraged with State and other funds in a comprehensive manner to address the issues of growth management. Local, state and federal resources over the next five years will concentrate on efforts to plan and implement revitalization strategies and to encourage development compatible with existing development.

Given the nature of the demographics and growth in Bowie, and the existence of successful operable public services addressing county wide public services needs, the City will continue to invest funds over the next five years on revitalization initiatives in the community. Stormwater drainage issues have been significantly curtailed with the use of CDBG funds over the past four years.

112

Monitoring

The City Manager’s Office will ensure compliance with HUD regulations that deal with the effective use of federal Community Development Block Grant funds. The City of Bowie administers a number of federal and state grant programs and has demonstrated its capacity to administer and manage the CDBG program. Project files will be maintained on the CDBG-funded activity; reports will be collected and submitted to HUD on a timely basis. Record keeping will be in accordance with City and federal policies.

On site monitoring will be carried out on a regular basis by trained City staff. The City will enforce the Davis Bacon Labor Standards through on site interviews, and by collecting certified payrolls of project crew. When available and necessary, staff will attend HUD-sponsored training and will provide ongoing technical assistance to other staff members responsible for the administration of this federally funded program. The City has no plans in the near future to grant CDBG funds to sub-recipients.

The City will conduct all CDBG funded activities in accordance to federal and local laws and policies, particularly in regards to Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity. The City currently directly mails Requests for Proposals (RFP) to a list of local minority contractors and provides them an opportunity to bid on municipal capital projects. All RFPs are advertised in the Prince George's Journal and local papers. The RFPs encouraging women/handicapped and minority owned businesses to submit proposals.

Benchmarks

Goals FY-2009 FY-2010 FY-2011 FY-2012 FY-2013 Applications Received 30 30 30 30 30 Applications Approved 20 20 20 20 20 Projects Completed 15 15 15 15 15 Energy Efficient Appliances Used 10 10 10 10 10 Energy Efficient Doors Installed 10 10 10 10 10

Energy Efficient Windows Installed 10 10 10 10 10 Insulation Replaced 5 5 5 5 5 Bathrooms Remodeled 5 5 5 5 5 “Green” Technologies Installed 10 10 10 10 10 Outreach Activities 8 8 8 8 8

113

114

City of Bowie Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development

Annual Action Plan Fiscal Year 2009 (July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009)

II. CONSOLIDATED ACTION PLAN FISCAL YEAR ‘09

Applicant’s Name

City of Bowie

Priority Need

The City of Bowie has determined that Housing Rehabilitation for Senior Citizens is the City’s highest priority need. Therefore, the CDBG eligible activity for the City of Bowie’s Consolidated Plan is housing rehabilitation for single-family units, which complies with the national objective (LMH) to provide benefits to low and moderately low-income residents. Senior citizens are determined by HUD regulations to be a “Presumptive” Low/Mod population.

Project Title

Senior Citizen Housing Rehabilitation and “Green” Technologies Demonstration

Primary Purpose: □Homeless □ Persons with HIV/AIDS ■Persons with Disabilities □Public Housing Need ■Low & Moderate Income Persons

Geographic Distribution

The entire corporate limits of the City of Bowie, Maryland . Project Description

private investment fund (a merger of a fund created by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and a fund created by the Universalist Church). We propose to incorporate, to the extent practical, energy efficient, renewable resources in each project as we proceed to

Locations

The corporate limits of the City of Bowie, Maryland shall constitute the boundaries for eligibility in the project.

Annual Action Plan Housing rehab will consist of: Activity Summary 1. Replace old Help the Homeless? and poorly maintained HVAC No systems Start Date: Project ID Project 1. Repair 07/01/08 Title structural Help those with HIV or HUD Matrix Code AIDS? No damage, Funding Sources Completion Date: leaks, and 06/30/09 decay Eligibility: Senior 2. Eliminate Low/Mod Citizen Housing Rehabilitation & insufficient Housing 14A - and poorly Sub-recipient: LMH CDBG installed None $163,367 insulation Location(s): 3. Correct “Green” technology leaky and The corporate Demonstration poorly limits of the City of Bowie, Maryland ODHF installed $250,000 ducts 4. Replace Local ID Priority inefficient Objective and/or leaky Title Citation windows and doors 5. Provide new Housing roofs Rehabilitation 6. Renovate 570.202 bathrooms to

provide Description access for Accomplishments indigent and handicapped seniors

Timeframe

The Senior Housing Rehabilitation project FY-09 will begin July 1, 2008 and will be completed by June 30, 2009.

Objectives

• Replace old and poorly maintained HVAC systems • Replace inefficient and/or leaky windows and doors • Repair structural damage, leaks, and decay • Provide new roofs • Eliminate insufficient and poorly installed insulation • Renovate bathrooms to provide access for indigent and • Correct leaky and poorly installed ducts handicapped seniors

Benchmarks

Energy Efficient Windows Installed 10 10 10 10 10 Insulation Replaced 5 5 5 5 5 Bathrooms Remodeled 5 5 5 5 5 “Green” Technologies Installed 10 10 10 10 10 Outreach Activities 8 8 8 8 8

Contingency

The cost to achieve first year rehabilitation for approximately20 single-family units, using the aforementioned quantities and items, is estimated at 200,000. Total first year costs will be $200,000. In the remaining four years, the Entitlement amount will be sequentially reduced by an inflationary 3% to provide projected rehabilitation amounts available for FY-2010 through FY-2013 projects.

Monitoring

City of Bowie Grants Administration, Department of Community Services, and other Departments as required, have the capacity to manage capital improvement projects, and has been providing site management and monitoring on CDBG projects for the past 20

years. On site monitoring will be carried out on a regular basis by trained City staff. The City will enforce all HUD rules and regulations through on site interviews, and by collecting relevant data and documentation.

The City of Bowie administers a number of federal and state grant programs and has demonstrated its capacity to administer and manage the CDBG program. Project files will be maintained on the CDBG-funded activity; reports will be collected and submitted to HUD on a timely basis. Record keeping will be in accordance with City and federal policies. The City Manager’s Office will ensure compliance with HUD regulations that deal with the effective use of federal Community Development Block Grant funds.

Homeless and Other Special Populations

Although the City will not be using CDBG funds on homeless and special needs populations, the City of Bowie will continue to provide emergency services and make referrals to County programs and agencies to residents in need of emergency shelter and transitional housing, particularly families with children as such services contribute to the prevention of homeless. Referrals to existing County programs will also be made for persons with disabilities and persons living with HIV/AIDS and their families.

Needs of Public Housing

Bowie does not have a public housing agency, nor is there public housing in the City. Public housing has not been established as a high priority need in Bowie. Therefore, the City will continue to refer all inquiries regarding public housing to the County. The City of Bowie will however continue to provide affordable housing that serves the demographics of the community.

Anti-Poverty Strategy

By working with the growing number of commercial developers in the City, Bowie is enhancing job opportunities and housing for all economic levels. The growing number of businesses in the city makes it a more attractive and livable place to raise a family. The City encourages coordination with programs and services with a number of County, State and local organizations:

Lead-Based Paint Hazards

The City of Bowie refers residents to regional programs addressing lead paint hazards. These agencies include: the Maryland Department of Environmental Resources, Maryland Department of Environment, Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development, and the National Center for Lead Safe Housing.

Urgent needs

There are no Urgent Needs identified in Bowie.

Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Other Actions

Although the City of Bowie has not conducted its own analysis on the impediments to fair housing, Bowie housing data was included in the Analysis of Impediments (AI) contracted by Prince George’s County in 1996. The Fair Housing Council of Greater Washington and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (WASH COG) researched and prepared the draft Analysis of Impediments (AI) for the local jurisdictions and the region. Prince George’s County adopted a local Fair Housing Analysis of Impediments, and agreed to assess the progress which local jurisdictions have made in removing barriers to fair housing choice within their boundaries and across the region. It is filed in the DHCD, Community Planning and Development Division, and is available for review by the public.

The County requires property owners and developers to comply with fair housing laws including posting of signs and symbols notifying clients of fair housing practices; providing verbal and written instructions to employees and informing applicants on DHCD waiting lists of available properties and vacancies. The County’s Rental Assistance Division carries out a number of fair housing activities, including Landlord Initiatives, Regional Opportunity Counseling, Counseling Resource Program, Section 8 Home Ownership Program, Family Self Sufficiency, Welfare to Work Initiatives, Criminal Background Checks,

Fair housing needs are discussed in the Analysis of Impediments. The single greatest fair housing concern is the need for housing affordable to low and very low-income households. The Fair Housing Council of Suburban Maryland reports that the rate of discrimination on the basis of race and national origin in Prince George’s County is similar to that of the metropolitan area surrounding Washington, D.C. Discrimination exists in both rental and ownership housing. Accessibility of rental housing is a particular concern for disabled home seekers. Minorities are facing discrimination securing mortgages and insurance.

Sources of Funds

The City will contribute the administrative costs to conduct the CDBG activities. These costs include all City staff and City resources required to conduct the senior housing rehabilitation program. Approximately $400,000 is proposed for the Senior Housing Rehab

program for the first year, which consists of marketing, development, and capital improvements. No ESG, HOME, or HOPWA funds will be used to fund this project.

Sources of Funds

Cost per foot =

Cost per project = Inflation (%) =

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 item GOALS avg unit cost unit % quantity cost quantity cost quantity cost quantity cost quantity cost 100 Houses Rehabilitated $10,000 unit 20 $10,000 20 $10,000 20 $10,000 20 $10,000 20 $10,000 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 Allowable CDBG Grant $163,367 $------$------$------$------present worth future worth future worth future worth future worth

APPENDIX A

CONSOLIDATED PLANNING PROCESS

125

126

APPENDIX B

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN

127

128

APPENDIX C

COMMUNITY NEEDS SURVEY

129

APPENDIX D

RESULTS OF COMMUNITY NEEDS SURVEY

130

APPENDIX E

LEGAL NOTICES

131

City of Bowie Community Development Block Grant Program Notice of Public Hearing

In accordance to guidelines established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), notice is hereby given that the City of Bowie, as an entitlement participant in the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, solicits public participation in the development of the Five Year Strategic Plan and Consolidated Plan for fiscal years 2009-13 at a Public Hearing to be held on Thursday, July 10, 2008 at 7 p.m. at Bowie City Hall, 2614 Kenhill Drive, Bowie, Maryland. All City CDBG documents are posted on the City’s website: www.cityofbowie.org under Community Information.

The Five Year Strategic Plan and Consolidated Plan must be developed through input and recommendations from residents, neighborhood groups, businesses, developers, and public and private sector service providers in the areas of housing, homelessness and community development. The Five Year Strategy Plan identifies community needs and proposed solutions in the areas of Housing, Special Needs, Economic Development, and Non-Housing Community Development. The City’s CDBG activities will benefit low and moderate- income persons by making improvements to owner-occupied homes for Senior Citizens throughout the City.

The “Draft Five Year Strategic Plan and Consolidated Plan, FY 2009-13” will also be available for review at the Bowie Public Library and Bowie City Hall from July 4, 2008 – August 4, 2008.

Accommodation for persons with disabilities and non-English speaking residents will be provided upon request. For additional information, please call 301-809-3072.

FOR PUBLICATION: BOWIE BLADE NEWS 7/3/08 BOWIE STAR 7/3/08

132

APPENDIX F

COMMUNITY MEETINGS

133

APPENDIX G

OPENDOOR HOUSING FUND LETTER

134

APPENDIX H

ARTICLES

135

APPENDIX I

CERTIFICATIONS

136

IV. CERTIFICATIONS

In accordance with the applicable statutes and the regulations governing the consolidated plan regulations, the City of Bowie certifies that:

Affirmatively Further Fair Housing -- It will affirmatively further fair housing, which means it will conduct an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice within the jurisdiction, take appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments identified through that analysis, and maintain records reflecting that analysis and actions in this regard.

Anti-displacement and Relocation Plan -- It will comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, and implementing regulations at 49 CFR 24; and it has in effect and is following a residential anti-displacement and relocation assistance plan required under section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, in connection with any activity assisted with funding under the CDBG or HOME programs.

Drug Free Workplace -- It will or will continue to provide a drug-free workplace by:

1. Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition;

2. Establishing an ongoing drug-free awareness program to inform employees about –

(a) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; (b) The grantee's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; (c) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and (d) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace;

3. Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by Paragraph 1;

4. Notifying the employee in the statement required by Paragraph 1 that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will –

(a) Abide by the terms of the statement; and (b) Notify the employer in writing of his or her conviction for a violation of a criminal drug statute occurring in the workplace no later than five calendar days after such conviction;

5. Notifying the agency in writing, within ten calendar days after receiving notice under subparagraph 4(b) from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. Employers of convicted employees must provide notice, including position title, to every grant officer or other designee on whose grant activity the convicted employee was working, unless the Federal agency has designated a central point for the receipt of such notices. Notice shall include the identification number(s) of each affected grant;

6. Taking one of the following actions, within 30 calendar days of receiving notice under subparagraph 4(b), with respect to any employee who is so convicted –

137

(a) Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination, consistent with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; or (b) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency;

7. Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

Anti-Lobbying -- To the best of the City of Bowie 's knowledge and belief:

1. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of it, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement;

2. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, it will complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions; and

3. It will require that the language of paragraph 1 and 2 of this anti-lobbying certification be included in the award documents for all sub awards at all tiers (including subcontracts, sub grants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all sub recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.

138

Authority of Jurisdiction -- The consolidated plan is authorized under State and local law (as applicable) and the City of Bowie possesses the legal authority to carry out the programs for which it is seeking funding, in accordance with applicable HUD regulations.

Consistency with plan -- The housing activities to be undertaken with CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds are consistent with the strategic plan.

Section 3 -- It will comply with Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, and implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 135.

City Manager August 4, 2008 Signature Title Date

139

Specific CDBG Certifications

The City of Bowie , as an Entitlement Community, certifies that:

Citizen Participation -- It is in full compliance and following a detailed citizen participation plan that satisfies the requirements of 24 CFR 91.105.

Community Development Plan -- Its Consolidated Housing and Community Development Plan identifies community development and housing needs and specifies both short-term and long-term community development objectives that provide decent housing, expand economic opportunities primarily for persons of low and moderate income. (See CFR 24 570.2 and CFR 24 part 570)

Following a Plan -- It is following a current consolidated plan (or Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) that has been approved by HUD.

Use of Funds -- It has complied with the following criteria:

1. Maximum Feasible Priority. With respect to activities expected to be assisted with CDBG funds, it certifies that it has developed its Action Plan so as to give maximum feasible priority to activities which benefit low and moderate income families or aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight. The Action Plan may also include activities which the grantee certifies are designed to meet other community development needs having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community, and other financial resources are not available);

2. Overall Benefit. The aggregate use of CDBG funds including section 108 guaranteed loans during program year(s) , (a period specified by the grantee consisting of one, two, or three specific consecutive program years), shall principally benefit persons of low and moderate income in a manner that ensures that at least 70 percent of the amount is expended for activities that benefit such persons during the designated period;

3. Special Assessments. It will not attempt to recover any capital costs of public improvements assisted with CDBG funds including Section 108 loan guaranteed funds by assessing any amount against properties owned and occupied by persons of low and moderate income, including any fee charged or assessment made as a condition of obtaining access to such public improvements. However, if CDBG funds are used to pay the proportion of a fee or assessment that relates to the capital costs of public improvements (assisted in part with CDBG funds) financed from other revenue sources, an assessment or charge may be made against the property with respect to the public improvements financed by a source other than CDBG funds.

The City of Bowie will not attempt to recover any capital costs of public improvements assisted with CDBG funds, including Section 108, unless CDBG funds are used to pay the proportion of fee or assessment attributable to the capital costs of public improvements financed from other revenue sources. In this case, an assessment or charge may be made against the property with respect to the public improvements financed by a source other than CDBG funds. Also, in the case of properties owned and occupied by moderate-income (not low-income) families, an assessment or charge may be made against the property for public improvements financed by a source other than CDBG funds if the jurisdiction certifies that it lacks CDBG funds to cover the assessment.

Excessive Force – The City of Bowie has adopted and is enforcing:

1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and

140

2. A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such non-violent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction;

Compliance With Anti-discrimination laws -- The grant will be conducted and administered in conformity with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC 2000d), the Fair Housing Act (42 USC 3601-3619), and implementing regulations.

Lead-Based Paint -- Its activities concerning lead-based paint will comply with the requirements of 24 CFR Part 35, subparts A, B, J, K and R.

Compliance with Laws -- It will comply with applicable laws.

City Manager August 4, 2008 Signature Title Date

141

142