City staff recommended the Springfield City Council extend a temporary waiver of certain city system development charges (SDCs) for affordable homeownership projects through Dec. 31, 2029, and adopt administrative changes intended to make the program easier to use.

Katie Carroll, housing analyst, told the council the waiver currently covers city SDCs for new units sold to households at or below 80% of area median income and is scheduled to expire at the end of 2025 or when $300,000 in city SDCs have been waived. Carroll said the city has waived $62,000 in SDCs to date for nine homes; three of those projects later repaid the waived fees after they could not meet program requirements.

Carroll described two main policy changes staff recommends to reduce common barriers: requiring applicants who must complete a land division to attend an early development-initiation meeting so potential land-division obstacles are identified up front, and adding a penalty fee if homes receiving a waiver are not sold within one year of receiving a certificate of occupancy. She said staff is not proposing changes to core program rules such as the affordability period or eligible income level.

Carroll also said the Willamalane parks district has adopted a waiver that mirrors the city
pproach and that staff estimates potential waiver-eligible city SDCs could exceed $1,000,000 over the next four years based on projects in the pipeline, including activity related to land acquisition for Square 1 Villages.

Councilors pressed staff on program effectiveness. "I'm not so much concerned about the cap issue as I am, like, can people use it? Is it an effective program?" Councilor Booker asked, noting three of the nine units repaid fees when land-division barriers prevented sale. Carroll told the council those projects faced land-division hurdles that the new guideline would aim to address by identifying issues earlier and adjusting the timing of when SDCs are waived.

Staff recommended extending the program without a fixed dollar cap and reporting annually to council through the extension period; if necessary, staff said a cap or pause could be added later. If the council agrees to the approach, Carroll said staff would return with a resolution to the Dec. 1 regular meeting.

Next steps: Council directed staff to bring a resolution implementing the recommended extension and guideline updates to the Dec. 1 meeting; the council did not adopt a final policy at the work session.