Advisory body recommends adding seven strategies to Springville’s moderate‑income housing plan

Springville planning staff recommended that the city add seven new implementation strategies to the general plan’s moderate‑income housing element and the advisory body voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt the amendment.

Planner Reese told commissioners the moderate‑income housing element is required by state law and that cities must pick strategies from a state‑specified list. Reese said the city chose to “over‑select” strategies so it has multiple ways to show progress when the state evaluates compliance and prioritizes funding. She explained that moderate income is defined using 120% of the county area median income (AMI) and that affordability is measured as housing costs that do not exceed roughly 30% of gross income.

Commissioners questioned how changes such as rezones, overlays and Traditional Neighborhood Development plans translate into on‑the‑ground affordable units. Staff described overlays (for example, the Westfields overlay) and TNDs as tools that can allow density bonuses or a different mix of housing types; staff said rezoning can be documented across multiple reporting periods to count as progress. Reese and other staff also discussed incentive tools—fee waivers, infrastructure financing and deed restrictions—that can be used to tie public assistance to long‑term affordability, noting that deed‑restricted units require administrative oversight and can be difficult for cities to monitor without nonprofit or authority partners.

The group also discussed state programs and financing. Participants referenced a previous $20,000 down‑payment program with eligibility limits, and a legislative allocation (mentioned in the meeting) of $14 million toward a 1600 South project as examples of state funding streams that operate separately from the state’s priority‑funding scoring for cities. Staff said recent reporting changes require cities to be more explicit about developer commitments in the state report.

Ahead of the vote, staff told commissioners that some strategies—such as reducing parking requirements—were not included in this year's report because they would require code changes and public education. Planning staff said they are prepared to pursue those conversations later as pilot projects or code amendments.

Unidentified Speaker (S2) moved to recommend that the City Council approve the amendment adding seven implementation strategies to the moderate‑income housing element; the motion passed by unanimous voice vote. The advisory meeting concluded and the body adjourned.

What happens next: the advisory body’s recommendation will go to the City Council for final action. Staff offered to provide commissioners with links to the Department of Workforce Services’ online reports and UTA planning documents for additional context.