SF Housing Fee Changes: Ordinances 250657, 250810, and 250815
- 2 days ago
- 3 min read
San Francisco just did a very San Francisco thing: it tried to make housing easier to build by moving (not removing) the pain.
The Board of Supervisors has been tweaking fee rules tied to new residential development. The theme across three recent ordinances is pretty consistent: reduce big upfront costs, keep projects from dying on the vine, and still make sure the City gets what it needs, just later or in a different form.
Before we translate the policy-speak, here’s today’s vocabulary:
Development impact fees: the big one-time charges on new projects to help pay for infrastructure like transportation, parks and public services - things new residents need
Administrative fees: the “we had to process your paperwork” costs (permits, monitoring agreements, etc.)
Inclusionary housing fees: what a developer pays instead of building affordable units on-site - that money helps fund affordable housing elsewhere
CFC/COO/TCO: the alphabet soup of “is the building done?”
Certificate of Final Completion / Certificate of Occupancy = done-done, officially ready
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy = people can move in, but there are still a few loose ends
Now, the three ordinances:
1) Ordinance 250657: deferring impact fees
What it does: This lets residential developers postpone paying development impact fees until the project is basically done (when the CFC or TCO is issued).
Why it matters: normally, these fees hit early, around permitting time - meaning the exact moment a project is spending cash and generating none. By shifting payment to the end, developers can use financing for construction first, then pay these fees when the building is close to producing revenue (rent or sales).
Plain English: “You don’t have to write the big check before you even pour concrete.”
2) Ordinance 250810: a little oxygen for affordable projects
What it does: Creates an “Affordable Housing Administrative Fee Deferral Program” that lets qualifying affordable housing projects push back when they pay certain Building Department administrative fees (the ones tied to permit issuance + plan review, etc.).
Why it matters: Normally, a chunk of these administrative costs show up at filing (hello, plan review fees) and other pieces hit as you move through the permit process, meaning you’re paying meaningful money before you’re anywhere near breaking ground.
Affordable housing projects are especially sensitive to early cash demands because their financing is often a layered stack (grants, tax credits, public funding, etc.)—so smoothing the timing can be the difference between “this pencils” and “this dies in predevelopment.”
Plain English: The City is still charging the fees, it’s just letting affordable projects pay more of them once the permit is actually being issued instead of front-loading the pain at the filing stage.
3) Ordinance 250815: rent control tradeoff
What it does: This one waives inclusionary housing fees if the project agrees to make its units rent-controlled.
Why it matters: Instead of paying upfront costs into an affordable housing fund, the developer commits to long-term limits on rent increases. The City is trading a near-term check for longer-term affordability stability.
Plain English: “Skip the fee, if you agree to limit rent hikes.”
Net-net, SF is trying to help more projects get off the ground by lowering the upfront “gulp” of fees without losing out on revenue or impact, tying more broadly to recent efforts to cut away some of San Francisco’s red tape.
Brought to you by Property Atlas
Comments