Present at the Feb. 12 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting were, from left, Dino Pallotta, Scott Osterholm, Matt Raska, Matt Reed, Anthony Salmonson and Planning and Economic Development Director Meg Leatherman. (Video still)
Board of Zoning Appeals approves LIHTC density, parking variances
- Published: February 27, 2025
The final hurdle ahead of an upcoming deadline for a low-income housing tax credit, or LIHTC, application was cleared last week.
On Wednesday, Feb. 12, the Village Board of Zoning Appeals granted Columbus-based Woda Cooper Companies — the Village’s selected developer for the LIHTC project — approval for its variance application to exceed the housing density limit, and reduce the parking space requirement for a proposed 71-unit affordable housing development.
The 3.6-acre site in consideration, located at the corner of East Enon and Dayton-Yellow Springs roads is presently district-owned land and the site of a number of local and school soccer programs. The land is zoned R-C, or high-density residential.
Per the provisions in the Village zoning code, an R-C designation calls for a maximum density of 14 dwelling units per acre, and requires new multifamily dwelling units — which are explicitly permitted in R-C zones — to provide two parking spaces for every unit.
So, to move forward with its plan — should the company be awarded $15 million in tax credits from the Ohio Housing Finance Agency, or OHFA — Woda Cooper sought relief from the Village’s code restrictions on density and parking in R-C.
After approximately an hour of deliberation, and by a vote of 4–1, Board of Zoning Appeals, or BZA, members approved Woda Cooper’s variance request.
Members Scott Osterholm, Dino Pallotta, Matt Raska and Matt Reed ultimately voted in favor; Board Chair Anthony Salmonson was the lone dissenting vote, as he voted against granting Woda Cooper their parking reduction.
With the group’s approval on Wednesday, Woda Cooper will now submit its LIHTC application to OHFA before the Feb. 27 deadline, with a site plan that includes 20 units per acre — six more than the code allows — and 1.75 parking spaces per unit — less than the two-to-one, space-to-unit requirement in the code.
That’s a total of 71 units and 124 parking spaces on 3.6 acres.
Woda Cooper Vice President of Development Jared Miller told the BZA that the request to increase the total number of units in the proposed development — from an earlier plan for 50 — stems from additional state funding that could be made available to the developer.
“By adding the 21 units, we’d be able to receive an additional $4.5 million from the tax credit program,” Miller said. “That’s not money you want to leave on the table.”
According to Village Planning and Economic Development Director Meg Leatherman, the number of units and unit mix will be set in stone upon Woda Cooper’s application to OHFA. Other aesthetic, environmental and infrastructure considerations will occur in the coming months, with several opportunities for public and governmental input.
Should Woda Cooper be awarded the $15 million to build the development, which they have tentatively dubbed the “Enon Greene” apartments, construction would begin in the summer of 2026, with a projected completion time of fall 2027.
More on the board’s deliberation
Ahead of the vote, the five BZA members present at Wednesday’s meeting were reminded of their quasi-judicial role at the dais.
Village Solicitor Amy Blankenship told the group, “In terms of what you’re considering tonight, you’re focused on a specific request: a variance for density and parking. You are to hear and weigh evidence, then look at the decision standards as they apply to the request.”
Blankenship noted that while the board may also entertain public comments and testimony, the only evidence — “under Ohio law,” she specified — the group can consider in their decision must have relevance as it pertains to “direct benefit or detriment that their person or property may experience as a result of the variance.”
Blankenship’s reminder was followed by several public comments — some of which advocated for the BZA to approve outright Woda Cooper’s requests, some of which advocated for conditions embedded in the approval of the requested variances.
In the latter camp was Yellow Springs Board of Education President Rebecca Potter, who approached the podium in Council Chambers ahead of the vote with several concerns, most of which dealt with the unit mix of Woda Cooper’s site plan — specifically, a perceived deficit of three-bedroom, or “family” units.
As the News reported last week, Woda Cooper has proposed 13 one-bedroom units, 43 two-bedrooms and 15 one-bedrooms.
“When the board worked on investigating the feasibility of the LIHTC project back in May, we decided to subdivide 3.6 acres in order to avoid this meeting tonight — a variance,” Potter said. “The conditions we were given were that this would be developed as 50 units for families — especially for kids.”
Potter continued, beseeching the board for conditions of approval: “Make sure that at least a third of the units are three-bedrooms, make sure greenspace is protected, and make sure the design includes separate buildings that promote the ‘community feel,’ which you are dedicated to support.”
In responding to the Village’s request for proposals toward the end of last year, Woda Cooper had initially envisioned two 25-unit buildings on the 3.6 acres for their LIHTC project, but, upon being selected as the developer for the LIHTC project, changed its design to a single, “L”-shaped building comprised of 71 units ahead of a community feedback meeting on Feb. 6.
Some BZA members appeared keen to advocate for more three-bedroom units.
“If this is the last step,” board member Matt Reed said, referring to Woda Cooper’s need to have a unit mix established ahead of OHFA’s Feb. 27 deadline, “then, I’m wondering if we can craft a condition that allows a density of 1.5 spaces per unit. With the space gained, we can get more three-bedrooms.”
After some discussion on the matter, Village Solicitor Amy Blankenship recommended against any changes to the variance — particularly as those changes pertained to increasing the number of three-bedroom units.
“I advise the board not to change the variance on the fly tonight,” she said. “It undermines the record to do so. … If you change anything, I see legal issues.”
“Could we be sued?” asked BZA member Raska.
“That’s exactly the legal issue,” Blankenship responded.
Agreeing with the solicitor’s recommendation, Pallotta suggested his colleagues move forward without issuing any conditions on Woda Cooper’s request.
“For us to come in at this point, as unelected officials, to undermine it is going to be detrimental to all of us and the community,” Pallotta said. “Whether I’ve been for it or against it, I’m at the point where we have to push it through. It has to happen.”
Permanent affordability?
In the same discussion, and at the Feb. 6 community meeting, community members wondered, if Woda Cooper is awarded the LIHTCs, will this housing development remain affordable in perpetuity?
According to Miller, who applied to the BZA for the variance on behalf of Woda Cooper, the answer is “yes.”
As a part of the LIHTC program, OHFA mandates an affordability of at least 30 years, the first 15 of which are financed by private investors or banks who purchase low-income tax credits from developers — in this case, Woda Cooper. The state of Ohio then tacks on an additional 15-year compliance period of mandated affordability.
Beyond that, Miller told the board, Woda Cooper aims to “be involved throughout the life of the project” and to “maintain permanent affordability.”
“We’ve been in business since 1990. This is our bread and butter,” Miller said.
He added that upon the expiration of the 30-year compliance period, Woda Cooper would apply for what’s called a resyndication, or a refinancing process that would entail the developer again applying to OHFA for additional low-income tax credits to conduct any necessary updates the 71-unit complex would need in 2055.
“In 30 years, the project is going to need certain updates — on the mechanical systems or the exterior,” Miller said. “We’d apply for tax credits again, reissue that 30-year period, then be awarded the financing to update the building.”
He added: “Some of [Woda Cooper’s] early-year projects are now seeing the end of their [first] compliance period. We’re going through that resyndication process right now.”
Some attendees who offered public comment at the BZA meeting remained somewhat unconvinced by Miller’s assurances of permanent affordability.
“We’ve had other promises in the past that have not been kept by larger businesses in town because they were never put in writing,” school board Vice President Judith Hempfling said.
Echoing her was Council member Brian Housh who added, “Good intentions do not always translate. Our community is looking for certain guarantees.”
Anticipating these concerns, Planning and Economic Development Director Leatherman said earlier in the meeting that Village staff has “been in some initial discussions” with Woda Cooper to include the permanent affordability stipulation in the development agreement, which Leatherman said has not yet been finalized.
“Staff is aware of this being a community concern,” she said. “We hope to integrate that in the next steps and our agreement with them.”
The Yellow Springs News encourages respectful discussion of this article.
You must login to post a comment.
Don't have a login? Register for a free YSNews.com account.
No comments yet for this article.