Columbus-based Windsor Companies aims to demolish the derelict former Student Union at
Antioch, and in its place on the 2.16-acre site, build two three-story apartment buildings. A rendering of one is shown here. (Submitted photo)
Village Council greenlights plans for 139 new apartments
- Published: July 14, 2025
Villagers crowded Council Chambers on Monday, July 7, when Village Council members deliberated over legislation that could affect the local housing market for years to come.
By unanimous votes of approval for four separate ordinances, Village Council gave Columbus-based real estate developer Windsor Companies the greenlight to press ahead with their plans to build over 100 apartments around Antioch College.
As the News reported last week, Windsor sought Council’s approval to rezone land where the college’s former Student Union and the Charles F. Kettering buildings sit from educational designations, or E-1, to planned unit developments, or PUDs.
The developer also needed the Village’s formal blessing for their preliminary site plans for both locations — namely, to demolish the derelict Student Union, and in its place on the 2.16-acre site, build two three-story apartment buildings, with 48 rental units in each; and in the Kettering building, install 43 rentals for persons 55 and older.
Voting 4–0 on each request, Village Council gave Windsor the go-ahead with these plans. Abstaining from the votes was Council President Kevin Stokes, who recused himself because of his professional ties to Antioch College.
Now, Windsor has exactly one year to present to Village staff their final site plans, which must incorporate results from future traffic, parking and pedestrian impact studies; state requirements for sound, accessibility and sustainability; architectural reviews; and engineering recommendations.
As Village Planning and Economic Development Director Meg Leatherman told Council ahead of their votes, a number of public hearings and meetings will take place around the time Windsor submits its final plat plans.
Unlike with these preliminary plans, Planning Commission has the ultimate say on the final plats; Windsor cannot break ground until that body grants approval.
According to Windsor documents, should Planning Commission say “yes” to their final plan, the developer aims to begin construction at both sites in December of this year, and begin leasing units in June 2027.
In an interview with the News last summer, Windsor’s head designer Jason Dorsey estimated rents for all these units will range from $900 to $1,700 per month.
In building these apartment complexes, Windsor seeks from the Village a 15-year, 75% property tax abatement on their properties. As Leatherman previously told the News, Village Council will have to later decide on and approve the details of those possible tax allowances.
Public testimony at the July 7 Village Council meeting took nearly two and a half hours as villagers sounded off on the proposed apartments at Antioch. With Council’s approval of the preliminary development plans, real estate developer Windsor Companies will draft final plans for a 96-unit complex at the site of the former Antioch College Student Union, as well as 43 senior-focused rentals in the Charles F. Kettering building. (Photo by Reilly Dixon)
The voices in the room
In addition to the few dozen villagers who packed Council Chambers on Monday, four Windsor representatives were present for the meeting — including Daniel Mayer, an architect for the developer, who addressed previously aired public concerns regarding the accessibility and potential noisiness of the proposed 96-unit apartment complex on the Student Union site.
Stating that Windsor aims to exceed state-mandated accessibility and energy performance standards and design guidelines, Mayer said Windsor plans to render four of its 96 rentals as “Type A” units — or fully accessible for those with disabilities or mobility limitations. All others, Mayer said, will be “Type B” units, which will be outfitted with adaptable features such that they could be converted into “Type A” units.
“This is in line with the Fair Housing Act design criteria that deals with everything from thresholds to access to countertops,” Mayer said.
As for noise and sound criteria, Mayer added that Windsor also plans to go beyond state requirements and standards — which, in Ohio, he claimed, are much more stringent than other states.
Windsor partner Erik Alfieri later added to Mayer’s remarks, and suggested that some recent public scrutiny of Windsor’s preliminary plans and the perceived lack of details on design specifics will be allayed by the time a final plat plan is drafted.
“We wouldn’t secure a building permit for something that’s not up to code,” Alfieri said. “The plans that people have reacted to are conceptual and don’t have the level of detail required of us to get a permit for our final plan.”
Alfieri also pointed out that the Kettering building, which will be designed with senior tenants in mind — with elevators, wide hallways and other assistive designs — should satisfy some of the calls for accessibility in Windsor’s plans.
Despite Alfieri’s assurances that perceived shortcomings in Windsor’s plans would later be resolved, some villagers came to the podium at Monday’s Council meeting with lingering concerns.
Local resident and direct neighbor to the Student Union site Jerry Papania, for example, said he believes Windsor should include more parking in their plans.
For now, Windsor aims to create 128 parking spaces for the 96-unit Student Union complex — 110 which would be on-site, and 18 diagonal spaces on the abutting President Street — and 67 spaces for the 43-unit Kettering building — 52 on-site, and 15 on-street.
Speaking to the perceived deficit of parking in the plans for the Student Union site, Papania said he wants “a minimum” of 1.5 spaces per unit, and cited the “absence of sufficient public transportation” and his neighborhood’s inability to “accommodate overflow parking.”
Others who spoke before Council aired their concerns over density and scale. Desiree Nickell called for a reduction of units at the Student Union location to a total of 64; Barbara Tuss said she was concerned about “the kind of precedents being set in terms of variances … and accommodations being made with developers in a way that density becomes a big problem for the village.”
“This is going to decrease the quality of life for villagers who came here to live in a village, not suburbia,” Pan Reich said. “Ninety-six units are simply not reasonable for a village neighborhood.”
“It looks cookie-cutter,” said Jay Williams.
In contrast to these statements, a slight majority of those villagers who spoke during the public hearings were in favor of Windsor’s plans. Many of these folks stressed the need for Yellow Springs to expand its housing stock, and disputed the notion that Windsor’s apartments would negatively affect the local quality of life.
“What truly threatens the village’s character is the trend toward becoming older, wealthier and less diverse — this being driven by a housing shortage that keeps prices high and new families out,” Asa Leventhal said.
Antioch College Trustee and YS Home, Inc. Director Emily Seibel later added to Leventhal’s assertions and noted that “more than 350” households are presently on Home, Inc’s waiting list for local rental units.
“We watch people we love who are being displaced by the cost of housing here,” Seibel said. “There’s almost nowhere to rent in this town. This project will help — it’ll alleviate that pressure and expand choice.”
Luisa Bieri Rios, a faculty member at Antioch College, asked those present to remember what the added apartments “is all about,” and said “ The real point about all this is being able to make a home here. When you have more than you need, build a longer table, not a taller fence.”
“This proposal is not perfect, but it’s the way we need to go,” Malte von Matthiessen said, noting that the apartments could serve a mutually beneficial role for both the village and Antioch.
What united opponents and supporters of Windsor’s project was the need to reopen the stretch of East North College Street — owned by Antioch and currently decommissioned for vehicle traffic — to reconnect Livemore and Corry streets, thereby creating another throughway around the proposed apartments and likely decongesting neighborhood traffic.
Antioch President Jane Fernandes said on Monday she was amenable to one day reopening that road to cars.
“We look forward to being in close proximity to residents and revitalizing the relationship between Antioch and the village,” Fernandes said. “We’re very willing to be in partnership … to allow the Village to have the right-of-way reopened. We want to work through it logically.”
Village Manager Johnnie Burns later said that he and Fernandes have been crafting an agreement for the last several months, but as the road remains closed for now, and is beyond the property line of the Windsor-owned Student Union parcel, its hypothetical reopening could not factor into Council’s deliberations on Monday.
Council members Gavin DeVore Leonard and Brian Housh were dismayed that East North College Street’s reopening could not be factored into a condition for approval, but were willing to “let it go,” as Housh said, with faith that the road will be incorporated in future plans.
“My hope is it gets done,” DeVore Leonard said. “Lots of the parties who have the ability to work on it are trying, but I’ve seen many of these things not go through. I would ask [Village] staff that if there’s ever a point where there’s a fork in the road, it’d be helpful to know.”
Another traffic-related concern was raised by Senior Center Director Caroline Mullin, who beseeched Windsor to include in their forthcoming traffic studies the Senior Center’s plans to build a replacement facility at the intersection of Livermore and East North College streets — just beside the proposed apartments.
“We’re asking, as the Senior Center, that all consideration about our future juxtaposition is included in the traffic study,” Mullin said. “Take into consideration that it won’t always be an empty half-acre lot. There will be increased pedestrian traffic — people with alternative mobility needs on the road.”
By the end of the meeting, Mullin got her wish.
Council members agreed to modify one of Planning Commission’s recommended conditions for approval, which initially stated broadly that Windsor must conduct a traffic study and incorporate those findings in their final plan, to a condition that specifies a traffic study that includes potential impacts on traffic, parking, biking and pedestrian road-usage, as well as factoring in the future Senior Center and other likely developments — the latter of which alluded to the now-closed stretch of East North College Street.
Council also agreed to amend Planning Commission’s recommendation for Windsor to devote 15% of the total number of dwelling units to affordable housing.
Following the amendments, Windsor is now to devote a specified 15 apartment units at the Student Union site to affordable housing, or to those tenants under 80% of the area median income, and seven units at the Kettering building.
Other conditions for approval included Windsor building sidewalks around both the Student Union and Kettering sites, creating bicycle parking at both locations and conducting stormwater management plans.
Near the end of Council’s deliberations on Windsor’s rezoning requests and preliminary plat proposals, and following the wave of public input, Council member DeVore Leonard summed up his thoughts.
“This has been a challenging, complex process,” he said. “There is a legitimate question about how we think about density and scale in the village. This is just to say that I don’t have a problem with people raising some of these questions, and I don’t think it necessarily means people are anti-development.”
He continued: “Is it possible that we could figure out a plan that everyone would agree on? I don’t think it’s impossible. The hard part is, for decades, it hasn’t come about.”
The next Village Council meeting will be Monday, July 21, at 6 p.m. in the John Bryan Community Center’s Council Chambers.
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.