This article is part of a Worthington Pulse special edition on the city's draft comprehensive plan. Start with the Resident's Guide to the draft plan, which links the full series.
Housing generated nearly twice the public feedback of any other topic during the comprehensive plan's engagement rounds, and the draft's housing chapter (printed pp. 113-123) is where the plan's language will be read most closely. This article quotes the key passages directly, with page references to the draft, because on this topic paraphrase is where misunderstandings start.
The starting picture
Worthington has about 6,200 housing units. Eighty percent are single-family homes, and 70 percent were built before 1970 (p. 115). While Franklin County's housing stock grew 12 percent from 2000 to 2010 and another 10 percent from 2010 to 2020, Worthington's grew 2 percent and 3 percent in those same periods (p. 115).
The result is high demand against constrained supply. The median property value was about $359,000 in 2023, with over 70 percent of homes valued above $300,000, and rents run about 17 percent higher than the surrounding area (p. 115). Seventeen percent of Worthington households are cost-burdened, meaning they spend more than 30 percent of income on housing; among renters the figure is 36 percent, and among households over 65 it is 25 percent (p. 115).
Two thousand units of demand, two hard constraints
The chapter builds on the city's 2024 Housing Needs Assessment, which identified potential demand for up to 2,000 units, with the community needing nearly half of those to be affordable. The draft immediately pairs that with two constraints, stated flatly (p. 115):
- "Worthington does not have the land available to build 2,000 new units in the short term."
- "Constructing new houses for less than $200,000 is not financially feasible."
City Council set the working number in December, when it adopted the Workforce Housing Tax Abatement Program targeting 1,300 new units. A sidebar in the draft explains how council landed there: it weighed the full 2,000-unit demand estimate, Worthington's proportional share of the Columbus region's 200,000-unit goal (1,300 units), and a smaller share crediting Columbus's commitment to deliver half the regional total (1,100 units). Council chose 1,300 as "reflecting Worthington's responsibility as a regional partner while remaining grounded in what the City can realistically support" (p. 120). The abatement program pauses for re-evaluation as it approaches that count, with the Tax Incentive Review Council reviewing it annually (p. 121).
Stay connected to what's happening in Worthington, Ohio.
Where new housing would go
The plan draws a two-part line on location.
Larger multifamily development is directed to the five opportunity areas: Wilson Bridge, North High, Old Worthington, South High, and Forge Fields-Northeast (p. 119). The plan urges focus over sprawl-by-a-thousand-projects: "The City should resist pressure to pursue numerous small opportunities simultaneously and instead be strategic in allocating resources... where they will have the biggest impact." A handful of significant projects, it says, could move the city close to its housing goal (p. 119).
Missing-middle types get broader language. For duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhomes, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs, sometimes called in-law suites or backyard cottages), the draft says the Future Land Use and Character Map "recommends that a combination of these housing types be supported everywhere that residential uses are appropriate" (p. 120). The mechanism would come through the plan's proposed zoning code rewrite: "replacing density requirements (units per acre) with design requirements (e.g., height, distance from the ROW, architectural design, streetscape features) for residential development" (p. 120).
How far "everywhere that residential uses are appropriate" extends in practice depends on that same map, which keeps most existing single-family neighborhoods in their current Residential Suburban and Residential Large-Lot categories; the large-lot areas west of the Olentangy are explicitly described as "not intended to change" (p. 26). Residents who want to pin down what could appear on their own street should compare the map (p. 25) against the housing chapter's language. It is a fair question to raise at the July 23 public comment session.
The protection side of the chapter
The chapter's first strategic priority is about existing neighborhoods, not new ones. Its lead action is refining compatibility standards for infill housing and additions during the zoning update, so that new construction fits the scale of its block; a sidebar illustrates a rule requiring new development to fall within a range of the "block-face average" (pp. 116-117). This addresses teardown-and-rebuild pressure in older neighborhoods rather than introducing new housing types to them.
The plan also proposes allocating future tax revenue growth from redevelopment to dedicated housing programs, pursued one at a time (p. 117). A menu of options includes home repair grants and loans, down-payment assistance, preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing, aging-in-place resources, and the city's existing SEEN Grant Program (p. 118). One option, a Columbus-style housing bond, is noted as something that would go to voters (p. 117).
The full housing chapter starts on printed page 113 of the draft plan PDF, and includes a photo glossary of missing-middle housing types on page 123.
More from this special edition: