Charlottesville has responded to lawsuit seeking overturning of new zoning code

As promised, the City of Charlottesville has filed three motions on March 15, 2024 in response to a lawsuit whose plaintiffs seek overturning of the city’s new Development Code. A group of property owners argued in a case filed in January that the city did not follow state code in reviewing a zoning plan to increase residential density throughout the city. 

“The Plaintiffs already have that which they now seek to deny others—good, affordable housing in a desirable locality,” reads the introduction of the city’s demurrer in the case of White v. Charlottesville. “To do so, the Plaintiffs, having lost at City Council and at the ballot box, seek a judicial veto of the City’s zoning ordinance changes.” (read the demurrer)

A demurrer is a legal response that asserts there is no valid claim under the facts asserted in the lawsuit. The introduction argues that the community participated in the Cville Plans Together initiative that led to the new zoning code, the new Comprehensive Plan, and an affordable housing plan. Public outreach for much of the plan took place during the pandemic when meetings were held virtually, but that fact has no legal bearing on this case. 

Two previous suits by anonymous parties sought to overturn the Comprehensive Plan based on similar arguments, but Judge Claude Worrell dismissed three out of four counts in the first one in August 2022. A second suit was filed but declared a nonsuit. 

This time around, the city’s demurrer notes that the plaintiffs are overstating many of their claims. 

“Plantiffs’ statements about population increase and infrastructure burden are exaggerated,” the introduction continues. 

A second motion known as a Plea in Bar is a five-page document that maintains that the first three counts in White v. Charlottesville are actually legal claims against the Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted 27 months before the anti-zoning lawsuit was filed. This motion also argues that plaintiffs wouldn’t have had standing anyway.  (read the Plea in Bar motion)

A third document known as a Motion Craving Oyer seeks to add eight exhibits to the record for this case. They include excerpts from the affordable housing plan, the Comprehensive Plan, the inclusionary zoning analysis, and a July 7, 2023 document on the city’s infrastructure capacity. (read the Motion Craving Oyer)

The demurrer also seeks to dismiss both the City of Charlottesville and the Planning Commission as parties to the suit. The city also maintains that Charlottesville had no obligation to submit the Comprehensive Plan to the Virginia Department of Transportation for any legally-mandated review. 

No date has yet been set for any hearings before a judge but City Attorney Jacob Stroman said both parties are seeking to find a date for a hearing. 

Before you go: The time to write and research of this article is covered by paid subscribers to Charlottesville Community Engagement. This particular post appeared in both the print edition of the March 25, 2024 regular newsletter. The audio version is in the March 26, 2024 podcast. As Town Crier Production grows, you’ll begin to see much of this writing in different places. Any questions? Please ask!