Case against Charlottesville’s zoning to proceed to trial after Judge Worrell changes position on default

Charlottesville Circuit Court Judge Claude Worrell has changed his mind and will allow a trial against the city’s new zoning code to proceed.

On June 30, Judge Worrell granted a motion of default judgement against the city for failing to respond to a key document by a specified deadline. That canceled a trial for White v. Charlottesville scheduled for June 2026. 

On July 22, the city filed a motion asking him to reconsider and a hearing was held on August 13. At the conclusion, Worrell asked attorneys for the city to provide information on how they would defend claims from the plaintiffs that the city did not comply with a requirement to conduct an analysis of the new zoning’s impact on “state-controlled highways.” 

Worrell’s written opinion begins by recounting the Cville Plans Together initiative that began in January 2020 to adopt a new housing policy, a new Comprehensive Plan, and a new zoning code. 

“The City and many of its residents hoped to increase the affordable housing supply through a new zoning ordinance allowing increased density through ‘missing middle’ housing choices in formerly single-family-zoned neighborhoods,” Worrell writes. “At the same time, other residents worried that significant zoning changes could harm the character and livability of a more than 260-year-old city.” 

City Council adopted the new Comprehensive Plan in November 2021 and an anonymous group of property owners filed suit against the city using many of the same arguments that the named group used in a suit against the development code. 

“In that case, the Court ruled in August 2022 that the anonymous plaintiffs had sued too early,” Worrell wrote. “At the time, the Court made it clear that future plaintiffs would have a right of action when a zoning ordinance actually affected their rights.” 

Around the same time, the city and consultants produced an “inclusionary zoning analysis” that attempted to describe how fast change might occur with new rules that allowed more units across the city. In July 2023, Neighborhood Development Services director James Freas wrote an “infrastructure capacity” memo to Council, the Planning Commission, and interim city manager Michael C. Rogers. This document predicted no more than 1,300 new units over a three year period. 

Worrell also cites correspondence between Charlottesville and the Virginia Department of Transportation on whether the city had to send the zoning proposal to the highway division for their review. §15.2-2222.1(B) states a “locality shall submit the proposal to the Department of Transportation within 10 business days of receipt thereof if the proposal will substantially affect transportation on state-controlled highways.” 

Council adopted the Development Code on December 18, 2023. Plaintiffs sued on January 16, 2024 and several motions and hearings were heard that year. Judge Worrell cleared the way to a trial on April 16 and an order was entered on April 30 that directed attorneys for the city to respond to an amended complaint filed by plaintiffs in late 2024. 

Attorneys with Gentry Locke failed to do so and plaintiffs filed a motion seeking default judgment on June 2. The city responded and asked for permission to file a late response the next day. A hearing was held on June 30 at which Judge Worrell granted the default. The city asked for Worrell to reconsider and another hearing was heard on August 13. The city was asked to provide information on how it would defend itself at trial. The plaintiffs responded two days later. 

In his written opinion, Judge Worrell said Virginia’s court system has no power over a locality’s zoning powers. 

“But courts are responsible for deciding whether a municipality complies with the statutes governing its authority,” Worrell wrote. “There are important and complex questions of public policy wrapped up in this litigation, but this Court takes no position on the merits of the 2023 New Zoning Ordinance as a matter of policy.” 

The city’s “Written Submission of its Substantial Defense” persuaded him to use his discretion to grant relief from default due to a good cause argument. 

“The Court acknowledges the Plaintiff’s argument that the City has simply conducted a part of the analysis it was already required to do to determine if the [New Zoning Ordinance] needed to be submitted,” Worrell wrote in his conclusion. “The City went on to argue that the conclusion that the submission of the full [New Zoning Ordinance] might not be required under a specific set of circumstances could be considered is sufficient for this Court to grant relief from default.”

The opinion unfreezes the use of a development code that had been rendered ab initio which means as if it never been enacted. In the wake of the June 30 default judgment, the city announced it would no longer take applications under the new rules but reversed course on July 11. 

A written order is expected to be drafted by attorneys for the city and entered into the court no later than August 29. There are many more questions to be answered and many more stories to be written.

Before you go: The time to write and research of this article is covered by paid subscribers to Charlottesville Community Engagement as well as sponsors and other supporters. This story was posted here first because the newsletter is seldom published on a Saturday. To ensure this research can be sustained, please consider becoming a paid subscriber or contributing monthly through Patreon.