From university town to density town: Charlottesville passes huge zoning reform
The Kindlewood affordable housing development by Piedmont Housing Alliance. Image by Livable Cville
Virginia residents may one day look back upon 2023 as the year that the commonwealth began to take its self-created housing crisis seriously. Arlington allowed missing middle countywide, Richmond removed mandatory parking minimums and legalized accessory dwelling units, and Alexandria ended its exclusionary single-family-only zoning. With so much reform happening, it’s all too easy to overlook the city that passed Virginia’s most ambitious housing policy: Charlottesville.
After seven years of hearings, studies, and debate, Charlottesville City Council unanimously adopted a new zoning ordinance in late December. Starting immediately, the new code abolished mandatory parking minimums, modernized the permitting process, and legalized duplexes citywide with the potential for up to eight units per lot based on location, preservation, and affordability.
History has been made in Charlottesville!
City Council has unanimously approved the new zoning code! pic.twitter.com/B89vYh08XI
“Charlottesville’s zoning code did a number of things that other cities have had trouble doing piecemeal, and we did a whole list of things that are both forward-thinking but also pretty nuanced in trying to make the pieces fit together,” said Matthew Gillikin, co-chair of Livable Cville, a local housing advocacy group. “This is a very thoughtfully crafted code.”
Density over displacement
As is true about much of the city’s recent politics, the opinion shift on housing came as the result of the Confederate statue debates, which ended with the 2017 neo-Nazi terrorist attack on the city that killed 32-year-old Heather Heyer.
“One of the things said back then was, ‘Why are you focused on symbols and not the structures and substance of racism like poverty?’” said Gillikin. “The symbols and the systems are tied together. That understanding, combined with Charlottesville acknowledging how bad our housing crisis and the fact that we use a lot of tools for our housing and zoning rooted in Jim Crow, led to widespread agreement that single-family exclusionary zoning was bad and we should get rid of it.”
How to translate the values of equity and racial justice into a zoning code (a planning tool some experts describe as “an American form of apartheid”) was a much trickier question. In a city that destroyed the homes of 600 Black families less than 60 years ago, residents realized that reducing displacement had to be a top priority.
In addition to allowing duplexes citywide by right with the ability to build up to eight units on one parcel if the existing structure is preserved and two if the new units are affordable at 80% AMI, the new zoning code also established anti-displacement zoning. Covering the Black neighborhoods of Fifeville, Rose Hill, and 10th and Page, the RNA designation allows for a second unit if the original structure is preserved and up to six units if half or more are affordable.
“We wanted to allow some opportunity for wealth-building for long-term homeowners but also reduce the opportunity for displacement from market incentives in those neighborhoods,” said Gillikin.
City council’s unanimous vote in favor of the new zoning code last month didn’t even include the voice of newly elected Councilmember Natalie Oschrin, a former UVa student who campaigned on housing affordability and abundance. Had she already been seated, she too would have voted for the measure.
“Legalizing multiplexes citywide is huge, so there is no longer any area with exclusionary single-family zoning in Charlottesville,” she said. “The direction is positive towards building up the community within the city through more housing choice.”
Wahoo nah
Beyond the zoning code vote, the clearest demonstration of the turn Charlottesville has taken on housing policy came less than a month ago when its city council voted unanimously to approve two new developments totaling 792 units near the University of Virginia campus — despite UVa officials testifying against them. “Jesus Christ” was all UVa’s architect said as she left the meeting immediately thereafter.
“Wealthier white neighborhoods and UVa were very accustomed to getting what they wanted, but advocates pushed the city to take a more expansive view of who they should listen to,” said Gillikin. “That has ultimately led to a much better approach to housing, but voices that used to be centered are frustrated that that’s no longer the case.”
The opposition to the Verve and 2117 Ivy Road largely focused on the idea that Lewis Mountain, an affluent neighborhood adjacent to UVa, needed to be protected from new development. The months-long campaign against the developments represented the first time in the last five years that university officials had explicitly opposed a project. UVa’s points did not prove persuasive.
“They didn’t state compelling reasons why not,” said Oschrin. “They don’t get that right to dictate what someone else does on their private property. There were current students who came to speak who are struggling with high housing costs. Design preferences don’t override the needs of students who don’t want to be homeless or turn down acceptance here because they cannot afford to live here.”
What ultimately persuaded the city council to vote for the projects was the prospect of losing out on a $6.8 million contribution to Charlottesville’s affordable housing fund (a condition of project approval for the developers) as well as annual property taxes from the properties. As an extremely land-constrained city, every acre owned by UVa is an acre that contributes nothing to local coffers via property taxes.
“When they buy land, we lose out on tax revenue forever,” said Oschrin. “I don’t think it needs to be an antagonistic relationship, though. We can get more things done if we are working together, but the city is not beholden to UVa either. Charlottesville is its own entity that is independent, strong, and works for more people in the city than just the UVa community.”
This university town’s push for city officials to care more about all its residents than just wealthy, white neighborhoods is similar to many Yes In My Backyard campaigns around the state. In Arlington and Alexandria, in particular, the end of exclusionary zoning was driven by fears that sticking with single-family-only zoning would price out diverse, working-class residents.
“Housing is viewed as a central issue to what is the future of our city going to be, and the city did a good job in balancing a lot of competing priorities while also recognizing that the housing crisis is ruining our diversity, our affordability, and people’s ability to live here and raise a family,” said Gillikin.
However, not all Charlottesville residents agree with him. Last week a group filed a lawsuit alleging that the new zoning ordinance did not follow statutory requirements to conduct impact studies on schools, traffic, sewer, and water services, invalidating the recently passed policy.
A lawsuit has been filed to block the city’s new zoning code. The suit is a meritless defense of the status quo and its proponents will only perpetuate our area’s affordable housing crisis if their efforts are successful.
Link to document: https://t.co/07r9MBuq1d pic.twitter.com/USh6ThH0Ea
So far it seems Charlottesville’s city council is unfazed by the suit and anticipates the zoning ordinance to remain in place.
“They can put forward any arguments that they would like and that they think would be effective, but the opinion of our staff and our council is that we’ve fully done our due diligence,” said councilmember Michael Payne in a recent CBS19 interview. “If you’re making a very big, significant policy change it’s just often the case that lawsuits come with that territory.”