Virginia state trial court recently ruled against Arlington County’s “missing middle” zoning reform, which aimed to allow owners of land previously zoned for single-family homes to build multifamily residences with up to four or six units. This reform was seen as a way to protect property rights, reduce housing costs, and increase opportunities for people to move to Arlington and benefit the regional economy.
The Arlington Now website provides a detailed summary of the ruling, highlighting the judge’s concerns about the county’s failure to consider localized impacts, follow proper procedures, and comply with state tree canopy requirements.
The judge’s ruling has put a halt to the Expanded Housing Option, which allowed for the construction of up to six-unit buildings on properties previously zoned for single-family homes. The decision is likely to be appealed, emphasizing the need for state-wide zoning reform and stronger enforcement of property rights protections.
It is essential to address the technical aspects of state law that impact zoning reform efforts, as seen in cases like this and the recent California court decision that struck down SB 9. Statewide legislation or constitutional amendments could help streamline the process and prevent procedural hurdles from derailing such reforms.
Furthermore, advocating for stronger judicial enforcement of takings clause protections for property rights could provide additional support for zoning reform efforts. Collaborative efforts between litigation and political reform could help overcome obstacles in implementing more inclusive zoning policies.
UPDATE: For those concerned about local autonomy, it’s important to consider the benefits of YIMBYism as a form of localism that promotes inclusive and sustainable development practices.
