Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 36-27 (2026)

Eminent domain

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. An authority shall have the right to acquire by the exercise of the power of eminent domain any real property pursuant to a duly adopted redevelopment or conservation plan, or otherwise only in accordance with this chapter, after the adoption by it of a resolution declaring that the acquisition of the real property described therein is necessary for such public purposes. An authority may exercise the power of eminent domain in the manner provided in Chapter 2 (§ 25.1-200 et seq.) of Title 25.1. In condemnation proceedings evidence may be presented as to the value of the property including but not limited to the owner's appraisal and the effect that any pending application for a zoning change, special use permit application or variance application may have on the value of the property. The court may also determine whether there has been unreasonable delay in the institution of the proceedings after public announcement by the condemnor of a project that necessitates acquisition by the condemnor of a designated land area consisting of or including the land sought to be condemned. If the court determines that such unreasonable delay has occurred, it shall instruct the commissioners or jurors in such proceedings to allow any damages proved to their satisfaction by the landowner or landowners to have been sustained to his or their land during and because of such delay, in addition to and separately from the fair market value thereof, but such damages shall not exceed the actual diminution if any in fair market value of the land in substantially the same physical condition over the period of the delay.

B. Prior to the adoption of any redevelopment plan for a redevelopment area pursuant to § 36-49 or any conservation plan for a conservation area pursuant to § 36-49.1, an authority shall send by certified mail, postage prepaid, to the record owner or owners of every parcel of property to be acquired pursuant to such plan, at their last known address as contained in the records of the treasurer, the current real estate tax assessment records, or the records of such other officer responsible for collecting taxes in that locality, a notice advising such owner that (i) the property owned by such owner is proposed to be acquired, (ii) such owner will have the right to appear before the local governing body and present testimony with respect to the proposed redevelopment or conservation area, and (iii) such owner will have the right to appear in any condemnation proceeding instituted to acquire the property and present any defense which such owner may have to the taking. Such notice shall not be the basis for eligibility for relocation benefits. At the time it makes its price offer, the authority shall also provide to the property owner a copy of the appraisal of the fair market value of such property upon which the authority has based the amount offered for the property, which appraisal shall be prepared by a real estate appraiser licensed in accordance with Chapter 20.1 (§ 54.1-2009 et seq.) of Title 54.1.

C. In all such cases the proceedings shall be according to the provisions of Chapter 2 (§ 25.1-200 et seq.) of Title 25.1, so far as they can be applied to the same. No real property belonging to the city, the county, the Commonwealth or any other political subdivision thereof may be acquired without its consent.

1938, p. 453; Michie Code 1942, § 3145(12); 1958, c. 518; 1972, cc. 466, 782; 1989, c. 593; 1998, c. 880; 2000, c. 1029; 2001, c. 729; 2002, c. 272; 2003, c. 940; 2006, cc. 586, 784.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1953–2006 · leading case: Pearsall v. Richmond Redevelopment & Hous. Auth., 242 S.E.2d 228 (Va. 1978).
Pearsall v. Richmond Redevelopment & Hous. Auth., 242 S.E.2d 228 (Va. 1978). · cites it 14× “The trial commenced on May 11, 1976 and after taking a view and hearing testimony during four days, the commissioners, with one dissent, reported that Pearsall should be awarded $172,000 as compensation for the land taken, $300 as damages to the *894 residue of the property not…”
Virginia Elec. & Power Co. v. Hampton Redevelopment & Hous. Auth., 217 Va. 30 (Va. 1976). “A municipal housing authority is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth with public and corporate powers (Code §§ 36-4, -19); it serves a public purpose (§ 36-2); it has a common seal, may sue and be sued, and may enter into contracts and acquire, hold, and dispose of its…”
Norfolk Hous. v. C & C Real Est., 630 S.E.2d 505 (Va. 2006). · cites it 2× “Nevertheless, when a delay in pursuing condemnation proceedings becomes unreasonable, the Authority is subject to Code § 36-27, which allows a court to instruct the commissioners in such proceedings to allow damages incurred by the landowner because of the delay.”
Hunter v. Norfolk Redevelopment & Hous. Auth., 78 S.E.2d 893 (Va. 1953). “Code, § 36-27. Section 20 of the Act empowers the authority to borrow *329 money or accept contributions or other financial assistance from the Federal Government for or in aid of any housing project.”
BWT, L.L.C. v. Norfolk Redevelopment & Hous. Auth., 57 Va. Cir. 121 (2001). “The Virginia General Assembly provides for the award of damages in condemnation proceedings that may result from a finding that a housing authority waited an unreasonable period of time before it proceeded with the actual taking of a target property.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.