Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 36-52.3 (2026)

Adoption and designation of "rehabilitation area."

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Whenever it appears to the governing body of any locality that a portion of such locality adjacent to an area embraced in a "conservation plan," approved by such body pursuant to § 36-49.1, is in the early stages of deterioration and determines that if not rehabilitated such area is likely to continue to deteriorate and become eligible for designation as a conservation area, such governing body may create a rehabilitation area.

B. No rehabilitation area shall be effective until notice has been sent to the property owner or owners of record in such area in accordance with subsection B of § 36-27 and an ordinance approving such rehabilitation area has been adopted by the local governing body. The ordinance shall outline specific boundaries for the rehabilitation area, establish that the rehabilitation area is adjacent to a conservation area and include such properties as are in need of rehabilitation in such area.

C. An authority is specifically empowered to encourage and assist property owners or occupants within the rehabilitation area so designated to improve their respective holdings, by suggesting improved standards for design, construction, maintenance, renovation and use of such properties and offering encouragement or assistance in other ways including the power to lend money and make grants to said owners or occupants, directed toward prevention and elimination of deteriorating conditions within such area.

D. In executing the powers provided in subsection C, an authority shall have all of the rights, powers and immunities granted in connection with conservation or redevelopment plans pursuant to this chapter except the power to acquire property through the exercise of the power of eminent domain.

1978, c. 360; 2006, c. 784.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1980–1984 · leading case: Reasor v. City of Norfolk, Va., 606 F. Supp. 788 (E.D. Va. 1984).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Reasor v. City of Norfolk, Va., 606 F. Supp. 788 (E.D. Va. 1984). · cites it 3× “Va.Code § 36-52.3. Most importantly, the legislature authorized the city to have the same rights and powers to cooperate with and assist the authorites in redevelopment that the city has under the Housing Law.”

Infants v. Virginia Hous. Dev. Auth., 272 S.E.2d 649 (Va. 1980). · cites it 2× “1, (iii) is likely to deteriorate, as provided in § 36-52.3, or (iv) is characterized by a higher relative density of population and proportion of substandard housing than in the overall metropolitan area and inhabited predominantly by persons of a lower socio-economic status…”

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.