Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves ordinance to vacate Clark Court after debate over city land sale
Summary
Charlottesville City Council voted 3–2 to adopt an ordinance vacating Clark Court, a small cul‑de‑sac touching two parcels owned by the Jefferson Scholars Foundation, after agreeing the sale would include easements for utilities and compensation above assessor valuation.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charlottesville City Council voted 3–2 to adopt an ordinance vacating Clark Court, a short cul‑de‑sac off Maury Avenue adjacent to Jefferson Park Avenue, allowing the adjoining property owner to acquire the right‑of‑way with conditions to retain necessary public easements.
The city attorney, John Maddox, told council an assessor valuation placed the right‑of‑way at $618,000 and that the negotiated price of the vacation is $750,000, a premium he said reflected the city’s loss of five public parking spaces and the value of the street. Maddox recommended adoption with an amendment to describe the street by parcel identifiers rather than an exact distance measurement.
In discussion council members asked that easements be guaranteed for maintenance, replacement and access to public utilities. Scott Rainey, attorney for the applicant, said a minor surveying discrepancy added about 10 feet to the platted length and justified the decision to describe the area by the tax map parcels rather than a specific measurement.
Opponents on council questioned the optics of selling a public street to a private owner closely connected to the applicant and recalled an earlier placeholder price of $10 that had been replaced during negotiations. Supporters said the current negotiated price reflected fair‑market determination by the assessor and the city’s rubric for considering vacation requests.
A motion to adopt the ordinance as amended was made, seconded and carried 3–2. The ordinance will be effective after the applicant grants the city the easements required by the approval.
The council record shows the action was framed as a land‑use and process decision rather than a personal judgment about the applicant. No change to parking supply, or a timeline for transfer of ownership, was specified in the presentation.

