HomeMy WebLinkAbout21-01 Fairfield Inn & Suites - Shawnee - BackfileBOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Variance Request Tracking Sheet
Date:
File opened
Reference Manual updated/number assigned
D-base updated
✓ One B&W location map requested from GIS
�V-Z Two sets of labels requested from Data Processing
5.6 0 File given to Renee' to update Application Action Summary
Y,5cL—
7—
MEETING DATE: FINAL ACTION:
'�`'�':��r�
CLOSE OUT FILE:
Approval (or denial) letter mailed to applicant/copy made for file
File stamped "approved", "denied" or "withdrawn"
Reference Manual updated
vx'l D-base updated
D • 8• Q% File given to Renee' for final update to Application Action Summary
Mov
UACarol\Common\TRACKBIG.BZA
Revised 05/25/01
Lu z Received From
Address
w �
For
OR
�
ix
RL!
AMT. OF
ACCOUNT
AMT. PAID
W.
tz
V.
BALANCE
DUE
---------------
Date _ ;-� # O IJ 2 4 4 6
Dollars $
CASH
CHECK
MONEY
ORDER By
BZA REVIEW DATE: 12/18/01 (tabled); 01/15/02
VARIANCE #21-01
FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES
LOCATION: This lot is located on the north side of the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522)
and Costello Drive (Route 1367).
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64B-1-4 and 64B-1-5
PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned B2 (Business General) District; Land use - Vacant
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned B2 (Business General) District and B3
(Industrial Transition); Land use - Commercial and Residential
VARIANCE: The applicant is requesting a 40' distance buffer variance to the Category A buffer
requirements.
REASON FOR VARIANCE: See #12 and #13 on Page 2 of the application.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The subject properties (lot consolidation pending) are intended to be developed into a hotel facility.
The adjoining properties are zoned B2 with one exception. One of the adjoining properties on the
eastern side is zoned B3. Chapter 165-37D specifies the zoning district buffers. It states that: "Buffers
shall be placed on land to be developed when it adjoins land in certain different zoning districts."
Subsequent tables illustrate the requirements for a property zoned B2, proposed for development when
it adjoins property previously developed, zoned B3. The requirements are for a provision of a
Category A buffer. The Category A buffer allows for no landscape screening with a 50' distance buffer
required. Please refer to Exhibit "A" for the illustration of the buffer requirement. Half (25') of the
distance buffer may be used for active functions such as a parking lot. The remaining half is required
to be an inactive use such as open space. The only applicable setback for this property is 50' for the
front. The sides and rear have no setback requirements.
Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites
Page 2
January 8, 2002
Exhibit "B" is a copy of the proposed site plan that has been submitted for review by staff. The
applicant has indicated that the placement of the building is restricted by the irregular shape of the
parcel and the anticipated stormwater management requirements related to the adjoining stormwater
management facility. The concern regarding fire protection has been alleviated by the Fire Marshal's
approval (see attached comment sheet submitted by the Fire Marshal regarding the site plan). Should
the variance be granted, the applicant is proposing to establish a 10' landscape screening buffer in place
of the 50' distance buffer as indicated on Exhibit "A."
STAFF CONCLUSION:
The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2), states that no variance shall be authorized by the Board
unless it finds that: a) strict application ofthe Ordinance would produce an undue hardship approaching
confiscation; b) that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district
and the same vicinity, and; c) that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment
to adjacent property, and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the
variance.
The adjoining property, Southern Fasteners, zoned B3, should not be negatively impacted by the
reduced distance buffer nor should the proposed hotel facility be negatively impacted by the reduced
proximity to Southern Fasteners. The zoning district buffer between the subject property and the
property zoned B3 could be determined to place an undue hardship upon the applicant's capability to
develop the property. A practical hardship may exist due to the onsite stormwater management
requirements and the adjoining stormwater facility. The other practical hardship may also exist due
to the irregular shape of the property. However, all properties proposed to be developed in the County
must recognize the zoning district buffers and other allowed potential uses on the applicant's property
may not require the waiver being currently considered. After consideration ofthe merits ofthe request,
the granting of this waiver would be justified.
O:\Agendas\BZA\Stall Report\2001\Pairfield Inn&Suites.wpd
9
COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA
FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE
LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMENTS
Control No. SPO1-0059 Date Received 10/24/01 Date Reviewed 10/24/01
Applicant Greenway Engineering Plan Rev. Date:
Address 151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, Va. 22602
Project Name Fairfield Inns & Suites Phone No. 540-662-4185
Type of Application Site Plan Current Zoning B-2
1st Due Fire Co. 21 Ist Due Rescue Co. 21 Election District Shawnee
Tax I.D. No. 64-1-4 & 5
RECOMMENDATIONS
•
Automatic Sprinkler System XX Residential Sprinkler System
Automatic Fire Alarm System XX Other 0
REQUIREMENTS
Emergency Vehicle Access
Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Fire Lanes Required Yes XX No
Comments : Fire Lane No Parking signage and markings required at all fire
hydrants and curbage not identified as parking.
Roadway/Aisleway Widths Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Special Hazards Noted Yes No XX
Comments
Hydrant Locations Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Siamese Location Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Additional Comments Attached? Yes No XX
Plan Approval Recommended? Yes XX No
Signature �. Title
SEC •
EIVED
NOV 3 0 200,
°r OF 1LAWNG1NFVEL0py,
E
0
Request For Site Plan Comments
Frederick County Fire Marshal
Mail to:
Frederick County Fire Marshal
Attn: Fire Marshall
-
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
(540) 665-6350
Hand deliver to:
107 N. Kent Street
First Floor
Winchester, VA
(540) 665-6350
Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with
their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet.
Applicant's Name: Greenway Engineering
Address: .151 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602
Phone Number: (540) 662-4185
Name of development and/or description of the request: Fairfield Inn & Suites
Location of property: 1000'south of Millwood Pike/Front Royal Pike intersection
ar" I M11
RECEIVED
NOV 3 0 2001
- -IT 17 P1 ANNIOAVVROP41:1 -
December 18, 2001 .
To: Board of Zoning Appeals
Frederick County, Virginia
From: Jerry L. and Patricia B. Grimes
Adjoining property owners
229 Garber Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
I am appearing here today for two reasons:
1. To request that the Board of Zoning Appeals deny Variance #21-01 as submitted.
A. A development of this size and nature will negatively impact the quality of life of
those residing in the three remaining residences adjoining this property. The variance
submitted proposes a ten -foot landscape -screening buffer only with the adjoining
property included in the variance. I propose that as a requirement for the granting of
a variance that the landscape screening buffer be extended to twenty feet and be
extended to include all borders that adjoin property being used as residences.
B. The granting of a variance to allow development of this size and nature will further
negatively impact my property downhill due to additional storm water runoff. My
property presently suffers to accept runoff from surrounding areas as well as water
from the VDOT detention pond. This water originates from the Route 522 VDOT
right of way where it has been redirected and made to flow to the detention pond and
then flow down to my property. The development of two more acres of roof and
asphalt will create an enormous amount of runoff and additional threat to my
property. The developers' answer has been to create an elaborate underground storm
water system requiring a drainage easement through my property. This easement
would require enlarging an already existing twenty foot water and sanitary sewer
easement to as much as 35 feet to include a thirty inch storm water pipe. This
easement would prohibit approximately 3000 square feet of valuable property from
future development.
2. To register a complaint and have this complaint entered as part of the public record.
Recently, Mr. Butler represented me in a lawsuit involving a right of way dispute over
the same twenty -foot water and sanitary sewer easement mentioned previously. Mr.
Larrick represented the opposing side. Mr. Butler now represents Fairfield Inn and Suites.
Mr. Larrick is the present chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals. I am asking that Mr.
Butler and Mr. Larrick both excuse themselves from the present and future proceedings
due to conflict of interest. I have provided each of you a copy of Rules of Professional
Conduct for Lawyers for your reference.
In conclusion, it is obvious that to grant Variance #21-01 in whole is to open the door to more problems.
The development and intensity of use will produce undue hardship shared generally by adjoining property
owners and longtime residents. The authorization of such variance will be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property and the character of the local district will be changed, therefore making it unjustified.
There are more suitable uses for the property, which would cause a less negative impact.
Respectfully submitted:
Jerry L. and Patricia B. Grimes
412/17/01 MON 11:43 FAX 703 591 5082 D1A7ALL,HARRIGAN,HALE&HAS
• i
191001
HALE, HASSAN, CARLSON & PENN, PLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1.0511 Judicial Drive
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
(703) 591-4900
FAX (703) 591-5082
E-MAIL: dM-Ji@valawyers_com
TELECOPIER COVER SHEET
Transmitting ftom telecopier number: (703) 591-5092
Transmitting to telecopier umber'.
DATE:
TO:
FROM:l
{ 111
TOTAL NUMBER OF P
!NGINAL NOT M41LED
MESSAGE-
A,<
U'r(lh e �
IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM
r CLUDING COVER SHEET:
1
TFHS TELECOPY, PLEASE CALL: (703) 591-4900 AND ASK FOR
CONT'IIDENTIAUTX NOTICE
The information in this transmiss-loll ;s intended only for the individual orentitynamed above. It maybe legally privileged and confidential.
If you have received this information in error, please notify us immediately and send the original transmission to us by trait Return postage
is guaranteed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this comet nication or its contents is strictly prohibited.
12/17/01 MON 11:43 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,H.ARRIG.9N,HALE&HAS I4D002
•R1✓LES OF P R 0 F E § S10NA*C0NIDUC"I'
;on of Fee
A division of fee refers to a :angle bi
Firm. A division of fee facibiares ass
the client as well, and most often is
and a trial specialist.
ores over Fees
; to a client covering the fee of two or more lawyers who are not in the same
ion ofmorc than one lawyer in a matter in which neither alone could serve
l when the fee is contingent and the division is herween a referring lawyer
If a procedure has been established for resolution of fee dispures, such as an arbitration or mediation procedure
established by the bar, the lawyer should conscientiously consider submitting to it. Law may prescribe a procedure
for-dctermining a lawyer's h:e, for ex plc, in rcpresentacion of an executor or administrator, a class or a person end-
ued to a reasonable fee as p Lrt of the measure of damages. The lawyer entitled to such a Fee and a lawyer represent-
ing another parry concerned with their should comply with the prescribed proc:edttre.
NIA CODE COMPARISON
regard to paragraph (a), DR 2-105(A) req Tired that a "Iawyer'.s Fees ... be reasonable and adequately explained to the
" The Factors involved in asses': ing the re a onableness of a fee listed in Rule 1.5(a) arc -substantially similar to those listef l
2-20.
raph (b) emphasizes the lawyex'> duty to adequately explain fees (which appears in DR 2-105(A)) but stresses the
is dory to disclose fee information to the dicnt rather than merely responding to a client's request :for information (as in
105(B))-
raph (c) is substantially the went as DR 2- 05(C). EC 2-22 provided that "[clontingent fee arrangements in civil cases
Iong been commonly accepted n the Uliit d States," but that "a lawyer generally should decline to accept employment
:ontingent fcc basis by one who is able to �ay a reasonable fixed fee...."
regard to paragraph (d), DR 2-105(C) prghibircd a contingent fee in a criminal case. k?C 2-22 provided that `condn-
'ee arrangements in domestic relation cases are rarely justified."
regard to paragraph (e), DR 2-105(D) pcimitted division of fees only ifi "(1) The client consents to employment of
Tonal counsel; (2) Both artorneti s expressly assume responsibility to the client; and (3) The terms of the division of dhe
e disclosed to the client and the client coments thereto."
Contmittee believes that DR 2-105 placed �rearer emphasis than the ABA Model Rule on the Full Disclosure of Fees and
.rrangements to Clients and rherefore added language from DR 2-105(A) to paragraph (a) and from DR 2-105(D)(3) to
,raph (e). The Comment to paragraph (d) I) reflects the Committee's conclusion that the public policy concerns which
.idc contingent fee arrangement: in certain Idomestic relations cases do not apply when properly division, support mat-
r atrorney's fee awards have beer previously dercrmined- Paragraph (e) eliminares dhe requirement in the K g,r.,_ia Code
:ach lawyer involved in a fee -splitting arrangement assume full responsibility to the client, regardless of the degree of the
s continuing participation. T.,c rcquiren ent in the Vi7giyria Code was deleted to encourage referrds under appropriate
instances by not requiring the h wyer malci�g the referral to auromatically assume ethical responsibility for all of the
tics of the other lawyers involved in the arrangement. However, such an arrangement is acceptable only if the client
:nts after full disclosure, which must includlle a delineation of each lawyer's responsibilities co the client.
�El.6 �C�,,ffid,,�tiaZllty�Worm�afiona
i
A lawyer shall not reveal in protected by the attorney -client privilege under applicable law or other
information gamed in the professional relationship that the client has requested be held inviolate or the disclosurr
of which would be enibarr.Lssing or would be likely to be detrimental to the client unless the client tonscritc alter
consultation, except for disclosures di4 are impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation, and
except as stated in paragraphs (b) and (c).
To the txtcnt a lawyer reasonably believes necessary, the lawyer may reveal:
(1) such information to comply with law or a court order;
iJl
F65510NAL GUIDELINES 2001 i
12/17/01 HON 11:43 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGA.\,HALE&HAS
I ANIL
RULES OF PRO1:ESSlONAL CONDUCT
(2) such information to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the
lawyer wid the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the Iawyer based [; i
upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proc,.ccding c:oneern.
ing the Iv yer's representation of the client; {;
(3) such information which clearly establishes that the client has, in the course of the representation, perpe-
trated upon a third parry a fraud related to the subject matter of the representation;
(4) such information stYfficient to participate in a law office management assistance program approved by
Vir
ginia rginia State Bar or other similar private program; or
(5) information to an outside agency necessary for statistical, booldceeping, accounting, data processing,
printing, or outer similar office management purposes, provided the lawyer exercises due care it- the
selection of the agency, advises the agency that the information must be kept confidential and reasonably
believes tliat the information will be kept confidential.
(c) A lawyer shall promptly reveal:
(1) the intention of a client, as stated by the client, to commit a crime and the information necessary to
prevent t to crime, but before revealing such information, the attomey shall, where feasible, advise the
client of the possible legal consequences of the action, urge the client not to commit the crime, and
advise tht, client that. the attorney must reveal the client's criminal intention wtless thereupon abandoned,
and, if the crime involves perjury by the client, that the attorney shall seek to withdraw as counsel;
(2) information which dearly establishes that the client has, in the course of the representation, perpetrated
a fraud related to the subject matter of the representation upon a tribunal. Before revealing such infor-
mation, 1, owever, the lawyer shall request dial the client advise the tribunal of the frauds For the pur-
poses ,oft his paragraph and p;uhaaraph (b)(3), information is clearly established when the client acknowl-
edgesto the attorney that the client has perpetrated a fraud; or
(3) inforr aatiun concerning the misconduct of another attorricv to the appropriate professional authority
under, Rule 8.3, but nnxly if the client consents after consultation. Consultation should include frill dis-
closut'e of all reasonably foreseeable consequences of both disclosure and non -disclosure to Elie client.
Under Ellis paragraph, an attorney is required to request the consent of a client to disclose inforntatio.n
necessary to report tltc misconduct of another attorney.
u�Ait
Ill The lawyer is part of a judicial system charged with upholding the law. One of the lawyer's functions is to advise
clients so that r�hey avoid any violation of the law in the proper exercise of their rights.
[2] The common law wcognizcs that the client's confidences must be protected from disclosure_ The observance of the
ethical obligaugn of a lawyer tp hold inviolate Confidential information of die client not only facilitates the full
development offac:s csscnrial to proper representation of the client but also encourage people to seek early legal
assistance.
[3] Almost without exception, clients come to lawyers in order to determine what their rights are and what is, in the
In= of laws anti rcFulations, deemed to be legal and correct. Fused upon experience, lawyers knotisr that slit-nts usu-
ally follow the 4'dvir.e given, and the law is upheld.
[41 A Fundamental prirciple in the client -lawyer relationship is that the lawyer mainu n confideuiLty of information
relating to the representation, The he client is thereby encouraged to communicate fully tired fianlcly with the lawyer
even as to crnba2ias:ing or legally damming subject matter.
I5j The principle d co,Lfidcntiality is given effect in two related bodies of law, the arorney-client privilege (which
includes Elie work product doctrine) in the law of evidence and the rule of confidentiality establishers in professional
ethics. The arto5ney-cacnr privilege applies in judicial and other proceedings in which a lawyer may be called as a
witness or other -wisc• required to produce evidence concerning a client. The rule of client -lawyer confidentiality
applies in situations other than those where evidence is sought from the lawyer through compulsion. oflavv The con-
fadenriality rule 4pp.ics not mcrcly to matters communicated in confidence by the client but also to all infor ration
protected. by Elie attorney -client privilege under applicable law or other information gained in the professional rela-
tionship that tht client has rcgtiesred be held inviolate or the disclosure of which would be embarrassing or would be
to 003
v t a f t N 1 6 C i A 9 e n. -
12/17/01 MON 11:44 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,AALE&HAS ,
MILES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
likely to be detrim�nr.l to the client, wherever its source. A lawyer may not disclose such information except as
aurhori7ed or rrqu,ired by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.
[5a] The rules govern' rg confidentiality of information apply to a lawyer who represents an organization of which the
lawyer is an employee_
[61 'The requirement of maintaining conhdcnriality of information relating to representation applies to government
lawyers Nvho may glis q ree with the policy goals that their representation is designed to adN ancc.
Authorized Disclosure
[7j A lawyer is impliedly:,uthorixed to :make disclosures about a dientwhen appropriate in carrying out [he representa-
tion, except to thcicxnont that the. client's instructions or special circumstances limit that authority. la litigation, for
example, a lawyer ina, disclose information by admitting a fact that cannot properly be disputed, or in negotiation
by making a dise,, losu that facilitates a satisfactory conclusion.
[7a] Lawyers frequcndyi neod. to consult with colleagues or other attorneys in order to competently represent their clients'
interests. An overly st,ict reading of the duty to protect client information would render it difficult for lawyers to
eonsulr with each other, which is an important means of continuing professional education and development. A
lawyer should exercise great care in discussing a client's cast with another attorney from wbom advice is sought.
Among other things, the lawyer should consider whether the communication risks a waiver of the attorney -client
privilege or other applicable protections. The lawyer should endeavor when possible to discuss a case in strictly
hypothetical or abstrac t terms. In addition, prior to seeking advice from another attorney, the attorney should take
reasonable steps roi determine whether the arrorney from whom advice is sought has a conflict. The attorney from
whom advice is sough: must be carcfW to protect the confidentiality of The information given by the atromey seek-
ing advice and must not use such infornnarion for the advantage of the lawyer or a third parry_
j7b] Compliance with RWc- 1.6(b)(5) might require a written confidentiality agreement with the outside agency to which
the lawyer discloses information.
131 Lawyers in a farm may, in the course of the firm's practice, disclose to each other information relating to a client of
the firm, unless the client has instructed that particular information be confined to specified lawyers.
Disclosure Adverse to Client
[91 The confidentiality' rude is subject ro limited exceptions_ However, to the extent a lawyer is required or permitted to
disclose a clicnfs confidences, the client will be inhibited from revealing facts wluch would enable the lawyer to
counsel against a kror,gftil course; of acrion. The public is better protected if full and open communication by the
client is encouraged tT•.an if it is inhibited.
[1.01 Several situarions musr be distinguished.
1111 First, die lawyer may tuor counsel or assist a client in conduct that is criminal or fraudulent_ Set Rule 1.2(c).
Similarly, a Iawycrhas a duty under Rule 3.3(a)(4) not to use false evidence. This duty is essentially a special instance
of the duty prescribed in Rule 1.2(c) to avoid assisting a client in criminal or fraudulent conduct.
[12] Second, the lawyer may have been innocently involved in past conduct by the client char was criminal or fraudulent.
In such a situation (h( lawyer has not violated Rule 1.2(c), because to "counsel or assist" criminal or fraudulent con-
duct requires kncnvint , chat the conduct is of that character.
[131 Third, the lawyer tna} learn that a client intends prospective criminal conduct. As stated in paragraph (c)(1), due
lawyer is obligated to -eveal such information. Some discretion is involved as it is very difficult for a lawyer to
"know" when proposed criminal conduct will actually be carried our, for the client may have a change of mind.
[141 The lawyer's cxcrcisc of di5crc6oq requires consideration of such factors as the nature of the lawyer's relationship
with the client, the nhcusc of the client's intended conduct, the lawyer's own involvement in the transaction, and fac-
tors that may extealuze the conduct in question. Wherc practical, the lawyer should seek to persuade the client to
take appropriate acdo; i. In any case, a disclosure adverse to the client's interest should be no greater than the lawyer
reasonably believes ne,_essary to the purpose.
19004
23
PROFESSIONAL GUIDELINES 2001
12/17/01 MON 11:44 FAX 703 5915082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,HALE&HAS Igiuuo
RULES 01-- PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Z'thdrawal
(151 If the hwycr's services will be used by the client in materially ft.trthering a course of criminal or fraudulent condo
the lawyer must withdraw, as stated in RLdc 1,16(a)(1).
[161 After withdrawal the lawyer is required to refrain from malting disclosure of the client's co.nfidenccs, exccpr as of
wise provided is Rule 1.6_ Neither this Rule nor Rule 1.8(b) nor Rule 1.16(d) prevents the lawyer from giving
notice of the fact of withdrawal, and the lawyer may also withdraw or disaffirm any opinion, document, affirms
or the like.
[171 Where th,� client is an organisation, the lawyer may be in doubt wlmcther contemplated conduct will actually be
ried out b,v the organization. Where necessary to guide conduct in connection with this Rulc, the lawyer may m
inquiry w thin the organization as indicated in Rule 1.13(b).
Duprete Concerning a Lawyers Conduct
1181 Where a is gal claim or disciplinary charge alleges complicity of the lawyer in a client's conduct or other miscond
of the lavo,er involving representation of the client, the lawyer may respond to the extent the lawyer reasonably
believes necessary to establish a defense. The same is true with respect to a claim involving the conduct or repress
ration of, former client_ The lawyers right to respond arises when an asserdotl ofsuch complicity has been mad
Paragraph (b)(2) does not require the lawyer to await the commencement of an action or p.rocecding that charge
such complicity, so that the dcfensc may be established by responding directly to a third party who has trade suc
an assertion. The right to defend, of course, applies where a proceeding has been commenced_ Where practicable
and not pr. judicial to the lawycr's ability to establish the defense, the lawyer should advise the client of the Third
pa' e s assertion and request that the client respond appropriately. In any event, disclosure should be no greater t1
the lawyer reasonably believes is necessary to vindicate innocence, Lhc diSdOSL re should be made in a manner wh
limits access to the information to the rribunal or other persons having a need to know it, and appropriate prorec
orders or ocher arrangements should be sought by the lawyer to the fltllcst extent practicable.
1191 If the lawyer is charged with wrongdoing in which the client's conduct is implicared, the rule of conFidcntiality I
should not prevent The lawyer from defending against the charge. Such a charge can arise in a civil, criminal or pr
fessional disciplinary proceeding, and can be based on a wrong allegedly committed by the lawyer against the die
or on a wrong alleged by a third person; for example, a person claiming to have been defrauded by The lawyer an,
client aainl; together. A lawyer entided to a fee is permitted b gra h b 2
Y P� p OO to prove the service:, rendered in
action to collect it. This aspect of the Rule expresses the principle that the beneficiary of a fiduciary relationship r
not exploit it to the detriment of the fiduciary_ As stared above, the lawyer must make every effort practicable to
avoid unnecessary disclosure of information relating to a representation, to limir disclosure to those having the ne
to know it, ;ind to obtain protective orders or make other arrangements minimizing the risk of disclosure.
.Discloneres Qtbowi:e Required or Authoriwd
[201 If a lawyer L, called as a witness to give testimony concerning a client, absent waiver by the client, paragraph (a)
requires the lawyer to invoke the attorney -client privilege when it is applicable. Except as permitted by Rule 3.4(d
the lawyer n ust comply with the final orders OFa. court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction requiring the
lawyer to give information about the client.
[21] The Rules oi'Professional Conduct in various circumstances permit or require a lawyer to disclose information rel
ing to the representation. See Rules 2.2, 2.3, 3.3 and 4.1. In addirion to these provisions, a lawyer may be obligav
or permitted by other provisions of law to give information about a client_ Whether another provision of law sups
sedes Rule I.6 is a matter of interpretation beyond the scope of These R.tdes, but'a presumption should exist again
such a supersession.
Arto7wey .Mucondmcz
[21a] Self-regulatio e of the legal profession occasionally places attorneys in awkward positions with respect to Their obiit
rions to clients and to the profession. Paragraph (e)(3) requires an attorney who has information indicating that
another arronley has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct, learned during the course of representing a client
to request the permission of the clienT to disclose the information necessary to report the misconduct to disciplina
authorities- Ir requesting consent, the attorney must inform the cUcnr of all reasonably foreseeable consequences c
both disclosure and non -disclosure.
Pill
12/17/01 MON 11:45 FAX 703 5,JL 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,HALEBAS
14006
.RULES OF PROFESSIONAL, CONDUCE'
(2Ib) Although paragraph (c)(3) requires that authorized disclosure be made promptly, a lawyer dots not violate this Rule
lct, by delaying in rc porting attorney misconduct for the minimum period of time necessary to protect a client's inrer-
Ms. For examplc, a lawyer miglu choose to postpone reporting attorney misconduct until the end of litigation
when reporting during litigation might harm the client's intcmT—,s.
her -
Former Clsenr
tiorl,
[221 The duty of con`.idcntiality continues after the client -lawyer relationship has terminated.
car- VIRGINU CODE COMPARISON
ake
Rule 1.6 retains the two -Fart definition of information sublcct to the lawycFs ethical duty u wnfidcnvalirq. EC 4-4 added
that the duty differed from the evidentiary privilege in that it e2dsted `without regard to the nature or source of information
or the fact that others share the knowledge_" :However, the definition of "client information" as .set forth in the ABA Afoalel
Ruler, which includes all information"relating to" the representation, was rejected as too broad.
uct
Paragraph (a) permit,; a lawyer m* er to disclose information where impliedly authorized to do so in order to carry out the rcpresen-
,n- ration. Under DR 4-101(3) and (C), a lawyer was not permitted to reveal "confidences" unless the client first consealted after
C. disclosure.
S Paragraph (b)(1) is substa>tially the same as DR 4-101(C)(2).
h Paragraph (b)(2) is substantially similar to DR 4-101(C)(4) which audio62.ed disclosure by a lawyer of "[tlonfidem.as or
secrets necessary to establish die trasonableness of his fec or co defend himsclfor his employers or associates against an accusa-
tan
tion of wrongful conduct.
ich Paragraph (b)(3) is subsrattdally the same as DR 4-101(C)(3)-
tive Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) are substantially die scone as DR 4-101(D).
Faragraph (c)(3) had no counterpart n the 1/zt-nia Code.
°- COmmn-f'EE CoM.'vmmmi!
it,
l The Committee added Iar.guagc to this Rule from DR 4-101 to make the disclosure provisions more consistent with current
an Virginia policy. The Committee specifically concluded that the provisions of DR 4-101(D) of the Virginia Code, which
,ay required broader disciosurz_ than the ABA iVlodel Rile even permitted, should be added as paragraph (c). Additionally, to pro-
mote the integrity of the I -pal profession, the Committee adopted new language as paragraph (c)(3) setting forth the circum-
,d stances under which a law,•er must report the misconduct of another lawyer when such a report may require disclosure of
privileged information.
RULE 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General Rule
(a) A lawyer shall not represent a dicrlL if the represenmrion of that client will be directly adverse to anotbax existing
client, unless-
(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not adversely affect the relationship with the other
t- client; and
l (2) each clicrit consents :after consultation.
(b) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyers
responsibilities to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless_
(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected; and
(2) the client consents after consultation. When representation of multiple clients in a single Mott(T is
undertaken, the consultation shall include explanation of the implications of the common representarion
and the :advantages and risk involved.
— 2
R PROFESSIONAL G1JIOELINE5 2001
12/17/O1 MON 11:45 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,HALE&HAS
U 007
RULES OF PR0FE,SS10NAL CONDUCT
COMMEN-1
Loyalty to a Client
Ill Loyalty is an ;xsenCial element in the Iawyer's relationship to a client. An impermissible conflict of interest may exist
before representation is undertaken, in which event the representation should be declined. The lawyer should adopt
reasonable pn?cedures, alipropriate for the size and We of firm and practice, to determine in both Iitigrazion and
non -litigation matters the parries and issues involved and to determine whether there arc actual or pou:nual conflicis
of interest.
[21 If such a conpict arises after representation has been undertaken, the Iawyer should withdraw Izom the represenEa-
rion. See Rule 1, 16. Where more than one client is involved and the lawyer withdraws because a conflict arises after
mprescntaaon, whether the lawyer may continue Eo represent any of rile clients is determined by Rule 1.9. See alto
Rule 2.2(c). As to whether a client -lawyer relationship exists or, having once been established, is continuing, see
Comment to i4ilc 1.3 and Scope_
[3) As a general proposition, loyalty to a client prohibits undemilung representation directly adverse to that client with.
out that client's consent. Paragraph (a) expmnses that general rule. Thus, a lawyer ordinarily may not ace as advocate
against a persc a the Iawyer represents in some other matter, even if it is wholly unrelated- On the other hand, simul.
raiaeous representation in ,unrelated matters of clients whose interests are only generally adverse, such as compering
economic enter. -prises, does not require consent of the respective clients. Paragraph (a) applies only when the repre-
sentation of one client would be directly adverse to the other.
DQ Loyalty to a Clem is also impaired when a lawyer cannot consider, recommend or carry out an appropriate course of
action for nce:Bent ben use of the lawyer's other responsibilities or interests. The conflict in effect forecloses alterna-
tives that would otherwise be available to Elie client. Paragraph (b) addresses such situations- A possible conflict does
not itself predude the representation. The critical questions are the likelihood that a conflict will eventuate and, if it
does, whether. t will marenaffy interfere with the lawyer's independent professional judgment in considcring alterna-
tives or foredo,e courses of action that reasonably should be pursued on behalf of the client_ Consideration shOLdd
be given to whether the dent wishes to accommodate the other interest involved.
Consultation and Concern
151 A client may consent to representation notwithstanding a conflict. However, as indicated in paragraph (a)(1) with
respect to .representation directly adverse ro a client, and paragraph (b)(1) with respect to material Iimitations on m-p_
resenration of a client, when a disinterested lawyer would conclude that the climr should not agree to the representa-
tion under the ;ircunistanCes, the lawyer involved cannot properly ask for such agreement or provide representation .
on the basis of [he dient's consent. When more than one client is involved, the qua: tion of conflict must be rmolved
as to each clien:. Moreover, there may be circumstances where it is impossible to make the disclosure necessary to
obtain consent. For example, when the lawyer represents different clients in related matters and one of tine clients
refi>_ses to consent to the disclosure necessary to permit the other client to matte an informed decision, tl;e lawyer
cannot properl) risk the latter to consent.
Lawyer's Intetwu
[61 A lawyer may not allow business or personal interests to affect represcnration of a diem- For example, a lawyer's neec
For income should not lend the lawyer to undeiTakc matters that cannot be handfed compctentb,, and at ;t reasonable
fee. See Rules 1..1 and 1.5. Similarly, a lawyer may not refer clients to an enterprise in which the lawyer has an undis•
closed interest. A lawyer's romantic or other intimate personal relarionship call also adversely affect representation of
a client. ;
Co►cfl{ets in L tzgatrnn
171 Paragraph (a) prohibits representation of opposing parties in litigation_ Simultaneous representation of p.u-ties whose
interests in litiga rion may conflict, such as co -plaintiffs or co-defendants, is governed by paragraph (b). An imper-
missible conflict may exist by reason of substantial discrepancy in the parries testimony, incompatibility in positions
in relation to an opposing party or the fact that there are substantially di&rent possibilities of setticment of the
claims or liabilib.-s in question. Such conflicts can arise in criminal cases as well as civil. The potential for conflict of
interest in representing multiple defendants in a criminal case is so grave thar ordinarily a Iawyer should decline to
represent more than one codefendant. On the ocher hand, common representation of persons having similar inter-
26
V r R G T. T a a • . -.
12/17,101 MON 11:46 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,HALE&HAS y 4 008
R U I E S OF PRO FFSSIONAL CONI3UCT
ests is proper if the lisle of adverse effect is minimal and the requirements of paragraph (b) arc mcr_ Compare Rule
2.2 involving intermediation between dienm
[s1 Ordinarily, a lawyer in -ay not ace as advocate against a client the lawyer represents in some other matter, even if the
other matter is who? y unrelated. POWever, there arc circumstances in which a lawyer may act as advocate against a
client. For oatnple, i lawyer representing an cnte.tprisc with diverse open, tions may accept employment as an advo-
CM against the enterprise in an unrelated matter if doing so will not adversely affect the lawycr's relationship with
the enterprise orcon(luct of the suit and if both clients consent upon consultation. By the slime token, goverrunent
lawyers in some circlimstances may Leprescnr government employees in proceedings in which a government agency
is the opposing party. The propriety of concurrent representation can depend on the nature of the litigation. For
example, a suit clrarging fraud entails conflict to a degree not involved in a suit for a declaratory judgment concern-
ing statutory interpretation.
[91 A Iawyer may repress rit parties having antagonistic positions on a legal question that has arisen in different cases,
unless representation of either client would be adversely affected. Thus, it is ordinarily nor improper to assert rsuch
positions in cases:per,ding in diltrent trial courts, but it may be improper to do so in Cases pending at the same
time in an appellarc•c:ourt.
Interest of Person ,f'uying for, a La"er's Service
[101 A lawyer may be paid frorn a sou:xce other than the client if the client is informed of that fact and consents and the
arrangement does no- compromise the lawyers duty of loyalty to the client. See Rule 1.8(f), For example, when an
insurer and its insure'l have conflicting interests in a matter arising from a liability insurance agreement, and the
insurer is required to provide special counsel for the insured, the arrangement should assure the special counsel's pro-
fessional independence_ So also, when a corporation and its directors or employees are involved in a controveny in
which they have conflicting interests, the corporation may provide funds for separate legal representation of the
directors or employees, if the clients consent after consultation and the arrangement ensures the lawyer's professional
independence.
Other Cnttilict Situations'
[111 Conflicts of interest in contexts other than litigation sometimes may be difficulr to assess, Relevant factors in deter-
mining whether there is potential for adverse diect include the duration and intimacy of the lawyeFs relationship
with the client or die its involved, the functions being performed by the lawyer, the lilcelihood that actual conflict
will arise and the likely prejudice to the client from the conflict if it does arise. The question is often one of proximi-
ry and degree_
[121 For cxample, a la*yci may not represent multiple parries to a negotiation whose interests arc fundamentally ar,tago-
nisric to each other, but common representation is permissible where the clients arc gcneLal.ly aligned in interest even
though there is some _lifference of interest among them-
[131 Conflict questions m:.y also arise in estate planning and estate administration. A lawyer may be called upon to pro-
pare wills for several frmily members, such as husband and wife, and, depending upon the circumstances, a conflict
Of interest may arise 'l'lie lawyer should niake clear his relationship to the parties involved_
[141 A lawyer for a corpor;.don or other organi7,adon who is also a member of its board of directors should deternu.ric
whether the responsibifiries of the two roles may conflict. The lawyer may be called on to advise the corporation in
matters involving actions of the directors. Consideration should be given to the frequency with which such situa-
tions may arise, the potential intensity of Chic conflict, the cffcct of the lawyer's resignation fi-orn the board and the
possibility of the corporation's obtaining legal advice from another lawyer in such situations. If there is material risk
that the dual role will compromise the lawyces independence of professional judgment, the lawyer should not nerve
a,r a director_
Corr CFiarged bya- Opposing -Party
[151 Resolving questions ol'confliet of interest is primarily the responsibility of the lawyer undertaking the representation,
In Iitigation, a court may raise the question when there is reason to infer that dic lawyer has neglected the responsi-
bility, In a crirtiimd ca:;e, inquiry by the court is generally required when a lawyer represents multiple d&ndanrs.
Where the conflict is .,ueh as clearly to call in question die fair or efficient administration of justice, opposing coun-
scl may properly raise the question. Such an objection should be viewed with caution, however, for it can be misused
as a technique of harassment,
27
pROFES5I0NAL GOIDE'LINES 10o1
12/17/01 MON 11:46 FAX 703 51L 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,HALE&IIAb
RULFS 0'.I, PROFESSIONAL C0_NDOCT
VrRGMA CODE COMPARISON
This Rule is substantially similar to DR 5-101(A) and DR 5-105(C). DR 5-101(A) provided that "(a] lawyer shall not acce
employment if th,::. exercise of his professional judgment on behalf of his client may be affected by his own financial, busing
property, or personal interests, except with the consent of his client after full and adequate disclosure under the circum-
stances." DR 5-1(15(C) provided that "a lawyer may represent multiple clients if it is obvious that he can adequately represea
the interest of cads and if each conscnrs to the representation after full disclosure of the possible effect of Stich represcmatiot
on the exercise of his independent professional judgment on behalf of each"
Rule 1.7(b) clarifi,_s DR 5-105(A) by requiring that, when the lawycr's other intcrests are involved, not only must the client
consent after consulration but also that, independent of such consent, the representation reasonably appears not to be advcr.
ly affected by the ,awyeFs other interests. This requirement appears to be the intended meaning of the provision in DR 5-
105(C) that "it [b_>] obvious chat [the lawycrj can adequately represent" the client, and was implicit in EC 5-2, which sratec
that a lawyer "should not accept proffered employment if his personal interests or desires may affccr. adversely the advice to
given or services to be rendered tine prospective client."
CONUMITE COMMENfAR'Y
Although there ary few substantive differences between this Rule and corresponding provisions in the Vrrginsa Code, the
Committee condt.ded that the .ABA Model Rule provides a more succinct statcmcnr of a general conflicts title.
RULE 1.8 (conflict of Interest Prohibited Transactions
a A lawyer shall not cuter into a business transaction with a client or knowingly acquire an ownership, possessory
security (,r other pecuniary interest adverse to a client unless:
(1) The transaction and terms on which the lawyer acquires the interest arc fair and reasonable to the clien
:ind are fully disclosed and transmitted in writing to the client in a manner which. can be reasonably
understood by the client;
(2) the client is given a reasonable opportunity to seek the advice of independent cottnsel in the transactio
and
(3) I he client consents m writing thereto.
(b) A lawyer shall not use information relating to representation of a client for the advantaf a of the lawyer or of a
third person or to the disadvantage of the client unless the client consents after consulr,4isoexigpt as permitre
or required by Rule 1.6 or Rule 3.3.
(c) A lawyer !:hall not prepare an instrument giving the lawyer or a person related to the lawyer as parent, child, sit
ling, or spouse any substantial gilt fiom a client, including a testamentary gift, except whcrc the client is relate(
to the donee.
(d) Prior to the conclusion of all aspects of a matter giving rise to the representation of a client, a lawyer shall not
make or negotiate an agreement giving the lawyer literary or media rights to a portrayal or account based in su
stantial part on information relating to the representation.
(e) A lawyer shall not provide financial assistance to a client in connection with pending or contemplated Ltigatioi
except that:
(1) a lawyer may advance court costs and expenses of litigation, provided die cliew remains ultimately lia
for such costs and expenses; and
(2) a lawyer representing an indigent client may pay court costs and expenses of litigation on behalf of th
c' ient.
(f) A lawyer shall not accept compensation for representing a client from one other than the client unless:
(1) the client consents after consultation;
(2) there is no interference with the lawyer's independence of professional judgrnem or with the client -
lawyer relationship; and
(3) information relating to representation of a client is protected as required by Rule 1.6.
28
t!r 0 r-ru i n er • rr
12/17/01 AEON 11:47 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,.HALE&HAS
16 010
be '
RULES OF PROFESS]ONAI. CONDUCT
A lawyer who represents two or more clients shall not participate in making an aggregate settlement of the claims
of or against the clients, or in a criminal case an aggregated agreement as to guilty or polo contefiderc pleas.
unless each client consents after consultation, including disclosure of the e}dstence and nature of all the claims or
plc;ts involved .and of the participation of each person in the settlement.
(11) A lawyer shall not make an agreement prospectively limiting the lawyer's liability to a client for malpractice,
except that a lawyer may make such an agreement with a client of which the lawyer is an employee as long as the
client is independently represented in making the: agreement.
(i) A lawyer related to another lawyer as parent, child, sibling or spouse, or who is intimately involved with another
lawyer, shall not mpresent a client in a representation directly adverse to a person whom the lawyer knows is rep-
reserated by the other lawyer except upon consent by the client after consultation tegxrding the vlationship.
(1) A lawyer shall, not acquire a proprietary interest in the cause of action or subject matter of litigation the lawyer is
conducting for a client, except that the lawyer may-
(1) acquire a lien granted by law to secure the lawyer's fee or expenses; and
(2) contract with a client for a reasonable contingent fee in a civil case, unless prohibited bqv Rule 1.5.
COMNEN r
Transactions Between Clie;rt and ,Lauryer
[i] As a general principle, all transactions between client and lawyer should be Fair and reasonable to the client. In such
73 transactions a review by independent eounscl on behalf of the client is often advisable. Furthermore, a lawyer may
not exploit inform; Lion relating to the representation to the client's disadvantage. I -or example, a la.nycr wlxi has
learned that the client is investing in specific real estate may not, without the client's consent, see—k to acquire nearby
t property where doing so would adversely affect the clienes plan for investment. Paragraph (a) does not, however,
apply to standard commercial transactions between the lawyer and the client for products or services that the client
generally markets co others, for example, banking or brokerage services, medical services, products manufactured of
n, distributed by the client, and utilities services. In such transactions, the lawyer has no advanuige in dealing with the
client, and the resu iccions in paragraph (a) are unncccssary and impracticable.
[21 A lawyer may accept ordinary gifts from a client. For example, an ordinary gift such as a present given at a holiday
or as a token of appreciation is pcmlirred_ If effectuation of a substantial gift requires preparing a legal instrumenr
d such as a will or co, Ivey 'Moe, however, the client should have the detached advice that another lawyer can provide.
Paragraph (c) recognizes an exception where The client is a relative of the donee or the gift is not substantial.
Literary Rights
[3] An agreement by v�hich a lawyer acquires literary or media rights concerning the conduct of the representation cre-
ates a conflict bctw;:-cn the interests of the client and The personal interests of the lawyer. Measures suitable in the
representation of The client may detract from The publication value of an account of the representation. Paragraph
(d) does not prohibit a lawyer representing a client in a transaction concerning literary property from agreeurg Thar
the lawyers fee shall consist of a share in ownership in the property, if the arrangement conforms to Rule 1-5 and
Paragraph (1)
Person Paying for a L4wyer's Services
Ie
[4] Paragraph (f) requi�'es disclosure of the fact that the lawyer's services are being paid for by a third parry. Such an
arrangement must also conform to doe requirements of Rule 1-6 concerning confidentiality, Rine 1.7 concerning
conflict of interest, and Rule 5 4(c) concerning the professional independence of a lawyer. Where d-ie client is a class,
consent may be obtained on behalf of the class by court -supervised procedure.
[5) ABA Model Rule Comment not adopted.
Family Relationships Bet wt en .Lauyeis
Paragraph (i) applies to related lawyers who are in differcnt films. Related lawyers in the same firm are governed by
Mules 1.7, 1.9, and 1.10. Tine disqualification stated in paragraph (i) is personal and is not imputed to members 017
firms with whom die lawyers arc associated
�R Z%
PROFESSIONAL GU10ELINE5 2001
12/17/01 MON 11:47 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,ILALE&HAS
'Ut
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Acquisition oflntrrest in Litigation
[71 Paragraph (j) states the traditional general rule that lawyers are prohibited from acquiring a proprietary interest in LE
igation_ T tis general rule, which has its basis in common law champerry and maintenance, is subject to specific
ctception: developed in decisional law and continued in these Rules, such as the exception for rtntsonablc contingeg
fees set forth in Rule 1.5 and the exception for certain advances or payment of the costs of litigation set forth in
paragraph (e). r.
VIRGLNTA CODE CONIPARiSON
— Wuh regard to paragraph (a), DR 5-104(A) provided rhat a lawyer "shall nor enter into a business transaction with a client if
they have differing ntcrests therein and if the client e:xpceac the lawyer to exercise his professional judgment Therein for the
protection of the client, unless the client has consented after full and adequate disclosure ...... PC :;i-3 scared that a lawyer
"should not seek to persuade his client to permit him to invest in an undertaking of his client nor make improper use of his
professional rclation hip to influence his client to invest in an enterprise in which the lawyer is interested."
Paragraph (b) is substantially similar to DR 4-101(B)(3) which provided that a lawyer should not me "a conhdcnce or seCM
of his client for the advantage of himself, or a third person, unless the client consents after full disclosure_"
Paragraph (e) is substantially similar to DR 5-104(B) which stated that a lawyer "shall not prepare aai instrunient giving the
lawyer or a member of the lawyees family any gift from a client, including a restamenrary gift, except where (he client is a rel-
ative of the donee." 1SC 5-5 stated that a lawyer should nor suggest to his client that a gift be made to himself or for his ben.
_cfir. If a lawyer accepts a gift from his client, he is peculiarly susceptible to the charge that he unduly influenced or over-
reached the client. G" a client voluntarily offers to make a gift to his lawyer, the lawyer may accept the gift, but before doing
so, he should urge Haar the client secure disintcresred advice from an independent, competent person who is cognizant of all
the circumstances_ 1 ccepr in those instances in which the client is related to the donee, a lawyer may not prelrarc an instru-
ment by which the client gives a gift to the lawyer or to a member of his family."
Paragraph (d) has no direct counterpart in the Virginia Code_ EC 5-4 scared that in order to avoid "potentially differing inter-
ests" a lawyer should "scrupulously avoid [lizertuy arrangements with a clienrl prior to tic termination of all aspects of the
matter giving rise to the employment, even though [the lawyers] employment has previously ended."
Paragraph (c)(1) incorporates the provisions of DR 5-103(B), including the requirement that the client remain "ultimately
Iiable" for such advanced expenses.
Paragraph (e)(2) has no direct counrerparr in the Virginia Code, although DR 5- 103(B) allowed a lawyer to :advance or guar-
antee expenses of liri, ration as long as the client remained ultimately liable_
Paragraph (f) is substantially similar to DR 5-106(A)(1) and DR 5-106(B). DR 5-106(A)(1) stated: '%Xcept with die consent
of his client after full and adequate disclosure under the circumstances, a lawyer shall not ... [a}ecept compeiisation for his
legal services from otit other than his client_" DR 5-106(B) stated that "fa] lawyer shall not permit a person who rccom-
mends, employs, or lays him to render legal services for another to direct or regulate his professional judgment in rendering
such legal services."
Paragraph (g) is subsiantially similar to DR 5-107, but also covers aggregated plea agreements in criminal cases.
The first portion of Paragraph (h) is essentially the same as DR 6-102(A), but the second portion of Paragraph (h) has no
counterpart in the Virginia Code. The new provision allows in-house lawyers to arrange for the same indenonity available to
orher officers and employees, as long as their employers are independently represented in making the arrangement.
Paragraph (i) has no counterpart in the Wrgirda Code.
Paragraph (j) is subsrmrially the same as DR 5-103(A).
Comvfr= CommEVTARX
The Commitrce added "for the advantage of himself or a third person" from DR 4-10I (B)(3) to paragraph (b) as a further
limitation on a lavvyer's use of information rdaring to representation of a client_
The Committee addcd a further time limitation to paragraph (d)'s restriction. Borrowing language from EC 5-4, the restric
rion on agreements giving a lawytr literary or media rights extends through the conclusion of "all aspeccrs of a matter giving
rise to the representation."
30
V r ., r r IU f n e T A r e e
12/17/01 MON 11:48 FAX 703 591 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN',HALE&HAS � � LELJuIz
RULES
OF PROFESSIONAL C()NDUCT
L1 Rule (1), the CoMmIttee retained the requirement in OR 5-103(B) that a client must "remain ultimatePy liable for
[litigation] expenses'" llowcve, the Committee adopted the limited exception for indi gent Clients that appears in Rule
(2)
After le,loy debate, the Corm ottee adopted 1.8(h), which retains the general prohibition on lawyers prospecd-vely limiting
dt it malpricricc liability to clients (which appeared in Vrginia Code OR 6-102). However, the Committee added a limited
,%ccprion that allows in-house lawyers to arrange for the type of indemnity that other officers and <:mployccs of entities .Fray
obtain. The Committee voted :o insist that the client be independently represented in agreeing to any such arrangement.
In 1.8(i), the Committee adopted the ABA Model Rule approach, which permits lawyers who are members of the same
nocle,qr family to represent slier rs adverse to each other, as long as both clients consent after full disclosure. TheVirginia
Code was interpreted to create :i non-waivable perse conflict of interest in these circumstances. See LEO 190 (April 1, 1985).
RULE 1,9 Conflict of Interest Former Chient
(`a) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a mattcr shall not thereafter represent another person in d to
same or a s bstauatially �tnesent
matt which that ersods interests are material) adverse to the interests of theformer client ess 1 and former client consent after Consultation.
(b) A, lawyer shall not knuwingly represent a person in the same or a substantially related matter in whij-6 a f rni with
which the lawyer formerly was associated had previously represented a client
(1) whose interests are materially adverse to that person; and
(2) about whom the lawyer :had acquired information protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that is material to
the mattcr; uirless both the present and former client consent after consultation.
(c) A, lawyer who has fiortuerly represented a Client in a matter or whose present or former firm has forraerly repre-
,sented a client in a mattcr shall not thereafter.
(I) use information relating to or pAined in the course of the representation to the disadvantage of the for-
mer client et` .ept as Rulc 1.6 or Mc 3.3 would permit or require with respect to a clicnt, or when die
information has become generally )mown; or
(2) reveal information relating to the representation except as Rule 1.6 or Rule 3.3 would permit or require
with respect ro a client.
COMMF'N T
[1] After termination of a client -lawyer relationship, a lawyer may not represent another client except in conformity
with this Rule. The principles in Rule 1.7 determine whether the interests of the present and former client are
adverse. Thus, a lawyer could not properly seek to rescind on behalf of a new client a contract drafted on behalf of
the former client. So also a lawyer who has prosecuted an accused person could nor properly represent the accused in
a subsequent civil action against the govemment concerning the same transaction.
(2) The scope of a "matret" for purposes of this Rule may depend on the facts of a particular situation or Transaction.
The lawyees involvement in a matter can also be a question of degree. When a lawyer has been dimcd i, involved in a
specific transaction, su::)scquent representation of orher clients with materially adverse interests clearly _s prohibited.
On the other hand, a lawyer who recurrently handled a type of problem for a former client is nor precluded from
later represenring another client in a wholly distinct problem of that type even though the subsequent representation
involves a position adverse to the prior client. S.irnilar considerations can apply to the reassignment of military
lawyers between dcfcn:,c and prosecution functions within the same mmilimr7 jurisdicrion_ The underlying question is
whether die latiyer wa, so involved in the matter that the subsequent representation c<Ln be justly reps-ded as a
changing of sides in th:: matter in question.
Lawyers MovirT Between Finns
131 Whcn lawyers have be, n associated within a farm but then end their association, the question of whetl:acr a lawyer
should undertake repr<scntation is more complicated_ There are several competing considerations. First, the client
previously represented by the former Firm must be. rtrtsonably assured that the principle of loyalty to tl:'te client is not
compromised_ Second, die Rule should nor be so broadly cast as to preclude other persons from having reasonable
choice of legal counsel. Third, the. Rule should nor umeaso.nably hamper lawyers from forming new associations and
31�
PROFESSIONAL GUIDELINES 2001
12/17/01 MON 11:48 FAX 703 jJ 5082 DUVALL,HARRIGAN,HALE&HAS — —
RULES OF PROFESSIONAI. CONDtiCT
taking oil nc%. clients after having left a previous association. In this connection, it should be recognized that today. t, many lawyers practice in firms, d1at many lawyers to some degree limit their practice to one firld or another: and k that many move from one association to another several times in their careers. If the concept of imputarion were
It
applied with unqualified rigor, the resuir would be radical curtailment of the opportunity of la, crs co move from
NY
one practice si,cting to another and of the opportunity of dicnrs to change counsel-
(41 Reconciliation of these compering principles in the past has been attempted under two rubrics One approach has
been to seek prrse rules of disqualification. For example, it has been held that a partner in a later firm is conclusively
presumed co have access to all confidences concerning all clients of the firm- Under this analysis, if a lawyer has berfi
` a partner in one law firm and then becomes a p.u-tner in another law firm, there may be a prestunprion that alI con-
fidences know i by the partner in the first Finn are known to all partners in the second firm.'rlds presumption
aught properll be applied in some circumstances, especially where the clime has been extensively represented, but
may be unrealistic where rlle client was represented only for limited purposes. Furchermorc, such a rigid rule exag-
gerates die difl�rcnce between a partner and an associate in modem law firms.
[51 The other rube is formerly used for dealing with disqualification is the appearance ofimpropriery proscribed in
Canon 9 of dzc 1/z��istia Code- This rubric has a twofold problem_ First, the appearance of impropriety can be Laken
to include any stew client -lawyer relationship chat inighr make a former client fed anxious. If d%ar rncaning were
adopted, disqualification would become little more than a question of subjective judgment by cJ`le former client.
Second, since mpropriery' is undefined, the tcrin "appearance of impropriety-" is question -begging. It i hereForc has
to be recognized daat the problem of disqualificztion cannot be properly resolved cirlier by simple an-& to a
lawyer practicing alone or by the very general concept of a117
ppearance of hnpropricry. A rule based on a functional
analysis is more appropriate for detcnruning the question of vicarious disqualification. Two functions are involved:
preserving confidentiality and, avoiding positions adverse to a clienr_
Confide n,hty
[61 preserving conft.lcndaliLy is, a question of access to information. Access to information, in trim, is cssez]d rely a ques rion of fact in particular circumstances, aided by infermces, deductions or working in
that re sonably
may be made ab gut the way in which lawyers work together. A lawyer may have general access co files of all clients
Of a Iaw Firm and may regularly participate in discussions of their affairs; it should be inferred that such a lawyer in
fact is privy to all information about all the firm',,; clients. In contrast, another lawyer may have access to i he files of
only a limited nurmber of clients and participate in discussions of tic affairs of no other clients; i°1 the absence of
information to dic conuary, it should be inferred chat such a lawyer in fact is pries to information about the clients
actually served bur not those of other clients.
rest upon the firt �i whose clisqualification is sought.
[71 Application of p.-ragraph (b) depends on a situarion's particular facts. In suclt an inquiry, the bUd, n of proof should
[$] Paragraph (b) op,:rates to disqualify nce lawyer only when chc lawyer involved has actual knowledge of information
protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(b). Thus, if a lawyer while with one firm acquired no knowledge or inforniarion
relating to a pard:-ular client of the firm, and than Iawyer lacer joined another firm, neither the lawyer individually
nor die second fit m is disqualified from representing another chcnt in the same or a related matter even though the
interests of the two clients conflict- See Rule 1.10(b) for the restrictions on a firm once a lawyer has rermirLated asso-
ciation with the firm.
[91 Independent of d c question of disqualification of a Firm, a lawyer chan,ng professional. association has a continuing
duty to preserve emfidcntialiry of informationi about a client formerly represented. Sce Rules I-6 and 1.9.
Adverse Positions
[10) the second as ea of Io 1 t 1 cli t i e e ' o tion o decline bset ucnt re ressentations involving
Positions adverse t;i a former client "reusing in substantially related matters. This obligation requires abstention from
adverse mpresentai ion by the individual lawyer involved and other lawyers may be subject to imputed disgaaMca-
don under Rule 1.10. If a Iawycr left one firm for another, the new affiliation would not preclude the firms involved from con :inuing to represent clients with adverse interests in the same or related matters, so long as the
conditions of paral ;raphs 1.9 (b) and (c) con<:crning confidentiality have been met.
1111 Inforrmarion acq uu ed b the la
-- - Y wyei in the course of representing a client may not subsequently be used or revealed
63> teed tarvfer co rh,. d,stdvanrape of die client. However, the fact that a lawyer has once served a C ient does nor pre-
clude the lawyer fn>m using non -confidential information about that clime when later rcpresentin:j another client.
WJU1a
12i17i01 MO\ 11:49 FAX 703 5,k 5082 DUNALL,H.ARRIGA\,HALE&HAS, C. u1.4
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL COGDUCT
[12] is ualificarion from subsequent representation is primarily for the protection of former clients but may -Aso t'frct
cttrretu clients. This pro:ection, oNvever, sari --vx-uved by both. A waiver is effective only i [Fire is 01 disclosure
of the circumstances, including the lawyer's intended role in behalf of the new client.
[131 Witl-I regard to an opposing partys raising a question of conflict of interest, see Comment to Rule 1.7. With rega,d
to disqualification of a firm with whidi a lawyer is or was formerly associated, see Rule 1.10_
VJaGnvtA CODE COMPAJUsorr
pai.agmph (a) is substantially the : ame as DR 5-105(D), although the Rule requires waiver by both a lawyers current and for-
mer vicar, rather than just the former client_
There was no direct counterpart to paragraph (b) in the Ui 6inia Code. Representation by a lawyer adverse to a client of a law
firm with which a lawyer was prL-iously associated was sometimes dealt with under the rubric of Canon 9 of the b'zrginia
Code which provided: `A, lawyer s zould avoid even the appcaranec of impropriety."
There was no counterpart to Para raph (c) in the Vrginirz Code. The exception in the last clause of paragraph (c)(1) permirs a
lawyer to use information relating to a former client that is in the "public domain," a use that also was nor prolubi:ed by the
yirginia Coda' which protected only "confidences and secrets." Since rbe scope of paragraphs (a) and (b) is much broader than
"confidences and secrets," it is necessary to define when a lawyer may make use of information about a client after the clieirit-
lawyer relationship has terminates.
COMM= COMI MEN-EkRY
The Committee believed that, in :m ern, when lawyers frequently move between firms, this Rule provided more specific Stud -
ante than the implicit provisions of the Disciplinary Rules. However, the Committee added language to paragrapha (a) requir-
ing consent of both present and former clients_ Additionally, the Committee adopted broader language in paragraph (c) pre-
cluding the use of any information F" "relating to or gained in the course othe representation of a former client, rather that
precluding the use only of information "relating to" the former representation.
RULE 1-10D Imputed Disgnalificatiom Genera! Rule
(a) While lawyers are associ iced in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one :r;f them
practicing alone would l,e prohibited from doing so by Rules 1.7, 1.8(c), 1.9 or 2.2_
(b) When a lawyer has terminated an association with a firm, the firm is not prohibited from thertcaftcr representing
a person with interests materially adverse to those of a client represented by the formerly associated lawyer and
not currently represented by the firm, unless:
0) the mutter is the same or substantially related to that in which the formerly associated law}cr represent-
ed the client; acid
(2) any lawyer remaining in the firm has information protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that is rreaterial to
the matter.
(c) A disqualification prescribed by this Rule may be waived by the affected client under the conditions stated in
Rule 1.7-
COM.ETT
Definition of "Firm"
[1] Whether two or more lawyers constitute a firm as defined in the Terminology section can depend on the specific
facts. For example, t-.vo pittctitioners who share Ace space and occasionally consult or assist Etch other ordinarily
would not be regarded as constituting a firm. 1-iowcvcr, if they present themselves to the public in a way suggesting
that they area firm or co iduct themselves as a firm, they should be regarded as a firm for the purposes of the Rules.
The terms of any formal igreernent between associated lawyers are relevant in determining wherher they arc a firm,
as is the fact Char they ha-e mutual access to information concerning the clients they seine_ Firtherinorc, it is rele-
vant in doubtful cases to ::onsider die underlying purpose of die Rule that is involved. A group of lawyera could be
rewarded as a firm for pui poses of the rule that the same lawyer shoLdd not represent opposing parries in litigation,
wile it might not be so icgarded far purposes of the rule that information acquired by one lawyer is attributed to
die other.
33
P R 0 F e 5 5 I 0 N A L G H 1 0 E L I N E S 2 0 0 1
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
IN THE
COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA
MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK — PLEASE PRINT
1. The applicant is the owner X other. (Check one)
2. APPLICANT: OCCUPANT (if different)
NAME: Greenway Engineering NAME: Aikens Group(Contract Owner)
ADDRESS 151 Windy Hill Lane ADDRESS PO Box 2468
Winchester, VA 22602 Winchester, VA 22604
TELEPHONE 540-662-4185 TELEPHONE 540-667-3752
3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers):
North side of intersection of Front Royal Pike (US Route 522) and Costello Drive
Rt 1367
4. The property has a road frontage of 390 feet and a depth of 390 feet and consists of
2.01 acres. (please be exact)
5. The property is owned by Janet G. Ziviello (current owner)
as evidenced by deed from (previous owner) recorded
In deed book no. 764 on page 501 of the deed book of the Clerk of the Court for
Frederick County
Attach a copy of the deed
6. Magisterial District: Shawnee
7. 14-Digit Property Identification No.: 64B-((1))T4, 64B-((1))-5
8. The existing zoning of the property is: B2
9. The existing use of the property is: Vacant
0:
Page 2 of 5
10. Adjoining Property: See attached Zoning Map
USE ZONING
North Commercial, Residential B2
East Ponding Area, Commercial B2
South Route 522
West Commercial, Residential B3, B2
11. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5'
rear yard variance for an attached two car garage.")
A 40' distance buffer variance, Category A -No screen.
The applicant proposes to provide a landscape screening buffer of 10' in width and
to be in compliance with Section 165-37B.(1).
12. List specific reason(s) why the variance is being sought in terms of-
- exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or
- exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situational or condition of
property, or
- the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto
• All surrounding properties are zoned B2. except for the one existing B3 zoned
property as shown on the attached Zoning Map. The existing B3 zoned
property, Southern Fasteners, was a B2 zone in the original rezoningof f this
area. In 1989 Southern Fasteners requested their property zone to be changed to
meet their specific need of operation. At that time, there were no buffering
standards within the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance.
• The existing Southern Fasteners building adjacent to this property to be
developed is of metal building construction with no door access or window
openings facing the subject property
• The unique configuration of the subject property to be developed is approaching
a triangular shape near the Southern Fasteners property and limits the ability of
this property to be developed.
13. Additional comments, if any
• See attached Buffering Exhibit
See 2 review comment letters from Frederick Countv Planning Department
referring the Category A Buffering requirements. The first letter, dated
November 13, 2001, corresponds to the applicant's original interpretation of the
Category A Buffer being allowed the ability to provide a landscape easement.
The second letter, dated November 19, 2001, states that the original
interpretation was invalid and should have been a 50' distance buffer
requirement. After further discussion with the County and research on the
applicant's part, we concur with the County's 50' distance buffer interpretation.
We. as the applicant for the owner, herebv respectfullv reauest approval of this
variance as stated above in Item 11.
•
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
November 19, 2001
Greenway Engineering
Mr. Michael S. Stickley, P.E.
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, Virginia 22602
RE: Addendum to Review Comments for Site Plan #50-01
Category A Buffer Requirements
Fairfield Inn & Suites: Proposed Hotel
Property Identification Numbers (PINs) 6411-1-4 and 64B-1-5
Dear Scott:
After further review of the proposed site plan, staff has determined that the Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance requires no less than a fifty-(50)- foot distance buffer between Lot 6413-1-4 and 6413-1-1 A.
This must be divided into a twenty-five-(25)- foot inactive buffer and a twenty-five-(25)-foot active
buffer. Section 165-37 D (])of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance does not allow a Category
A Buffer to be reduced with the installation of a full screen or a landscape screen.
Based on the requirements noted above, the proposed hotel location does not satisfy the requirements
of Section 165-37 D (1). In order to satisfy all buffer requirements, you must either provide a
distance buffer of fifty (50) feet or obtain approval of a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals.
If the latter option is chosen, please consult with staff regarding the appropriate procedure for
applying for such a request.
Feel free to contact me, if you
Sincerely,
9"(f4`/
Je emy Franklin Camp
Planner II
any questions or concerns.
JFC/rsa
cc: Mark Smith, Greenway Engineering
U.UeremylSitePlanReviml200lTairfteldlnn&Sut1esl4ddendumCo entSPN50.01.%pd
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
r- ,�753 f
Page 3 of 5
14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations
owning property
adjacent to the property for which the variance is being sought,
including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject
property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail
of this application:
NAME
Sunnyside I LLC
Address 303 South Loudoun Street
Property ID#
64B-((1))-3
Winchester, VA 22601
NAME
GKH Partnership &
Address 160 Garber Lane
Building
Property ID#
64B-((1))-2D
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Gordon Enterprises,
Address 174 Garber Lane, Suite 3
LLC
Property ID#
64B-((1))-2C
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Southern Fasteners, Inc.
Address 182 Garber Lane
Property ID#
64B-((1))-1A
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Dr. James M. Schultz
Address 170 Garber Lane, Suite 12
Property ID#
64B-((1))-2B
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
James A. Garber
Address 190 Garber Lane
Property ID#
64B-((A))-2
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Billy Au
Address 1705 Brandon Drive
Property ID#
64B-((A))-1
Winchester, VA 22601
NAME
Jerry L & Patricia B
Address 229 Garber Lane
Grimes
Property ID#
64-((A))-5B
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Marilyn J. Roane, et als
Address 241 Garber Lane
Property ID#
64-((A))-5C
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Commonwealth of
Address VDOT-
Virginia
14031 Old Valley Pike
Property ID#
64-((A))-4C
Edinburg, VA 22824
15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page). Show proposed and/or
existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines and
to the nearest structure(s) on adjoining properties. Please include any other exhibits,
drawings or photographs with this application.
Page 4 of 5
AGREEMENT
VARIANCE #d"" Q�
I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application, and petition the
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals (BAZ) to grant a variance to the terms of the
Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any
conditions for the variance required by the BZA.
I authorize the members of the BZA and Frederick County officials to go upon the
property for site inspection purposes.
I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be
placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the BZA public hearing
and maintained so as to be visible from the road or right-of-way until the hearing.
I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein are, to
the best of my knowledge, true.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER
(if other than applicant)
-OFFICE USE ONLY
04`_ /.5-
BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF. Z—'(J"l�c'" ACTION:
-DATE- j
APPROVAL SIGNED:
ZA CHAI ' AN
L] DENIAL
DATE:
o<- os- ()z
E
EX IMGIDEWS-�l
N/F JERRY L. 4 PA
015 400, PG 261
zoNEp: 5-2
\USE: RESIDENTIAL
N/F E3lLLY AU
D5 4,135, P3 220
ZONED: 5-2
USE:: RESIDENTIAL
/r* JMAM,EM 1G4A4
R5ER
ZONED:R5-2 USE: RESIDENTIAL
N
, EX CLOCK
csw
N/F SOUTHERN FASTENERS,
D5 649,
PCs81
ZONED: 5-3 ox
USE: COMMERCIAL BLDG
N# GORDON ENTERPRISES, LLC
00
D5,B20, PG i(P-3
ZONED: 5-2 \
USE: COMMERCIAL EX TWO WOW %
ONCK OFFICE
N/r- DR. JAMES M. k-44ULTZ / >
J**
D PG 2&4
USE: COMMERCIAL
N# GKH PARTNERSHIP 4 5UILDIW4.*:.. N/F JANET G. ZIVIELLO
D5 58% FIG III TM 645-((I))-5
ZONED. 5-2 ZONED: 52
USE: COMMERCIAL USE; VACANT
��\ N/F JANET G. ZIVIELLO
TM 645-((I))-4 Im
SUNNY61DE I LLN D5 164 10 501
D5 814, PG 614 ZONED: 5-2 IDARCE.6 TO BE
ZONED: 5-2 USE: VACANT CONWLIC)ATM
USE: COMMERCIAL
�SAW W�
............ .. ....................................... ..... ..... ............. ............................ ..... ..... ................................................ . ..... ..... .................. ..........
.................. .................. .................. ......................
. ..... ....
B. GRIMES
N/F MARILYN J. ROANE, ET ALS
05 rol&, Fps 154
ZONED< 5-2
USE: COMMERCIAL
N/F COMMONUEALT,4 OF
VIRGINIA
D5 805, PG 563
ZONED: 5-2
USE: POND ING AREA
........... ...
I .............. .................. ..............
"IN ...... .........
............. ... ... .
FRONT ROYAL PIKE
.................. .................. .............
..... ..................... ............................
-7 — — — — — — — — — — --- — —
77
mm THE PRICE COMPANY
N/F VIRGINIA ASSOC., INC.
D.B. 6n, PG. 481
Z
DA5. 951, Fa 63
ZOtE: 52
ZONE: 52
USE: RESTAURANT USE: RETAIL SALES
MCKAEL & STOW
LXDW Ka.j
03110
I DATO NOV.. 2M 1
19CAIA C - BW I
30 is 0 30 i0 DOWN= BY.WS
SCALE, I- . 30' rax NO. 27536
MEW I ;r-
Q
O-W71��
`i7456!- iv/!
given -,%gs�is�������������
0
6
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/ 665-6395
November 13, 2001
Greenway Engineering
Mr. Michael S. Stickley, P.E.
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, Virginia 22602
RE: Review Comments of Site Plan #50-01
Fairfield Inn & Suites: Proposed Hotel
Submitted: October 24, 2001
Property Identification Numbers (PINs) 64B-1-4 and 64B-1-5
Dear Scott:
Thank you for your recent submission of the above -referenced site plan. I have reviewed the site plan
and have noted that some changes are required before staff can consider final administrative approval.
To assist you, please find the enclosed copy of the site plan with red markings. These markings
should correlate with my comments listed below. Staff s comments are as follows:
Review Comments
(1) Property Identification Numbers (PINS). The PINs that you have provided are inaccurate.
The subject parcels of land are referenced with PINs 6413-1-4 and 6413-1-5.
(2) Open Space Calculations & Owner's Signature. Please elaborate on how you arrived at the
provided open space calculations. Specifically, are you including both parcels of land in these
calculations? If Lot 5 is included in your open space calculations, and if there is not sufficient
open space on the hotel property, you will need to provide the owner's signature of Lot 5 on
the site plan. The County's real estate records indicate that the property is owned by Janet
G. Ziviello, the same owner as Lot 4. You should inform the owner that approval of this site
plan may limit the development potential of Lot 5 because it is included in the calculations for
this development. �
(3) CategoryA Buffer. Please provide a Category A buffer between Lot 64B-1-4 and 64B-1-
IA. This buffer is required because 6413-14A is zoned B3 and 64B-1-4 is zoned B2. A
Category A Buffer requires a 50-foot distance buffer unless a landscape or full screen is
provided. I would recommend that you plant a double row of evergreen trees, 200 feet long,
in this area. If this option is selected, please provide all necessary information regarding
planting, tree species, and tree size.
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Request For Site Plan Comments
Frederick County Fire Marshal
Mail to:
Frederick County Fire Marshal
Attn: Fire Marshall_
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
(540) 665-6350
Hand deliver to:
107 N. Kent Street
First Floor
Winchester, VA
(540) 665-6350
Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with
their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet.
Applicant's Name: _ Greenway Engineering
Address: 151 Windy Hill Lane, Winchester, VA 22602
Phone Number: (540) 662-4185
Name of development and/or description of the request: Fairfield Inn & Suites
Location of property: 1000'south of Millwood Pike/Front Royal Pike intersection
• u•
RECEIVED
NOV 3 0 2001
°T O;:PLANNINGHIEVELOP*A`
7
COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA
FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE
LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMENTS
Control No. SPO1-0059 Date Received 10/24/01 Date Reviewed 10/24/01
Applicant Greenway Engineering Plan Rev. Date:
Address 151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, Va. 22602
Project Name Fairfield Inns & Suites Phone No. 540-662-4185
Type of Application Site Plan Current Zoning B-2
1st Due Fire Co. 21 1st Due Rescue Co. 21 Election District Shawnee
Tax I.D. No. 64-1-4 & 5
RECOMMENDATIONS
Automatic Sprinkler System XX Residential Sprinkler System
Automatic Fire Alarm System XX Other
REQUIREMENTS
Emergency Vehicle Access
Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Fire Lanes Required Yes XX No
Comments : Fire Lane No Parking signage and markings required at all fire
hydrants and curbage not identified as parking.
Roadway/Aisleway Widths Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Special Hazards Noted Yes No XX
Comments
Hydrant Locations Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Siamese Location Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified
Additional Comments Attached? Yes No XX
Plan Approval Recommended? Yes XX No
Signature_��Title����\��
IREC IVE
NOV 3 0 200,
` 711 OPPLANNINGIDEVELORpr,
5 BK76kPG0501
THIS DEED made and dated this /6 day of August, 1991,
by and between PATRICIA G. BIGGS, widow, party of the first part,
hereinafter referred to as the Grantor and JANET G. ZIVIELLO,
party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the Grantee.
I
WITNESSETH that for and in consideration of the sum of Ten
($10.00) Dollars, and other good and valuable consideration,
$ receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby
N II
o grant and convey with general warranty of title, unto the Grantee
a p� a two-thirds (2/3) undivided interest in that certain lot or
,� ; parcel of land, together with all rights, rights of way and
it appurtenances thereto belonging, lying and being situate 0.7
l� mile South of the city of Winchester, in Shawnee Magisterial
i
s jl District, Frederick County, Virginia, set forth on a certain
I± plat made by H. Bruce Edens, Land Surveyor, dated August 12, 1991,-
I� attached hereto and made a part hereof. The aforesaid is the
1
�I same property conveyed to the Grantor and the Grantee from Eli A.
IIGarber and Alice J. Garber, his wife, by deed dated August 2,
1968, of record in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court
'i
�. of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 345, at Page 706,
to which deed reference is made for a farther description and
derivation of title.
�i The Grantor covenants that she has the right to convey the
SCULL..
n,wotcrpwr�w
• -1-
•rra %1YS Ar'_'
3DWU %Kt%TSrwt[r If
..VW4. I,
-C2
said property to the Grantee; that the Grantee shall have quiet
possession thereof, free from all liens and encumbrances; and
that the Grantor will execute such further assurances of title
as may be requisite.
WITNESS the following signature and seal this date first
above written:
(SEAL)
PATRICIA G. BIGGS
(i STATE OF VIRGINIA
it CITY/69tftYfY OF il'�1'.'/�• �` To -wit:
I ,� �; ,� a Notary PUblic in and
for the State anb jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that
PATRICIA G. BIGGS, whose name is signed to the foregoing writ-
�� ing, bearing the date of the � day of August, 1991, has
and acknowledged the same in my
personally appeared before me
State and jurisdiction aforesaid.
My commission expires:
�i Given under my hand this /G . day of August, 1991.
�I Nota Pyblic, or _ } ? .':l• .
Ii1
1
i
9C\AlT•
TwOOcv0�1'Ow � � 2—
ATTOWSM AT UN.
U*OUT% ct"T ITwlR
a
JA►,AEg A G4eW2 I 1 P
1
d
06/
6x760503
1 I F 5
v B 9
O � '
aWU a �I 4�� C
r
a 1 r
�I 9�
�I �
LDT 4
a j 33b64d f c¢ 0.770 AC ftES Z-b
O 745 - P 706
r r 1 xe DO A41t .01017
2
A
a.�
pkr
•s ��
�1 O
►� aer rra-�u I
AFFo¢oAeLC / CUQve C)AT-
CAQ't,MY- p QAC) AQC TAN lc)
00 Q:!8' PG6'J / Q 05% 15'- 30' +4e5.40 C4 47' 42 25 s 44. 3 D - 53' w
84 4(0'
l Pf! . %QON PIN FOU►14D
l PS • tQopj PIN dC T
PLAT 5"OVJM1G
LOT 4 - GAeMR' 3 5U5DIV1510M
A FMT1OW OF THE LAkxs OF PPMZiGA G BIGGS, ET AL-
6HAMiNEC 019TOCT, FQEDEOCK COU►M, VIQGINIA
BCALE a t-. GO IDATE - AUGL?5T G. —I
[0!- C EMWPkY, INC.
1104 Sonar Lime • WeKtws*(. Vrp w a 226010 703-662-4185
%i Bruce Eden* Presidaal
T
i
NL 000iS"
SHEET 1 of 1 I
viRGINIA FREDMCK COUNTY. SCT.
This
ufst c was
p t0 Oft fhe
ane w 19 `�
ane Mrtn certl.ca:e ct t to re.
/ J .1 , i /! /
•
� '�'E52
AppoimTMENT OF TRUSTEE
WHZ3tFAs, by Trust Agreement dated May 27, 1964, of record in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County,
Virginia, in Deed Book 300, at Page 192, Charles E. GAR9ER, and
Nora L. r.ARSER, his wife, appointed O. Lee rA89ER, Julian F. DER
and Donald E. r.ARRER, TBSlETEER of said Trusts and
c WHEREAS, by Substitution of Trustee, dated January 16, 1984,
recorded in the aforesaid Clark's Office in Deed Book 592, at Page
520, Patricia G. Biggs was appointed as Substitute Trustee to serve
in the place and stead of O. Lee Garber, who had died, and Alma
ao Bell Biggs (one and the same person as Alma G. Biggs) was appoint
ed
as Substitute Trustee to serve in the place and stead of Julian F.
fiber, who had died, said Substitute Trustees being 'vested with
s � � the powers set forth in said Trust Agreement and pursuant to the
vo�L
lava of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and
d ac d = WHEREAS, at a joint meeting of the Beneficiaries of said Trust
Agreems nt and the Garber Ice Cream Company, Inc., on February 17,
1987, Donald E. Garber tendered his resignation as a trustee Of
said Trust, which resignation was accepted by the Beneficiaries,
and
�
�E WHEREAS, certain Beneficiaries directed that Alma G. Biggs and
Patricia G. Biggs should serve as the sole remaining trustees of
said Trust, and
1
2
l
WHEREAS, the Grantors of the Trust provided in said Trust that
there be three (3) Trustees, and
WHEREAS, the Trust provides that the Beneficiaries of the said
Trust shall have the right and power to appoint a Substitute
Trustee or Trustees, and
WHEREAS, the Beneficiaries at present are: Zetta P. Garber,
Alma G. Biggs, Margaret Joan Garber, Mildred G. Magaha, Patricia G.
Biggs, Janet G. Ziviello, James Arch Garber, Richard M. Garber,
Michael S. Garber, Thomas G. Garber and Eli A. Garber, II, and
WHEREAS, it is the
desire of the Beneficiaries to appoint
another Trustee so that the trustees shall number three.
MOM, ,THEREFORE MITMESSETH: That for and in consideration of
the sun of one Dollar ($1.00), and other valuable consideration,
the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Beneficiaries of
that certain Trust Agreement recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's
Office in Deed Book 300, Page 192, do hereby appoint Margaret Joan
Garber as Trustee and that hereafter the Trustees of said Trust
shall be Patricia G. ijiggs, Alma G. Biggs, and Margaret Joan
Garber, and that said Trustees shall be vested with the powers set
forth in said Trust Agreement and pursuant to the laws of the
Comonwealth of Virginia.
WITNESS the following signatures and seals of the
Beneficiaries of the aforesaid Trust Agreement:
C�
(3 EAL )
tta P. GarbO
ATE OF Yl
OT TO -WIT:
_._, e_._tore....4 w.w,a Adept of .Trust# .yq5. Rq?CnOM1bQ*d before
�1 ��`�y of .I 1998, by Z tta P. Garber.
+ as this �
Give
n under my !sand this 1 1 4aY of i 1998. l `
ley comission �
3
• • FILE COPY
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/665-6395
January 16, 2002
Mr. Mark D. Smith, P.E., L.S.
Greenway Engineering
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
RE: VARIANCE #01-02 OF FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES
Dear Mr. Bushman:
This letter is to confirm that the above -referenced application was approved by the Board of Zoning
Appeals at their meeting on January 15, 2002. This approval allows for a 40' distance buffer variance
to the Category A buffer requirements. This property is located on the north side of the intersection
of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367), and is identified with Property
Identification Numbers 6413-1-4 and 64B-1-5 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
If you have any questions regarding these actions, please feel free to call this office.
Sincerely,
Patrick T. Davenport
Zoning Administrator
PTD/ch
cc: Building Inspections
Jane Anderson, Real Estate
O\Agenders\BZA\APPR_DEN.LTR\Faifield Inn.wpd
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
#z66 .... _ _.._
0. LEE GARBED TT ALTRS. **
TO :: :: DEED
PATRICIA G. BIGGS ET AL
DATE
• BOOK 412. PncE 6 ;9
THIS DEED, made and dated this ��o day of June,
1973, between 0. Lee Garber, Julian F. Garber and Donald E.
Garber, Trustees, under that certain Trust Agreement dated
May 27, 1964, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 300, Page 192
of Charles E. Garber, et ux, of the one part, hereinafter calle
the Grantors, and Patricia G. Biggs and Janet G. Ziviello,
of the other part, hereinafter called the Grantees.
WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the
sum of Ten ($10.00) Dollars, and other good and valuable con-
sideration, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor
do hereby grant and convey, with general warranty and English
covenants of title, unto the Grantees, in fee simple, all of
that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situate
just East of Winchester in Shawnee Magisterial District,
Frederick County, Virginia, containing 2.479 acres, more
particularly described by metes and bounds in that certain
plat and survey dated May 23, 1973, attached hereto and as a
part hereof. This is a portion of the same property conveyed
to said Trustees under said Trust Agreement pursuant to
Article IV, paragraph 1 (c) of said Trust Agreement.
This property is conveyed subject to all restrictions
easements and/or conditions of record, if any, affecting the
aforesaid realty.
WITNESS the following signatures and seals the date
first above written:
LAROSN'l. ANDSRBON
a LAR.I;.
ATT0U.e» AT LAW
Waccasans. V"Mm"
1.
SEAL
0. Lee Garber, Trustee
• BOOK 412 PACE 6,10
J an F. Garber, Trustee
Donald E. Garber, Tieustee
STATE OF VIRGINIA*
OF J thc.cj), to -wit:
131 -,CIA a Notary Public
in and for the n and State aforesaid, do hereby certify
that 0. Lee Garber, Julian F. Garber and Donald E. Garber,
Trustees, whose names are signed to the foregoing instrument
bearing date of the �n`OU day of June, 1973, have personally
appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my
aforesaid.
My commission expires �2 Ml. 7- /9 7 6o
Given under my hand this 'day of 1973.
LA8O8NT� ANDHRSON II
a LAM. .
AT M.XY. wa LAY
W,NCNUNTSM. vinamu►
y. „s.,77 4 1` °f► Y' l k r'. v ' r'l1a"� �. d+� i t v,�c y `"Tr.' 1 Tj of
.. : ,�k r <•:� }� •w •�*N Y ��ss "1tP` r � b Ov`s.$ t � e .
/$6. io _
olf
LOT - 4
AMMIA 0106S
Co..S4S - P.;M
V#ftVMW.A*WAX,V
-------i,
\cAmrAimcio\
ows
TAX
i
FR*ZI PML LAND
LMI�/iWL : I
A 1OV of
LOT - d 1
W/Ao*-SMR
2- 4 A9 ACRES
zv,-w - PM I
I
LP. F.
(PT. Lam)
U. S. RovrE 522
SCALE
The above plat represents a survey of aportion of the land conveyed to
C. Lee Garber, EtAI, by Trust Agreement dated 27 May 1964 and recorded in
Oeed Book 300 at Page 192 and all of the land contained in Lot 5 "Garber's
Subdivision" conveyed to C. Lee Garber, EtAI, by deed dated 16 July 1969 and
recorded in Deed Book 358 at rage 690. The aforesaid deeds are recorded in
the Frederick County Court Clerks Office, Frederick County, Virginia..
The said land fronts the '.,'eat boundary line of U.S. Route 522 in Shawnee
Ilistrict, Frederick County, Virginia and is bounded as follows:
Beginning at an iron pin (round, a corner to the Federal Land Bank, Assn.
lot in the said line of Route 522; thence with the said line of Rte. 522,
S 46° II' 39" W -- 352.00' to an iron pin found at the corner of Lot 4; thence
with Lot 4, N 43° 48' 22" W - 198.80' to an iron pin found; thence continuing
with Lot 4, N 710 26' 47" 11 - 46.70' to the corner of Lot 4, lot 1, and the
James Garber lot; thence with James Garber; h 01' 44' 54" E - 210.00, to the
corner of of said Garber lot, Grimes lot, and the Retained Portion; thence
with the said Retained Portion, N 86v 07' 27" E - 291.91' to an iron pin Found
a corner to the Retained Portion, Virginia Ilomes, Inc. land, and the Federal
Land Bank, Assn, lot; thence with a line of the said Federal Land Bank, Assn.
lot, S 43° 49' 22" E - 200.00, to the beginning.
Containing . . . • • • .
• .479 Acres
Surveyed . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 May 1973 ���1►LT1�0pLi"�
H. Vic, 17�ls
MINA*( ENP'�fERiNr, � suqt[riys n
P. 01. Box 666
Winchester. Va.
VLriG-NUiL 43`.�5:'.iCY, CCLT:•,,TY, S"I•
.Ircme: or r ri=-j was rei c-:: to , e ea iFc
- cray or P
ad vita 10r at
to < cord. T u3. , d7 c sreto aaao co i W.0 '
T i ,e•� d �edL: L ��a oki• �.1 0:
' " SE-54 hava bcea paid, if a so
y
0j
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
5401665-5651
FAX: 540/ 665-6395
December 4, 2001
PUBLIC HEARING
TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S)
RE: VARIANCE #21-01 OF FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES
On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals, you are hereby notified of a public
hearing being held on Tuesday, December 18, 2001, at 3:25 p.m., in the board room of the
Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This is a
public hearing to consider Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites, submitted for a 40' distance
buffer variance to the Category A buffer requirements. This property is located on the north side of
the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367), and is identified
with Property Identification Numbers 6413-1-4 and 6413-1-5 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this meeting. A copy of the
application will be available for review at the Handley Library the week of the meeting, or at the
Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia.
Sincerely,
Patrick T. Davenport
Zoning Administrator
PTD/ch
0:Wgendas\BZAWDJ0INER\2001 Adj\Autumn Woods LLC.wpd
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
s
This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on
X2 - 4L — Q /
from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick
County, Virginia:
( 64B - A• . 1
- -- -
AU, BILLY
64B - 1- - 3-
SUNNYSIDE I, LLC
1705 BRANDON DR
303 S LOUDOUN ST
WINCHESTER, VA 22601.3109
WINCHESTER, VA 22601-4637
64 . A• . 5-13
GRIMES, JERRY L & PATRICIA B
64B - 1• - 2-D
( 229 GARBER LN
GKH PARTNERSHIP & BUILDING
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4385
160 GARBER LN
_ i
64 - A- - 5-C
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4386
ROANE, MARILYN J ETALS
C 64B -1- - 2•
�
I 241 GARBER LN
GORDON ENTERPRISES, LLC
WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4385
CIO CHARLES A GORDON, MEMBER
174 GARBER LN STE 3
64 . A• . 4-C
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4304
I I COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
00000
64B -1- - 1-A
SOUTHERN FASTNERS CO INC
a
182 GARBER LN
s PP - ---- --- - ---- --- -- --
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4386
- ---ll' - - _ __-_ :,--
5
64B 1 4. U h
ZIVIELLO, JANET G
64B . 1 • - 2-B
SCHULTZ, DR JAMES M
5 W GATE LN
SETAUKET LONG ISLAND, N.Y. 11733.1621
170 GARBER LN # 12
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4386
64B A- 2-
`
��
. -
/'✓'"l[a
GARBER, JAMES A
"A
190 GARBER LN
Patrick T. Davenport, Zoni g Administrator
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4386
Frederick County Plannin De artment
g p
i
-V-lAl-I.J-Vl'-1-11��J 11\lA ---
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
I,,e -h Am Hc(1 I , a Notary Public in and for the State and County
aforesaid, do hereby certify that Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning Administrator for the Department of
Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated f� ,
has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid.
Given under my hand this ' h day ofDOOMerj 0001
My commission expires ) f onr jA0j Q
-1
Mr. Mark D. Smith
Greenway Engineering
151 Windy Hill Lane
Winchester, VA 22602 J '�,�N�IARY PUBLIC
4�
WJ �44r 22604-
• JAI, TO: Barbara in Data Processing
J U%tM�J FROM: Carol f -Planning Department
Please print �� sets of labels by:
Page 3 of 5 I �A _ p,C , 4- THANK YOU!!
V
14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations
owning property adjacent to the property for which the variance is being sought,
including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject
ges if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail
property. (Use additional pa
of this application:
C Address 303 South Loudoun Street
NAME Sunnyside I LL
Property ID# 64B-((1))-3 Winchester, VA 22601
NAME GKH Partnership & Address 160 Garber Lane
Building _
Property ID# 64B-((1))-2D Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Gordon Enterprises, Address 174 Garber Lane, Suite 3
LLC
Property ID# 64B-((1))-2C Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Southern Fasteners, Inc. Address 182 Garber Lane
Property ID# 64B-((1))-lA Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Dr. James M. Schultz Address 170 Garber Lane, Suite 12
Property ID# 64B-((1))-2B Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
James A. Garber
Address
190 Garber Lane
Property ID#
64B-((A))-2
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Billy Au
Address
1705 Brandon Drive
Property ID#
64B-((A))-1,
Winchester, VA 22601
NAME
Jerry L & Patricia B
Address
229 Garber Lane
Property ID#
Grimes
64-((A))-5B
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME
Marilyn J. Roane, et als
Address
241 Garber Lane
Property ID#
64-((A))-5C
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Commonwealth of Address VDOT-
Virginia 14031 Old Valley Pike
Property ID# 64-((A))-4C Edinburg, VA 22824
15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page). Show proposed and/or
existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines and
to the nearest structure(s) on adjoining properties. Please include any other exhibits,
drawings or photographs with this application.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning & Development
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
M
r
Z
m
z
z
o
CD
Mz
N
m
r
z3E�?s- IF
j.•� J n �3 k^'.'.r ,•rj JAZL�U2
64B - 1- - 2-D
GKH PARTNERSHIP & BUILDING
160 GARBER LN
WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4386
U.S. POSTAGE
Ar
a
H METER712274
NIXIE 2110 1 22 Qi/06/02
RETURN TO SENDER •
NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED
UNABLE TO FORWARD
} 0,2% n :3
��:�=•=w �,:� � _ _ ._ t„t,t„t,t,tt„tt,,,,„tt,t,t,ft,,,tt,,,tt,,,t,t„I,t,,,ti.,l
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/ 665-6395
PUB-11r, HE RIPIr
January 2, 2002
TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S)
RE: VARIANCE #21-01 OF FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES (tabled at the Dec. 1.8, 2002 meeting)
On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals, you are hereby notified of a public
hearing being held on Tuesday, January 15, 2002, at 3:25 p.m., in the board room of the Frederick
County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This is apublic hearing
to consider Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites, submitted for a 40' distance buffer variance
to the Category A buffer requirements. This property is located on the north side of the intersection
of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367), and is identified with Property
Identification Numbers 6413-1-4 and 6413-1-5 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this meeting. A copy of the
application will be available for review at the Handley Library the week of the meeting, or at the
Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia.
Sincerely,
Patrick T. Davenport
Zoning Administrator
.PTD/ch, .
0AAgendas\BZA\ADJ0MR\2001 Adj\(:airfield Inn.wpd
107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
0
COUNTY of FR`i DERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/ 665-6395
PUBLIC HEARING
December 4, 2001
TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S)
RE: VARIANCE #21-01 OF FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES
On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals, you are hereby notified of a public
hearing being held on Tuesday, December 18, 2001, at 3:25 p.m., in the board room of the
Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This is a
public hearing to consider Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites, submitted for a 40' distance
buffer variance to the Category A buffer requirements. This property is located on the north side of
the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367), and is identified
with Property Identification Numbers 64B-1-4 and 6413-1-5 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this meeting. A copy of the
application will be available for review at the Handley Library the week of the meeting, or at the
Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia.
Sincerely, R6,Ij�j
Patrick T. Davenport
Zoning Administrator
PTD/ch
0AAgendas\BZAWD701NER\2001 Adj\Aulumn Woods LLC.wpd
107 worth Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning & Development
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
0
E,
IJJ
0C=
O
LL
C
F
c
,
•
a'
tr
!`h i
64B - 1- - 2-1)
GKH PARTNERSHIP & BUILDING
160 GARBER LN
WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4386
w U.S. P� 1ACT
fi l"OETER71 -2 . :a
NIXIE 75123 1 35 12/07/01
RETURN TO SENDER
NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED
UNABLE TO FORWA-7D
.t
N
r
_.J
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
5401665-5651
FAX: 540/ 665-6395
January 2, 2002
PUBLIC FEARING
TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S)
RE: VARIANCE #21-01 OF FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES (tabled at the Dec. 18; 2002 meeting)
On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals, you are hereby notified of a public
hearing being held on Tuesday, January 15, 2002, at 3:25 p.m., in the board room of the Frederick
County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This is a public hearing
to consider Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites, submitted for a 40' distance buffer variance
to the Category A buffer requirements. This property is located on the north side of the intersection
of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367), and is identified with Property
Identification Numbers 6413-1-4 and 6413-1-5 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this meeting. A copy of the
application will be available for review at the Handley Library the week of the meeting, or at the
Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia.
Sincerely,
Poi � o(41-e nj
Patrick T. Davenport
Zoning Administrator
PTD/ch
0AAgendasTZMADJOINGR\2001 Adffairfield Inn.wpd
107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
46
This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on
1-2 4Z from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick
County, Virginia: -- —
64B . 1- - 3.
SUNNYSIDE I, LLC
303 S LOUDOUN ST
WINCHESTER, VA 22601-4637
64B - A- - 1-
AU, BILLY
1705 BRANDON DR
WINCHESTER, VA 22601.3109
64 - A- 5 C -
ROANE, MARILYN J ETALS
241 GARBER LN
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4385
64B - 1- - 2-C
GORDON ENTERPRISES, LLC
CIO CHARLES A GORDON, MEMBER
174 GARBER LN STE 3
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4304
64B - 1- - 2-D
GKH PARTNERSHIP & BUILDING
I
160 GARBER LN
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4386
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
64B - 1- - 2-B
SCHULTZ, DR JAMES M
170 GARBER LN # 12
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4386
64 - A- - 5-B
GRIMES, JERRY L & PATRICIA B
229 GARBER LN
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4385
64B - A- - 2-
GARBER, JAMES A
190 GARBER LN
WINCHESTER, VA 22602.4386
64B - 1- - 1-A
SOUTHERN FASTNERS CO INC
182 GARBER LN
WINCHESTER, VA 22602-4386
-a-Mael_y�
z Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning Administrator
Frederick County Planning Department
I, &--ffi Ann Hjc � i , a Notary Public in and for the State and County
aforesaid, do hereby certify that Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning Administrator for the Department of
Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated _ I I a 10a ,
has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid.
Given under my hand this day of
My commission expires on R'Umo() j
k Q +) --- Q 0
ARY PU LIC
14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or co orations
owning property adjacent to t*roperty for which the variance is bein�ght,
' including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject
property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail
of this application:
NAME Sunnyside I LLC ✓ Address 303 South Loudoun Street
Property ID# 64B-((1))-3 Winchester, VA 22601
NAME GKH Partnership & Address 160 Garber Lane
Building
Property ID# 64B-((1))-2D ✓ Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Gordon Enterprises, Address 174 Garber Lane, Suite 3
LLC 1-/
Property ID# 64B-((1))-2C Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Southern Fasteners, Inc. Address 182 Garber Lane
Property ID# 64B-((1))-1A / Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Dr. James M. Schultz Address 170 Garber Lane, Suite 12
Property ID# 64B-((1))-2B ,/ Winchester, VA 22602
NAME James A. Garber Address 190 Garber Lane
Property ID# 64B-((A))-2 Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Billy Au Address 1705 Brandon Drive
Property ID# 64B-((A))-1, ✓ Winchester, VA 22601
NAME Jerry L & Patricia B
Grimes
Property ID# '64-((A))-5B v
Address 229 Garber Lane
Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Marilyn J. Roane, et als Address 241 Garber Lane
Property ID# 64-((A))-5C % Winchester, VA 22602
NAME Commonwealth of Address VDOT- .
Virginia 14031 Old Valley Pike
Property ID# 64-((A))-4C r"' Edinburg, VA 22824
15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page). Show proposed and/or
existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines and
to the nearest structure(s) on adjoining properties. Please include any other exhibits,
drawings or photographs with this application.
'�413-1-5
TO: Barbara in Data Processing
FROM: Carol uff - Planning Department
Please print oi sets of labels by:
�`�, • a�j • Q [ THANK Y1
i
!' iQ�C' aJ �JI IZl i (�i'�Icl Inn & i kS