Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201800001 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2019-03-200000000 1 • TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. Sp 2W"6 0000 1001 Boulders Parkway P 804.200.6500 Suite 300 F 804.560.1016 Richmond, VA 23225 www.tInwnons oom TRANSMITTAL TO: Frank V. Pohl, P.E., CFM Date: 3/20/2019 Job#: 40241 Albemarle County Engineering 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Project: Keswick Hall & Golf Club Reference: Central Water System Expansion Copies Sent To: THESE ITEMS ARE TRANSMITTED: ff enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. COPIES DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION 2 3/20/2019 Design Plans 2 3/20/2019 Technical Specifications 2 3/20/2019 VDH-ODW Comment Response Letter COMMENTS: Mr. Pohl, Pursuant to the Condiitons set forth in the Resolution to Approve Expansion of a Central Water Supply System for Keswick Hall and Golf Club, enclosed for your review are two (2) copies of the revised Design Plans and Technical Specifications for the Water System Expansion. Please note that we have also included the comment response letter to the Virginia Department of Health, Office of Drinking Water (VDH-ODW) for your records. At this time, we have not received comments from Albemarle County. This project is reliant upon approval from VDH-ODW and the County Engineer. We anticipate that VDH-ODW is prepared to approve the revised Design Plans and Technical Specifications enclosed. Please, at your earliest convenience, issue any comments that the County may have or provide an approval letter for this project. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or need further information. My direct number is (804) 200-6389 or you may reach me via email at bruce.strickland(a)timmons.com. Respectfully, Bruce W. Strickland, Jr., P.E. CIVIL ENGINEERING I ENVIRONMENTAL I SURVEYING I GIs I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. TO: Lexington Field Office Office of Drinking Water Virginia Department of Health 131 Walker Street Lexington, Virginia 24450 FROM: Timmons Group DATE: March 20, 2019 RE: Comment Response Letter Keswick Hall Water System Expansion PWSID No: 2003400 Dear Mr. Kvech: 1001 Boulders Parkway Suite 300 Richmond, VA 23225 P 804.200.6500 F 804.560.1016 www.timmons.com Thank you for your review comments regarding the proposed water system expansion project for Keswick Hall & Golf Club and the surrounding subdivision. The following are responses to your comments dated February 22, 2019, numbered according to your comment list. 1. '7he plans call for the exterior of the existing atmospheric tanks to be repainted. To our knowledge one of the two tanks has had the interior cleaned and recoated. The original interior coatings were failing. Will the second existing tank have its interior cleaned and recoated as a part of this project." Response: The second atmospheric tank was drained and had the interior blast cleaned and recoated in November and December of 2018 by Utility Service Co., Inc. (SUEZ). 2. "Please explain how the sodium hypochlorite feed system will function and provide basic calculations for design dosage. Also, please verify that the specified chlorine feed pumps are not oversized for this application. The chemical feed pump specifications list a feed range of 0.02- 19.3 gph. The design chemical feed rate is specified as 0.6 gpd (0.025 gph), at the low end of the pump accurate dosage range." Response: Please refer to specification 25 9000— Sequence of Operation, item 1.3.C.l.a). Calculations for chemical feed are enclosed. The chemical feed rate listed on sheet M1.4 was revised to 2.1 gpd (0.088 gph). The calculated feed rate is based on the current chemical feed rate, adjusted to account for the additional raw water flow. The operators are currently dosing undiluted 12.5% sodium hypochlorite. However, if the specified pump does not reliably perform at the proposed settings then the solution will be diluted with potable finished water and the pump speed increased until the desired results are achieved. 3. 'Please clarify the control sequence for the booster pumps. The plans show lead/lag cut in/out pressure settings, but the specifications suggest these are variable frequency drive (VFD) pumps. Also, please provide a pump curve that indicates the operating point when both the lead and lag pumps are running simultaneously" CIVIL ENGINEERING I ENVIRONMENTAL I SURVEYING I GIs I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Response: Please refer to specification 25 9000— Sequence of Operation, item 1.3.A.1 and 1.3.6.1. The booster pumps will have two independent sets of controls that are operator selectable with a HAND -OFF -LOCAL -REMOTE switch on the pump logic panel. Primary operation in LOCAL mode consists of a PLC that controls the VFD speed based on a pressure transmitter located on the discharge side of the pumps. Secondary operation in REMOTE mode consists of pressure switches and electromechanical relays that will call the pumps to run at a preset VFD speed. The enclosed booster pump performance curve shows the calculated operating points of one pump running individually and two pumps running simultaneously at full speed and at a reduced speed selected to meet the peak hour flow of 236 gpm. 4. "Please explain the well pump VFD controls in more detail and sequence of operation for the wells." Response: Please refer to specification 25 9000 — Sequence of Operation, item 1.3.A.2 and 1.3.8.2. The proposed well pump VFDs were replaced with reduced voltage solid-state (RVSS) soft starters. The well pumps will have two independent sets of controls that are operator selectable with a HAND -OFF -LOCAL -REMOTE switch on the pump logic panel. Primary operation in LOCAL mode consists of a PLC that starts/stops the pumps simultaneously based on a submersible pressure transducer located in the atmospheric storage tank. Secondary operation in REMOTE mode consists of float switches and electromechanical relays that will call the pumps to run based on water level in the atmospheric tanks. 5. "Section 280 requires that new well sources have a recorded well lot plat and dedication document. A copy of these recorded documents needs to be provided before the construction permit can be issued." Response: Acknowledged. The well lot plat was submitted to Albemarle County Community Development for review and approval. The recorded well lot plat and dedication document will be provided once they are available. We have enclosed a design exception request letter pertaining to Waterworks Regulation 12VAC5-590-840 A.1.a. 6. "Section 1030 requires that wells be provided with a blowoff to grade. The blowoff must be downstream of the water meter and erosion protection is required at the discharge point. The revised piping layout for the four wells appears to lack blowoffs." Response: Revised as requested. Please referto sheets MIA and M1.3. 7. "Section 1030 also requires a properly screened vent atop the well casing. Please add a note to the well drawing to specifically identify this feature." Response: Revised as requested. Please refer to sheet M2.0. 8. "Section 1070 requires that booster pumps be provided with a discharge pressure gauge." Response: Revised as requested. Please refer to sheet M1.2. 9. "The atmospheric tank overflow needs to be modified. As designed, water would begin to overflow out of the tank vent and/or access hatches before the overflow pipe. The discharge should also be directed away from the tank foundation. Response: Revised as requested. Please refer to sheets M1.1, M1.2, and M1.3. I� 10. "Consider relocating the hydropneumatic tank vacuum relief valve to a location inside the building to reduce exposure to the elements and prolong its life." Response: Revised as recommended. Please refer to sheet M1.4. 11. "We recommend that a)tll line be extended to the back of the hydropneumatic tank to promote turnover. The VFD controlled booster pumps may not cause much fluctuation in tank level to turn the tank over." Response: Revised as recommended. Please refer to sheets M1.1 and M1.4. 12. 'Sheet H1.1 calls for the safety eyewash station across the room from the sodium hypochlorite feed system. We recommend the eyewash be located as close to the chemical feed area as possible so that the operator can easily access it in an emergency situation. Consideration should also be given to the floor drain location." Response: Revised as recommended. Please refer to sheets M3.1. Enclosed are the revised Design Plans and Technical Specifications. We respectfully seek approval of the proposed modifications to the waterworks. Please feel free to contact me directly at (804) 200-6389 with any additional comments or concerns. Sincerely, Bruce W. Strickland, Jr., P.E. Water Infrastructure - Project Manager Enclosed: 1. Chemical Feed Calculations 2. Booster Pump Performance Curve 3. Design Exception Request Letter cc: John Trevenen, General Manager, Keswick Hall & Golf Club TIMMONS GROUP 644t4 YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. 0 4t It PROJECT: KESWICK SUBJECT: CHEMICAL FEED CALCULATIONS DATE: JANUARY 2019 SUMMARY: CHEMICAL FEED EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS Sodium Hypochlorite Feed Pump to Keswick System Existing Pump Stenner Pumps - Classic - Single Head Adjustable - 45 Series - 45MHP2 @ 60Hz However, #2 tube is in use (not the recommended #1 tube), which effectively makes it model 45MHP10 design point: 0.02 gph to 0.42 gph (pump is capable of 100 psi output) at the 1.5 setting, pump will run at 1.5 gpd (0.0625 gph) Proposed Pump Flex -Pro - Peristaltic Metering Pump - Series A2V - Model A2V24-*ND Flex-A-Prene A2 Tube Pumps design point: 0.02 gph to 1.7 gph (pump is capable of 125 psi) target pump feed rate: 2.1 gpd (0.088 gph) SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE Disinfection Existing Proposed well pump flow rate 103 146 gpm well pump flow rate 0.148 0.210 mgd target concentration 1.5 1.5 mg/L chemical mass flow rate 1.86 2.63 lb/day chemical concentration in solution 0.125 0.125 - solution specific gravity 1.19 1.19 - solution density 9.92 9.92 lb/gal chemical in solution 1.24 1.24 Ib/gal solution feed rate 1 1,51 2.1 gpd solution feed rate 1 0.06231 0.088 gph Keswick Booster Pump Performance Curves _---����■���■■.■.■■■.■.■■■..■■...■■■.■■ ■■■ ■\��_��� —_ —���■■■■..■■■...■■■..■N.■■o... ..■■■■.■.\'■.■...■■���■■■■■■.■■.■..■....■■■■■ ....■..■..■,■.■.■■■.■/��■..■■■■.■■...■.N.N ■.■.■■■■■■...■�..■■■.■■..■■���...���i/■■■■EM ■.��■.■■■■■■.■...■■■■■■■■■■.�._�i/■■■■.■..■■■ ■■■.■.■.�\►�����i//■ice!..■■■...■.■■►■■...■■■■ ��■■■■��■■■■■■■■..►\..1.■...■..■■■■■.■��■■■.► ■■.■■■■■.■■..■■■■..■■.V■■■■■■■■.■■■■.■■....■\ TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. TO: Lexington Field Office Office of Drinking Water Virginia Department of Health 131 Walker Street Lexington, Virginia 24450 FROM: Timmons Group DATE: March 20, 2019 RE: Design Exception Request Keswick Water System Expansion PWSID No: 2003400 Dear Mr. Kvech: 1001 Boulders Parkway Suite 300 Richmond, VA 23225 P 804.200.6500 F 804.560.1016 www.timmons.com Keswick Hall & Golf Club is currently undergoing a major renovation and expansion project that began once the hotel closed in January Of 2018. As a result of this expansion, the owner is required to increase capacity of the central water system that serves Keswick Hall & Golf Club and the surrounding Keswick Estates residential community. Certificates of Occupancy for the hotel are reliant upon completion of this water system expansion project and time is of the essence. The central water system is currently supplied by four wells located on the far southeastern corner of the property. This area is partially underlain by a narrow band of limestone, referred to as the Everona Limestone geologic formation. Timmons Group contracted Golder Associates to perform an Electronic Resistivity Imaging (ERI) survey to target a new water supply well in this formation due to its excellent water -bearing potential. Four test well locations were identified by the ERI Survey and staked in the field using GPS equipment. We immediately scheduled the Preliminary Engineering Conference and Well Site Inspections. All four sites were approved within a few days of the inspection. We initially planned to pursue a favorable test well (TW3-45) adjacent to the existing well house and within the limits of the field -run topographic survey. Just days before the well driller was set to mobilize, a precautionary Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) scan of the well location was conducted. A high - voltage power line was located within a few feet of the test well stake. It was determined that the ERI survey results were invalid in this location due to cultural interference. The target well was changed to the most favorable test well location (TW1-26) approximately 450' away from the existing well building; outside the limits of our field -run topographic survey. A review of the test well's GPS coordinates and available property boundary information indicated that TW1-26 was approximately 94' away from the nearest existing property line. With the well driller on standby and the next available window several weeks away, the call was made to proceed with drilling TW3-26. The well was successfully drilled and tested with adequate yield and water quality for the expansion project., CIVIL ENGINEERING I ENVIRONMENTAL I SURVEYING I GIs I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES The survey crew was later deployed to field -locate the well and adjacent property lines so the required well lot plat could be produced. It was then that we identified a 61' discrepancy between the available property line information and the actual location of monuments; as well as a 19' discrepancy between the GPS coordinates of the test well and its installed location. This culminated in the new well having approximately 24' of separation from the nearest existing property line, which happens to be the right- of-way boundary for Interstate 64. Given that future development is extremely unlikely to occur within the adjacent right-of-way and the fact that topography slopes down away from the well to the property line in question, we believe the well's current location should not be detrimental to water quality. The minimum required setback will be maintained for the new well lot property lines. We hereby request a design exception pertaining to Virginia Waterworks Regulations, code section 12VAC5-590-840 A. 1. a.: 'The well lot shall provide a distance of at least 50 feet from the well to all property lines of the well lot. Larger well lots may be required under certain conditions. Fencing of the well lot may be required under certain conditions," We eagerly await your response and would be happy to provide any additional information upon request. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly at (804) 200-6389. Respectfully, Bruce W. Strickland, Jr., P.E. Water Infrastructure - Project Manager cc: John Trevenen, General Manager, Keswick Hall & Golf Club 1001 Boulders Parkway P 804.200.6500 T I M M O N S GROUP Suite 300 F 804.560.1016 YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. Richmond, VA 23225 www•tlmnwmcom TRANSMITTAL TO: Frank V. Pohl, P.E., CFM Date: 2/4/2019 Job#: 40241 Albemarle County Engineering 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Project: Keswick Hall & Goff Club Reference: Central Water System Expansion Copies Sent To: THESE ITEMS ARE TRANSMITTED: If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once. COPIES DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION 2 1/18/2019 1 Design Plans 2 1/18/2019 1 Technical Specifications 2 1/18/2019 1 Hydraulic Model Data Summary 2 1/18/2019 1 Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Certification COMMENTS: Mr. Pohl, Pursuant to the Condiitons set forth in the Resolution to Approve Expansion of a Central Water Supply System for Keswick Hall and Golf Club, enclosed for your review are two (2) copies of the Design Plans and Technical Specifications for the Water System Expansion. Please note that the Groundwater Well Completion Report is included in Appendix A of the Technical Specifications. The scope of this design is consistent with the previously submitted "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 2017 Update"; specifically, the upgrade titled Base Improvement W2: Domestic System. Also included in this submittal package are two (2) copies of the Hydraulic Model Data Summary and Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Certification required by the Virginia Department of Health. The hydraulic analysis layout and results are located on plan sheets C5.0 and C5.1 for reference. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or need further information. My direct number is (804) 200-6389 or you may reach me via email at bruce.strickland(a)timmons.com. Respectfully, Bruce W. Strickland, Jr., P.E. CIVIL ENGINEERING I ENVIRONMENTAL I SURVEYING I GIs I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ;1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4176 April 18, 2018 Valerie Long Williams Mullen 321 E. Main Street, Suite 400 Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: SP 2018-001 Keswick Hall and Golf Club Ms. Long: Staff has reviewed your resubmittal for a special use permit amendment to the Keswick Hall and Golf Club (SP2000-23 and SP2008-42). We have a number of questions and comments which we believe should be resolved before your proposal goes to public hearing. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues. Our comments are provided below: 1. The provided concept plan does not address any of the proposals discussed in Phases 2 and 3 in the 2017 Water/Wastewater Plan. The approval of the special use permit amendment will be only for those improvements requested at this time, any future improvements (banquet hall, event barn, clubhouse restaurant expansion, additional rooms, etc) are not approved with this request and an amendment of the special use permit will be required. 2. The Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan states that were will be 43 rooms in the new Hotel Wing, however your request states 38 additional rooms. Please clarify. 3. A left turn lane and right turn taper at the Route 22/Hunt Club Road intersection will be required due to the changes requested to the property. See attached comments from VDOT and the County Transportation Planner for further detail. These improvements are included in the draft conditions stated further in this letter. 4. The response letter states "specific parking layouts and counts will be included in the site plan review process", however parking areas will likely be conditioned as a major element of the special use permit (see draft conditions). While 46 to 64 new spaces are proposed (in excess of the 38 new keys for the hotel addition), it would be prudent to ensure that this is sufficient for both the expansions of Fossett's Restaurant and the Villa Crawford (both of which will be open to the public per the comment response letter dated March 19, 2018), which will require additional parking at a ratio of thirteen (13) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of gross floor area, and expansions to the spa and fitness uses, which will require additional parking at a ratio of one (1) space per one hundred twenty-five (125) square feet of useable recreation area. Provide the square footage of restaurant, spa and fitness center uses. 5. There were a number of previous conditions related to water usuage in the prior SP's. These conditions have been modified to clarify the usuage allowed, as well as additional conditions have been added. See draft conditions and Planning and Zoning comments. 6. A critical slopes waiver request and justification should be submitted so that it can be taken with the Special Use permit to the Board for action. 7. Concerns have been raised from residents in Keswick Estates regarding the traffic and gate operation near Fairway Drive that allows access to and from the Inn and Club through the subdivision. It is recommended that these concerns be addressed prior to the public hearing. 8. Will there be a separate entrance for the Maintenance and Laundry facility off of Keswick Road? If so, this should be shown on the concept plan. If not, the access should be shown on the plan as well, as it is not clear how that facility will obtain access. Planning Planning staff's comments are organized as follows: • How the proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan • Planning Comments • Additional comments from reviewers Comprehensive Plan. Comments on how your project conforms to the Comprehensive Plan will be provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared for the work session or public hearing. The proposed expansion is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which does not recommend hotels or resorts in the County's designated Rural Areas. However, staff notes that this use was approved with prior special use permits. In addition, Strategy 1c in the Economic Development chapter of the Comprehensive Plan recommends uses that promote tourism by preserving scenic, historic, and natural resources in the Rural Areas. The renovation of the Inn will not preserve the historic portion of the Inn, Villa Crawford, as it is slated for demolition. However, the Inn is located in a scenic rural landscape and will provide an opportunity for visitors to spend money in the County. Planning Comments 1. While Zoning staff is recommending that the improvements for the well and sewage be completed prior to the CO for Phase 113, Planning staff believes this should be done with Phase 1A due to the amount of unbuilt single family residential lots that will not have capacity if they are all built before Phase 1B is complete. Therefore, the condition recommended by Zoning has been modified to state that the improvements need to be completed with Phase IA. a. Table U2-2 shows that Phase 1A projects a maximum total demand of 61,400 gpd, and 77 Single Family Residences at a demand of 23,100, and the system's permitted capacity is 76,000 gpd. This excess of 14,600 gpd would not be sufficient to serve more than 48 new single-family residences with an average daily flow of 300 gpd per unit, per the same table. At least 15 unbuilt residential lots that are shown on the County GIS are currently under ownership of entities other than Keswick Real Estate LLC. In addition, there are 44 lots listed for sale currently in Keswick Estates. 2. Parking calculations should be included in the special use permit as parking is a major element listed in the recommended draft conditions. 3. All required/recommended improvements will require a major amendment, including the traffic improvements. 4. Zoning recommended modification for condition #4 has been updated to include the capacity of the sewage system as well as the approval from the Department of Environmental Quality. Zoning The following comments related to zoning matters have been provided by Andrew Knuppel: Zoning staff recommends implementation of water system expansions as conditions of approval. These conditions shall coordinate with the phases and alternatives outlined in the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. Below are examples of draft language that have not yet been subject to review by the County Attorney's Office. a. "The applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals by the Virginia Department of Health, Albemarle County Fire Rescue, and the County Board of Supervisors for a water system improvement to support dedicated internal fire protection as described in the "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 2017 Update for Keswick Hall & Golf Club" prepared by Timmons Group dated December 1, 2017 and revised March 19, 2018 (hereinafter the "2017 Water/Wastewater Plan") before a building permit for the proposed improvements described in Phase 1A of the aforementioned plan may be issued. No certificates of occupancy for the improvements in Phase 1A shall be issued prior to the completion of the aforementioned water system improvement." b. "The applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals by the Virginia Department of Health, Albemarle County Fire Rescue, and the County Board of Supervisors for a water system improvement to support expanded permitted capacity of the water distribution system as described in the "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 2017 Update for Keswick Hall & Golf Club" prepared by Timmons Group dated December 1, 2017 and revised March 19, 2018 before a building permit for the proposed improvements described in Phase 1B of the aforementioned plan may be issued. No certificates of occupancy for the improvements in Phase 1B shall be issued prior to the completion of the aforementioned water system improvement." i. The 2017 Water/Wastewater Plan recommends executing the improvement of the domestic system, including new well, ground storage tank, and booster pumps in conjunction with the Phase 2 expansion. However, staff has concerns with the limited permitted capacity that will remain after the completion of Phase 1B without expansion of the system: Table U2-2 shows that Phase 1B projects a maximum total demand of 74,300 gpd, and the system's permitted capacity is 76,000 gpd. This excess of 1,700 gpd would not be sufficient to serve more than 5 new single-family residences with an average daily flow of 300 gpd per unit, per the same table. At least 4 unbuilt residential lots that were platted pursuant to SP2000-33 are currently under ownership of entities other than Keswick Real Estate LLC. ii. Therefore, pursuant to Section 33.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, in considering that the proposed special use will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent lots; that conditions may be imposed to address impacts arising from the use in order to protect the public health, safety or welfare and may pertain to but are not limited to the provision of adequate improvements pertaining to water and sewage; staff is recommending the above drafted condition related to Phase 1B. c. Modify Condition 4 of SP2008-42 to read: "The restaurant, tavern, and inn and accessory uses shall not consume water in excess of existing permitted capacity of the existing water system (76,000 gpd). If the central water or sewerage system must be expanded to meet existing or future demand for residential users, the applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals for expanding the system from the Virginia Department of Health and the County Board of Supervisors." 2. The provided concept plan does not address any of the proposals discussed in Phases 2 and 3 in the 2017 Water/Wastewater Plan. Any conditions of this special use permit should be clear as to not imply approval of these improvements without prior amendment of the concept plan. 3. The applicant has stated that "specific parking layouts and counts will be included in the site plan review process", however parking areas will likely be conditioned as a major element of the special use permit. While 46 to 64 new spaces are proposed (in excess of the 38 new keys for the hotel addition), it would be prudent to ensure that this is sufficient for both the expansions of Fossett's Restaurant and the Villa Crawford (both of which will be open to the public per the comment response letter dated March 19, 2018), which will require additional parking at a ratio of thirteen (13) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of gross floor area, and expansions to the spa and fitness uses, which will require additional parking at a ratio of one (1) space per one hundred twenty-five (125) square feet of useable recreation area. Historic Preservation The following comments related to the Historic Preservation have been provided by Heather McMahon: Following a site visit to Keswick Hall on 2-13-2018, staff concurs with the VDHR Preliminary Information Form prepared by Patricia Castelli and submitted 9-6-2017 that: "The original floors (Georgia heart pine), room divisions, fireplaces and their surrounds, room divisions, crown moldings, wainscoting, cornices and grand staircase of Villa Crawford, now designated as the historic wing of the hotel, are essentially unchanged. Countless guests and visitors have enjoyed tours and presentations about its history, and marveled at the preservation and authenticity of the historic aspects of the structure." Hence, staff maintains that the interior and exterior of the Villa Crawford retain a significant degree of integrity and recommends that Villa Crawford be preserved and/or sensitively restored. It is further recommended that: • Rehabilitation or remodeling of this wing of the hotel be limited and undertaken in consultation with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. • Architectural features that are deteriorated beyond repair, such as the windows and doors, should be replaced in like materials with the same/original configuration of lites; • The interior wood flooring should be protected; • The interior detailing, such as fireplace mantles, stair balustrade and rail, wainscoting, paneling, dentilated cornice, scroll brackets, door surrounds, and window frames should be preserved in situ. • The Villa Crawford retains its original floorplan (room layout) and this should continue to be preserved. The VDHR report also identifies two historic structures on the grounds that were in good condition at the time of the last survey (9-6-2017). Both are single dwellings that were constructed circa 1940 and which served as motel rooms when the private residence was converted into a hunt club and resort after 1948. Today, they are identified as "administration buildings" located southwest of the hotel building along Club Drive. While the current SP request does not specify any proposed alterations to these structures, staff recommends that if these structures are to be altered in future, this would necessitate further review/documentation/determination of historic significance. Staff is not concerned with the applicant's proposal to expand the Energy Plant, expand/renovate the Club House, or expand the hotel with a +38 Room Guest Wing on the hotel's south elevation as none of these structures are deemed historically significant. Furthermore, staff has no objection to the construction of a new Maintenance and Laundry Facility, Pool Bar and Pavilion, new Spa Facility, or new Restaurant space. Although the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (DHR) Evaluation Committee determined on 11-9-2017 that the Villa Crawford, the historic (ca. 1910) core of the hotel, is not eligible for individual listing on either the state (Virginia Landmarks Register) or federal (National Register of Historic Places) registers, it is a contributing resource to the Southwest Mountain Rural Historic District [a full report of the DHR's findings can be found in the VCRIS database under DHR File No. 002-0941]. Therefore, historic preservation staff recommends careful stewardship of this historic resource. VDOT The following comments have been provided by Adam Moore: 1. The Department has reviewed the TIA for the studied intersection in addition to a memo dated 28 March, 2018 containing additional comments on the crash history and associated FR-300 Crash reports. 2. The above referenced memo does not meet VDOT's standard criteria for an intersection safety study. Most notably, the memo does not compare the crash history to other similar intersections as a basis of comparison and does not appear to consider the severity of the crashes. If the county would like VDOT to perform a safety study, the scope and schedule for it can be discussed separately. 3. Although the proposed development does not trip the left turn lane warrant, and the study suggests there will be little or no operational concerns (congestion/delay), the estimated traffic does lie very near the warrant line plot. To demonstrate, a future increase from the expected 309 VPH southbound to 375 VPH would trigger the turn lane warrant. This informs and contributes to the Department's recommendations. 4. The intersection's position on the District's PSI (Potential for Safety Improvements) Top 100 list and its crash history suggest that regardless of additional development safety improvements should be considered at some point in the future should funding become available. 5. The Department recommends that a left turn lane and right turn taper be installed at the intersection of Route 22 and Route 744. This recommendation is based on the intersection's position on the District's PSI Top 100 list, a review of the applicable crash history, and the expectation that additional traffic added to the intersection will likely result in an increase in crashes. SP Conditions Staff has drafted the following conditions. Please note these are just draft conditions and have yet to be reviewed by the County Attorney's office, however the language and content has been discussed. Please note that changes were made to the recommended conditions from Zoning regarding the timing of the improvements based upon concerns regarding the residential capacity and timing of the improvements. 1. Development and use shall be in general accord with the conceptual plan titled "Keswick Hall & Golf Club Special -Use Permit Plan" prepared by Hart Howerton and dated March 2018 (hereafter "Conceptual Plan"), and narrative title "Keswick Hall and Golf Club Project Narrative" (hereafter "Narrative"), dated January 16, 2018 , updated March 19, 2018, as determined by the Director of Planning and the Zoning Administrator. To be in accord with the Conceptual Plan, development and use shall reflect the following major elements within the development essential to the design of the development, as shown on the Conceptual Plan and described in the Narrative: a. location of buildings and structures b. location of parking areas c. 38 additional guest rooms for a total of 86 rooms d. 4 additional spa treatment rooms for a total of 8 treatment rooms e. 165 seat restaurant f. 10 seat Villa Crawford Bar g. 20 seat pool bar and restrooms Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be made to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Pursuant to road plans approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT"), the Owner shall construct right turn taper and left turn lane at the intersection of Route 22 and Route 744. These improvements must be completed prior to the issuance of the building permit for the additional Guest Wing, as shown on the Conceptual Plan, to the satisfaction of the Virginia Department of Transportation. 3. The restaurant, tavern, and inn and accessory uses shall not consume water in excess of existing permitted capacity of the existing water system (76,000 gpd) and sewage system (60,000 gpd). If the central water or sewerage system must be expanded to meet existing or future demand for residential users, the applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals for expanding the system from the Virginia Department of Health, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and the County Board of Supervisors. 4. The applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals by the Virginia Department of Health, Albemarle County Fire Rescue, and the County Board of Supervisors for a water system improvement to support dedicated internal fire protection as described in the "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 2017 Update for Keswick Hall & Golf Club" prepared by Timmons Group dated December 1, 2017 and revised March 19, 2018 (hereinafter the "2017 Water/Wastewater Plan") before a building permit for the proposed improvements described in Phase 1A of the aforementioned plan may be issued. No certificates of occupancy for the improvements in Phase 1A shall be issued prior to the completion of the aforementioned water system improvement. 5. The applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals by the Virginia Department of Health, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, Albemarle County Fire Rescue, and the County Board of Supervisors for a water system improvement to support expanded permitted capacity of the water distribution system as described in the "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 2017 Update for Keswick Hall & Golf Club" prepared by Timmons Group dated December 1, 2017 and revised March 19, 2018 before a building permit for the proposed improvements described in Phase 1A of the aforementioned plan may be issued. No certificates of occupancy for the improvements in Phase 1A shall be issued prior to the completion of the aforementioned water system improvement. 6. No unplatted property shall be subdivided and no approved subdivision plat shall be recorded unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission that the existing central water system, approved under Permit Number 2003400 issued by the Virginia Department of Health, Division of Water Supply Engineering dated January 7, 1998, or as such permit is amended or such subsequent permit approved by the Virginia Department of Health, Division of Water Supply Engineering and the Board of Supervisors, is available and adequate to serve all of said lots, as well as all existing improvements, associated uses, and platted lots, without compromising on -site and adjacent off -site well water supplies. Nothing herein shall guarantee approval of such amendment or permit. In making this demonstration, the application shall use test procedures approved by the Virginia Department of Health and the Community Development Department Engineering Division. 7. Except for any restaurant and spa on the property open to the general public, Keswick Hall and its associated facilities shall be used only by the guests of the inn and their invitees, and members of the Keswick Country Club and their invitees. 8. In the event that the use, structure or activity for which this special use permit is issued is not commenced within twenty-four (24) months from the date of Board of Supervisors approval, it shall be deemed abandoned and the permited terminated. The term "commenced" means "construction of any structure necessary to the use of the permit". Action after Receipt of Comments After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on "Action After Receipt of Comment Letter" which is attached. Resubmittal If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is a fee of $538. The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience online at http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms center/departments/Community Development /forms/Special Use Permit Applications/Special Use Permit Submittal and Review Schedule.p df Notification and Advertisement Fees Prior to scheduling a public hearing with the Planning Commission, payment of the following fees is needed: $294.00 Cost for newspaper advertisement $215.00 Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage/$1 per owner after 50 adjoining owners) $509.00 Total amount due prior to Planning Commission public hearing Prior to the Board of Supervisor's public hearing, payment of the newspaper advertisement for the Board hearing needed. $294.00 Additional amount due prior to Board of Supervisors public hearing $803.00 Total amount for all notifications Fees may be paid in advance. Payment for both the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors public hearings may be paid at the same time. Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place and adjoining owners need to be notified of a new date. Feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is mnedostup@albemarle.org Sincerely, Megan Nedostup Principal Planner, Planning Services enc: Transportation Planner Comments Action After Receipt of Comments Resubmittal Form COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 March 12, 2018 Re: SP20180001 Keswick Hall and Golf Club; Traffic Analysis Comments Based on the following, County Transportation Staff continues to recommend that the Keswick Hall and Golf Club address the transportation impacts through construction of a left turn lane and right turn taper on Route 22 at Hunt Club Road. This recommendation is based on the following points: The Keswick Hall Traffic Analysis submitted on January 15, 2018 shows that a left turn lane is warranted at the intersection of Hunt Club Road and Route 22. This is displayed on Figure 14 of that report although the figure states it is not warranted. The chart shows the bidirectional traffic on Route 22 to be high enough to require a left turn lane. The traffic generation assumed by the Traffic Analysis was exceptionally conservative (assumed an extremely low traffic generation by the development) and further research appears to show it will be much higher. At the time of the original scoping meeting for the Traffic Analysis, the full scope of the development was not known and so that conservative estimate was accepted. • Staff evaluated trip generation estimates based on ITE trip generation for the full Keswick Club and determined that expected trips would be much higher than what was shown in the Traffic Analysis when totaling the existing traffic plus that expected for the new addition alone. Despite the assessment by the traffic consultant hired by the developer, staff continues to believe that the history of crashes at the intersection display a need for improvement. Although this is not scheduled to be addressed by the County or VDOT at this time, the crash history remains a concern. If there were not other intersections that are a higher safety priority at this time, the County would be working to address this issue. The increased use expected to be generated by this development makes this a higher concern. In the previous comments from the Transportation Planner (attached) it was mistakenly determined that the water use levels displayed an extreme reduction in visitation during the year in which the traffic counts were taken. Clarification from the Developers representatives show that this water usage was not for a full year and therefore did not represent that reduction in visitation. However, there is no way of determining that visitation remained at the amount that would be typically expected for this type of use during the period when traffic data was collected. See attached comments from February 27, 2018 for additional details. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please do one of the following: (1) Resubmit in response to review comments (2) Request indefinite deferral (3) Request that your Planning Commission public hearing date be set (4) Withdraw your application (1) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments If you plan to resubmit within 30 days, make sure that the resubmittal is on or before a resubmittal date as published in the project review schedule. The full resubmittal schedule may be found at www.albemarle.org in the "forms" section at the Community Development page. Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last oaRe of vour comment letter with vour submittal. The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal. Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee Schedule.) (2) Request Indefinite Deferral If you plan to resubmit after 30 days from the date of the comment letter, you need to request an indefinite deferral. Please provide a written request and state your justification for requesting the deferral. (Indefinite deferral means that you intend to resubmit/request a public hearing be set with the Planning Commission after the 30 day period.) (3) Request Planning Commission Public Hearing Date be Set At this time, you may schedule a public hearing with the Planning Commission. However, we do not advise that you go directly to public hearing if staff has identified issues in need of resolution that can be addressed with a resubmittal. After outstanding issues have been resolved and/or when you are ready to request a public hearing, staff will set your public hearing date for the Planning Commission in accordance with the Planning Commission's published schedule and as mutually agreed by you and the County. The staff report and recommendation will be based on the latest information provided by you with your initial submittal or resubmittal. Please remember that all resubmittals must be made on or before a resubmittal date. Revised 6-15-17 racy By no later than twenty-one (21) days before the Planning Commission's public hearing, a newspaper advertisement fee and an adjoining owner notification fee must be paid. (See attached Fee Schedule. Your comment letter will contain the actual fees you need to pay. Payment for an additional newspaper advertisement is also required twenty-two (22) days prior to the Board of Supervisors public hearing. Please be advised that, once a public hearing has been advertised, only one deferral prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing will be allowed during the life of the application. The only exception to this rule will be extraordinary circumstances, such as a major change in the project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously been brought to the applicant's attention. As always, an applicant may request deferral at the Planning Commission meeting. (4) Withdraw Your Application If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing. Failure to Respond If we have not received a response from you within 30 days, we will contact you again. At that time, you will be given 10 days to do one of the following: a) request withdrawal of your application, b) request deferral of your application to a specific Planning Commission date as mutually agreed to with staff, or c) request indefinite deferral and state your justification for requesting the deferral. If none of these choices is made within 10 days, staff will schedule your application for a public hearing based on the information provided with your original submittal or the latest submittal staff received on a resubmittal date. Fee Payment Fees paid in cash or by check must be paid at the Community Development Intake Counter. Make checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the Review Coordinator. Fees may also be paid by credit card using the secure online payment system, accessed at http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=21685. Revised 6-1 5-17 racy FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP # or ZMA # Fee Amount S Date Paid By who? Receipt # Ck# Bv: Resubmittal of information for Special Use Permit or ��' Zoning Map Amendment �.�N,r PROJECT NUMBER: ,SF2_0A` (QJ PROJECT NAME: �syV�c� II C tnGl ti IUb XResubmittal Fee is Required ❑ Per Request ❑ Resubmittal Fee is Not Required \- - ) -0-6 � �.Y 1 Name of Applicant iPhone Number Signature FEES Date Resubmittal fees for Special Use Permit — original Special Use Permit fee of $1,075 ❑ First resubmission FREE Each additional resubmission $538 Resubmittal fees for original Special Use Permit fee of $2,150 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission $1,075 Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,688 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission $1,344 Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $3,763 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission $1,881 ❑ Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request — Add'I notice fees will be required $194 To be said after staff review for Dublic notice: Most applications for Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission and one public hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing a legal advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body. MAKE CHECKS TO COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE/PAYMENT AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices $215 + actual cost of first-class postage Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50) $1.00 for each additional notice + actual cost of first-class postage Legal advertisement (published twice in the newspaper for each public hearing) Actual cost (minimum of $280 for total of 4publications) County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126 1/24/17 Page 1 of 1 sY/ A COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper. Virginia 22701 Stephen C. Brich, P.E. Commissioner April 12, 2018 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Megan Nedostup Re: Keswick Hall & Golf Club — Special Use Permit SP-2018-00001 Review #2 Dear Ms. Nedostup: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan and accompanying traffic study dated 19 March 2018, and offers the following comments: • The Department has reviewed the TIA for the studied intersection in addition to a memo dated 28 March, 2018 containing additional comments on the crash history and associated FR-300 Crash reports. • The above referenced memo does not meet VDOT's standard criteria for an intersection safety study. Most notably, the memo does not compare the crash history to other similar intersections as a basis of comparison and does not appear to consider the severity of the crashes. If the county would like VDOT to perform a safety study, the scope and schedule for it can be discussed separately. • Although the proposed development does not trip the Ieft turn lane warrant, and the study suggests there will be little or no operational concerns (congestion/delay), the estimated traffic does lie very near the warrant line plot. To demonstrate, a future increase from the expected 309 VPH southbound to 375 VPH would trigger the turn lane warrant. This informs and contributes to the Department's recommendations. • The intersection's position on the District's PSI (Potential for Safety Improvements) Top 100 list and its crash history suggest that regardless of additional development safety improvements should be considered at some point in the future should funding become available. • The Department recommends that a left turn lane and right turn taper be installed at the intersection of Route 22 and Route 744. This recommendation is based on the intersection's position on the District's PSI Top 100 list, a review of the applicable crash history, and the expectation that additional traffic added to the intersection will likely result in an increase in crashes. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING April 12, 2018 Megan Nedostup Page 2 If further information is desired, please contact Adam Moore at 434-422-9782. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, obot, qoxt"' Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING n� cYi AI /.tr 4, 1 ♦ FJi COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 March 12, 2018 Re: SP20180001 Keswick Hall and Golf Club; Traffic Analysis Comments Based on the following, County Transportation Staff continues to recommend that the Keswick Hall and Golf Club address the transportation impacts through construction of a left turn lane and right turn taper on Route 22 at Hunt Club Road. This recommendation is based on the following points: The Keswick Hall Traffic Analysis submitted on January 15, 2018 shows that a left turn lane is warranted at the intersection of Hunt Club Road and Route 22. This is displayed on Figure 14 of that report although the figure states it is not warranted. The chart shows the bidirectional traffic on Route 22 to be high enough to require a left turn lane. The traffic generation assumed by the Traffic Analysis was exceptionally conservative (assumed an extremely low traffic generation by the development) and further research appears to show it will be much higher. At the time of the original scoping meeting for the Traffic Analysis, the full scope of the development was not known and so that conservative estimate was accepted. • Staff evaluated trip generation estimates based on ITE trip generation for the full Keswick Club and determined that expected trips would be much higher than what was shown in the Traffic Analysis when totaling the existing traffic plus that expected for the new addition alone. Despite the assessment by the traffic consultant hired by the developer, staff continues to believe that the history of crashes at the intersection display a need for improvement. Although this is not scheduled to be addressed by the County or VDOT at this time, the crash history remains a concern. If there were not other intersections that are a higher safety priority at this time, the County would be working to address this issue. The increased use expected to be generated by this development makes this a higher concern. In the previous comments from the Transportation Planner (attached) it was mistakenly determined that the water use levels displayed an extreme reduction in visitation during the year in which the traffic counts were taken. Clarification from the Developers representatives show that this water usage was not for a full year and therefore did not represent that reduction in visitation. However, there is no way of determining that visitation remained at the amount that would be typically expected for this type of use during the period when traffic data was collected. See attached comments from February 27, 2018 for additional details. County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Megan Nedostup, AICP, Principal Planner From: Andrew Knuppel, Planner Division: Zoning Date: April 12, 2018 Subject: 2°d Round Zoning Review Comments for SP201800001 Keswick Zoning staff recommends implementation of water system expansions as conditions of approval. These conditions shall coordinate with the phases and alternatives outlined in the Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan. Below are examples of draft language that have not yet been subject to review by the County Attorney's Office. a. "The applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals by the Virginia Department of Health, Albemarle County Fire Rescue, and the County Board of Supervisors for a water system improvement to support dedicated internal fire protection as described in the "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 2017 Update for Keswick Hall & Golf Club" prepared by Timmons Group dated December 1, 2017 and revised March 19, 2018 (hereinafter the -2017 Water/Wastewater Plan") before a building permit for the proposed improvements described in Phase IA of the aforementioned plan may be issued. No certificates of occupancy for the improvements in Phase I shall be issued prior to the completion of the aforementioned water system improvement." b. "The applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals by the Virginia Department of Health, Albemarle County Fire Rescue, and the County Board of Supervisors for a water system improvement to support expanded permitted capacity of the water distribution system as described in the "Water and Wastewater Facilities Plan 2017 Update for Keswick Hall & Golf Club" prepared by Timmons Group dated December 1, 2017 and revised March 19, 2018 before a building permit for the proposed improvements described in Phase 1 B of the aforementioned plan may be issued. No certificates of occupancy for the improvements in Phase 1B shall be issued prior to the completion of the aforementioned water system improvement." SP201800001 Review Comments Page 2 i. The 2017 Water/Wastewater Plan recommends executing the improvement of the domestic system, including new well, ground storage tank, and booster pumps in conjunction with the Phase 2 expansion. However, staff has concerns with the limited permitted capacity that will remain after the completion of Phase 1 B without expansion of the system: Table U2-2 shows that Phase 113 projects a maximum total demand of 74,300 gpd, and the system's permitted capacity is 76,000 gpd. This excess of 1,700 gpd would not be sufficient to serve more than 5 new single-family residences with an average daily flow of 300 gpd per unit, per the same table. At least 4 unbuilt residential lots that were platted pursuant to SP2000- 33 are currently under ownership of entities other than Keswick Real Estate LLC. ii. Therefore, pursuant to Section 33.8 of the Zoning Ordinance, in considering that the proposed special use will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent lots; that conditions may be imposed to address impacts arising from the use in order to protect the public health, safety or welfare and may pertain to but are not limited to the provision of adequate improvements pertaining to water and sewage; staff is recommending the above drafted condition related to Phase 113. c. Modify Condition 4 of SP2008-42 to read: "The restaurant, tavern, and inn and accessory uses shall not consume water in excess of existing permitted capacity of the existing water s. stem 76,000 gada If the central water or sewerage system must be expanded to meet existing or future demand for residential users, the applicant shall seek and obtain all necessary approvals for expanding the system from the Virginia Department of Health and the County Board of Supervisors." 2. The provided concept plan does not address any of the proposals discussed in Phases 2 and 3 in the 2017 Water/Wastewater Plan. Any conditions of this special use permit should be clear as to not imply approval of these improvements without prior amendment of the concept plan. 3. The applicant has stated that "specific parking layouts and counts will be included in the site plan review process", however parking areas will likely be conditioned as a major element of the special use permit. While 46 to 64 new spaces are proposed (in excess of the 38 new keys for the hotel addition), it would be prudent to ensure that this is sufficient for both the expansions of Fossett's Restaurant and the Villa Crawford (both of which will be open to the public per the comment response letter dated March 19, 2018), which will require additional parking at a ratio of thirteen (13) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of gross floor area, and expansions to the spa and fitness uses, which will require additional parking at a ratio of one (1) space per one hundred twenty-five (125) square feet of useable recreation area. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4176 March 2, 2018 Valerie Long Williams Mullen 321 E. Main Street, Suite 400 Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: SP 2018-001 Keswick Hall and Golf Club Ms. Long: Staff has reviewed your initial submittal for a special use permit amendment to the Keswick Hall and Golf Club (SP2000-23 and SP2008-42). We have a number of questions and comments which we believe should be resolved before your proposal goes to public hearing. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues. Our comments are provided below: 1. Section 10.2.2.27(b) of the Zoning Ordinance, which requires the Inn to be served by a water and sewerage systems having adequate capacity for both the existing and proposed uses and facilities without expansion of either system. A more detailed analysis is needed for the water usage and sewage treatment capacity. Provide information as to how this proposal will affect future development, particularly as it relates to remaining available water sewer system capacity after expansion for the existing undeveloped lots within the subdivision. Include information on the water and sewer capacity for all users and uses, i.e. Irrigation, retail, restaurant, pool, bars, fire suppression, residences, catering operation/kitchen, Inn, etc. A Water Facilities Plan was submitted with the 2008 SP and an update to this plan/similar document should be provided. 2. Will there be a future phase? The prior SP's included two phases, however it now appears that this will be the extent of the expansions for the Inn and associated uses. Please clarify for both the uses and for the water and sewage information. 3. A left turn lane and right turn taper at the Route 22/Hunt Club Road intersection will be required due to the changes requested to the property. See attached comments from VDOT and the County Transportation Planner for further detail. 4. Clarify and include all existing and proposed uses and spaces. The water usage table provided included a Cafe/Retail space as well as Villa Crawford Bar Addition. Will these be open to the public? Also during the tour it was mentioned that the old Fossetts kitchen will be remodeled and used as a catering kitchen, provide this use as well. Please see historic preservation comments for information on remodeling the historic portion of the Inn. 5. SP2008-042 Condition #3 was related to future subdivisions as it relates to water usage. The lots that would relate to this condition should be a part of the special use permit, as it limits water and sewage capacity. 6. The critical slopes shown on the application Steep Slopes exhibit do not match the County GIS critical slopes layer. Please update exhibit to show the critical slopes as shown on the County GIS layer. This is a zoning layer and cannot be changed without a Zoning Map Amendment. Areas that are surveyed and found to be less than 25% or resulting from development activities can be identified with a different hatch to allow development within these areas in accordance with 18-4.2.5.b. All grading within critical slopes should be included in the area of impacts (please confirm). Planning Planning staff's comments are organized as follows: • How the proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan • Additional comments from reviewers Comprehensive Plan. Comments on how your project conforms to the Comprehensive Plan will be provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared for the work session or public hearing. The proposed expansion is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which does not recommend hotels or resorts in the County's designated Rural Areas. However, staff notes that this use was approved with prior special use permits. Planning Comments 1. Changes to the site including parking will require a site plan amendment. These changes should also be stated in the narrative, as they are changes to the application plan. 2. Provide information on parking requirements for all of the uses. 3. See attached comments from Kevin McDermott regarding transportation. Fire/Rescue Staff is pursuing further comments from Fire/Rescue and will provide those comments at a later date. Zoning The following comments related to zoning matters have been provided by Andrew Knuppel: 1. Please ensure that the water uses outlined in Exhibit G are consistent with the information in the Project Narrative. It is unclear where the "Cafe/Retail" and "Villa Crawford Bar Addition" uses in Phase 1A are occurring on the provided plans. Please include these on the concept plan. 2. Please clarify which uses listed in Phase 1A in Exhibit G will be open to the public, versus those that shall be used only by the guests of the inn and their invitees or members of the Keswick Country Club and their invitees. 3. Please be aware of the following text from Zoning Ordinance Section 10.2.2.27(b): "Nonconforming uses, provided the restaurant or inn is served by existing water and sewerage systems having adequate capacity for both the existing and proposed uses and facilities without expansion of either system." Engineering and Water Resources The following comments related to engineering and water resources have been provided by Frank Pohl: The critical slopes shown on the application Steep Slopes exhibit do not match the County GIS critical slopes layer. Please update exhibit to show the critical slopes as shown on the County GIS layer. This is a zoning layer and cannot be changed without a Zoning Map Amendment. Areas that are surveyed and found to be less than 25% or resulting from development activities can be identified with a different hatch to allow development within these areas in accordance with 18-4.2.5.b. All grading within critical slopes should be included in the area of impacts (please confirm). Notes from the pre -application meeting follow below: Critical slopes waivers were granted with SP 2000-33 for improvements shown on the plan approved with the SP. However, some of the improvements were approved in a different location with SP 2008-42 which nullified some of the approvals provided with SP2000-33. Staff recommends that you avoid critical slopes or provide field run topo to show the slopes are not critical. If you can't avoid the slopes, you will need to request a special exception. Staff recommends that you request a special exception for critical slopes disturbance for all slopes that you wish to disturb rather than try to figure out what slopes have and have not been approved for disturbance. Critical slope disturbance on manmade slopes outside of the required stream buffer can be supported. Staff can typically support approval of critical slopes that are isolated small bands not part of a larger system or related to a stream. The Water Protection Ordinance was last amended on July 1, 2014. Any new development must comply with the current ordinance, including stream buffer regulations (17-600). A VSMP application/approval is required and shall comply with Part 2B stormwater management requirements (9VAC25-870). Historic Preservation The following comments related to the Historic Preservation have been provided by Heather McMahon: 1. The DHR report that the interior and exterior of the Villa Crawford retain a significant degree of integrity and should be preserved and/or sensitively restored. Rehabilitation or remodeling of this wing of the hotel should be limited and undertaken in consultation with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Architectural features such as the windows and doors should be replaced in like materials with the same/original configuration of lites; the interior wood flooring should be protected; the interior detailing, such as fireplace mantles, stair balustrade and rail, wainscoting, paneling, dentilated cornice, scroll brackets, door surrounds, and window frames should be preserved in situ. The Villa Crawford retains its original floorplan (room layout) and this should continue to be preserved. VDOT The following comments have been provided by Adam Moore: 1. The department has reviewed the TIA and studied crash data for the studied intersections. At this time the Department recommends that a left turn lane and right turn taper be installed at the Route 22/Hunt Club Road intersection. This intersection has a history of rear end crashes, which could potentially increase with greater traffic generated by Keswick Hall. The turn lane and taper can reasonably be expected to reduce the incidence of rear end crashes. Virginia Department of Health (VDH) The following comments have been provided by Josh Kirtley: VDH does not have authority over the permitting process for any additional connections made to an existing DEQ permitted treatment system. At this point, it's a matter of ensuring that both the water and wastewater supplies have adequate capacity for the proposed expansion. The applicant has provided a report which lists the water capacity at 76,000 gpd and the sewage treatment plant capacity to be 60,000 gpd. The report goes on to estimate the water demands after Phase IB of this project to be 74,300 gpd. At first glance, it appears that the water supply demand will exceed the sewage treatment plant capacity. I would question how much of the current and estimated water use is used for irrigation, pool filling, etc and therefore never makes it to the treatment plant in the form of sewage. Taking into consideration the existing water use and the proposed additions, along with the permitted capacity of the STP, I would tend to think that they should be able to justify the proposal with further correspondence. I say this because they appear to be well under the permitted capacity based on a peak daily average and I'm assuming that a certain portion of the water that is used never makes its way to the STP. I also believe that they can itemize the additional uses to justify the expanded services. Please note that the projected water use and wastewater treatment capacity doesn't appear to take into consideration any future development on the property. SP Conditions Staff has not drafted conditions to date for this special use permit, due to the potential changes that need to occur and additional information requested. Once conditions are drafted, staff will send it out to you. Action after Receipt of Comments After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on "Action After Receipt of Comment Letter" which is attached. Resubmittal If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is no fee for the first resubmittal. The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience online at http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms center/departments/Community Development /forms/Special Use Permit Applications/Special Use Permit Submittal and Review Schedule.p df Notification and Advertisement Fees Prior to scheduling a public hearing with the Planning Commission, payment of the following fees is needed: $294.00 Cost for newspaper advertisement $215.00 Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage/$1 per owner after 50 adjoining owners) $509.00 Total amount due prior to Planning Commission public hearing Prior to the Board of Supervisor's public hearing, payment of the newspaper advertisement for the Board hearing needed. $294.00 Additional amount due prior to Board of Supervisors public hearing $803.00 Total amount for all notifications Fees may be paid in advance. Payment for both the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors public hearings may be paid at the same time. Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place and adjoining owners need to be notified of a new date. Feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is mnedostup@albemarle.org Sincerely, Megan Nedostup Principal Planner, Planning Services enc: Transportation Planner Comments Action After Receipt of Comments Resubmittal Form COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 February 27, 2018 Re: SP20180001 Keswick Hall and Golf Club; Traffic Analysis Comments Albemarle County Community Development has determined that the proposed plan would generate a level of traffic that requires a left turn lane on Louisa Road (Route 22) at Hunt Club Drive. The basis for this determination are the following factors: The traffic volumes expected in 2019, including existing (based on November 2017 traffic counts), expected background growth, and site generated traffic from the new 38 hotel rooms and four additional spa treatment rooms appears to be at, above, or within a fraction of trips that would warrant a left -turn storage lane. Figure 14 of the Keswick Hall Traffic Analysis appears to display this for the AM Peak Hour. Even if below the level that would require left -turn storage, the county believes that the traffic levels displayed in the Analysis are unrealistically low resulting from exceptionally low traffic counts and an extremely conservative estimate of site -generated trips. County staff checked the existing traffic counts performed for this analysis against the existing counts performed in 2000 for a previous application on the site. The traffic levels counted in that study show that of the six movements, five in the AM and three in the PM, exceeded those in the current analysis. All movements in the previous count on to or off Hunt Club Road, in both the AM and PM, except one (which was under by one), exceeded the current count. The most reasonable explanation for this discrepancy is that the number of visitors to the club were less than typically expected, and less than will be expected following the extensive renovations of the property proposed along with this application. A reason for this discrepancy may be the time of year as well as that the counts were taken only a month and a half before the closure of Keswick Hall for a yearlong renovation, a time when visitation would likely be winding down. Supporting this conclusion is the water consumption report provided with the Special Use Permit application, which shows that water consumption in 2017 was approximately half of what it was in 2016 and 2015. Further supporting this is that the applicant made the County aware that visitation to Keswick and memberships have been on a steady decline, which is why ownership proposes this complete remodel of the property. To further verify this, staff looked at ITE trip generation estimates for similar uses as proposed for the site. The PM peak hour trips estimated for an 86-room hotel, 18-hole golf course, 8-court Racquet Club, and a 165-seat restaurant far exceed the PM peak hour trips provided in the study as 2019 Total Traffic in Figure 8. The level of redevelopment proposed for Keswick Hall could generate a similar number of trips to those that a new development of this type would generate, making this estimate appropriate. These estimates generated by the County do not account for the single-family residential uses accessed from Hunt Club Road, nor does it account for additional uses at Keswick Hall such as the aquatics center, full spa, event space, or the additional bar and grill seats scattered throughout the site. The crash history at the intersection of Louisa Road and Hunt Club Road shows nine crashes attributable to turning movements onto Hunt Club Road in the past five years. This number concerns the County enough to warrant the recommendation for inclusion of the left -turn lane at the described location. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please do one of the following: (1) Resubmit in response to review comments (2) Request indefinite deferral (3) Request that your Planning Commission public hearing date be set (4) Withdraw your application (1) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments If you plan to resubmit within 30 days, make sure that the resubmittal is on or before a resubmittal date as published in the project review schedule. The full resubmittal schedule may be found at www.albemarle.org in the "forms" section at the Community Development page. Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last oaRe of vour comment letter with vour submittal. The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal. Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee Schedule.) (2) Request Indefinite Deferral If you plan to resubmit after 30 days from the date of the comment letter, you need to request an indefinite deferral. Please provide a written request and state your justification for requesting the deferral. (Indefinite deferral means that you intend to resubmit/request a public hearing be set with the Planning Commission after the 30 day period.) (3) Request Planning Commission Public Hearing Date be Set At this time, you may schedule a public hearing with the Planning Commission. However, we do not advise that you go directly to public hearing if staff has identified issues in need of resolution that can be addressed with a resubmittal. After outstanding issues have been resolved and/or when you are ready to request a public hearing, staff will set your public hearing date for the Planning Commission in accordance with the Planning Commission's published schedule and as mutually agreed by you and the County. The staff report and recommendation will be based on the latest information provided by you with your initial submittal or resubmittal. Please remember that all resubmittals must be made on or before a resubmittal date. Revised 6-15-17 racy By no later than twenty-one (21) days before the Planning Commission's public hearing, a newspaper advertisement fee and an adjoining owner notification fee must be paid. (See attached Fee Schedule. Your comment letter will contain the actual fees you need to pay. Payment for an additional newspaper advertisement is also required twenty-two (22) days prior to the Board of Supervisors public hearing. Please be advised that, once a public hearing has been advertised, only one deferral prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing will be allowed during the life of the application. The only exception to this rule will be extraordinary circumstances, such as a major change in the project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously been brought to the applicant's attention. As always, an applicant may request deferral at the Planning Commission meeting. (4) Withdraw Your Application If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing. Failure to Respond If we have not received a response from you within 30 days, we will contact you again. At that time, you will be given 10 days to do one of the following: a) request withdrawal of your application, b) request deferral of your application to a specific Planning Commission date as mutually agreed to with staff, or c) request indefinite deferral and state your justification for requesting the deferral. If none of these choices is made within 10 days, staff will schedule your application for a public hearing based on the information provided with your original submittal or the latest submittal staff received on a resubmittal date. Fee Payment Fees paid in cash or by check must be paid at the Community Development Intake Counter. Make checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the Review Coordinator. Fees may also be paid by credit card using the secure online payment system, accessed at http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=21685. Revised 6-1 5-17 racy FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP # or ZMA # Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt # Ck# Bv: Resubmittal of information for Special Use Permit or �" Zoning Map Amendment PROJECT NUMBER: JA I — OG J PROJECT NAME: (�� +'IC �l '4 C,01C l..'U L� ❑ Resubmittal Fee is Required ❑ Per Request �( Resubmittal Fee is Not Required 01"(4- Ar- Communky Development Project doordinator 44 Sigify Da e 11e,V- Name of Applicant 13 Phone Number Signature FEES Date Resubmittal fees for Special Use Permit -- original Special Use Permit fee of $1,075 First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission $538 Resubmittal fees for original Special Use Permit fee of $2,150 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission $1,075 Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,688 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission $1,344 Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $3,763 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission $1,881 ❑ Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request — Add'1 notice fees will be required $194 To be Daid after staff review for Dublic notice: Most applications for Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission and one public hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing a legal advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body. MAKE CHECKS TO COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE/PAYMENT AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER ➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices $215 + actual cost of first-class postage ➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50) $1.00 for each additional notice + actual cost of first-class postage ➢ Legal advertisement (published twice in the newspaper for each public hearing) Actual cost (minimum of $280 for total of 4publications) County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126 1/24/17 Page 1 of 1 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper Virginia 22701 Stephen C. Brich, P.E. Commissioner March 1, 2018 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Megan Nedostup Re: Keswick Hall & Golf Club — Special Use Permit SP-2018-00001 Review #1 Dear Ms. Nedostup: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan and accompanying traffic study dated 15 January 2018, and offers the following comment: • The department has reviewed the TIA and studied crash data for the studied intersections. At this time the Department recommends that a left turn lane and right turn taper be installed at the Route 22/Hunt Club Road intersection. This intersection has a history of rear end crashes, which could potentially increase with greater traffic generated by Keswick Hall. The turn lane and taper can reasonably be expected to reduce the incidence of rear end crashes. If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434-422-9894. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Megan Nedostup From: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) <Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virg inia.gov> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 2:46 PM To: Megan Nedostup Subject: RE: Special Use Permit- Keswick SP2018-001 Megan: It appears that the only calculations presented in the report are for the existing uses on the property. They do not seem to take into consideration further development outside of their current proposal. As far as whether or not future homes could have their own sewage disposal system and private well, that can only be determined on a case by case (lot by lot) basis. Technology and regulations have certainly developed to where it could be possible within the current regulatory fabric whereas it wasn't an option back when the lots were platted. Drainfield suitability is site dependent and must be made on an individual basis. At this point, one cannot say with 100% certainty that any of the individual lots are suitable for an onsite SDS and private well. Josh Josh Kirtley Environmental Health Technical Consultant Onsite Sewage and Water Programs Thomas Jefferson Health District Office (434) 972-6288 From: Megan Nedostup [mailto:mnedostup@albemarle.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 1:39 PM To: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) <Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov> Subject: RE: Special Use Permit- Keswick SP2018-001 Thank you Josh, l just want to clarify that you are saying that it does not appear that the calculations take into account the existing subdivision lots that have not been developed, correct? if yes, would the future houses be able to have their own well and septic and not be a part of the system? Megan Nedostup, AICP (former Yanig/os) (pronounced nuh-DAHST-up) Principal Planner Community Development Department Planning Services ph: 434.296.5832 ext. 3004 From: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) [mailto:Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 1:31 PM To: Megan Nedostup <mnedostup@albemarle.org> Subject: FW: Special Use Permit- Keswick SP2018-001 Good afternoon, Megan. VDH does not have authority over the permitting process for any additional connections made to an existing DEQ permitted treatment system. See Marcia's email below. At this point, it's a matter of ensuring that both the water and wastewater supplies have adequate capacity for the proposed expansion. The applicant has provided a report which lists the water capacity at 76,000 gpd and the sewage treatment plant capacity to be 60,000 gpd. The report goes on to estimate the water demands after Phase IB of this project to be 74,300 gpd. At first glance, it appears that the water supply demand will exceed the sewage treatment plant capacity. I would question how much of the current and estimated water use is used for irrigation, pool filling, etc and therefore never makes it to the treatment plant in the form of sewage. Taking into consideration the existing water use and the proposed additions, along with the permitted capacity of the STP, I would tend to think that they should be able to justify the proposal with further corespondance. I say this because they appear to be well under the permitted capacity based on a peak daily average and I'm assuming that a certain portion of the water that is used never makes its way to the STP. I also believe that they can itemize the additional uses to justify the expanded services. Please note that the projected water use and wastewater treatment capacity doesn't appear to take into consideration any future development on the property. If you have any questions, or if I can clarify anything, please let me know. Have a good afternoon, Josh Josh Kirtley Environmental Health Technical Consultant Onsite Sewage and Water Programs Thomas Jefferson Health District Office (434) 972-6288 From: Degen, Marcia (VDH) Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 4:50 PM To: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) <Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov> Subject: RE: Special Use Permit- Keswick SP2018-001 Hi Josh, So VDH has no authority to issue any permits for a DEQ permitted facility. If a construction permit is needed for the connection, DEQ would issue it. I was trying to find info on the process on the DEQ website, but couldn't find it. It used to be that as long as there was capacity, DEQ would issue a construction permit for the connection but with this small a system, they may not require anything. Just have them contact their permit writer at DEQ to see what DEQ wants. You can also let DEQ know as well to give them a heads up. If you're not sure who to contact, you can always contact the water permit manager at the DEQ office, give them the permit name/number, and let them know what's going on. I like easy questions. Keep em coming Marcia From: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 4:02 PM To: Degen, Marcia (VDH) <Marcia.Degen@vdh.virginia.gov> Subject: FW: Special Use Permit- Keswick SP2018-001 Good afternoon, Marcia. Hope that you're doing well. I was wondering if you could help me out with a few questions that I have regarding a discharge system here in Albemarle. Keswick Hall is served by a DEQ issued discharge permit for up to 60,000 gpd with a permit is in good standing. They are proposing to build a couple of additional buildings for a new restaurant and a new hotel wing, but the additional flow will not push them past their permitted limit. At this time, they are operating well below their permitted limit (approx. 32-34,000 gpd). A couple of questions for you: 1. Which agency is responsible for the sewer connections to the existing collection system? Would VDH need to approve minor modification permits for these additional lines? If VDH is responsible for issuing the minor modification permits, what information should be required? I'm hoping to keep is simple, but at the same time, I don't have information about the collection system. Should we get information on this? Is there a process to let DEQ know about the proposed construction? I don't want them to be "surprised" even though the resulting additional water use will still be well below the permitted limit (per conversation with the PE group). This project is in the early phases, but I've been asked to review the proposal and to provide comments for the County. As always, I appreciate your time. Josh Josh Kirtley Environmental Health Technical Consultant Onsite Sewage and Water Programs Thomas Jefferson Health District Office (434) 972-6288 From: Bruce Strickland [mailto:Bruce.Strickland@timmons.com] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 3:27 PM To: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) <Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov> Subject: RE: Special Use Permit- Keswick SP2018-001 Josh, n� cYi AI /.tr 4, 1 ♦ FJi COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 February 27, 2018 Re: SP20180001 Keswick Hall and Golf Club; Traffic Analysis Comments Albemarle County Community Development has determined that the proposed plan would generate a level of traffic that requires a left turn lane on Louisa Road (Route 22) at Hunt Club Drive. The basis for this determination are the following factors: The traffic volumes expected in 2019, including existing (based on November 2017 traffic counts), expected background growth, and site generated traffic from the new 38 hotel rooms and four additional spa treatment rooms appears to be at, above, or within a fraction of trips that would warrant a left -turn storage lane. Figure 14 of the Keswick Hall Traffic Analysis appears to display this for the AM Peak Hour. Even if below the level that would require left -turn storage, the county believes that the traffic levels displayed in the Analysis are unrealistically low resulting from exceptionally low traffic counts and an extremely conservative estimate of site -generated trips. County staff checked the existing traffic counts performed for this analysis against the existing counts performed in 2000 for a previous application on the site. The traffic levels counted in that study show that of the six movements, five in the AM and three in the PM, exceeded those in the current analysis. All movements in the previous count on to or off Hunt Club Road, in both the AM and PM, except one (which was under by one), exceeded the current count. The most reasonable explanation for this discrepancy is that the number of visitors to the club were less than typically expected, and less than will be expected following the extensive renovations of the property proposed along with this application. A reason for this discrepancy may be the time of year as well as that the counts were taken only a month and a half before the closure of Keswick Hall for a yearlong renovation, a time when visitation would likely be winding down. Supporting this conclusion is the water consumption report provided with the Special Use Permit application, which shows that water consumption in 2017 was approximately half of what it was in 2016 and 2015. Further supporting this is that the applicant made the County aware that visitation to Keswick and memberships have been on a steady decline, which is why ownership proposes this complete remodel of the property. To further verify this, staff looked at ITE trip generation estimates for similar uses as proposed for the site. The PM peak hour trips estimated for an 86-room hotel, 18-hole golf course, 8-court Racquet Club, and a 165-seat restaurant far exceed the PM peak hour trips provided in the study as 2019 Total Traffic in Figure 8. The level of redevelopment proposed for Keswick Hall could generate a similar number of trips to those that a new development of this type would generate, making this estimate appropriate. These estimates generated by the County do not account for the single-family residential uses accessed from Hunt Club Road, nor does it account for additional uses at Keswick Hall such as the aquatics center, full spa, event space, or the additional bar and grill seats scattered throughout the site. The crash history at the intersection of Louisa Road and Hunt Club Road shows nine crashes attributable to turning movements onto Hunt Club Road in the past five years. This number concerns the County enough to warrant the recommendation for inclusion of the left -turn lane at the described location. Megan Nedostup From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hi Megan, Heather McMahon Wednesday, February 14, 2018 2:02 PM Megan Nedostup Margaret Maliszewski SP2018-1: Keswick Hall and Golf Club -- Historic Preservation staff preliminary comments Keswick Hall report on VCRIS.pdf Follow up Completed Please see Historic Preservation staff's preliminary comments on this SP below. I have also attached to this email a .pdf of the DHR's report/data on this property for your convenience. In researching the historic eligibility of this property, staff has discovered that the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (DHR) Evaluation Committee determined on 11/9/2017 that the Villa Crawford, the historic (ca. 1910) core of the hotel, is not eligible for individual listing on either the state (Virginia Landmarks Register) or federal (National Register of Historic Places) registers, but is, however, considered a contributing resource to the Southwest Mountain Rural Historic District. A full report of the DHR's findings can be found in the VCRIS database under DHR File No. 002- 0941. Staff concurs with the DHR report that the interior and exterior of the Villa Crawford retain a significant degree of integrity and should be preserved and/or sensitively restored. Rehabilitation or remodeling of this wing of the hotel should be limited and undertaken in consultation with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Architectural features such as the windows and doors should be replaced in like materials with the same/original configuration of lites; the interior wood flooring should be protected; the interior detailing, such as fireplace mantles, stair balustrade and rail, wainscoting, paneling, dentilated cornice, scroll brackets, door surrounds, and window frames should be preserved in situ. The Villa Crawford retains its original floorplan (room layout) and this should continue to be preserved. The VDHR report also identifies two historic structures on the grounds that were in good condition at the time of the last survey (9/6/2017). Both are single dwellings that were constructed circa 1940 and which served as motel rooms when the private residence was converted into a hunt club and resort after 1948. Today, they are identified as "administration buildings" located southwest of the hotel building along Club Drive. While the current SP request does not specify any proposed alterations to these structures, staff recommends that if these structures are to be altered in future, this would necessitate further review/documentation/determination of historic significance. Staff is not concerned with the SP's proposal to expand the Energy Plant, expand/renovate the Club House, or expand the hotel with a +38 Room Guest Wing on the hotel's south elevation as none of these structures are deemed historically significant. Furthermore, staff has no objection to the construction of a new Maintenance an Laundry Facility, Pool Bar and Pavilion, new Spa Facility, or new Restaurant space. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Heather McMahon, Senior Planner Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-296-5832 x3278 hmcmahon@albemarle.org Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 Property Information - Property Names Property Evaluation Status Name Explanation Name Current Name Keswick Hall and Golf Club Historic Keswick Country Club DHR Evaluation Committee: Not Eligible Historic Villa Crawford This Property is associated with the Southwest Mountains Rural Current Keswick Hall Historic District. Property Addresses Former - Keswick Road Route 231 Current - 701 Club Drive County/Independent City(s): Albemarle (County) Incorporated Town(s): No Data Zip Code(s): 22947 Magisterial District(s): No Data Tax Parcel(s): No Data USGS Quad(s): KESWICK Additional Property Information I ■ Architecture Setting: Rural Acreage: 600 Site Description: ca 1942: This fine old Virginia estate, consisting of three hundred and fifteen acres, is located seven miles east of the city of Charlottesville, Virginia, in a community of fine homes. Its acreage is divided equally between woodland and cleared land, suitable for cultivation and grazing. In the heart of a noted hunting section, it affords excellent opportunities for either a hunt club or a private home. The site of the stately Georgian residence, situated on a knoll commanding a magnificent view of the Blue Ridge Mountains, is beautifully landscaped with fine old boxwood and fall shade trees which cast lovely shadows on the lawn and gravel drive. There is a fine stream and a gold -fish pond. Outbuildings include a five -car garage that is part of the six box stall stable, and an overseer's cottage. 1984 PIF: Located on Route 231 in Keswick, the country club includes 26 outbuildings. 1992 HD inventory: Located on Route 731. The property includes non-contributing swimming pools, tennis courts and motel lodging. 2017 PIF: Historic 8000sf house, built in 1912, converted to Keswick Country Club in 1948, enlarged and converted to Keswick Hall in 1993.On the same property, a Fred Findley golf course was built in 1949, redesigned by Arnold Palmer in 1992 and again by Pete Dye in 2014. Secondary buildings include clubhouse, tennis pavilion, administration and service buildings, some of which, by virtue of age, qualify as historic. Surveyor Assessment: 1984 PIF: House was built for R.B. Crawford and his wife at an original cost of $100,000 and changed hands twice as a private dwelling until 1947. In that year a group of local businessmen purchased the property from the August Heid estate and developed the golf course, converting the residence to a clubhouse. It has remained in this use under many changes of ownership ever since. PEC Survey, ca 1990: Villa Crawford is of architectural interest for its hollow -tile construction and vaguely Mediterranean style, and historically for its use as a country club for many years. 1992 HD nomination: Villa Crawford at Keswick is a rare example of the Mediterranean style. Used as a country club during third quarter of 20th century; designed by local architect Eugene Bradbury. Nov 2017: The Keswick Hall & Golf Club in Albemarle County will close the doors of its award -winning hotel early next year for an extensive renovation that is expected to last until spring 2019. The project will feature a comprehensive reconstruction of the building's interior and foundation along with a "floor -to -ceiling makeover" of the hotel's 48 rooms and suites, public spaces, meeting facilities and dining areas. The main building, parts of which were constructed more than 100 years ago, has not been renovated since the 1990s. Keswick Hall received a five-star rating in the 2017 Forbes Travel Guide. The resort's golf course, Full Cry at Keswick Golf Club, will remain open during the renovation, along with the golf clubhouse, spa, fitness center, driving range and members' pool. The resort's full -service pavilion pool and tennis facilities also will be unaffected during the closure. Keswick Hall and The Hermitage Hotel had been owned by Richmond -based The Riverstone Group, which is part of businessman William H. Goodwin Jr.'s real estate empire. That group bought Keswick Hall in 2012. February 14, 2018 Page: 1 of 9 Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 2017 PIF: The history of Villa Crawford, which became Keswick Hall and Golf Club, reflects the values, norms, lifestyle, tragedies, traditions, decisions and idiosyncrasies of those who 1. owned private property of significant value in central Virginia from 1912-1947; 2. owned, worked at and frequented country clubs in the South in the mid-20th century; and 3. owned, worked at and visited world - class luxury resorts from the early 1990s onward. Regarding its years as a private residence and working farm (1912-1947), one sees direct connections to the University of Virginia, Keswick Hunt Club, and numerous local, historic properties of standing such as Castle Hill, Castalia and Cloverfields, all part of the designated Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District, approved in Virginia in 1991 and by the NRHP in 1992, the unaltered nature of which (as stated in the Statement of Significance of its NRIIP Registration Form) remains remarkable. The events that took place and the individuals who worked and resided here give a clear picture of, for example, the restrictions placed upon and roles of servants, women and children; the peculiarities of wealth; the effects of mental illness; the importance of family; and the structure of business. Some of the original outbuildings still stand, and have been adapted for other uses; one fireplace standing in the woods in the outer acreage near the eastern border of the property possibly belongs to Broad Oak, an adjacent property purchased by the original owner in 1913. As a country club (1948-1982), this property was included as a contributing resource of the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District. It reflected the post -WWII national pursuit of pleasure and fun which was still highly associated with fading cultural and societal norms such as segregation. One of the most significant contributions was the decision of owner Knox Turnbull in 1965 to break the racial and religious barriers of the time; the repercussions of this decision — the initial resistance on the part of the membership and the subsequent embracing of change -- stand as a testament to courage and integrity despite Turnbull's personal tragedy. Subsequent attempts in the 1970s and 80s to revitalize the property reflect nascent industries such as winemaking as well as the determination of the community to protect local traditions and landscape. In 1990 the property was purchased by Sir Bernard Ashley, the widower of world-famous Laura Ashley and head of their successful fashion and textiles business. His determination and resources resulted in a resort of world -class caliber which opened in 1993 and has hosted such celebrities as Margaret Thatcher, Paul Newman, Mick Jagger and Anthony Hopkins. The original Fred Findlay golf course was redesigned by Arnold Palmer and completed in 1992; it has maintained Audubon certification for environmental stewardship since 2002, and was redesigned by golf course icon Pete Dye in 2014 under current owners Robert and Molly Hardie. The historic significance of Villa Crawford is multi -dimensional and has been documented extensively in The Story of Keswick Hall by Keswick Hall's Resident Historian Patricia Castelli (2011, second printing 2014, Paper Shoe Press, 163 pages). The book has been the subject of numerous presentations in and around Charlottesville, was nominated for a nonfiction award by the Library of Virginia in 2012, and was the subject of a two -page feature article by David Mauer in the Charlottesville Daily Progress on August 14, 2011 and a presentation by the Charlottesville -Albemarle Historical Society in October 2011. It was featured at the 2012 Virginia Festival of the Book, on a segment of PBS's Charlottesville Inside -Out with Terri Allard on April 3, 2014, and on a broadcast of Charlottesville's WINA radio program A Gracious Life with Jeanne McCusker on May 23, 2015. Sources of information include: extensive personal interviews; family memoirs, archives and home movies (some from the 1930s); club newsletters and archives; Charlottesville Daily Progress, Richmond Times Dispatch and Keswick Life; Universal Studios; University of Virginia Special Collections Library; and many photographs (including some by Ed Roseberry, who documented much of Charlottesville's history). Surveyor Recommendation: Recommended Not Eligible Ownership Ownership Category Ownership Entity Private No Data Primary Resource Information � W Resource Category: Domestic Resource Type: Single Dwelling Date of Construction: 1910Ca Historic Time Period: Reconstruction and Growth (1866 - 1916) Historic Context(s): Architecture/Landscape, Domestic, Recreation/Arts Architectural Style: Neo-Eclectic Form: No Data Number of Stories: 2.5 Condition: Good Interior Plan: No Data Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: Architecture Summary: Lower set of sash windows have 4-light fixed (?) transoms above. Porch projects from entrance and has a balustrade along the edge of the balcony, entered by French doors. 1-story, single bay wings on both sides of facade. An old photograph shows a balustraded terrace across the width of the facade. 1984 PIF: 2-1/2-story estate house constructed circa 1910 of stuccoed tile with 7-bay facade and rear wing. It was designed by Eugene Bradbury, a local architect whose work includes a bank, a church, a university building, all in Charlottesville, and other residences and buildings in Albemarle County. It is an impressive example of early 20th century eclectic architecture, combining the Georgian Revival and Italian Villa styles. Elegantly detailed interior rooms (about 22) include entrance hall with staircase, great reception hall, ballroom, and eight bedrooms, all in neglected condition. Fireplaces, porches, and terraces are intact. Swimming pools, tennis courts, and motel lodging date from late 1940s February 14, 2018 Page: 2 of 9 Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 conversion to a country club. Original interior plan is unaltered except for basement level in rear. 1992 HD inventory: Stucco (hollow -tile construction); 2 1/2 stories; 7-bay (symmetrical); hipped roof with modillioned cornice; three front hip - roofed dormers; single side dormers; 1-story front porch with Tuscan columns and roof balustrade; similar side porch; four interior brick end chimneys; 2-story rear wing addition; 1-story side addition; unusual example in Albemarle County of early 20th century Eclectic architecture combining Georgian Revival and Italian Villa styles; built ca. 1910 with later additions and renovations; presently undergoing extensive renovation. 2017 PIF: The description of Villa Crawford (a contributing building in the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District) on the NRHP Registration form, Section 7, pages 69-70, is as follows: "Stucco (hollow -tile construction); 2 1/2-story; 7-bay (symmetrical); hipped roof with modillioned cornice; three front hip -roofed dormers; single side dormers; 1-story Front porch with Tuscan columns and roof balustrade; similar side porch: four interior brick end chimneys; 2-story rear wing addition; 1-story side addition: unusual example in Albemarle County of early 20th-century Eclectic architecture combining Georgian Revival and Italian Villa styles and designed by local architect Eugene Bradbury." Eugene Bradbury also designed St. Paul's Memorial Church on University Avenue in Charlottesville, the University of Virginia Entrance Building (now occupied by the University of Virginia Women's Center), and numerous private residences in the Charlottesville area. He is remembered as a "regionally inspired classicist" whose work reflected the favored Italian style of American country home architecture between 1900 and 1920. Original blueprints of all levels and elevations of Villa Crawford, the six -bedroom, 8000sf country house of Mr. and Mrs. Robert B. Crawford which is now the historic wing of Keswick Hall, are housed at the University of Virginia's Special Collections Library. The house included 18 rooms, numerous baths and a 100' brick terrace along the front. The estate included a carriage house, a stable of eight box stalls, several cattle bams, utility buildings and four dwellings besides the main house. The main floor of the Italianate-style house (called "vaguely Mediterranean" on the VDHR Architectural Survey Form ID: 002-0941) contained the 35x20-foot hall, the reception room (with fireplace), the living room/music room (with fireplace), the dining room (with fireplace), and a service extension to the south containing the kitchen and servants' dining room. The second floor consisted of bedrooms for the family (above the main structure) and for the service staff (above the service extension), and the third floor included both open attic and one servant's room. Five different families occupied the private home during its 35 years as a private residence. Mr. and Mrs. Robert Crawford were the original owners; Mr. Crawford died in 1919. Mrs. (Robert Crawford) H.W. Greenough sold it in 1923 to Mr. Leighton Kramer, who sold it in March of 1928 to Dr. and Mrs. Ridgeley F. Hanscom, who sold it in September of 1928 to Mr. and Mrs. George E. Nelson. Mrs. Nelson sold the property in 1936 to Mr. and Mrs. August Heid. In 1947, Mrs. Heid sold the property to the Keswick Corporation, which then converted it to a country club. Tennis courts, a large swimming pool and a nine -hole golf course were in place by 1949; these structures were considered noncontributing in the 1992 NRIIP registration form for the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District. Seven more tennis courts, another swimming pool and another nine holes of golf were added by the late 1960s. To the main structure were added a dining room overlooking the golf course and a golf pro shop. The country club closed in 1972 due to the death of the owner; some aspects of the club were open on and off for the next ten years, but the property seriously deteriorated throughout the 1980s. In 1990, Sir Bernard Ashley, the widower of world-famous Laura Ashley and head of their successful fashion and textiles business, purchased the property and expanded the original house into a 48-room country house hotel by carefully restoring the main part of Villa Crawford, demolishing the service wing and expanding southward. The front (north) elevation of the house (both as it was photographed in 1914 and in the original blueprints of 1911) is nearly indistinguishable from the current elevation of the same. Ashley considered Villa Crawford "the heart of the hotel" and took pains to restore it to its original glory and preserve it for posterity while adapting it for modem use. The original floors (Georgia heart pine), room divisions, fireplaces and their surrounds, room divisions, crown moldings, wainscoting, cornices and grand staircase of Villa Crawford, now designated as the historic wing of the hotel, are essentially unchanged. Countless guests and visitors have enjoyed tours and presentations about its history, and marveled at the preservation and authenticity of the historic aspects of the structure. Exterior Components Component Component Type Material Material Treatment Structural System and Masonry Other Stuccoed Exterior Treatment Windows Sash, Double -Hung Wood 4/4 Chimneys Exterior End Brick Cap, Corbeled Windows Sash, Double -Hung Wood 6/6 Roof Hipped No Data Shingle Porch 1-story, 1-bay No Data Columns, Tuscan Dormer Hipped No Data No Data Secondary Resource Information ' ■ Secondary Resource 91 Resource Category: Domestic Resource Type: Single Dwelling Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: No Data Condition: Demolished Threats to Resource: Demolition Architectural Description: February 14, 2018 Page: 3 of 9 Virginia Department of Historic Resources Architectural Survey Form Architecture Summary, Feb 1984: Four single dwellings besides the main house. 2017 PIF: The stable, carriage house, barns, and other dwellings mentioned in Historic Virginia are gone Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #2 Resource Category: Domestic Resource Type: Carriage House Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: No Data Condition: No Data Threats to Resource: Demolition Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: The stable, carriage house, barns, and other dwellings mentioned in Historic Virginia are gone Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #3 Resource Category: Agriculture/Subsistence Resource Type: Stable Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: No Data Condition: Demolished Threats to Resource: Demolition Architectural Description: Architecture Summary, Feb 1984: Stable of eight box stalls. 2017 PIF: The stable, carriage house, barns, and other dwellings mentioned in Historic Virginia are gone Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource 94 DHR ID: 002-0941 Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 Resource Category: DSS Legacy Resource Type: Shed Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: 1960 Condition: Moved Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: Architecture Summary, 2017 PIF: The garden shed, as it is presently known, was constructed as a tennis shop/concession stand for the country club in the 1960s; it originally stood near the present vineyard and was moved intact to its present location south of the main building. Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource 95 Resource Category: Resource Type: Architectural Style: Form: Date of Construction: Condition: Threats to Resource: Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: The stable, ca Agriculture/Subsistence Stable No Data No Data No Data Demolished Demolition house, barns, and other dwellings mentioned in Historic Virginia are February 14, 2018 Page: 4 of 9 Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #6 Resource Category: Agriculture/Subsistence Resource Type: Barn Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: No Data Condition: Demolished Threats to Resource: Demolition Architectural Description: Architecture Summary, Feb 1984: Several bams. 2017 PIF: The stable, carriage house, barns, and other dwellings mentioned in Historic Virginia are gone Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #7 Resource Category: Social/Recreational Resource Type: Pool House Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: 1948 Condition: Demolished Threats to Resource: Demolition Architectural Description: Architecture Summary, February 1984: Cabana is assumed to date from the time of the house's conversion to a country club in the 1940s. Two connected portions, one with flat roof, one with hipped, metal, standing seam roof. 2017 PIF: Features of the property no longer in existence include the above -grade oval pool and cabanas (built in 1948). Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #8 Resource Category: Domestic Resource Type: Single Dwelling Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: No Data Condition: Demolished Threats to Resource: Demolition Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: The stable, carriage house, barns, and other dwellings mentioned in Historic Virginia are gone Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #9 Resource Category: Domestic Resource Type: Single Dwelling Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: 1940 Condition: Good Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: The larger of the two administrative buildings seems to be of the same era (1940s or earlier); it has four distinct units and was designated as the "motel' on a golf course map of the 1960s. February 14, 2018 Page: 5 of 9 Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #10 Resource Category: Domestic Resource Type: Single Dwelling Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: 1940 Condition: Remodeled Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: The two administrative buildings have stood on the site at least since the 1940s, and possibly much earlier. The smaller of the two was likely one of the dwellings mentioned in Roy Wheeler's Historic Virginia (ca.1941); before renovations it had a kitchen, bathroom, bedrooms and living room, and was likely a tenant house. Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #11 Resource Category: Social/Recreational Resource Type: Clubhouse Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: 1992 Condition: Good Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: The clubhouse was completed in 1992 and stands approximately where the old oval pool used to be; it houses the pro shop, spa and fitness rooms, members' lounge, a restaurant, locker rooms and an indoor pool. Its outdoor terrace overlooks the driving range and back holes of the golf course. Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #12 Resource Category: Commerce/Trade Resource Type: Shed Architectural Style: No discernible style Form: No Data Date of Construction: No Data Condition: No Data Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: Architecture Summary: Utility buildings. 2017 PIF: One maintenance building sits near the present site of the garden shed, and neither may be old enough to be considered historically significant. Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #13 Resource Category: Commerce/Trade Resource Type: Shed Architectural Style: No discernible style Form: No Data Date of Construction: No Data Condition: No Data Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: Architecture Summary: Utility buildings. February 14, 2018 Page: 6 of 9 Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 2017 PIF: One maintenance building sits about a mile down Club Drive, and neither may be old enough to be considered historically significant. Number of Stories: No Data Secondary Resource #14 Resource Category: Social/Recreational Resource Type: Tennis Court Architectural Style: No Data Form: No Data Date of Construction: 1997 Condition: Good Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: The tennis pavilion was built in 1997. Secondary Resource #15 Resource Category: Social/Recreational Resource Type: Pool/Swimming Pool Architectural Style: No discernible style Form: No Data Date of Construction: 1968 Condition: Demolished Threats to Resource: Demolition Architectural Description: 2017 PIF: Features of the property no longer in existence include the 5-lane Olympic length pool that was next to the above -grade oval pool and cabanas. The Olympic -length pool was built in 1968. Historic District Information Historic District Name: Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District Local Historic District Name: No Data Historic District Significance: The Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District, is a remarkably unaltered and picturesque rural area northwest of the city of Charlottesville. It has significant associations with historical figures in local, state, and national history; its historic buildings and structures retain considerable integrity; and its rural landscape has remained relatively unchanged despite recent development in surrounding areas. The district contains a broad range of 18th and 19th C. architecture as well as early 20th C. estates with grand manor houses evocative of the district's earlier history. Small rural settlements, each dominated by a railroad depot or country store, as well as more modest farms and rural lots where the traditional I -house or a bungalow may be evident, illustrates the evolution of the Virginia countryside from a plantation -dominated society to the more diverse rural community that characterizes the Southwest Mountains Rural District today. Today's agrarian landscape is dominated by pasture rather than field crops, and many areas that were planted previously are now in woodlands. The emphasis on fox hunting as a recreational and social activity in the district has resulted in the deliberate preservation of enough rural countryside to conduct the hunt. Early road corridors, and curving country lanes shaded by allees of towering cedars and mature deciduous trees, together with fields delineated by old fence and cedar lines enhance the integrity of the district. The district has strong associations with several of the nation's early intellectual and political figures -- including Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Thomas Mann Randolph and Nicholas Meriwether -- who lived in or near the district and who maintained social family and business ties to district residents. In addition the district has strong linkages two the adjacent Madison -Barbour Rural Historic District (which extends for a forty -square mile area form the Orange -Albemarle line north to the town of Orange). The Southwest Mountain district serves as a geographic link between the historic residences of former United States presidents and friends Thomas Jefferson (Monticello) and James Madison (Montpelier in the Madison -Barbour District) and lies partially within Monticello's viewshed. Together the two districts represent not only the broad influence of Madison and Jefferson on the agrarian society but also reflect the Virginia plantation legacy that survives in the many large estates and horse farms that still exist in the district. The district provides a visual as well as historical linkage with the agricultural society that played a vital role in the lives of the two former presidents and their neighbors and political associates. CRM Events Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 Event Type: DHR Evaluation Committee: Not Eligible DHR ID: 002-0941 Staff Name: DHR Evaluation Committee Event Date: 11/9/2017 Staff Comment E. Lipford presenting: Villa Crawford, Albemarle County, DHR File No. 002-0941 Villa Crawford, also known as Keswick Country Club, is a stucco; 2%2 -story; 7-bay former dwelling with a hipped roof featuring a cornice, hip - roofed dormers, a replacement porch with Tuscan columns and roof balustrade (the porch design is based on historic photos), and four interior brick end chimneys. The original dwelling was designed by local architect Eugene Bradbury and featured a combination of the Georgian Revival and Italian Villa styles. After the property became a country club in 1947, various additions were built onto the house and other amenities, such as tennis courts, a swimming pool, and a golf course, were constructed. On the interior, the dwelling's first floor includes historic flooring, staircases, fireplace mantels, cornices, wainscoting, and door and window casing. The floor plan has not been altered, and rooms now are furnished to accommodate various social gatherings. In 1990, a historic service wing was removed to allow construction of a 48- room, two-story wing on the side of the original dwelling. The new wing was designed in a similar style and with similar materials to the original dwelling, but dwarfs the dwelling in size and appearance. Secondary structures presently standing include two administrative buildings, a garden shed, the clubhouse, two maintenance buildings, and the tennis pavilion. Five different families occupied the private home during its 35 years as a private residence. Mr. and Mrs. Robert Crawford were the original owners; Mr. Crawford died in 1919. Mr. and Mrs. August Heid were the last two use the house as a dwelling when they acquired Villa Crawford in 1936. In 1947, Mrs. Heid sold the property to the Keswick Corporation, which then converted it to a country club. In 1990, Sir Bernard Ashley, the widower of world-famous Laura Ashley and head of their successful fashion and textiles business, purchased the property and had the 48-room addition constructed to function as a hotel. Villa Crawford was evaluated at the local level of significance under Criterion A (Entertainment/ Recreation; Social History) and Criterion C (Architecture), with a period of significance of 1912-1971, representing construction of the original dwelling through the club's closure due to the owner's death. The committee recommended that the property not proceed to listing with 23 points. This property has been recorded as an individual property in VCRIS. Villa Crawford is classified as a contributing resource in the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District (002- 1832) and the committee recommended that it is correctly classified as contributing. Event Type: PIF Project Review File Number: No Data Investigator: Patricia Castelli Organization/Company: VA Dept. of Historic Resources Sponsoring Organization: No Data Survey Date: 9/6/2017 Dhr Library Report Number: No Data Project Staff/Notes: Patricia Castelli, Keswick Hall & Golf Club In an area already rich in history, Keswick Hall and Golf Club has a rich and varied history of its own dating from 1912 which many visitors enjoy. Historic designation would reinforce the significance of this aspect of the property. Event Type: DHR Staff: Other DHR ID: 002-0941 Staff Name: State Review Board Event Date: 3/20/1984 Staff Comment At its March 24, 1984 meeting, the State Review Board has determined that Villa Crawford, Albemarle County, appeared to meet the criteria for entry on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic Places. Event Type: DHR Staff: Other DHR ID: 002-0941 Staff Name: DHR Evaluation Comittee Event Date: 3/12/1984 Staff Comment Rated by staff as eligible at the time of this meeting. Event Type: PIF Project Review File Number: No Data Investigator: Emma Jane Saxe Organization/Company: VA Dept. of Historic Resources February 14, 2018 Page: 8 of 9 Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 002-0941 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: 002-1832-0164 Sponsoring Organization: No Data Survey Date: 2/29/1984 Dhr Library Report Number: No Data Project Staff/Notes: Recorded under DHR ID number 002-0941. Thomas R. Willson, Green Brook Country Club, North Caldwell, NJ (owner) Bibliographic Information Bibliography: 1984 PIF references: Additional information includes documentation of the early history of the house in newspaper articles: The Daily Progress, Charlottesville, August 5, 1983, and The Richmond -Times Dispatch, December, 1982. It is anticipated that additional information on Eugene Bradbury is also available. Constructed as private residence; country club since 1947 ------------------------- Name: Seal, Dean Record Type: Article Bibliographic Notes: "Keswick Hall in Albemarle County to close early next year for extensive renovation" Charlottesville Daily Progress -- 11/8/2017 ------------------------- Name: Parkhurst, Erin Record Type: Article Bibliographic Notes: A Civilized Christmas, Virginia Living, December 2010. pp 94-99. ------------------------- G.B. Lorraine Real Estate Brochure and photographs - ca 1942 ------------------------- Property Notes: No Data Project Bibliographic Information: No Data February 14, 2018 Page: 9 of 9 Virginia Dept. of Historic Resources;;. Virginia Cultural Resource Information System Legend p Architecture Resources Architecture Labels Q Individual Historic District Properties p Archaeological Resources Archaeology Labels ■ USGS GIS Place names County Boundaries JJr� Feet 0 60012001SOC2400 1:36.112 / 1 "=3.009 Feet Title: Architecture Labels Date: 2/14/2018 DISCLAIMER: Records of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (DHR) have been gathered over many years from a variety of sources and the representation depicted is a cumulative view of field observations over time and may not reflect current ground conditions. The map is for general information purposes and is not intended for engineering, legal or other site -specific uses. Map may contain errors and is provided 'as -is ". More information is available in the DHR Archives located at DHR's Richmond office. Notice if AE sites: Locations of archaeological sites may be sensitive the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) and Code of Virginia §2.2-3705.7 (10). Release of precise locations may threaten archaeological sites and historic resources. WILLIAMS MULLEN March 19, 2018 Megan Nedostup Albemarle County Department of Community Development Via: Hand Delivery RE: SP 2018-001 Keswick Hall and Golf Club Ms. Nedostup: This comment response letter covers staff comments dated March 2, 2018 for the initial submittal for a special use permit amendment to the Keswick Hall and Golf Club (SP2000-23 and SP2008-42). 1. Section 10.2.2.27(b) of the Zoning Ordinance, which requires the Inn to be served by a water and sewerage systems having adequate capacity for both the existing and proposed uses and facilities without expansion of either system. An updated Water and Waste Water Facilities Plan has been provided with this submittal. Concurrent with the expansion of the Inn, the applicant intends to expand the water system capacity through the addition of a well, pump and storage tank, thus ensuring capacity for all residential lots as well as the Inn and Golf Club uses. Timmons Group studied the existing Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities to confirm that the proposed expansion of the Inn would not exceed the capacity of the existing systems. With 86 total rooms, Keswick Inn remains under the threshold of the existing facility, with a maximum capacity of 76,000 gallons per day. The previous submittal included a summary of the study, however this submittal includes the fully updated Water and Waste Water Facilities Plan, prepared by Timmons Group, is attached as Exhibit G. The previous report had a slightly different number of rooms proposed, however the updated report is consistent with this application and draws the same overall conclusions. Will there be a future phase? The prior SP's included two phases, however it now appears that this will be the extent of the expansions for the Inn and associated uses. Please clarify for both the uses and for the water and sewage information. No second phase is planned at this time, however we want to maintain reference to the banquet hall and additional rooms that were approved for Phase 2 in previous amendments dating back to 2000 with the understanding that additional development would require a WILLIAMS M U LLE N future amendment to the Special Use Permit's Concept Plan. 3. A left turn lane and right turn taper at the Route 22/Hunt Club Road intersection will be required due to the changes requested to the property. See attached comments from VDOT and the County Transportation Planner for further detail. As discussed in our meeting with staff on March 12, the TIA concludes that neither a left nor a right turn lane are warranted based on the uses proposed and the resulting minimal increase to traffic in the area. All intersections continue to function at the some high levels of service, with Route 22 and Hunt Club Road continuing to operate at a Level of Service C and Black Cat Road and Club Drive continuing to operate at a Level of Service A. The study also confirms that queuing or delays are minimal to none. The inn and Golf Club are both off peak uses, with multiple access points from Route 22, Keswick Road and Black Cat Road. With a majority of inn guests arriving from the South, the recommendation that this applicant should be tasked with providing such expensive and unnessecary improvements that are unrelated to any impact of their uses is inconsistent with the standard of review for a Special Use Permit. As we demonstrated in the March 121h meeting, the crash history data shows that several of the noted crashes in this general area are not related to turn movements at the intersection. Regardless, 9 crashes over 5 years in the general area is very low by VDOT standards. In the meeting, VDOT confirmed that this crash history would not warrant the investment of any VDOT funds in the intersection. In addition, Route 22 is a scenic byway and part of the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District. Residents of this area are extremely opposed to any road widening in this area, including new turn lanes, that would impact the bucolic character of the surroundings. For these reasons, the applicant is not including turn lanes on Route 22. 4. Clarify and include all existing and proposed uses and spaces. The water usage table provided included a Cafe/Retail space as well as Villa Crawford Bar Addition. Will these be open to the public? Also during the tour it was mentioned that the old Fossetts kitchen will be remodeled and used as a catering kitchen, provide this use as well. Please see historic preservation comments for information on remodeling the historic portion of the Inn. Villa Crawford Bar will continue to operate in its same general location in a renovated space, serving drinks and lite fare. This existing use is intended to primarily serve guest of the Inn, but it remains open to the public, consistent with prior to the start of renovations of Keswick Hall. The Cafe/retail space is for guests only, similar to a small inn gift shop. All uses are covered within the updated Water and Waste Water Facilities Plan, included. 5. SP2008-042 Condition #3 was related to future subdivisions as it relates to water usage. The lots that would relate to this condition should be a part of the special use permit, as it limits water and sewage capacity. WILLIAMS MULLEN Condition #3 was originally established through SP 2000-33. Our current submittal is consistent with SP 2008-42 in which no additional lots were included in the request. While water usage is studied for all of the lots within the Keswick subdivision, the uses associated with this Special Use Permit only apply to TMP 80-8Z, 80-9 and TMP 80-60A. 6. The critical slopes shown on the application Steep Slopes exhibit do not match the County GIS critical slopes layer. Please update exhibit to show the critical slopes as shown on the County GIS layer. This is a zoning layer and cannot be changed without a Zoning Map Amendment. Areas that are surveyed and found to be less than 25% or resulting from development activities can be identified with a different hatch to allow development within these areas in accordance with 18-4.2.5.b. All grading within critical slopes should be included in the area of impacts (please confirm). Critical slopes and conceptual grading have both been updated. A detailed critical slopes waiver request will accompany our site plan review process. Planning Comprehensive Plan. Comments on how your project conforms to the Comprehensive Plan will be provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared for the work session or public hearing. The proposed expansion is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which does not recommend hotels or resorts in the County's designated Rural Areas. However, staff notes that this use was approved with prior special use permits. Keswick Hall is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goals to promote economic development and tourism within the County. In addition, the expansion of Keswick Hall allows for the renovation and maintenance of the entire structure, including the Villa Crawford wing. As stated in our narrative, properties such as Keswick Hall allow visitors and County residents to have an immersive experience in the Virginia countryside, creating new advocates for protection of our rural areas. Planning Comments 1. Changes to the site including parking will require a site plan amendment. These changes should also be stated in the narrative, as they are changes to the application plan. The narrative has been updated to include changes to the parking lot. 2. Provide information on parking requirements for all of the uses. Parking information has been added to the narrative. Specific parking layouts and counts will be included in the site plan review process. WILLIAMS M U LLE N 3. See attached comments from Kevin McDermott regarding transportation. Noted. Fire/Rescue Staff is pursuing further comments from Fire/Rescue and will provide those comments at a later date. Noted. Zoning The following comments related to zoning matters have been provided by Andrew Knuppel: 1. Please ensure that the water uses outlined in Exhibit G are consistent with the information in the Project Narrative. It is unclear where the "Cafe/Retail" and "Villa Crawford Bar Addition" uses in Phase 1A are occurring on the provided plans. Please include these on the concept plan. Villa Crawford Bar area is being reconfigured within the Villa Crawford wing of Keswick Hall, consistent with the current general location. The full water report has been attached for staff review and in consistent with all existing and proposed uses. 2. Please clarify which uses listed in Phase 1A in Exhibit G will be open to the public, versus those that shall be used only by the guests of the inn and their invitees or members of the Keswick Country Club and their invitees. The relocated Fossett-s restaurant will be open to the public, consistent with the existing restaurant and previous approvals. The proposed Spa facility will be open to the public, as approved in SP 2008-42. All other facilities and uses are for members of the Golf Club or Guests of Keswick Hall. 3. Please be aware of the following text from Zoning Ordinance Section 10.2.2.27(b): "Nonconforming uses, provided the restaurant or inn is served by existing water and sewerage systems having adequate capacity for both the existing and proposed uses and facilities without expansion of either system." Noted.. Water capacity is available to serve the restaurant and inn uses as required by the referenced text. Engineering and Water Resources The following comments related to engineering and water resources have been provided by Frank Pohl: The critical slopes shown on the application Steep Slopes exhibit do not match the County GIS critical slopes layer. Please update exhibit to show the critical slopes as shown on the County GIS layer. This is a zoning layer and cannot be changed without a Zoning Map Amendment. Areas that are surveyed and found to be less than 25% or WILLIAMS MULLEN resulting from development activities can be identified with a different hatch to allow development within these areas in accordance with 18-4.2.5.b. All grading within critical slopes should be included in the area of impacts (please confirm). Updated exhibits with conceptual grading and conceptual impacts are attached. More detailed exhibits will be provided with the Critical Slopes waiver that accompanies the Site Plan review process. Notes from the pre -application meeting follow below: 91 Critical slopes waivers were granted with SP 2000-33 for improvements shown on the plan approved with the SP. However, some of the improvements were approved in a different location with SP 2008-42 which nullified some of the approvals provided with SP2000-33. Staff recommends that you avoid critical slopes or provide field run topo to show the slopes are not critical. If you can't avoid the slopes, you will need to request a special exception. Staff recommends that you request a special exception for critical slopes disturbance for all slopes that you wish to disturb rather than try to figure out what slopes have and have not been approved for disturbance. Critical slope disturbance on manmade slopes outside of the required stream buffer can be supported. Staff can typically support approval of critical slopes that are isolated small bands not part of a larger system or related to a stream. Noted. The Water Protection Ordinance was last amended on July 1, 2014. Any new development must comply with the current ordinance, including stream buffer regulations (17-600). A VSMP application/approval is required and shall comply with Part 2B stormwater management requirements (9VAC25-870). Noted. It is acknowledged that the plan must adhere to the Water Protection Ordinance, including stream buffers and Part 28 stormwater management requirements. Regarding stream buffers, the spa location that is being shown will adhere to being setback 100' from the stream and any contiguous wetlands. Those details will be provided with the site plan amendment application. Additionally, the team is currently studying low impact techniques for stormwater and is anticipating a greater amount of treatment on site, then would be required, capitalizing on runoff reduction methods to assist with water quality and flow reduction. Historic Preservation The following comments related to the Historic Preservation have been provided by Heather McMahon: 1. The DHR report that the interior and exterior of the Villa Crawford retain a significant degree of integrity and should be preserved and/or sensitively restored. Rehabilitation or remodeling of this wing of the hotel should be limited and undertaken in consultation WILLIAMS M U LLE N with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Architectural features such as the windows and doors should be replaced in like materials with the same/original configuration of lites; the interior wood flooring should be protected; the interior detailing, such as fireplace mantles, stair balustrade and rail, wainscoting, paneling, dentilated cornice, scroll brackets, door surrounds, and window frames should be preserved in situ. The Villa Crawford retains its original floorplan (room layout) and this should continue to be preserved. As previously established, no part of the project is subject to specific historic protections due to the extensive renovations and expansion completed in the 1990's. However, the proposed renovation and addition seek to preserve the historic quality, character, and key detailing of the original 'Villa Crawford' wherever possible, and only perform select, critical modifications to the space necessary to achieve a standard of guest comfort and operational viability needed for the success of the hotel. The addition to the building will be of a like style and architectural character, with complimentary massing that respects the existing Hall as the primary, grand villa of Keswick. VDOT The following comments have been provided by Adam Moore: 1. The department has reviewed the TIA and studied crash data for the studied intersections. At this time the Department recommends that a left turn lane and right turn taper be installed at the Route 22/Hunt Club Road intersection. This intersection has a history of rear end crashes, which could potentially increase with greater traffic generated by Keswick Hall. The turn lane and taper can reasonably be expected to reduce the incidence of rear end crashes. As discussed in our meeting with staff on March 12, the TIA concludes that neither a left nor a right turn lane are warranted based on the uses proposed and the resulting minimal increase to traffic in the area. All intersections continue to function at the same high levels of service, with Route 22 and Hunt Club Road continuing to operate at a Level of Service C and Black Cat Road and Club Drive continuing to operate at a Level of Service A. The study also confirms that queuing or delays are minimal to none. The Inn and Golf Club are both off peak uses, with multiple access points from Route 22, Keswick Road and Black Cat Road. With a majority of Inn guests arriving from the South, the recommendation that this applicant should be tasked with providing such expensive and unnessecary improvements that are unrelated to any impact of their uses is inconsistent with the standard of review for a Special Use Permit. As we demonstrated in the March 121h meeting, the crash history data shows that several of the noted crashes in this general area are not related to turn movements at the intersection. Regardless, nine crashes over five years in the general area is very low by VDOT standards. In the meeting, VDOT confirmed that this crash history would not warrant the investment of any VDOT funds in the intersection. In addition, Route 22 is a scenic byway and part of the WILLIAMS M U LLE N Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District. Residents of this area are extremely opposed to any road widening in this area, including new turn lanes, that would impact the bucolic character of the surroundings. For these reasons, the applicant is not including turn lanes on Route 22. Virginia Department of Health (VDH) The following comments have been provided by Josh Kirtley: VDH does not have authority over the permitting process for any additional connections made to an existing DEQ permitted treatment system. At this point, it's a matter of ensuring that both the water and wastewater supplies have adequate capacity for the proposed expansion. The applicant has provided a report which lists the water capacity at 76,000 gpd and the sewage treatment plant capacity to be 60,000 gpd. The report goes on to estimate the water demands after Phase IB of this project to be 74,300 gpd. At first glance, it appears that the water supply demand will exceed the sewage treatment plant capacity. I would question how much of the current and estimated water use is used for irrigation, pool filling, etc and therefore never makes it to the treatment plant in the form of sewage. Taking into consideration the existing water use and the proposed additions, along with the permitted capacity of the STP, I would tend to think that they should be able to justify the proposal with further correspondence. I say this because they appear to be well under the permitted capacity based on a peak daily average and I'm assuming that a certain portion of the water that is used never makes its way to the STP. I also believe that they can itemize the additional uses to justify the expanded services. Please note that the projected water use and wastewater treatment capacity doesn't appear to take into consideration any future development on the property. Noted. The full utility report has been included with this submittal. Watersupply demand and permitting is based on the peak flow necessary, while sanitary permitting is based on the average flow. This is further discussed in the updated Water and Wastewater Report (included), as the uses and their impact on both the existing water and sewer system are defined. The existing water and sanitary systems have available capacity to support this Special Use Permit request. SP Conditions Staff has not drafted conditions to date for this special use permit, due to the potential changes that need to occur and additional information requested. Once conditions are drafted, staff will send it out to you. Noted. WILLIAMS M U LLE N Thank you for your assistance with these applications. Please let us know as soon as possible if there is any other information that you require to address your comments. Sincerely, �&�uLu V'j. C�� Valerie Long Enclosures cc: Keswick Club LLC Ashley Davies, Williams Mullen 35820711_1 Keswick Hall and Golf Club Project Narrative January 16, 2018, updated March 19, 2018 PROJECT PROPOSAL Introduction .0� 1912 �,LSWICK }TALL ;�_ COLF CLun On behalf of our client, Historic Hotels of Albemarle, LLC and Keswick Club, LLC (together, the "Applicant"), who are the owners of the resort commonly known as Keswick Hall and Golf Club, located at 701 Club Drive, in Albemarle County, Virginia (the "Property), we would like to request several amendments to SP-2008-00042, which would allow for improvements to the Property, as more particularly described below. The Property is further identified on Albemarle County Tax Maps as Parcels 08000-00-00- 008Z0, 08000-00-00-00900 and 08000-00-00-060A0 with a combined acreage of approximately 174 acres. The Property is part of the Rural Areas zoning district ("RA"). Within the RA zoning district, Clubs and Lodges; Swim Golf and Tennis Clubs; and Restaurants, Taverns and Inns are allowed pursuant to a Special Use Permit. This application is an amendment to the uses approved for the Property, pursuant to SP 2000-33 and SP 2008-42, with the primary purpose of this request being a relocation and reduction in proposed uses and impacts. Background Use of the Property as an Inn originated from the approval of a Special Use Permit in 1978, identified as SP-1978-76, which allowed an Inn, as well as several accessory uses, such as swimming pools and tennis courts, both of which may be open to the public without regard to whether users are patrons of the dining facilities or guests at the Inn itself. Since that time, the County has processed numerous applications related to the Inn, the residential subdivision surrounding the Inn, the Golf Club and Golf Course, and the private water and sewer system infrastructure associated with these various improvements. Albemarle County staff has provided a summary of the timeline of applicable applications, attached hereto as Exhibit B. The existing use of the Property is a 48-room Inn and Golf Course with supporting amenities, including: • Club House and Golf Course • Dining Options (Fossett's Restaurant and Club Grill) • Tennis Courts • Pools • Spa • Fitness Facility The two most recent legislative approvals for Keswick Hall and Golf Club include Special Use Permits SP 2000-33 and SP 2008-42, both of which permit the expansion of the 48-room Inn and Golf Club use, 75 additional guest rooms and related amenities, as well as restaurants and spas that are open to the public. Immediately prior to the submittal of SP 2000-33, representatives of Keswick submitted ZTA 1999-07, which was approved by the Board of Supervisors. ZTA 1999-07 added Section 10.2.2.27(b) to the Zoning Ordinance, which permits Restaurants and Inns in the RA district by Special Use Permit under certain circumstances: Restaurants and inns that are: (b) Nonconforming uses, provided the restaurant or inn is served by existing water and sewerage systems having adequate capacity for both the existing and proposed uses and facilities without expansion of either system. This provision was written specifically so that it would only apply to the Keswick Hall and Golf Club Property, because the Property did not qualify under subsection (a) of Section 10.2.2.27 as it was written at the time. It is through this provision (Section 10.2.2.27(b)), as well as the allowance of Swim, Golf and Tennis Clubs via Special Use Permit in the Rural Areas, that both SP 2000-33 and SP 2008-42 were approved. No other property in the Rural Areas operates a Restaurant or Inn pursuant to Section 10.2.2.27(b), thus creating a unique scenario for the Keswick Hall and Golf Club Property. SP 2000-33 includes Conditions of Approval as well as a Conceptual Plan, dated 12-18-2000, prepared by Roudabush, Gale & Associates (the "2000 Conceptual Plan"). The 2000 Conceptual Plan is attached as Exhibit C. Although phasing is mentioned in the staff report, no phasing is 2 shown on the 2000 Conceptual Plan or specifically delineated within the approved conditions. The 2000 Conceptual Plan shows an addition to the Inn, freestanding Cottages, a Banquet Hall, a Pool and Pool House, a Spa and several Administrative and Maintenance Buildings. The SP 2000-33 submittal package included a Traffic Study as well as information regarding the establishment and details of the Keswick Utility Company. This Special Use Permit allowed for the construction of 75 additional guest rooms in addition to the existing 48 rooms in the Inn, for a total of 123 permitted rooms. SP 2008-42 amended SP 2000-33 with updated conditions and an additional Conceptual Plan prepared by Train and Partners (the "2008 Conceptual Plan") that is referenced within the conditions of approval. The 2008 Conceptual Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit D, and the approved conditions for SP 2008-42 are attached hereto as Exhibit E. The 2008 conditions of approval mimic those of SP 2000-33, although they also reference the 2008 Conceptual Plan, which generally shows the proposed Phase 1 improvements to the Property. The 2008 Conceptual Plan and conditions do not list any uses or breakdown of phasing, only buildings are shown. In SP 2008-42, which allowed for modifications to uses allowed within Phase 1, VDOT determined that by reducing the hotel room count of Phase 1 from 28 to 23, the traffic impact of the 13-room spa was mitigated, and the left turn lane on Route 22 was not needed for these Phase 1 improvements. The existing condition of approval regarding the approved restaurant and spa facilities states as follows: Except for any restaurant and spa on the property open to the general public, Keswick Hall and its associated facilities shall be used only by the guests of the inn and their invitees, and members of the Keswick Country Club and their invitees. It is important to note that neither the SP 2008-42 conditions of approval, nor the 2008 Conceptual Plan limits the size, number or location of any restaurant or spa on the Property. Overview of Proposal For a variety of reasons, including the economic recession that began in 2008, the previously designed and approved expansions of the Inn were not constructed. The Conceptual Plans approved with previous submissions were also overly specific, not allowing for the approved uses to shift in location within the site. The Applicant has engaged the architectural firm Hart Howerton, the landscape architecture firm Nelson Bryd Woltz, and the engineering firm of Timmons Group to create a plan for the addition of a new wing of guest rooms, an expansion of the existing fitness facility to include a relocated restaurant, a comprehensive renovation of the existing rooms and Inn and a parking lot reconfiguration including a second service entrance onto Keswick Road. The proposed new wing and expansions have been designed to be sensitive to the scale and siting of the existing building. The wing is sited in the same location as the expansion approved with SP 2000-33 and as shown on the 2000 Conceptual Plan. However, because the proposed improvements are not in the exact same location or format as the SP 2008-42 approvals 3 (including the 2008 Conceptual Plan), a new Special Use Permit amendment is required. We request approval of 38 additional guest rooms in Phase 1 for a total room count of 86 in Phase 1. As described earlier, the previously approved Special Use Permits for the expansion of the Inn allowed for a maximum of 123 rooms (48 existing plus 75 new rooms). Of these 123 permitted rooms, the 2008 SUP permitted Phase 1 to have 23 rooms, and for Phase 2 to have 52 rooms. This Application proposes that the maximum number of additional rooms permitted in Phase 1 be increased to 38 rooms, which would bring the total key count to 86 rooms. This request is an overall decrease of 37 rooms from SP 2008-42. This application includes the expansion of the Energy Plant building to meet capacity requirements for the new Guest Wing. This facility will increase in size by approximately 50%, as shown on the attached exhibits, to incorporate the necessary additional mechanical equipment. It is anticipated that the footprint will expand on the west side, toward the driving range, in similar scale and appearance to the existing structure. The envelope for the Energy Plant has been expanded slightly from the first submission to accommodate the additional mechanical equipment necessary for providing heating, cooling, fire protection, and technology support for the resort expansion. The proposed entry landscape adjustments will accommodate the necessary parking additions and better organize circulation between the Hall, Restaurant, and Club. A new entry drive alignment will simplify the guest arrival experience to bring vehicles primarily to the Hall, with fewer crossing drives. A proposed access point north of the Energy Pavilion will allow service and maintenance vehicles more direct access to the Club, and provide a secondary entry/exit for members. The central parking layout is intended to highlight the natural character of the Keswick landscape, incorporating pervious surface materials, canopy trees, and native vegetation, while providing additional parking capacity and improved circulation. The parking lot configuration has been adjusted from the initial submission to preserve key specimen trees at the landscape arrival, and better organize the vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Minor adjustments to the site paths needed to improve guest circulation have been represented as well. These changes are all per Nelson Byrd Woltz's landscape plan recommendations. Currently, Keswick Hall and Golf Club has approximately 182 existing spaces. This application and project would include the addition of 46 - 64 spaces for a total of 228 - 246 spaces. The additional spaces exceed the County's requirement of one space per each new room, given we propose a maximum of 38 new keys. The new Maintenance and Laundry Building sited near the Tennis Courts will relocate those same functions which are currently carried out in the existing Inn, and a separate maintenance structure, and are being displaced by the renovations and the new Guest Wing. Maintenance includes a workshop for repairs to the Inn, and the Laundry will handle guest linens currently processed in the basement of Keswick Hall. The facility will be an unobtrusive one-story building set in the landscape. 4 The new restaurant, located in an expansion of the Club House, will match the existing capacity at Fossett's Restaurant, with a maximum of 165 seats. The existing Fossett's space will be converted to common area/living area for the Inn. The Villa Crawford Bar will continue to provide drinks and a limited menu, serving the same function as the space prior to the commencement of renovations. Although Keswick Hall is not listed as an individual resource on the State Historic Register, the Property is listed as a contributing resource to the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District at the time the district was created in 1991. In SP 2000-33, staff discussed whether the renovations to the Property had impacted its contributing status. The Property was listed as contributing because of the Mediterranean style of the architecture and the fact that a portion of the building known as "Villa Crawford" was designed by Eugene Bradbury. No interior elements were considered. While Villa Crawford is part of the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District, the Villa is not protected or specifically historic as it exists today. Of the 58,000 square feet in Keswick Hall, only 11,000 square feet (19%) are in the "original" Villa Crawford building, which is the wing adjacent to the horizon pool. During either the original addition, circa 1993, or prior to that, most of the original finishes had been replaced, and at least some the interior was modified to accommodate that addition. Additionally, the location of the new wing is proposed for the opposite side and newer portion of the structure, and is designed to be subordinate to the existing Inn as it steps down the hill. The proposed renovation and expansion seeks in every possible way to complement Keswick Hall, to honor the traditions of Virginia hospitality, and to celebrate the unique heritage of this hotel. The architecture and character of the renovation is meant to highlight that history, while recognizing that the story of Keswick is defined by many incremental improvements and additions over time, adapting the Property to each generation of guests and members. This Application proposes to write the next chapter in that long legacy. The proposed renovation and addition will involve subtle modifications to the building envelope, exactingly executed in the spirit of Eugene Bradbury's Mediterranean -influenced style, to allow for more a comfortable guest experiences. This will help to ensure the financial success of the hotel, which is critical to preserving and maintaining Keswick for future generations. The Applicants are committed to being respectful, long-term stewards of the Property, and will endeavor to ensure the integrity of this significant Albemarle County property. The Applicant proposes numerous improvements to the Property, as described below and as shown on Exhibit A, attached. Allowed pursuant to SP 2008-42: • Comprehensive Renovation of the existing Inn • Installation of a Pool Pavilion • Expansion of Energy Plant 9 Requested Amendments to SP 2008-42: • Construction of a new wing with a net increase of 38 guest rooms, for a total of 86 rooms • Freestanding Spa with 8 Treatment Rooms (this is a reduction from the 13 treatment rooms previously approved per SP 2008-42). This is a net increase of 4 Treatment Rooms, as 4 exist in the current Fitness Facility. • Clubhouse Expansion o Restaurant (Replacement of Fossett's): 165 total seats, including bar and outdoor seating — approximately 2,800 SF of dining area o Relocation of existing Fitness —either to lower level of clubhouse or to spa facility. • Realignment of entry road, reconfiguration of parking and drop-off areas, site landscape improvements, pool, and necessary infrastructure repairs and upgrades • Laundry and Maintenance Facility • New Service entry off Keswick Road near the energy plant. CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Property is designated Rural Areas in the Comprehensive Plan, and is surrounded by the Golf Course, the Keswick Hunt Club and residential lots. Keswick Hall is a unique architectural and cultural asset within Albemarle County's Rural Areas. The Property is recognized as a long- standing existing facility. The Property supports the regional economy through the employment of over 200 full and part-time employees. The Applicants estimate that the proposed expansion and renovation will result in an additional 148 employees, for a total of approximately 348 employees. Keswick Hall and Golf Course also provides significant contributions to the County tax base with over $600,000 paid in property, lodging and meals taxes annually. The total projected annual tax revenues for the project with the proposed expansion are over $1.5 million. Keswick Hall also contributes approximately $20,000 in donations to the Thomas Jefferson Foundation annually in the form of a donation for each rented room. This number would double to approximately $40,000 per year with the additional rooms in the new Guest Wing. The Property attracts tourists from all over the world and raised Albemarle County's profile within the tourism community. The Keswick Hall venue allows tourists, visitors and club members an immersive experience in the rural landscape of Albemarle County, thus fostering the protection and enjoyment of such areas consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. IMPACTS ON PUBLIC FACILITIES & PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE An updated Traffic Study by Timmons Group is included with this Application. The updated study is supported by the Traffic Studies and data that were provided in 2000 and 2008. The study concludes that the proposed expansion of the Inn will not result in any significant impact to the area roadways and intersections. Traffic data was collected in November, 2017 to analyze the existing volumes and capacity of nearby intersections. The study also analyzed whether the proposed expansion of the Inn would create any impacts to the roadway network. With the proposed 38 additional hotel rooms and a new spa (net increase of 4 treatment rooms), the L updated traffic study confirms that all surrounding intersections would continue to operate at a Level of Service (LOS) C or better. In fact, the intersection of Club Drive and BIack Cat Road continues to operate at a LOS A, even with the expansion. The north/south movement of Louisa Road is maintained at a LOS A and the Westbound approach from Hunt Club Drive continues to operate at a LOS C, both with minimal queuing. In fact, left turns will wait less than 1 second and will experience a 1-foot queue before being able to turn onto Hunt Club Road. The traffic study confirms that no new turn lanes or tapers are warranted for the uses proposed with this Special Use Permit request. Timmons Group also studied the existing Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities to confirm that the proposed expansion of the Inn would not exceed the capacity of the existing systems. With 86 total rooms, Keswick Inn remains under the threshold of the existing facility, with a maximum capacity of 76,000 gallons per day. The previous submittal included a summary of the study, however this submittal includes the fully updated Water and Waste Water Facilities Plan, prepared by Timmons Group, is attached as Exhibit G. The previous report had a slightly different number of rooms proposed, however the updated report is consistent with this application and draws the same overall conclusions. IMPACTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES Because the proposed location of the new wing of guest rooms and new restaurant are within the immediate vicinity of the existing Inn and Clubhouse, impacts to environmental features are minimized. All new buildings, such as the Spa and Laundry/Maintenance Facilities are kept out of sensitive areas of the site including the stream buffer. The Special Use Permit Plan, showing the general location of proposed uses, includes a delineation of the stream buffer area. An Illustrative Plan and Conceptual Grading has also been included to provide supportive, non- binding, documentation. By containing the proposed additions within a limited area of the site, the remainder of the land can be left as golf course area and open space to be enjoyed by the community. List of Exhibits: Exhibit A 2018 Keswick Conceptual Development Plan, updated March 2018 Exhibit B Keswick Timeline of Events (from Albemarle County Staff and previously submitted) Exhibit C SP 2000-33 Conceptual Plan, dated 12-18-2000 (previously submitted) Exhibit D SP 2008-42 Conceptual Plan, Phase 1 (previously submitted) Exhibit E SP 2008-42 Conditions of Approval (previously submitted) Exhibit F Traffic Study, dated January 15, 2018 (previously submitted) Exhibit G Timmons Group Water and Waste Water Facilities Plan, dated December 1, 2017, updated March 19, 2018 351320154 7 BUILDING KEY # Name I Keswick Hall 2 Horizon Pool 3 Golf Club I 4 Energy Plant 5 Maintenance Shed 6 Admin. Buildings 7 Overflow Parking 8 Pavilion 9 Staff House 0 ........... I ........... I ........... I ........... 0 200 400' 1 200' at 8.5"x 11 41 III HART HOWERTON FR4NCSCO Keswick Hall & Golf Club Existing Site Albemarle County, Virginia BUILDING KEY # Name 1 Keswick Hall 2 Horizon Pool & Bar 3 Restaurant & Flex Space 4 Golf Club 5 Expanded Energy Plant G +38 Room Guest Wing 7 Admin. Buildings 8 Spa and Fitness 9 Pavilion 10 Staff House 11 Maintenance & Laundry 0 200 V = 200' at 8.5"x 11 " HOWERTON IF.ul �w.ux. u.•w Rfu..l....la v.6 �k ..�,.....I r�.�....�i�.�n.A IL �Il.x.. �..�� goo, StrPd 1,� e415 ..I 400' 5 4 4' / rab Or�L Keswick Hall K Golf Club Albemarle Counly, Virginia U Special -Use Permit Plan Nfareb 2018 -'-1 I 1 BUILDING KEY # Name 1 Keswick Hall 2 Horizon Pool & Bar 3 Restaurant & Flex Space 4 Golf Club 5 Expanded Energy Plant 6 +38 Room Guest Wing 7 Admin. Buildings 8 Spa and Fitness 9 Pavilion 10 Staff House 11 Maintenance & Laundry ZZ 0 200 400' 1" = 200' at 8.5" x 11 " HART HOWERTON „ »Ew.o. 1 F­CI1CO Kesys iek Hall K Golf Club Illustrative Site Example \lurch 20111 - 3 ��:.�,..,,,,......,.,....,.,.,..,...,,u.�.,;..,..�...............,,���.,,��.....,,, :1lbc:marleGounty. Farglnm BUILDING KEY # Name I Keswick Hall 2 Horizon Pool & Bar 3 Restaurant & Flex Space 4 Golf Club 5 Expanded Energy Plant 6 +38 Room Guest Wing 7 Admin. Buildings 8 Spa and Fitness 9 Pavilion 10 Staff House I I Maintenance & Laundry 0 fey I........... I ........... I........... �. 0 200 1" = 200' at 8.5"x I]" U ..1 400' r 3 r�L P goo St�Pdhe` S 1 HHART HOWERTON �Ew.o,x.,.�...„�,4�0 Messick Hall & Golf �,�ll�) h-climinary (:ra dill" P1,111 (T) .> :ol „�x, �,,.0 lxli�� 14.,4.if...�.l...u•I.i. •A... i�.�. �L..,,I. ��,,,.�i� „ II....,. I . II. 4..L._�,,,,...,..,,,..,,.�....,.._„�„� ..,.,..,L...............�.,..Il.,,n.... Albemarle County. t "4r,[;lnui March 2018 BUILDING KEY # Name I Keswick Hall 2 Horizon Pool & Bar 3 Restaurant & Flex Space 4 Golf Club 5 Expanded Energy Plant 6 +38 Room Guest Wing 7 Admin. Buildings L5 8 Spa and Fitness 9 Pavilion 10 Staff House 11 Maintenance& Laundry Impacted Slope Area: 1,000 SF, 0 25% Slopes Note: Critical slopes adjacent to `\ Keswick Hall and Keswick Golf Club the ' - 1 are a product of original construction of those buildings and thus are man-made slopes. Impacted Slope Area 11 200 SF D9 Impacted Slope d—Area: 3,000 SF ­7 700 St,iq," 08 Impacted Slope Area: 1,000 SF Note: Critical slope data from Albemarle County G IS (T)I........... I ........... I ........... I ........... I 0 200 400' V = 200' at 8.5"x 11 III HART ! OWERTON 2_0 Keswick Hall & Golf Club Steep Slopes (-25%) 1111­111. nr-r-­ . ....... . ...... ... Albemarle Counly, Virginia