Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201800001 Correspondence 2023-01-25 (2)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 MULLEN future amendment to the Special Use Permit's Concept Plan. 3. A left turn lane and right turn taper at the Route 22/1-lunt 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 121 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 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 MULLEN 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 forstoff review and inconsistent 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: 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 2B 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 MULLEN 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 121 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 MULLEN 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. Water supply 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 MULLEN 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, Valerie Long Enclosures cc: Keswick Club LLC Ashley Davies, Williams Mullen 35820711_1 County Meeting 3-14-18 West Gate and traffic Keswick Estate has entries/exits on Black Cat Rd (East Gate) and shares an entrance/exit off of Keswick Rd with Keswick Hall and Keswick Golf Club. Club Drive connects both entrances. A short distance from Keswick Road, inside the resort, on Club Drive, is the gated entrance/exit (West Gate) to the residential community of Keswick Estate. Keswick Hall guests, Keswick Golf Club members and any attendees to an event at either facility have the right to use these entrances/exits. Hall guests and Club members arriving from Richmond or other areas from the east generally exit 1-64 at exit 129 to access the East Gate and travel through the Estate in order to reach the Hall and Club. The East Gate consists of three gates. There are two gates for entry. One of the entry gates is only for residents and is activated by the residents EZ-Pass type device. The other entry gate is manned and screens Hall and Club members and then allows entry. In order to exit at the East Gate, the exiting vehicle must drive over a sensing device in the pavement, which activates the gate. The West Gate entry/exit consists of two gates, one for entry and one for exit. This area is not manned. Exiting by residents and any guests is achieved by a car driving over a sensor in the pavement. Entering at the West Gate by residents is achieved by an EZ-Pass type device. Hall and Club members use the same entry gate and must use the call box and contact the guard located at the East Gate to open the gate. Since many are not familiar with the procedure, traffic flow regularly slows or stops until the situation is cleared up. Increasing the resort facilities will make this a greater problem. i In addition, the golf maintenance facility, the water supply and waste water treatment plant and the trash compactor station for the resort is located inside the gated, residential area. This already causes increased traffic at the West Gate that must be processed through the call box in order to reach the guard at the East Gate. Why require an additional entry gate at the West Gate entrance? > Traffic conditions with the current capacity of Keswick Hall and Golf Club create traffic flow delays. > an additional 148 employees to the already existing 200, many of which will be dropped at employee entrance at loading dock > additional deliveries and service providers entering at loading dock > the laundry facility will be changed to a remote location requiring delivery of clean laundry and pick up of soiled linen at the loading dock > additional trips by the resort trash vehicle through the West Gate to the trash compactor located at the golf maintenance facility. Trash is picked up at Golf Club and loading dock. (2-4 trips daily before expansion) > The banquet and convention facilities will remain in the current Keswick Hall. Facilities to provide room service will remain in the current Keswick Hall. Employees will use the loading dock entrance. > The employee cafeteria will remain in the current Keswick Hall. Employees will use the loading dock entrance. > It appears the employee parking area (and with more employees) that is accessed by the West Gate will still be in use causing additional traffic problems > Additional traffic from 38 additional guest rooms, many using the West Gate. > A new spa and fitness center will be located at the West Gate area with parking for this facility accessed in the area of the West Gate. > A new free standing restaurant to replace Fossett's is planned with substantially more seating is planned. It is expected that this new restaurant will attract additional customers and be open 6-7 days per week. The old Fossett's was only open 4 nights per week. This will create additional traffic at the West Gate. > The additional guest rooms will allow the resort to cater to larger corporate groups and attract additional social functions. This creates additional traffic at the West Gate. > This proposal is a major investment not only to expand the resort capacity but is a substantial upgrade of facilities. This means that the existing facilities will have a higher utilization rate. As an example, the resort guestrooms currently may have been experiencing a 70% occupancy rate. Those same guest rooms after the upgrades will a have a higher occupancy rate of 75% or more due to the upgraded product. The number of golfers currently may be 80 per day; after the upgrades the number may increase to 100. To these increased numbers as a result of the upgrades, guests from the increased capacity provided by the expansion must be considered. Bottom line is the utilization rate for the renovated existing facilities and the new facilities will be higher than the existing facilities before the renovation. > The increased traffic around the loading dock area, new spa and fitness center and the increased number of guests using the West Gate requires a solution. Adding a second entry gate at the current West Gate location will eliminate a substantial amount of the traffic issues. Adjacent to the West Gate area, Club Drive in the vicinity of the administration buildings is already in the proposed work to be relocated and modified.. Another recommendation, in addition to adding a second entry gate, is to change the car entrance to the spa and fitness center and the employee parking access to the road that passes by the Pavilion. This will reduce some of the traffic in the West Gate area. 3 > It has been suggested that access to Club Drive through the Estate by Hall guests and Club members be eliminated. Current visitors who have used this access for many years will be very upset, putting the burden of enforcement on Keswick Estate. Further, when visitors want to leave the resort, they will want to access 1-64 at the 129 entrance. This means they will attempt to enter the Estate at the West Gate to travel on Club Drive to access the interstate. If they are denied entrance, the resort visitors will have to back up with a line of cars behind them and leave through the entrance at Keswick Road. This option certainly is not guest friendly and does not portray gracious hospitality from Keswick Hall, Golf Club or Estate. Comments: The Keswick Road entrance to the Hall, Club and Estate during the Lord Ashley era was located a short distance from Keswick Road. This entrance consisted of two entry gates and one exit gate. In 2001, 1 understand that Orient -Express, who at the time owned all of the entities, unilaterally moved the Estate entrance to its current location. One of the entry gates was eliminated resulting in the existing West Gate configuration. >The narrative states the new restaurant that will replace the old Fossett's has a capacity of a total of 165 seats. The old Fossett's appears to have a capacity of 65-75 seats. (the Timmons traffic report page 1 states the new restaurant will have the same seating and will not generate additional trips). The narrative states that 10 additional seats (see Timmons water report -page 2) will be added to the Villa Crawford. There is substantial outdoor space at the Villa Crawford that is used for drinks and dining. Will the Villa Crawford continue as a bar and restaurant? How many seats will remain? > What is the plan for the existing Fossett's space? M > Where will breakfast be served? Is it expected that hotel guests will exit Keswick Hall in all types of weather to have breakfast at the new restaurant? > Will there be two fitness centers? There appears to be a new fitness facility at the new spa. In addition the narrative notes the existing fitness center will be relocated to the lower level under the new restaurant ( see page 5 of the narrative). > What will be in the existing fitness center? > At the February 27 meeting while reviewing these points, it was stated that a lot of the employee and product delivery traffic will be re- routed to the Golf Club service entrance as a result of the new restaurant. While there will be some traffic redirected to service the new restaurant, the overwhelming majority of traffic will be at the Club Drive loading dock area. > If the expansion is approved can the remaining 37 rooms be constructed? 123-86=37 rooms > Will the fitness facility (1 or 2?) be open to the public? 0 Water Supply > The Keswick Hall expansion plan appears to re -allocate water necessary to supply the residential community to supply the water needs of the expansion. There will not be enough water to complete the build out of the Estate. > This means that owners (including the Hardies for lots they own) of Estate lots may not be able to obtain a building permit due to the lack of water. > It is my understanding that the prior declarant confirmed that the water supply was adequate to supply all 121 homes prior to obtaining the approval of the subdivision. Has this been changed? > County of Albemarle letter, February 20, 2009—particularly item 3. What does this mean in relation to the residential lots? The expansion plans? > Community contains 121 lots; approximately 52 existing homes are currently on the water supply; plus 2 under construction, 67 additional homes to be built that will need water. (Note there may be 0-3 of the existing homes that are supplied by grandfathered wells.) > Timmons Report did not take into consideration of the future water needs of the Estate community. What is the county position on this? > Waste water treatment capacity 60,000 gallons per day? > fire suppression?