Art Jury Committee Meeting Minutes
June 7, 2005

Return to Art Jury

Previous Art Jury Minutes     

Present: President Ken Markstein, Vice President Diane Larsen, Secretary Mark McClure and Members Nancy Ullman and Gail Frazar-Mele

Also Present: Manager Pete Smith, Trails Committee Chair Kathy Mallick, Building Commissioner Robert Green, Senior Planner Kirk Dakan, Associate Planner Arnold Keene, Consulting Architect Jim Kelley-Markham and Administrative Assistant Carol Gorton

The Minutes of the May 24, 2005 meeting were approved as written.

Consent Calendar: A motion was made, seconded and passed to approve the consent calendar.

New Business: 

1. Trails Committee Chair Kathy Mallick presented a proposal for a bronze sculpture of a mare and her foal as the Committee’s response to the Planning Committee’s desires to reincorporate an equestrian ambiance to the village.  The Art Jury made several comments that possibly a more rustic solution could be considered.
2. Manager Pete Smith said that Richard Chandler is asking for representatives from the Art Jury, Road and Traffic, Finance and Planning Committees for a new committee that will report to the board on what would be the various functions performed by the Association and a city council should incorporation be approved.  Ken Markstein suggested Diane Larsen to represent the Art Jury and she accepted, with Mark McClure volunteering as alternate.

Nancy Ullman asked that a survey of Association members be considered before spending more money on the issue of incorporation.  Diane Larsen concurred.

CONFERENCE ITEMS:

Ryan Property I.D. 20.2.1

Appeal: Art Jury Deferral of April 26, 2005: Additions, Retaining Walls

Mr. and Mrs. Ryan and Don Looney attended the meeting.  Board Member Ken King conducted the mediation.

The mediation was continued and the Art Jury made the following comments:

1. The following comments (1.a, b, c and d) are from the Art Jury meeting of April 26, 2005 and are still applicable to the project:

a. Please redesign the existing portion of the project to create a more attractive appearance. Since the additions to the existing home are larger than the existing home, the old portions should be remodeled to reflect an improved, new exterior appearance that would be created with the additions.

b. Create a design that has more visual interest. The current design has a stark appearance with a lack of any elements that would describe any definable design type. Please create a design with a stronger, definable character. It is particularly noted that there is a definite lack of architectural detailing. Large structures need more detailing to visually break up the bulk of the walls and to create greater visual interest. It is not enough to break up the bulk of the proposed building with roofed projections and window placement. There needs to be an enrichment of architectural detailing and interest.

c. The new windows must create a greater level of detail and visual interest than those currently proposed. 

d. Please use a unity of roof forms to create a cohesive appearance for the house.

2. The following comments are from the mediation meeting of June 7, 2005:

a. Significant changes will be required to the existing structure. The applicant is strongly urged to consult with his/her architect to evaluate the relative benefits of an extensive remodel versus new construction on the site.

b. The existing structure has many characteristics that make it very difficult to create a successful remodel design that will allow the Art Jury to make the required finding of a “uniform and reasonably high standard of artistic result and attractiveness” per Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant. An approvable remodel of the existing structure could be a major undertaking. The amount of changes necessary for an approvable remodel will be significant, and the review process necessary for such a difficult transformation of the existing home could be long and time consuming if the design changes occur incrementally.  

c. Be aware that the property’s topography will limit the size and configuration of the proposed additions. As the project is revised to address the Art Jury’s comments, the overall size of the project may need to decrease.

d. Reduce the width of the addition on the south side of the house. The current configuration creates a large geometric area to be covered with a single roof mass, resulting in an awkward roof design.

e. All roofs on the existing house must be revised to be consistent with the new roofs of the additions.

f. The application is encouraged to further develop the appearance of the northerly portion of the concept which was presented at the workshop (of which there was only a front elevation) and apply that design concept to the rest of the revised project.     

Culver Property I.D. 2089.132

Commercial Sign: Wells Fargo Home Mortgage

This letter is to confirm that the applicant agreed to the following with the Building Commissioner prior to the Art Jury hearing on June 7, 2005 regarding the “Wells Fargo” sign:

1. The sign will be no deeper than 18”.
2. The color, materials and lettering of the sign will be as shown in the submitted plans.

Because the applicant agreed to make the above changes (1. and 2.), the above sign is therefore not subject to application and permit requirements per Section 46.0606.02 and a hearing with the Art Jury was not necessary.

Additionally, that applicant agreed that he will be changing the “Ranch and Coast” sign to a design which is consistent with the existing “Culver” and proposed “Wells Fargo” signs.

NIC LLC      

Property I.D. 39.2. 1, 3 & 4

Boundary Adjustment

At their June 7, 2005 meeting, the Art Jury considered the required findings related to the submitted Marshall-Wells Fargo boundary adjustment map, RSFA/BA-05-02, (date-stamped March 30, 2005), and voted to forward to the Board of Directors a recommendation of conditional approval with applicable standard conditions, as contained in Chapter 60 of the Regulatory Code, and the following special condition. Art Jury member Mark McClure abstained from the vote.

1. Pursuant to Chapter 40 of the Association’s Regulatory Code, as a result of the proposed changes to the horse keeping facilities on the proposed parcels, the applicants must apply for new horse keeping permits prior to the finalization of the application.  If the applicant intends to seek permits for more than 7 horses on the property, an approved Covenant Modification changing the Use Class from A (Single Family Residential) to L (horse keeping) would potentially allow for a larger number of horses to be permitted.

The Board of Directors will conduct a public hearing and consider the application and the Art Jury’s recommendations at their meeting on Thursday, June 16, 2005, beginning at 9:00 a.m. at the Association office. 

Glancy Property I.D. 34.9.6

2-Lot Subdivision

Mr. Glancy and Alex Friehauf attended the meeting.

The Art Jury discussed various restrictions in size, height, accessory structures and structure locations as possible conditions of approval for the proposed subdivision.  However, after much discussion and consideration, the Art Jury concluded that, even with a variety of restrictive conditions, due to the severe topographical constraints of the site it could not make the findings contained in Chapter 60 of the Regulatory Code and also could not find that the proposed map “insures a uniform and reasonably high standard of artistic result and attractiveness, in exterior and physical appearance…of property and improvements” as required by Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant.  Therefore, the Art Jury’s recommendation will be to deny the application.

Proposed subdivisions must meet both objective standards and subjective aesthetic criteria contained in the Association’s Protective Covenant, Regulatory Code and the applicable Covenant Acceptance Agreements.  While the proposal meets the objective standards of minimum net lot size requirement (2.86), does not impact slopes of 25% or greater, and complies with the applicable Covenant Acceptance Agreement allowing for potential additional parcels, the application must also meet subjective aesthetic standards and criteria.  These standards and criteria are stated in the governing documents and the Regulatory Code and are illuminated in the adopted Residential Design Guidelines.  In particular, the Art Jury noted problems with ridgeline prominence, topography, inadequate separation of conceptual structures on the subject site and inadequate separation between these conceptual structures relative to the amount of separation of existing homes in the vicinity.  Due to these factors, the Art Jury will not approve the map in any form.

Rancho Osuna Property I.D. 38.2.1

5-Lot Subdivision

Mr. Harry Collins, Mr. Chris Collins, Lorie Simon, Barry Munson, Anna Aguilera , Jake Wyer and Phyllis Paul and  attended the meeting.

Nancy Ullman abstained from all discussion and decision making.

The Art Jury is deferring a recommendation to the Board of Directors, pending review of suggested revisions and additional information and made the following comments:   

The Art Jury has received considerable feedback from the community requesting public access to the Osuna adobe located on this property. This structure, and its siting within the landscaping surrounding it, has played an important role in influencing the development of the unique cultural and aesthetic character that typifies the Rancho Santa Fe community. Because of the important contribution that this structure makes to the character of the entire community, the preservation of the Osuna adobe and the mature landscaping that surrounds it is of utmost importance. Therefore, the Art Jury is asking the applicants to take the following steps prior to making a recommendation on the subdivision application.

1. Please work with the Association Trails Committee to determine the feasibility of a 10’ wide trail easement along the property line between proposed Parcels 3 and 5, which would allow Covenant members the opportunity to view the Osuna adobe from the confines of the trail easement. Additionally, please work with the Trails Committee to determine a safe and effective trail alignment that would allow equestrians to get from the northwest corner to the southwest corner of the proposed subdivision while effectively and safely traversing the steep slope area in between.
2. Please provide a proposal to allow controlled public access to the Osuna adobe on a limited number of occasions each year.

The Art Jury also discussed the horse keeping facilities on the property, and made the following comments regarding the steps that would be required to maintain horse keeping uses on the property. 

1. The applicable Covenant Acceptance Agreement allows 50 horses for the entire site. Pursuant to Chapter 40 of the Association’s Regulatory Code, as a result of the proposed changes to the horse keeping facilities on the proposed parcels, the existing horse keeping permits will become void upon finalization of the subdivision application. New horse keeping permits must be obtained for each parcel upon which the applicants intend to keep horses.

At this time, the Art Jury will not make a recommendation of approval or conditional approval for the proposed subdivision, RSFA/TM-05-04. While your proposal meets the objective standards for a subdivision, the application must also meet the subjective aesthetic criteria contained in the Association’s Protective Covenant, Regulatory Code, and applicable Covenant Acceptance Agreement as illustrated in the Residential Design Guidelines. 

Based on the proposal reviewed today, the Art Jury cannot make the required findings contained in Chapter 60 of the Regulatory Code, and also cannot find that the proposed map “insures a uniform and reasonably high standard of artistic result and attractiveness, in exterior and physical appearance … of property and improvements”, as required by Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant.  Further, based on the unique characteristics of the site, the Art Jury finds that the proposed map cannot be conditioned in such as way as to allow the findings to be made.

CONSTRUCTION SITE SIGNS: Board Meeting of  June 16, 2005

Tuck - B&W Architects

The Art Jury is recommending approval of the sign to the Board of Directors subject to the standard Temporary Construction Site Sign conditions.

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:

Baker Property I.D. 11.4.3           

Final Application: Residence/Garage (8,729 sq. ft.), Cabana (590 sq. ft.), Guest House (875 sq. ft.), Grading, Fence, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape, Lighting, Sports Court, Colors and Materials

The Art Jury Approved the Final Application with the following conditions:

1. The gates and associated turnaround are not approved.  Provide written approval from the adjoining owner for the turnaround. NOTE: if written approval is not obtained for the turnaround, both the turnaround and the gates must be eliminated from the plans prior to issuance of permits.
2. Provide prints of corrected final drawings and corresponding detail sheets prior to issuance of permits.
3. All skylights must consist of tinted, flat-profiled glazing, and bronze, anodized frames.
4. Large stucco and rock samples must be prepared for the review and approval of the Art Jury prior to the first framing inspection.
5. In addition to the fruit trees, incorporate additional plant screening between the sport court and the property line. Provide plant selection for staff review and approval.
6. Horse keeping is discontinued for this site.

Bollert Property I.D. 21.3.7           

Preliminary Application: Residence/Garage ( 8,355 sq. ft.), Guest House (881 sq. ft.), Detached Garage (700 sq. ft.) Pool, Landscape, Colors & Materials

The Art Jury DEFERRED the Preliminary Application with the following comments:

1. Adjust the grading to lower the ridge by three feet.
2. Maximum roof pitch 30-35’ (accessory building).
3. Retain mature trees on south boundary.
4. Increase the use of screening trees at the Southside of the residence.
5. Increase the foundation planting at the base of the retaining wall for the pool area. Planting in this location shall be of sufficient height to screen the wall from off-site views.
6. Incorporate the use of a taller tree at the Eastside of the residence. The proposed Oaks will not provide the height needed to soften the rooflines of the residence.

Holmlund Property I.D. 36.14.3

Workshop Application: Workshop/Hobby Room (600 sq. ft. 1st floor, 600 sq. ft. 2nd floor), Garage Addition (239 sq. ft.), Detached Patio Cover, Trash Enclosure, Driveway

Per a Faxed request by Brian Sipe received on June 6, 2005, this project was postponed to the June 21, 2005 Art Jury meeting.

Lauder Property I.D. 2089.98

Preliminary Application: Art Studio/Addition (400 sq. ft.), Reroof

The Art Jury APPROVED the addition with the following conditions:

1. Landscaping is required to screen the project from off-site. If for any reason the final, approved landscape installation does not meet this objective, the Association may require additional plantings, pursuant to Regulatory Code Section 42.0302. Any existing vegetation not shown and approved on the plans as “to be removed” shall be considered “Critical View” landscaping as defined in that regulation. Any trees or landscaping damaged or destroyed during construction or transplanting shall be replaced in-kind with new materials prior to Final Inspection of the landscaping.
2. Provide details of landscaping prior to issuance of permits.
3. Colors and materials shall match the existing dwelling.
4. Maximum lot coverage shall not exceed 20% (for clarification). Confirm coverage in writing prior to issuance of permits.

S&G Const. Property I.D. 10.4.12

Preliminary Application: Residence/Garage (10,895 sq. ft.),Grading, Retaining Walls, Fence, Pool, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape, Lighting, Colors & Materials

The Art Jury DEFERRED the Preliminary Application with the following comments:

Site Plan Comments

1. Include a site plan which extends beyond the property lines of the site to include the structures on the adjacent properties.

2. Indicate on the site plan that the existing buildings in the north corner of the property (including the one which straddles the property line), will be removed.  

3. Please describe the use of easements on the property and detail whether any of the easements will be improved, kept clear of vegetation or paved. 

4. Please make the fill slope between the driveway and the pool area more gradual instead of the proposed 2:1.

Architectural Design Comments

5. Please submit a sample of the proposed:

a. rock
b. brick
c. window surround material
After review of the rock and brick, a sample installation on the site will be required during construction prior to commencement of the rock and brick installation.

6. Please make the muntin bar patterns on the windows consistent throughout the house.

7. Please propose a darker stucco color. The currently proposed color is very similar to the stucco color proposed on other homes in this subdivision. The Art Jury wants to create a diversity of home forms and color palettes for the different lots in the subdivision.

8. Provide additional information on the architectural details. Construction details are not necessary at this Preliminary application stage; however, include notes on the plans regarding the following:

a. Percentage of boosting and mudding of the tile roof as well as the stagger
b. Stucco finish
c. Materials for the eave details

Landscape Comments

9. Submit a RSF Fire Department approved landscape plan with all preliminary submittals.  

10. Clarify the status of the existing grove. The plan indicates the existing trees are to remain with supplemental citrus planting incorporated. The condition of the grove is very poor and new citrus plantings are encouraged.

11. Increase the use of groupings of tall screening trees and palms around the residence. The height of the trees shall provide roofline filtering.

Singh Property I.D. 27.2.2

Revision to Approved Plans: Entry Gate/Pilasters

The Art Jury denied the “As-Built” Driveway Entry Gate. The Art Jury noted the Preamble to the Rancho Santa Fe Covenant contains the following statements:

  “WHEREAS, Rancho Santa Fe is unusually attractive and valuable as a high class place of residence because of the rare quality of its landscape, trees and shrubs and the fine architecture and other improvements established by its property owners; and WHEREAS, these property owners are most desirous of preserving, continuing and maintaining this character of community and rare landscape features and of upholding the quality of all future architecture and improvements; and of restricting the use, height and bulk of buildings;…” (Covenant Preamble).

It is the opinion of the Art Jury that a “ …reasonably high standard of artistic result and attractiveness in exterior and physical appearance…” required by Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant, and “fine architecture” would be derived from the lack of obtrusive structures and features, which increase visual prominence, including the “As-Built” Driveway Entry Gate. The Gate is approximately 16’ feet wide (+/-) and 6’ high. The construction is of wood with a dark stain applied. The Gate design is of vertical planks surrounded with wood framing without any openings in the design. The “As-Built” gate, because of the unapproved solid design, is very prominent and has a utilitarian appearance. The approved gate design has a combination open and solid design, which is less prominent, and more compatible with the surrounding landscape features and community character.

The Art Jury noted that the Protective Covenant objective of “maintaining this character of community and rare landscape features” was in part achieved by maintaining predominantly a rural streetscape comprising primarily of landscaping as opposed to architectural features.  The Art Jury also noted that the location, within sixty feet (+/-) of the road and on a prominent hillside, coupled with the mass of the gate, add to the level of prominence and do not preserve the rural “character of community.” For the above reasons the Art Jury could not make the finding required by Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant that the “As-Built” structure would maintain a  “… reasonably high standard of artistic result and attractiveness in exterior and physical appearance….”

The Art Jury suggests that alternative possibilities may be available to address the applicant’s request. Modifications to the gate, creating an open design on the upper third of the gate, may be acceptable pending a review by the Art Jury.

Sticklen Property I.D. 9.2.4

Preliminary Application: Residence/Garage (7,499 sq. ft.), Basement (4,290 sq. ft.), Cabana (745 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Fence, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape, Colors & Materials, Pool

The Art Jury DEFERRED the landscape plan with the following comments:

1. The Art Jury considered that the building massing was acceptable and consistent with the plans previously submitted.
2. After reviewing the preliminary plans the Art Jury considered that the architecture and exterior building detailing was not consistent with Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant which requires that buildings “insure a uniform and reasonably high standard of artistic result and attractiveness, in exterior and physical appearance of said property and improvements”.
3. Incorporate groupings of tall growing trees at the west and southwest side of the residence. The proposed trees for this area do not provide sufficient screening of the residence.
4. Increase the planted size of the proposed trees to provide earlier screening of the residence.
5. Incorporate large screening trees between the garage and the cabana for screening of the residence from off-site views.
6. Plant legends shall include quantities.
7. Incorporate large screening trees at the Southeast corner of the residence.

Tuck Property I.D. J.2.10

Driveway Re-Alignment, Entry Gate/Pilasters

The Art Jury APPROVED the project subject to the following conditions:

1. Obtain the necessary easements from the Rancho Santa Fe Association prior to issuance of permits for these elements.
2. A sample installation of the proposed stone will be required prior to approval of that material.   
3. Landscaping is required to screen the project from off-site. If for any reason the final, approved landscape installation does not meet this objective, the Association may require additional plantings, pursuant to Regulatory Code Section 42.0302. Any existing vegetation not shown and approved on the plans as “to be removed” shall be considered “Critical View” landscaping as defined in that regulation. Any trees or landscaping damaged or destroyed during construction or transplanting shall be replaced in-kind with new materials prior to Final Inspection of the landscaping.

CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:

Ayres-Foster Property I.D. F.1

Commercial Sign:  McNally Co. Antiques

The Art Jury is recommending APPROVAL of the commercial sign to the Board of Directors.  The Art Jury recommendation will be forwarded to the June 16, 2005 Board meeting.

Ayres-Foster Property I.D. F.1           

Awnings: Barry Estates

The Art Jury DEFERRED the project with the following comments.

Please revise your application to include the following changes:

1. Remove the black metal plaque from the building façade (the business name is redundant to the hanging and window signs).

2. Revise the awnings as follows:

a. Make the awnings consistent with those on McNally Antiques adjacent to this tenancy in terms of style and placement on the façade.  It is noted that the current proposal for the awnings would block views of the hanging sign.

Ayres-Foster Property I.D. F.1

Commercial Sign (Final): Guiltinan Group

The Art Jury is recommending APPROVAL of the commercial sign to the Board of Directors subject to the following condition:

Please eliminate the “G” from the top of the sign.

The Art Jury recommendation will be forwarded to the June 16 Board meeting.

Bills Property I.D. 36.10.1                       

Accessory Building (Workshop) (1,907 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Landscape

The Art Jury APPROVED the Final Application subject to the following conditions:

1. Landscaping is required to screen the project from off-site. If for any reason the final, approved landscape installation does not meet this objective, the Association may require additional plantings, pursuant to Regulatory Code Section 42.0302. Any existing vegetation not shown and approved on the plans as “to be removed” shall be considered “Critical View” landscaping as defined in that regulation. Any trees or landscaping damaged or destroyed during construction or transplanting shall be replaced in-kind with new materials prior to Final Inspection of the landscaping.
2. Grading shall be as shown on sheet A7.0, section “B.”  Submit a revised grading plan at a larger scale which is consistent with the above architectural section for staff review and approval prior to issuance of permits.
3. The Art Jury noted the existing grouping of Eucalyptus near the proposed structure provides screening of the building. Two are proposed for removal with three remaining. If further tree removal is required or if the trees proposed to remain do not survive, a revised landscape plan shall be required to replace these trees in kind.
4. Submit details of the roof material for Art Jury review and approval prior to installation.

Buss Property I.D. 7.5.1

New Garage Doors, Repaint           

The Art Jury APPROVED the Final Application as submitted. The approved colors are on file at the Association.  The approved garage door is the Clopay Design #3, Hemlock Smooth.

Harrah Property I.D. 2089.57                       

Preliminary Application:  Additions (565 sq. ft.) , Entry Gate/Pilasters, Garden Gate, Fencing, Pool, Spa, Pool Equipment Enclosure, Retaining Walls, Outdoor Fireplace, Shade Structure, Landscape

The Art Jury DEFERRED the Final Application with the following comments:

1. The landscape plan makes reference to a “Future Guest House.” Please be aware that the application makes no further reference to a guest house and the Art jury did not review the concept of a guest house. The lack of comment on a guest house concept can not be interpreted as a tacit approval of the concept. If you wish to have the Art Jury review the concept of the guest house, please submit an application for one. 
2. The Art Jury noted that a prior Art Jury decision on the existing entry columns and wing-walls does not allow an entry gate at the location (see Art Jury letter dated November 1, 2001).

   a. The Art Jury may consider a request for the entry gate if suitable modifications are made to the entry driveway to reduce the amount of paving that currently exists. A substantial reduction in width at the street (36 feet wide at the edge of pavement) with a vehicle turnaround will be required.

   b. Additional landscaping at the edge of the driveway shall be required. 

   c. Provide a dimensioned and detailed gate drawing. The maximum gate height shall not exceed five (5) feet at the tallest point.

3. Provide a landscape plan that details the additional proposed landscape material for the area near the driveway and gate.
4. Please submit a detailed landscape plan for further review. The submitted plan is conceptual and difficult to review. Further refinement of the plan is requested for a complete review.
5. Pool containment fencing shall be separated a minimum of five (5) feet from the rear and side property line. Submit a detail of the fencing type. Landscaping shall screen the fence from off-site views.
6. Please do not extend the proposed stone garden wall to the rear of the property line.  This wall shall stop 15’ from the rear property.  Use standard approved fencing, such as peeler pole, returning to the rear property line.
7. Detailed construction drawings shall be submitted with the next submittal.                      

Johnson Property I.D. 33.2.5

New Driveway, Entry Pilasters, Carport Trellis, Landscape           

The Art Jury DEFERRED the project with the following comments:

1. Plans shall be professionally prepared. The submitted plan is insufficient for review based on the following:

   a. Submit a detailed and dimensioned elevation of the proposed entry columns.

   b. The area of the carport trellis indicated on the site plan does not correspond with the elevation and detail.

   c. Information not related to this application shall be removed from the plan or indicated as such.

2. The Art Jury is not in favor of a large trellis as indicated on the site plan.  A much smaller trellis structure to accent the front entry for pedestrian use may be acceptable pending further review.
3. The Art Jury is not in favor of matching pilasters at each driveway.  One small pilaster may be acceptable at each driveway, located further from the street than presently indicated.

Neff Property I.D. 34.9.1

Revisions to Approved Plans: Final: Residence/ Garage, Guest House, Grading

The Art Jury APPROVED the revisions as submitted.

Rowland Property I.D. 48.9.5

Landscape, Trellis, BBQ, Fountain, Spa

The Art Jury APPROVED the project subject to the following condition:

Landscaping is required to screen the project from off-site. If for any reason the final, approved landscape installation does not meet this objective, the Association may require additional plantings, pursuant to Regulatory Code Section 42.0302. Any existing vegetation not shown and approved on the plans as “to be removed” shall be considered “Critical View” landscaping as defined in that regulation. Any trees or landscaping damaged or destroyed during construction or transplanting shall be replaced in-kind with new materials prior to Final Inspection of the landscaping.

6 Los Morros Property I.D. 34.9.1

Final Application: Residence/Garage (10,030 sq. ft.), Basement (5,800 sq. ft.), Wine Building (720 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Fence, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape, Colors & Materials, Pool, Propane Tank

The Art Jury APPROVED the project with the following conditions:

1. Prior to issuance of any permits, correct the remaining items on the working drawings to be consistent. Submit plans for staff review and approval.
2. Landscaping is required to screen the project from off-site. If for any reason the final, approved landscape installation does not meet this objective, the Association may require additional plantings, pursuant to Regulatory Code Section 42.0302. Any existing vegetation not shown and approved on the plans as “to be removed” shall be considered “Critical View” landscaping as defined in that regulation. Any trees or landscaping damaged or destroyed during construction or transplanting shall be replaced in-kind with new materials prior to Final Inspection of the landscaping.
3. Provide large samples of all materials on site for Art Jury review and approval prior to installation.

Siry Property I.D. 36.11.8

Final Application: Re-submittal of Expired Final Application: Additions (2,067 sq. ft.), Barn (2,126 sq. ft.), Cabana (1,448 sq. ft.), Landscape, Colors & Materials, Request to Keep 3 Horses on 3.01 Acres

The Art Jury APPROVED the Final Application subject to the following conditions:

Please submit revised landscaping plans showing the following for staff review and approval prior to form inspection:

1. Add Phoenix Canariensis palms with a minimum of 10’ – 15’ bare trunk height for additional screening of the residence;
2. Confirm that one Eucalyptus and the grouping of Cypress at the pool are the only trees proposed for removal.
3. Increase the amount of trees located on the slope below the residence for screening. See staff for further direction.

Wolf Property I.D. 33.8.1

Preliminary Application: Addition (191 sq. ft.), Window and Door Replacements, Repaint

The Art Jury APPROVED the Final Application subject to the following conditions:

1. The colors and materials shall match the existing structures.
2. Landscaping is required to screen the project from off-site. If for any reason the final, approved landscape installation does not meet this objective, the Association may require additional plantings, pursuant to Regulatory Code Section 42.0302. Any existing vegetation not shown and approved on the plans as “to be removed” shall be considered “Critical View” landscaping as defined in that regulation. Any trees or landscaping damaged or destroyed during construction or transplanting shall be replaced in-kind with new materials prior to Final Inspection of the landscaping.