Art Jury Committee Meeting Minutes
July 12, 2005

Return to Art Jury

Previous Art Jury Minutes        

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

Also Present: Building Commissioner Robert Green, Senior Planner Kirk Dakan, Consulting Architect Jim Kelley-Markham and Administrative Assistant Nadine Garcia and Director Ken King, who mediated the Bunn appeal.

Absent: President Markstein.                                   

The Minutes of the June 21st meeting were approved as written.

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

CONFERENCE ITEMS:

Zagara California Investments LLC Property I.D. 2129.149.6

Workshop Application:  Residence/Garage (6,500 sq. ft.), Basement (800 sq. ft.), Guest House (1,000 sq. ft.)

1. The Art Jury expressed concern that the guest house and associated grading would destroy a natural feature and the building would be prominent. Please relocate the guest house off the ridgeline. Some alternatives designs for the guest/ garage structures were offered as follows:

• Substitute the 4 car garage with the guesthouse and one garage. Place three garages at the rear of the residence possibly cut into the slope.
• Place the guest house at the extreme east end of the residence above the “lower terrace” walk out area.
• Create a separate garage court with two banks of two car garages facing each other off the rear courtyard.

            (Other design solutions may be available.)

2. The Art Jury requested that the amount of grading required for the garages be reduced and noted that they were not in favor of the encroachment of the garage building so far into the slope

3. The Art Jury requested that the height of the downhill edge of the pool be reduced by stepping the rear patio/ landscaped area.

4. The design direction for the exterior of the building (shown in photos) was acceptable to the Art Jury subject to further review of more detailed plans.

5. Existing mature trees should be retained. Please show the trees to be retained on the plan.

6. Provide a RSF Fire Department stamped plan with the next submittal.

7. Concern was expressed about the length of the wing walls at the gate.

The discussion was continued to the next Art Jury meeting dated July 26, 2005.

Because of the proposal’s location over an existing lot line, any Art Jury decision will be subject to the finalization of the Boundary Adjustment application and Association permits cannot be issued until this is completed.

Bunn Property I.D. (44.5.1)

Appeal: Art Jury Deferral of May, 10, 2005

Mr. Daniel Bunn attended the Meeting. Board Member Ken King conducted the mediation.

As discussed at the meeting, the Art Jury determined to continue the mediation to allow the applicant time to submit revised plans that reflect the following:

1. Please replace the currently proposed retaining wall with two separate retaining walls (an upper retaining wall and a lower retaining wall) that step down the hill. The retaining walls must have the following characteristics:

a. The upper retaining wall shall be in the same location as the currently proposed retaining wall.

b. The upper retaining wall shall not exceed 30” (thirty inches) in height, thus eliminating the requirement for any guardrails (when used in conjunction with #1.c below)  and hence helping reduce the visual prominence of the walls and associated elements.

c. Have the terrace (the level area between the upper and lower retaining walls) a minimum of three feet wide, this will also eliminate the need for the guardrail.

d. The lower retaining wall must meander along the slope so that it is not perfectly parallel to the upper wall. This will help blend the wall into the slope by presenting a less formal appearance.

e. The retaining walls should be composed of large rock to further make them blend into the hillside.

f. Incorporate natural style landscaping into the slope.

2. Remove the colonnade from the east side of the house.

3. Eliminate the previously proposed guest house.

4. Revise the garage so that any Fire Department requirement will not necessitate changes to the existing topography below the garage.

The Art Jury is generally in favor of design solutions that limit alterations to contours and minimize the use of fill slopes and retaining walls as much as possible. The Art Jury is allowing the use of the two retaining walls on the rear slope in this particular instance because of the following special circumstances:

1. The rear slope is a manufactured slope with an unnatural appearance.
2. The extremely close proximity of the back of the home to the top of slope is an uncommon, existing condition. 
3. The rear slope is already quite steep which limits alterations to the area without necessitating special design considerations.
4. The neighboring home which is closest to the slope is not within the Rancho Santa Fe Protective Covenant.
5. There is an existing landscape screen between the slope and the non-covenant home below. The slope landscaping will be further enhanced as a requirement of the wall approval.
6. The visual impact to the site was reduced by the withdrawal of the guesthouse from the application.

Harrington Property I.D. 14.6.1

Workshop Application: Residence/Garage (12,885 sq. ft.),

Guest House (1,086 sq. ft.)

Mr. Harrington and Architect Mark Radford attended the meeting.

The Art Jury made the following comments:

1. Please significantly reduce the overall size of the development. The amount of development on the lot would create a visually prominent project with inadequate room for screen landscaping.

a. Placing some of the proposed uses below ground would achieve a portion of the required reduction.

i. Uses that can be accommodated below grade without a loss of function include: some or all garages, media rooms, laundry rooms, utility areas, and storage.

b. Even with the undergrounding of many of the uses, additional reductions in the size of the house could be necessary.

2. Create a design that has more visual interest and an appearance that is unique to this project. Please create a design with a stronger, definable character. 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 interest which includes massing as well as architectural detailing.

3. A design which incorporates a partial second story will be considered if the overall design has significant architectural quality and character.

4. Please make the house and the overall design respond to the inherent characteristics of the site, this includes responding to the topography and to the existing mature trees.

5. Please eliminate the mounding along the street. The terrain along this portion of La Valle Plateada is relatively level, a mound of soil along the street would look artificial.

6. Please eliminate one of the curb cuts.

7. Please move the driveway gate/pilasters/wing walls a minimum of 50 feet back from the edge of the pavement on La Valle Plateada.

8. Prior to your next application, please have an accurate site plan / topographic plan prepared and stamped by a licensed civil engineer or surveyor. While visiting the site, the Art Jury observed discrepancies between the submitted conceptual site plan and the existing improvements on the property.

9. Substantial changes are necessary to the project design, please be aware that if the required changes are made in small increments the review process will be prolonged and time consuming.

10. Please submit for another workshop.

Rancho Osuna Rancho Osuna, LLC

Proposed 5-Lot Subdivision

Block 38, Lot 2, parcel 1

Chris Collins, Laurie Simon and Harry Collins attended the meeting.

Nancy Ullman abstained. President Markstein participated telephonically.

This letter is to provide you with the Art Jury’s comments on the proposed 5-lot subdivision (RSFA/TM-05-04 revised #1) reviewed at the Art Jury meeting of July 12, 2005.  At this meeting, the Art Jury reviewed your proposals regarding trails alignments and public access to the Osuna adobe, as well as the recommendations of the Trails Committee and Historic Preservation Committee on the subjects. Additionally, the Art Jury considered the changes that you requested to the recommended special conditions within the staff report. The Art Jury recognizes and appreciates your client’s understanding of both the importance of the historic Osuna adobe and the memberships’ interest in preserving this important community feature.     

As discussed with you at the meeting, the Art Jury is not forwarding a recommendation to the Board of Directors, but is deferring a recommendation pending review of suggested revisions and additional information. In order to make an informed recommendation on your application, the Art Jury requests that the applicant’s provide additional information on the County’s likely requirements for the historic Osuna adobe. The Art Jury is concerned that prior Association actions or conditions associated with a subdivision on this historic site not be in conflict with subsequent County’s requirements.  As in all subdivisions, the Art Jury is concerned with community and neighborhood character including preserving and maintaining both the built and natural environment.  Therefore, the Art Jury needs to obtain information on the County’s processes relative to preservation of historic sites and structures and the role of CEQA in such determinations.  The goal is to understand and anticipate to the extent possible, how County actions may relate to proposed trail alignments, lot configurations and the existing landscape and architecture.    

The following comments made by the Art Jury will hopefully be of help to you in revising the proposed subdivision and provide an understanding of some of the limiting conditions that will likely be attached to any recommendations to the Board in the future.  

1. The Art Jury agrees that proposed Parcel # 1 should be excluded from special conditions regarding the construction of the proposed shared private drive prior to the separate sale of proposed Parcels 2, 3, 4, & 5.
2. The Association Trails Committee is requesting, and the Art Jury is supportive of, the requirement of a 10’ wide trail easement along the property line between proposed Parcels 3 and 5. Additionally, please consider an alignment that would widen the trails easement to fully encompass the Osuna adobe and associated landscaping which would preserve the character of the site and would provide Covenant members the opportunity to appreciate the historic site from the confines of the trail easement.  This objective is in-line with the Articles of Incorporation, the Preamble and paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant, Chapter 1, Section 1.10 of the Regulatory Code and the community’s designation as both a State Historic Landmark and Cultural Landscape.
3. To the extent possible, please provide a written statement regarding what the County of San Diego will require in terms of process and conditions regarding preservation of the Osuna adobe and its site when the proposed subdivision goes through the County’s process.
4. Additionally, the applicants are encouraged to explore additional or alternative ways to address concerns raised by the membership regarding preserving the integrity of the historic adobe including its historic landscape, and how controlled access might be provided.  Please feel free to share any ideas and/or proposals. 

At this time, the Art Jury will not make a recommendation of approval or conditional approval for the proposed subdivision, RSFA/TM-05-04, revised #1. 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. 

You now have the option of either submitting revised plans to the Art Jury for review, or moving forward to an Association Board hearing. Please note that if you choose to go forward to the Board without an Art Jury recommendation of approval, a five-member supermajority vote of the Board is required for the map to be approved.

If all of the requested information is submitted to staff on or before Monday, July 18, 2005, the Art Jury will place this item on their July 26, 2005 agenda. If the requested information is submitted subsequent to that date, please refer to the enclosed Art Jury submittal schedule.  In determining the appropriate date for an Art Jury meeting please note the “Resubmittal Deadline”.

CONSTRUCTION SITE SIGNS: Board Meeting of, 2005

None.

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:

S&G Const. Vista de Fortuna, Lot 4- Property I.D. 10.4.12

Preliminary Application:  Residence (9,372 sq. ft.), Tuck-Under Garage (1,523 sq. ft.), Detached Garage (1,006 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Fence, Pool, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape, Lighting, Colors and Materials

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

1. Please submit:

   a. A much larger rock sample. The small size of the submitted sample makes it impossible to determine the character and overall color tone of the rock.

   b. The sill material for the windows which appears in the architectural elevations

   c. The window surround material.

2. Please further explain the eave details, your note indicates that the eave shall be sandblasted wood but the elevations make it appear that portions of the eave have a stucco detail.
3. Please have the muntin bars on the great room pocket doors consistent with the style of the other windows and doors on the house.  
4. Please submit a revised landscape plan with the following changes:

   a. Provide Alder trees at the southwest side of the residence for additional screening of the residence.

   b. Substitute Alders for the proposed Tanbark Oak trees. The Alders are consistent with the theme and may be more reliable as a large screening tree.

   c. Provide information regarding proposed paving materials.

   d. Clarify that the existing grove will be completely removed and replaced with a new citrus grove.

   e. Increase the planted size of the Quercus ilex to a minimum of 36” box to provide faster screening of the residence.

   f. Provide a detail of the proposed fence.

CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:

Allen Property I.D. 48.7.1

Preliminary Application: Residence/Garage (5,184 sq. ft.),

Guest House (990 sq. ft.), Wine Room (641 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Landscape, Colors & Materials

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

1. The Art Jury is in favor of having the main residence moved back further from the street as proposed.
2. Please reduce the height of the retaining wall which is downslope from the guest house, this will probably require changes to the placement and/or floor plan of the guest house.
3. Please eliminate the large exposed retaining wall which supports the eastern portion of the guest house. The change in elevation appears to be artificially created because the back of the guesthouse is parallel to the topographic lines and therefore the foundation should be at the same topographic elevation. If there is a specific technical reason why the retaining wall is required please submit an explanation with the next application. 
4. Please retain the previous design for the wine room. The latest proposal is quite massive and would be prominent in the landscape. 

   a. When redesigning the wine room and preparing the drawings please ensure that the architectural elevations are consistent with the actual slope and grading configuration on the site. When visiting the site, the Art Jury observed discrepancies between the architectural elevations and the relationship of the ground to the story poles.

   b. The resubmitted wine-room design should keep the structure recessed into the slope as much as possible. The current design has far too much of the structure exposed above the grade.

   c. Submit an accurate cross-section through the wine room structure showing adjacent grades (existing and proposed). 

5. Select materials that are consistent with the proposed architectural style of the house.

   a. Please use the previously proposed horizontal siding in lieu of the shingles. The horizontal siding is more in keeping with the proposed ranch home style.

   b. The brick is consistent with the style of the house for minor masonry elements such as chimneys, however the brick must be real brick and not imitation used brick or similar manufactured products.

   c. The long retaining walls on the slope below the house should be faced with stone rather than brick. Stone is preferred because it would blend with the landscape better.

   i. The stone must be real stone, not imitation. The Art Jury will withhold judgment on the stone until a revised color and materials board is submitted.

6. Please eliminate the octagonal room on the rear of the house. The room’s shape is inconsistent with the chosen ranch home style.
7. The architectural detailing will be very important to the finished project. The Art Jury will require a high standard of review for the details of all aspects of the design.

   a. Ensure that the materials are of high quality.

   b. The patio railing detail on the guest house is unacceptable, please revise the railing design to be like the railing on the rest of the project. Please have the newel posts terminate at the deck surface rather than overlapping on the outer sides of the deck perimeter.

   c. Eliminate the cantilever from the guesthouse deck. The necessity for a raised deck on the back of the guest house may be eliminated as a result of comment #3.

8. Please submit a revised landscape plan with the following changes:

   a. Reduce the front lawn to allow a larger planter area along the street. The majority of the planter is in the County Right-of Way. Please expand the planter area for greater screening of the residence.

   b. Provide screening trees and shrubs for the Southside of the wine room.

   c. Provide larger foundation planting South of the motor-court.

Bacarti Property I.D. 2089.28.7

Window Replacement

The Art Jury DEFERRED the project with the following comments:

Provide window details and specifications for staff review & approval prior to issuance of permits.

Barrera Property I.D. 21.2.1

Landscape           

The Art Jury APPROVED the landscape plan 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.

   Bradley Family Trust Property I.D. 10.7.11

 Fence                       

The Art Jury DEFERRED the Fence plan for staff review and approval with the following comments:

1. Submit a plan that indicates all property lines.
2. Fencing proposed on property lines requires written approval from the adjoining property owner.
3. Include a detail of the fence construction on the plan.
4. Additional landscaping may be required for fencing that is exposed to off-site views.
5. Separate the fence along the road a minimum of 20’ from the property line. 
6. 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.

Conner Property I.D. 31.1.6

“As-Built” Trash Enclosure and Paving

The Art Jury denied the “As-Built” Trash Enclosure and Paving with the following comments:

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” Trash Enclosure and Paving. The Trash Enclosure is a “grape stake” wood fence and gate surrounding a roll-away trash receptacle. The fenced enclosure is approximately 8’ feet long, 6’ feet wide and 5’ high. Additionally, a concrete path 10’ feet wide and 25’ feet long has been installed for access to the trash receptacle. The “As-Built” Trash Enclosure and Paving is within 15’ feet of a private road used by another resident and is very prominent. Currently, there is no landscaping to screen the structure and because of the paving it will not be possible to screen the structure adequately. 

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 trash enclosure location, within 15’ feet (+/-) of the road and near an adjoining residence, coupled with the lack of landscaping, results in a structure which is prominent, unsightly and does 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 alternative possibilities may be available to address the applicant’s request. Other locations on the property that are further from the road and screened with landscaping are available, pending review by the Art Jury. 

Culver-Tucker Property I.D. 2089.131

The Art Jury DEFERRED the wheelchair ramp with the following comments:

1. The Art Jury noted that the proposed ramp design has a utilitarian appearance which does not blend with the existing architecture of the building or the landscaped area. The access ramp has features, such as the free standing handrails, which are prominent and detract from the character of the building.
2. The Art Jury suggests that alternative designs be explored which will create a suitable access that is compatible with the architecture and site.
3. As a design idea, please consider a design that eliminates the need for handrails by reducing the grade difference at the sides of the ramp.
4. Please contact Association staff for further design assistance.

Falk Las Colinas - Property I.D. 27.8.1

Final Application: Residence/Garage, Cabana, Exercise Room, Grading, Retaining Walls, Fence, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Pool, Tennis Court, Landscape, Propane Tank                                   

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

1. Submit revised framing plans which have deeply recessed windows for all windows.

   a. Indicate the wall thickness for each of the exterior walls on the floor plan.

   b. Please include cut sheets of the proposed garage doors top match the garage doors shown in the architectural elevations. The garage door shown on Sheet T.3 does not match the architectural elevations.   

2. Please include manufacturer’s lighting cut sheets for exterior fixtures.
3. Include a plan for landscape lighting.  
4. Submit roof samples of the roof tile blend and indicate percentages.
5. A sample installation of the stone will be required during construction prior to the Art Jury approving the stone selection. The Art Jury would prefer to see stone with greater texture than the previously submitted samples.
6. Submit a legible copy of the landscape plan.

Filanc Property I.D. 7.2.1

Resubmission of Expired Preliminary Application: Residence/Garage (8,150 sq. ft.), Guest House (1,023 sq. ft.), Barn (1,728 sq. ft.), Retaining Walls, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape                       

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

1. Move the driveway away from the property lines, and provide larger landscape buffers.
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.
3. Lower the elevated lawn area adjacent to the house to the level of natural grade and lower the adjacent retaining walls.
4. Return to the previously submitted design for the south wing stairwell (windows).

The Art Jury DEFERRED the landscape plan for staff review and approval with the following comments:

1. The proposed “dog-run” area indicated on the landscape plan was not a part of the application.  Dog runs must meet the Animal Keeping Regulations as stated in the Rancho Santa Fe Regulatory Code. Please submit a new application for the dog run.
2. A Rancho Santa Fe approval does not allow the applicant to enter other properties and trim or remove trees for compliance with the Fire Department 100’ Fuel Modification Zone.
3. Submit a complete plant legend that includes quantities and container sizes.
4. Reduce the proposed lawn area and increase planter or grove areas.  The Art Jury is not in favor of large lawn areas that do not blend with the rural character of Rancho Santa Fe.

The Art Jury DEFERRED the grading with the following comments:

Please return to the previously approved plan which showed less grading around the arena.

Greenway Property I.D. 29.5.10

Repaint Garage Doors

Wheelchair Ramp: Heritage Escrow                                               

The Art Jury APPROVED the project as submitted. The approved color is: 7805A – Copper Gold.

Hummel Property I.D. 2089.39

Workshop Application: Guest House (968 sq. ft.), Entry Gate/Pilasters           

The Art Jury made the following comments:

1. Review the project with the Fire Department and incorporate any comments into your next Workshop submittal.
2. Show all trees to be removed/retained on the plan.
3. Existing landscaping at the North and West side of the proposed structure shall remain and be protected during construction.
4. Incorporate a grouping of small trees such as Pittosporum undulatum at the East side of the proposed structure.

S&G Const. Vista de Fortuna, Lot 2- Property I.D. 10.4.10

Workshop Application: Residence/Garage (6,880 sq. ft.), Basement (1,388 sq. ft.), Detached Garage (576 sq. ft.), Guest House (624 sq. ft.), Grading, Landscape           

The Art Jury made the following comments:

1. Please revise some of the architectural details:

   a. Create greater consistency between the various windows and doors. Some of the windows have a “craftsman” appearance, others are double hung.

   b. Revise the tall window in the courtyard next to the chimney to be consistent with the chosen style of the home. The current look and proportions of the window are inconsistent with the style of the home. 

   c. Please revise the garage doors to be consistent with the appearance of the style of the building.

   d. Please revise the columns for the patio roofs as well as the railing. The house has an informal appearance, while the stone columns with wrought-iron railing seem overly formal in comparison to the rest of the house.

   e. Provide details of the decorative chimney caps.

   f. Eliminate the quatrefoil on the chimney.

2. Please revise the landscape plan as follows:

   a. Retaining walls shall be faced with stone to match the stone veneer on the house.

   b. Incorporate additional screening trees at the south side of the residence for the filtering of views from off-site.

Provide an RSF Fire Department approved landscape plan with preliminary submittals.                       

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, Pool

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

1. The building massing, bulk and siting are acceptable to the Art Jury.

The exterior design is not acceptable to the Art Jury. The project design is architecturally inferior and the required findings under paragraph 46 of the Rancho Santa Fe Protective Covenant cannot be made. The building contains a jumble of styles and materials without a defining or organizing design concept. Additionally, individual details are not well executed architecturally (including but not limited to the exterior staircase, entry door, windows).

ART JURY SITE VISITS:

The Art Jury made site visits from 1:30 to 3:15 p.m. to the following locations:

Name	Address
Block
Feldman
Plummer
Raptorfund