Art Jury Committee Meeting Minutes
RSF Association Office - 8:00 a.m.
July 24, 2007

Return to Art Jury

Previous Art Jury Minutes

PDF Format - 10 pages

Present: President Jack Queen, Vice President Diane Larsen, Secretary Gail Frazar, Members Mark McClure and Paul Slater

Also Present: Building Commissioner Robert Green, Covenant Administrator Ivan Holler, Senior Planner Kirk Dakan, Associate Planner Arnold Keene, Consulting Architect Jim Kelley-Markham and Administrative Assistant Jasie Gan

The Minutes of the July 10, 2007 meeting were approved as written.

Staff Reports:

Robert Green updated the Art Jury on the “Lilian” discussion at the last Board meeting and the review of the story poles. The Art Jury then discussed the new ideas they had after seeing the story poles.

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

CONFERENCE ITEMS:

Regulatory Code Chapter 62
Update Common Interest Developments Regulation

Manager Pete Smith, Covenant Administrator Ivan Holler, Associate Planner Liz Avalon and Assistant Planner Nikki Flynn attended.

Pete Smith presented the new Regulatory Code Chapter 62: Common Interest Developments Regulation.

The Art Jury recommended approval be forwarded to the Board.

Clotfelter Property I.D. 33.6.21
(Middleton) Workshop Application: Residence/Garage (10,550 sq. ft.), Basement/Tuck-under(1,875 sq. ft.), Detached Guest House (1,200 sq. ft.), Detached Garage/Caretaker (1,600 sq. ft.), Retaining Walls, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Pool/Spa

Cutter Clotfelter, Fred and Alex Middleton attended the meeting.

The Art Jury made the following comments:

Overall Comment

Substantially reduce the mass and bulk of the project. The proposed size of the project should be reduced by half. The property has a small buildable area due to its narrow width and steep slopes. The project must be scaled according to the size of the buildable area rather than the total area of the parcel. The current design has the main residence and detached garage stretching across most of the width of the lot would visually overpower the site and create a very prominent development.

The scale of the required reduction is substantial and therefore, small incremental reductions will not be productive and will greatly lengthen the review process.  

Site Plan

  1. Eliminate the motor court turnaround. Circular turnarounds require too much space for narrow properties such as this with a limited buildable area.
  2. Eliminate the detached garage / caretaker cottage from the front yard area.
  3. Reduce the extent of the four-foot retaining walls at the rear of the house. The long, uniformly high wall creates a very man-made appearance for that area and is an indication that the proposed development is too large for the more-level, buildable area of the property. 
  4. Reduce the amount of fill associated with the pool and surrounding hardscape.
  5. Please submit a site plan showing the current parcel boundaries as recorded by the County as well as the Association.

Architecture

  1. Eliminate the second floor.
  2. If the applicant wishes to have a caretaker structure, the location must be in an inconspicuous location.
  3. Make the floor plan and overall exterior form of the structure respond to the topography of the site. There is eight feet of topographic fall beneath the footprint of the home but there is only two feet of stepping within the floor plan. Note: With the substantial reduction of square footage, no stepping may be necessary.
  4. Please review the content of page 34 of the Rancho Santa Fe Residential Design Guidelines.

Karam  Property I.D. 10.7.13
Workshop Application: Residence (3,960 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (308 sq. ft.), Basement/Tuck-under (690 sq. ft.), Tuck-under Garage (776 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls

Mr. Karam, Agent Johnny Jabbour and Designer Dena Gillespie attended the meeting.

The Art Jury made the following comments:

  1. The Art Jury reviewed the story poles from on-site and off-site vantage points.
    1. As a result of the Art Jury’s review of the story poles the following comments are made:
      1. Substantially reduce the height of the ridgelines by a minimum of five feet. This height reduction will have the following beneficial effects on the project:
        1. It will reduce the visual prominence of the project.
        2. Allow the backfill against the first floor to have a more gentle and natural appearing slope. As revealed by the story poles, the currently proposed, backfill slope would be very steep and manufactured in appearance.
  1. With the next application submit a grading plan prepared by a licensed California civil engineer. 
  2. Increase the visual mass of the ground floor portion of the building below the rear, arched picture window to give the first floor a more solid appearance and further eliminate the current “top-heavy” look of the second floor.
  3. Further refine the west elevation. The protruding second floor mass which is cantilevered on two sides is contrary to the rest of the design which replicates the heavy, solid appearance of an adobe building. Create a first floor support for the second floor that has sufficient visual bulk to make a convincing base for the floor above.      
  4. Eliminate the arches on the front of the building; use straight columns instead. The arched columns have a very skinny appearance which is inconsistent with the rest of the design.  
  5. Submit another Workshop Application.

Kunkle Property I.D. 30.1.3
Workshop Application: Two Story Duplex (5,148 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (250 sq. ft.), Garage (2,000 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls

Mr. Kunkle and Designer Dena Gillespie attended the meeting.

The Art Jury made the following comments:

  1. Based on the information provided, the garage design option labeled as “First Choice” is the Art Jury’s preferred option as well. Continue to further refine the interior layout of the garage to create a functional vehicle ingress/egress pattern.  
  2. The relative heights of the garage floor and the floors above will be critical to the evaluation of what constitutes a “floor” when determining that the building is not three stories high (which is prohibited by the Protective Covenant). The Art Jury therefore requests the following:
    1. A grading plan and cross section prepared by a licensed California civil engineer showing existing and proposed grades and floor elevations. 
  3. The proposed massing of the second floor surrounded by first floor roofs seems acceptable in concept but the desirability of the design cannot be considered until the architectural elevations are reviewed. 
  4. Please submit another Workshop Application with:
    1. The details of the garage refined.
    2. Conceptual architectural elevations.
  5. When completing the site plan, please allow adequate room for a screened two-family trash enclosure.

CONSTRUCTION SITE SIGNS: Board Meeting of August 2, 2007

Mills Property I.D. 10.6.6
Temporary Construction Sign
Matzinger Construction, Inc.

The Art Jury is recommending APPROVAL of the Temporary Construction Site Sign to the Board of Directors at the August 2, 2007 meeting.

The Art Jury commented that their preference was for a sign with a muted background color; however the overall design quality of the sign and frame was taken into account in reaching their decision. The applicant is requested to phase in a sign design with a muted background color over the next 18 months as the supply of existing signs is used up.

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:

Amazing Ace Property I.D. 2089.135
Holdings Final Application: Commercial Sign
(Summers) Pacific Western Bank                                                           

The Art Jury is recommending APPROVAL of the Commercial Signs to the Board of Directors subject to the following conditions:

  1. Submit to Association staff 10 color copies of the following materials:
    1. The sunburst logos to be mounted on the face of the building shall be constructed of cutout metal.
    2. Indicate that the lettering and logos shall be painted “Pantone 626 green”.

Following the submission of the above requested material, the Art Jury recommendation will be forwarded to the Board at the September 6, 2007 meeting. Please submit the requested information within 14 days of the date of this letter. 

The currently installed, unapproved signs are in violation of the Rancho Santa Fe Protective Covenant. If you the necessary permit is not obtained, the unapproved signs must be removed.

CLB Partners Ltd. Property I.D. 33.2.10
(Cureton) Final Application: Re-Roof

Per the request of the applicant, the project was withdrawn from the July 24, 2007 Art Jury meeting.

DeGrazier Property I.D. 2089.66
Workshop Application: Residence/Garage (8,152 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (1,705 sq. ft.), Guesthouse (562 sq. ft.), Pool/Spa

The Art Jury made the following comments:

  1. Overall Comment: The proposed project is too large for the size and width of the property.
    1. Reduce the size of the project by a significant amount. The currently proposed mass and bulk would create a project that is too visually prominent.
    2. Please substantially reduce the width of the home. The structure has a wide profile when the covered porches are considered.
    3. Please break up the large mass of building in the center of the main residence. That portion of the main residence which houses the game room, master bedroom and master bath has very deep (width and depth) proportions creating a large block of structure. The large block of space results in a complex roof configuration. One portion of the roof does not appear to have an outlet for the rain water.
      1. Reconfigure some of the floor area in the central “block” to be in a narrow wing of the home thus allowing more natural light in, creating a less bulky profile and allowing a simplified roof pattern.
    4. Please move the house substantially farther back from the golf course.
  2. Other comments: The Art Jury is withholding detailed comments on the specifics of the design until the above comments are satisfied; however, the following issues have been identified:
    1. The tall, vertical windows within the front tower are inconsistent with the rest of the design. Use a different treatment for the tower. Ensure that all elements of the design reinforce the proposed architectural type.
    2. Please introduce a curve into the driveway. The new home will be larger and closer to the street than the existing one and thus there should be a deflection in the driveway alignment to reduce the visibility of the new home.
  3. Technical Comments:
    1. With the next application please include a site survey which includes the outlines of the homes to the east and west of the subject property.
    2. With future applications please include the roof outlines of the covered patios on the site plan.
    3. Ensure that all buildings are a minimum of 15 feet from each other as required by the Protective Covenant.
  4. Please submit another Workshop Application.

First Church of Property I.D. 30.2.4
Christ, Scientist Final Application: Replace/Add Windows & Door           

The Art Jury APPROVED the Final Application as submitted.

GJS Trust Property I.D. 5.1.3
(Shekhter) Final Application: Residence/Garage (12,519 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (9,967 sq. ft.), Guesthouse (1,828 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Fencing & Walls, Lighting, Landscape, Pool/Spa, Colors and Materials

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

  1. After construction has commenced, but prior to the installation of the following elements, please create mock ups of the following for Art Jury review and approval in the field.
    1. Sample roof installation
    2. Sample stone installation
    3. Sample roof beam/trellis texture and color treatment.

When creating the above sample installations, ensure that the textures of the materials are rustic in contrast with the smooth forms of the overall building. As a design suggestion, the applicant may wish to consider using reclaimed wood for the exposed trellis beams.

  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.

Greg Agee Property I.D. 36.22.1
Construction Workshop Application: Residence/Garage (8,695 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (358 sq. ft.), Guesthouse (1,131 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Fencing & Walls, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape, Pool/Spa

The Art Jury made the following comments:

  1. The Art Jury considers that the building design is not aesthetically pleasing. Please provide the best version of the selected design style possible. A more traditional Spanish colonial design should be used for this building.
  2. Members commented that the bulk of the building should be reduced.
  3. Members expressed concern about the height of the proposed residence. Please reduce the height.
  4. Please reduce the height of the guest house.
  5. Please step the building with the terrain.

Humber Property I.D. 2129.93
Preliminary Application: Landscape, Streetscape (See prior letter for previously approved items)           

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

  1. Prior to issuance of permits, please submit an alternative location for the propane tank for staff review and approval. Propane tanks shall be located outside of set-backs.
  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.

Karam Property I.D. 17.5.4
Workshop Application: Addition (285.5 sq. ft.), Re-roof, Replace Windows

The Art Jury made the following comments:

  1. Include manufacturer’s cut sheets of the new garage door that will be consistent with the new exterior.
  2. Please indicate what the new driveway material will be.
  3. Submit a Preliminary Application according to the RSF Association’s “New Submittal” schedule.

cont. on Page 2

 
  
Home | Members | History | Location | Association | Covenant | Art Jury | Clubs | Services | Numbers | Contact Us | Site Map | Links
© Rancho Santa Fe Association
PO Box A, Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Email: info@rsfassociation.org