Art Jury Committee Meeting Minutes
September 6, 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: Building Commissioner Robert Green, Senior Planner Kirk Dakan, Associate Planner Arnold Keene, Consulting Architect Jim Kelley-Markham and Administrative Assistant Nadine Garcia and Director Addario who conducted the Kendall and Nagy mediations.

The Minutes of the August 9, 2005 meeting were approved as written.

Staff Reports: Building Commissioner Green informed the Art Jury that the Art Jury selection process is starting and handed out the procedure for the Art Jurors to reference. According to that procedure, the Board of Directors will establish a selection committee to choose an individual to fill the seat on the Art Jury that will be vacated when Nancy Ullmans’ term expires on December 31, 2005.

Building Commissioner Green handed out a draft of a Revised Application Checklist for the Art Jury to review and comment back on at the next Art Jury meeting.

Intepretation: The Art Jury discussed the wording of Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant. The Art Jury found that there is a potential for abuse of the exception under Paragraph 46 of the Protective Covenant which allows “preparing land for orchard or farm use”. There have been instances where grading has occurred under the guise of “preparation” which is not intended for “orchard or farm” use but rather for development.

The Art Jury therefore unanimously approved an interpretation that Par 180 of the Protective Covenant means:

“Tilling or plowing, but not cutting, filling or stockpiling.” This interpretation is the formally adopted policy of the Art Jury.

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

CONFERENCE ITEMS:

Kendall Property I.D. 2129.114

Appeal: Denial of request to reconsider requiring staggered pattern to re-roof with Protex

Frank and Rory Kendall attended the meeting.

Board Director Marie Addario conducted the mediation.

The mediation was deemed successful.

The Art Jury approved the installation proposed by the applicant as a test case. 

Nagy Property I.D. 20.1.2

Continued Appeal

Architect Tim Wilson and Mrs. Nagy attended the meeting. Board Director Marie Addario conducted the mediation.

1. The Art Jury is not in favor of the currently proposed revisions. However, the Art Jury is willing to consider minor revisions to the previously approved project. The revisions must be compatible with the overall appearance of the project and create a cohesive design.
2. When the proposed revisions are submitted, please include them on a full elevation of the house, and submit all elevations that will be affected by the changes.  
3. Please include exposed rafter tails in the proposed elevations. The rafter tails were previously proposed to be retained. The appearance of the exposed rafter tails increases the level of detail and character in the project.
4. Do not proceed with any new construction that has not received Final approval by the Art Jury.

Village Community Presbyterian Church

Property I.D. 27.1.1 & 4

Workshop: Expanded Religious Facilities

Sanctuary, Music, Administration (20,004 sq. ft.), Classroom (8,839 sq. ft.)             

Church administrator Ray Martinez, Reverend Baca, parking engineer Herman Basmaciyan, Architect Lew Dominy, church elders Don Mac Neil and Ty Miller Sr. and associate pastor Mark Sworner attended the continued workshop.

Art Juror Diane Larsen abstained.

Overall comment:

Please revise the architecture of all of the proposed new and remodeled structures to be more reflective of the character and history of the Rancho Santa Fe Community. The community is typified by a preponderance of Spanish architecture and the new church buildings and remodeling should recognize the architectural setting.

Specific comments

1. The Art Jury has no specific comments on the new sanctuary and remodeled existing sanctuary at this time. When the above requested revisions are submitted, the Art Jury may have comments at that time.

2. Classroom Building

a.See the above paragraph listed as “overall comment”.

b. The classroom building has a very spare architectural style so the quality of the detailing will be crucial to the building’s appearance. As the design is refined please pay attention to the details including but not limited to:

i. window frame materials

ii. window trim / casing

iii. window recess within a thick wall

iv. eave details

c. The elevator tower needs additional design consideration to make it a part of the overall design rather than appearing so utilitarian.

3. Technical

a. The architectural plans are mislabeled with the north/south directions

b. The south elevation (labeled “north”) has an outline of a trellis but no trellis is shown on the site plan.

c. There are inconsistencies between the floor plans and the architectural elevations.

4. Landscaping

a. Please increase the width of the landscape strip along the south property line, the current width is inadequate.

PARKING

1. The addendum to the parking study did not examine the new classroom building.

   a. Please clarify the following in relation to parking requirements for the proposed classroom building:

   i. Student / faculty capacity

   ii. Building occupancy

   iii. Days / times of use

2. Moving the start time for the second Sunday service to avoid an overlap of parking use (as recommended by the parking study) will probably be a condition of approval when the project reaches an approvable stage.
3. During the meeting, the applicants’ representative requested a different parking ratio than the currently proposed 2:1 ratio (1 parking space/2 seats). The Art Jury is not in favor of altering the ratio but understands that there will be occasions of heavier than usual patronage when the parking ratio may be exceeded. Please list those days of the year when it is anticipated that the Church will exceed the parking standard. The final approval of the church (when it is in an approvable form) will probably have a proviso regarding parking on days that have especially heavy use (e.g. Christmas, Easter, etc.) so that the Church is not in violation of the approval on those specific days.

Raptorfund Property I.D. 32.10.2

Workshop Application:   Addition (497 sq. ft.), Pool House (853 sq. ft.),

Detached Garage (671 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Fencing & Walls, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Stucco & Stone Exterior, Reroof

1. For the body of the house, please submit plans that reflect one of the following alternatives:

   a. Illustrate how the windows and doors will be recessed into the equivalent of an eight-inch thick wall. The use of stucco requires a significant window/door recess to look architecturally appropriate.

   i. If you wish to pursue the stucco without a deep window recess you must include a detail of the proposed window treatment. If you have photographs of the proposed treatment please submit them as well. Please be aware that the Art Jury is not obligated to approve any alternative to the normally required deep recess.

   ii. The stucco must have a smooth or “Santa Barbara” finish. 

   b. Replace the existing T-111 plywood with board and batten. The board and batten would add greater character to the building and would be in keeping with the architecture of the house. A one-hour fire rating can be achieved with board and batten by installing drywall beneath the wood.

2. Please create a design for the exposed portion of the pool room that has greater character. The current proposal has a very utilitarian exterior appearance.

   a. Please propose an alternative to the metal handrail.

   b. Please indicate on a topographic plan the working pathway for the grading equipment that will be needed to excavate the proposed pool room area. The equipment route could affect the landscaping as well as the grading.

3. Please make the 6-foot wall proposed for the “walled bedroom courtyard” consistent with whatever surface you decide to use on the body of the house. 
4. Reduce the extent of the solid walls on each side of the driveway gate to no more than ten feet in each direction.
5. Please clarify the revisions to the existing garage, the plans of the existing garage do not reflect the current construction.
6. Please revise the driveway curbs to reflect the area needed for Fire Department access radii.
7. With your preliminary application submit a Fire Department approved landscape plan. Large areas of the site will need to be re-landscaped as a result of the disturbance from the new construction and grading.

   a. Show existing mature vegetation, indicate if it will be retained or removed.

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:

Bickoff Property I.D. 32.10.10

Final Application: Entry Gate/Pilasters

The Art Jury APPROVED the entry gates and pilasters with the following comments:

1. The Art Jury noted that the standard separation for gates and the edge of road pavement is (50) fifty feet.
2. The Art Jury commented that because of the low height of the gate (3’6” high) and the location below the street elevation, the gate is acceptable in this situation.

De Seroux Property I.D. 10.3.9

Workshop Application: Residence/Garage 1,860 (sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (898 sq. ft.), Basement (2,006 sq. ft.), Grading & Retaining Walls

1. The project shall comply with the front yard setback (per the revised plan received September 2, 2005).
2. The tree in the South east corner of the site shall be retained.
3. There shall be no additional grading to create level areas on the west side of the building. Grading shall be as shown on the submitted plans.

Huntington Hotel Property I.D. 2129.16

Satellite Dish and Pole (Merrill Lynch & Co.)

The Art Jury will forward a recommendation of approval of the satellite dish and pole to the Board of Directors at the Board meeting on September 15, 2005 subject to the following conditions:

1. The planted height of the tree shall be a minimum of 12 feet at the time of installation.

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.

Perlman Property I.D. 2089.4

Preliminary Application: Bedroom Addition (426 sq. ft.), Detached Guest house/ Garage (881 sq. ft.), Entry Pediment (75 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (244 sq. ft.) and Pool

The Art Jury APPROVED the preliminary application subject to the following condition:

1. With your final application please submit:

   a. A color and materials board.

   b. A detail of the wrought iron on the windows of the main residence.

   c. A revised landscape plan that retains the tree and the existing configuration of the driveway. The Art Jury is not in favor of removal of the existing tree located in the center of the driveway.

CONSENT 1 AGENDA ITEMS:

Akins Property I.D. 48.7.3

Workshop Application: Additions (900 sq. ft.), Attached Covered            Areas (640 sq. ft.), Grading, Landscape

Please revise the plans so that the “footprint” of the home is no greater than was previously approved.

Allen Property I.D. 48.7.1

Preliminary Application: Residence (3,950 sq. ft.),

Attached Covered Areas (980 sq. ft.), Tuck-under Garage (1,234 sq. ft.), Guesthouse (990 sq. ft.), Wine Room (640 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining walls, Landscape, Colors and Materials

The Art Jury DEFERRED the preliminary application with the following comments:

1. Please move the exposed face of the subterranean room further back to the previous position of the April 26, 2005 submittal.   
2. Please submit a more subdued paint color for the siding (a darker cream color is suggested).
3. Please submit color sample for the shutters.
4. Provide an RSF Fire Department approved landscape plan with preliminary submittals.

Bunn Property I.D. (44.5.1) 

Continued Mediation:  Appeal of Art Jury deferral of May 10, 2005

Preliminary Application: Remodel/Addition (134 sq. ft.), Patio,

Garage (672 sq. ft.), Guest House (800 sq. ft.), Shed (120 sq. ft.), Grading, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Retaining walls, Fence, Landscape, Repaint, Pool, Solar

Your continued mediation was reviewed at the September 6, 2005 Art Jury meeting.

Please submit a revised concept drawing with the following changes for staff review prior to the re-submittal of a Preliminary application.

1. Please revise the upper retaining wall to be no higher than 30 inches. The submitted site plan has a “call-out” indicating a bottom-of-wall elevation of 209 feet, but the topographic lines do not correspond, thus making the retaining wall higher than 30 inches. Making that revision will make the retaining wall consistent with the design concept discussed at the Mediation meeting of July 12, 2005.
2. Submit details of the pool equipment “bunker”. Please locate a solid wall between the opening of the bunker and the property line.
3. Please reduce the amount of parking associated with the driveway gate hammerhead and maintenance/garbage area.
4. Please reduce the length of wall associated with the driveway gate area to no more than ten feet on each side.

   a. Submit an architectural elevation of the walls in that area.

5. A landscape plan approved by the Fire Department will be required with your next preliminary application along with the other requirements for a preliminary application.

Burnitz Property I.D. 7.9.6

Covenant Violation: Grading and Landscape

The Art Jury DEFERRED the application for staff review and approval with the following comment:

1. Provide a RSF Fire Department approved landscape plan.

Janopaul Property I.D. 2129.50.1

Pool, Grading, Entry Gate, Fencing, Landscape

The Art Jury APPROVED the project with the following conditions:

1. Preserve the existing landscaping between the property line and the proposed fence at the west property line. If existing landscaping is insufficient to screen the new fence, provide additional landscaping for screening.
2. Fencing shall be separated a minimum of (5) five feet from the property line. Fencing may be placed on or near the property line with the written consent of the adjoining property owner.
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.

North County Custom Homes Property I.D. J.2.12

Final Application: Residence/Garage (6,451 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (341 sq. ft.), Guest House (591 sq. ft.), Grading, Retaining Walls, Fencing, Entry Gate/Pilasters, Landscape, Pool/Spa

The Art Jury DEFERRED the final application with the following comments:

1. Revise the design of the south elevation to change the design, scale and placement of the windows to create a cohesive design that still incorporates differentiation. The window design reviewed at the May 24, 2005 meeting and the current design has gone from being overly repetitive in both scale and placement to overly disparate with a large number of window styles that creates a disjointed design.        
2. Please submit a revised driveway gate with a less ornate design.
3. Please create a guesthouse design that has more architectural character.
4. The Art Jury appreciates the decorative iron work at the front door however, please create a unique design for this project which has not been used in the Covenant before.
5. Provide information on how the ventilation will be provided for the water heater room on the east side of the building. 

Poage Property I.D. 43.2.3

Final Application: Brow ditch, Grading, Landscaping

The Art Jury APPROVED the final application subject to the following conditions:

1. The Art Jury commented that the brow ditches, as proposed, are acceptable because the location and configuration do not make them prominent. In addition, landscaping shall be required near the brow ditches to further screen them from off site. Provide details for staff review and approval prior to installation.
2. Brow ditches shall be earth tone colored concrete.
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.

Robbins Property I.D. 29.5.18

Preliminary Application: Additions (1,200 sq. ft.), Attached Covered Areas (144 sq. ft.), Garage (960 sq. ft.)

The Art Jury APPROVED the preliminary application subject to the following conditions:

1. Please provide architectural details illustrating how the windows and doors will be recessed into the equivalent of an eight-inch thick wall. Have the wall thicknesses clearly “called-out” on the floor plan.
2. With your final application, please submit an RSF Fire Department approved landscape plan for the area surrounding the additions. The construction activity for the additions will create a large area of disturbance that will need to be re-landscaped. The Fire Department must also check the plan for adequate fire access.
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 2 AGENDA ITEMS:

Harrah Property I.D. 2089.57

Final Application: Additions (660 sq. ft.), Entry Gate, Landscape

Mark McClure abstained from this item.

The Art Jury DEFERRED the final application for staff review and approval with the following comments:

1. Delete the proposed three- foot high wing-wall near the entry gate. The Art Jury is not in favor of expanding the man made features that are close to the road.
2. Re-design the modified driveway to further screen the proposed gate (see staff for further direction).
3. Revise the proposed plant materials away from an ornamental appearance to a more native and natural theme. Landscaping shall provide screening of the residence and be compatible with the surrounding community character. Provide a complete plant legend.
4. The Art Jury is not in favor of the proposed gate at the service road. An informal gate design, located further from the street may be acceptable, pending further review.
5. Grading is indicated on the landscape plan without the required information to properly review it. Grading is not approved.
6. Provide color samples for the proposed gate.
7. Provide a detail of the proposed fencing.
8. 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.

Kalench Property I.D. J.2.4

Final Application: Repaint

The Art Jury APPROVED the final application as submitted.

Nagorner Property I.D. 19.2.13

Final Application: Entry Gate           

The Art Jury DEFERRED the final application with the following comments:

1. The Art Jury commented that the thin frame and narrow vertical members of the gate appeared visually weak and insubstantial, resulting in an appearance that was not aesthetically pleasing. The Art Jury therefore, could not make the required finding of approval under Par. 46 of the Protective Covenant.
2. The Art Jury suggested the addition of a solid metal piece across the lower portion of the gate may improve the appearance. The decorative metal addition shall be compatible with the gate and have architectural interest. The lower piece should not exceed 18 inches above the bottom of the gate.

Plummer Property I.D. 6.5.16

Final Application: Retaining Walls, Landscape, Spa

The Art Jury APPROVED the final application subject to the following conditions:

1. Prior to the first inspection, provide staff with a revised plant legend. The plant palette shall be less ornamental and incorporate the use of more native trees and plants.
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.

RSF DEVELOPMENT Property I.D. 27.8.3

Final Application: Convert Approved Garage into Bedroom and Craft room

The Art Jury APPROVED the final application with the following comment:

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.           

Woodson Property I.D. 16.6.1

Final Application: Fence

The Art Jury APPROVED the final application subject to the following conditions:

1. Fencing shall be separated a minimum of (15) fifteen-feet from the property line.
2. The proposed California peppers shall be installed and the existing plums removed.
3. Provide a modified plant list to avoid the proposed mono-species hedge in front of the fence. Screening shall appear natural, with random groupings of screening plants. Submit the plant list for staff review and approval prior to issuance of a permit.
4. Provide a detail of the proposed fence for staff review and approval prior to issuance of a permit.
5. 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.

ART JURY SITE VISITS:

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

Name	Address
Humber	Avenida Maravillas
Kendall	Avenida Maravillas
McChesney	La Crescenta
Nagy	El Acebo del Norte
Perlman	Calle Corte
S&G Const.	Vista de Fortuna
Yardley	Via de Fortuna