Estero Design Review Committee
Meeting Minutes
Public Meeting
December 14, 2005
5:00 P.M.
The Rapallo
Clubhouse Meeting Time: 5:00 P.M.
Members in Attendance: Gordon Lyons, Al O’Donnell, Jim
Wallace, Tom O’Dea, Wayne Robinson, Bill Prysi, Joe McHarris
Members Absent: Nancy Cohen
Minutes By: Terri Melna
Meeting called to order.
This is the first meeting at Rapallo. Our thanks to Jim Wallace for providing
the room.
An announcement was made regarding changes to the Lee County LDC. Neal Noethlich
will be bringing in copies of the new Chapter 33 and bring everyone up to date.
Any new development orders within Estero will have to comply with Chapter 33.
This chapter extends the Corkscrew Road Overlay area as well as covering signage
and big box standards.
Approval of the minutes of the November 9th meeting were called for. A motion to
approve the minutes was made, seconded and carried unanimously. Minutes were
approved with no changes.
Applicant: Coconut Point Update
Nothing to report
Fee: Paid
Presentation by: Steve Rivera of ABC Fine Wine & Spirits
Discussion:
This is a return project. Parapets along the front roof line were extended.
Landscaping changed per Committee recommendations. Some plantings moved and
palms added. A request was made to send a copy of the actual landscape plan to
the committee when it was finalized.
Comments/Suggestions:
• Agreed to send a copy of the landscape plan to the committee
_____________________________________________________________
Fee: Paid
Presentation by: Louis Wolodzko, Project Manager & James Kinsey, Kinsey
Associates
Discussion:
This consists of a 20,000 SF building at the rear of the site. Site is 2.3 acres
located south of The Vines on US
41. This will contain limited retail/office building feel. There is an existing
fiscus buffer between The Vines and this project along with a 6’ masonry wall
and chain link fence. Some of the gaps will be filled in. Concern was expressed
on residents of The Vines seeing the rooflines of Vintage Trace. No driveway on
back side of building. No loading or unloading will be allowed on back. Mr.
Kinsey told the Committee he did not own the fence. The Committee indicated
chain link fences are not allowed in Estero and it would have to be completely
hidden from his side of the project. Concern was raised and applicant asked to
look at Chapter 34 and parking near single-family residential uses. Look at the
buffer required. A betterment plan might be used to reduce the width of the
buffer. Applicant indicated he would comply with the buffers. He has owned the
property 10 years. Applicant agreed to meet with the homeowner’s association of
The Vines to discuss whether they want a wall separating the projects or more
landscaping as a buffer. One possible tenant would be a dry-cleaning business
and the drive-thru would be for drop off/pick up point. The sidewalk at the rear
side of the building is for access and maintenance. Mr. Kinsey has an easement
at the corner of the site for project signage. It will be a monument sign.
Project has potential for 11 tenants. Roof will be standing seam metal roof. Is
this allowed in Estero? Yes. Discussion ensued regarding whether this type of
roof would be incompatible with The Vines. It was suggested to discuss this at
the meeting with the HOA. EDRC would like to receive a written report of this
meeting with the HOA. Comments were given stating a metal roof is in conflict
with the Mediterranean style. Mediterranean should have a tile roof. The metal
will have a colored finish, but the color has not yet been chosen. EDRC must see
the roof color. Other comments included no overhangs, stepped fascia, transition
of fascia to overhang, and the back roof consisting of 300’ without any changes
to dimension or plane. Landscaping would help, but gables also could be used and
would help shed the water off. Applicant agreed to add some banding to the
covered porte cochere. Scored stucco is not Mediterranean. The wainscot is good.
Break the west elevation façade up more. Pull out and articulate. Add some
sabals on the back side. Applicant needs to verify monument sign size. Applicant
agreed to return to the next meeting.
Comments/Suggestions:
• Concern was raised and applicant asked to look at Chapter 34 and parking near
single-family residential uses. Look at the buffer required.
• Applicant agreed to meet with the homeowner’s association of The Vines to
discuss whether they want a wall separating the projects or more landscaping as
a buffer and the standing seam metal roof. Applicant to provide EDRC with
written comments regarding meeting.
• EDRC must see the roof color
• Applicant agreed to add some banding to the covered porte cochere
• Break the west elevation façade up more. Pull out and articulate.
• Add some sabals on the back side
• Applicant agreed to return to the next meeting.
• Applicant needs to be reminded that they should look at LDC Chapter 33 and 30
and the formula for sign size.
Fee: Not Paid
Presentation by: Brian Howell, Phoenix Associates
Discussion:
This is a return project, but with a different design from the previous
submittal. Using Mediterranean style now rather than Key West. Signage will be
channel lit, although signs will be at the same elevation. Plantings are
clustered per recommendation of the EDRC Committee. Parking isles end caps now
20’ wide. Added more shrubs and trees to edge buffers. Building shape the same
as before. Removed signage from towers. Committee agreed this project has a much
better design now. Applicant was reminded trees need to be 45 gallon, 12’-14’
tall. Applicant agreed his actual plantings would look much like the colored
rendering presented to the Committee. Agreed to send a JPEG for the website.
Fee: Paid
Presentation by: Rick Johnson
Discussion:
Project is on US 41 north of Broadway. Will consist of tire store and strip
center. His store will be the same as the Miromar store. Tile roof will wrap
around to the 1st door. Mediterranean colors will be used. Signage for the tire
store must meet Code. If a company does not want to meet Code, they do not have
to build in Estero. Applicant agreed to look at signage. Applicant informed no
visible spot lights were allowed. Applicant said spot lights were hidden by
parapet walls. Applicant informed no banners were allowed under the Code for
Estero. The 3 buildings on the site need to be similar in design for
compatibility. Tire store currently is 4900 SF which would require a pitched
roof. Applicant agreed to increase SF so pitched roof will not be required. The
strip center will consist of 24 bays and the rear building which is hidden will
be office warehouse. Buildings need to be unified. Agreed to integrate elements.
No side or rear elevations were shown for the buildings. 10 acres of commercial
to the north of this project. Applicant agreed the back side of the building
would undulate. Roadway ingress/egress to back area – can a fire truck clear
this? Another access point is an interconnect with the post office. Monument
sign needs to be wider than tall, no higher than 17’. Applicant needs to review
Chapter 30 and 33 of the LDC. Applicant should look at building perimeter
plantings. Use a narrow green strip between sidewalk and buildings. Site has a
10’ PUE and applicant needs to look at the required plantings for this area. Not
more than 25% of the required trees can be palms and the project appears to have
a 50-50% ratio. There is a billboard on the site which the applicant inherited
and the billboard must remain. Applicant is reminded he cannot attempt to hide
the billboard with plantings, but can use lower plantings to hide the posts of
the billboard. Monument sign too close to the trash. Applicant indicated trash
was being relocated to the back of the site. Applicant reminded to wall and
landscape trash area. Applicant indicated the front and rear elevations of the
tire store would be identical. Committee indicated there appears to be so much
parking in the back between the warehouse and office and that perhaps some of
the parking area could be used to change the dimension of the strip center. A
question was raised as to whether the tire store was Mediterranean in style.
Applicant was asked to look at the Arizona Pizza project which was southwestern
in style but made some changes to still keep their identity, but still fit in
with the Mediterranean style. US 41 buffer – should be Type E and 2-3’
undulating berm. Applicant agreed to return to the next meeting with his
changes. Committee also suggested applicant meet with the Fire Marshall to
review the plan. Look at size of islands with canopy trees. Applicant encouraged
to use 2 different elements to create interest in the strip center building.
Change height – make more random to create interest.
Comments/Suggestions:
• Signage for the tire store must meet Code
• Applicant informed no banners were allowed under the Code for Estero.
• The 3 buildings on the site need to be similar in design for compatability.
• Applicant agreed to increase SF so pitched roof will not be required.
• Buildings need to be unified.
• Applicant agreed the back side of the building would undulate.
• Applicant needs to review Chapter 30 and 33 of the LDC.
• Applicant should look at building perimeter plantings.
• Not more than 25% of the required trees can be palms and the project appears
to have a 50-50% ratio.
• Site has a 10’ PUE and applicant needs to look at the required plantings for
this area.
• Applicant reminded to wall and landscape trash area.
• Committee also suggested applicant meet with the Fire Marshall to review the
plan
• Applicant agreed to return to the next meeting with his changes.
Fee: Not Paid
Presentation by: Matt Falconer
Discussion:
Committee members indicated they did not receive complete packages, only
applications. Located on US 41 south of
Vintage Trace project near The Vines. Project will contain 26,000 SF
building with 10-15 tenants possible. Developer indicated he specializes in
strips adjoining Wal-marts which this site will also do. Landscaping and
buffering not shown and needs to comply with Chapter 34 of the LDC. Trees need
to be 45 gallon, 12-14’. A photometric lighting plan was submitted to the
County. Applicant was reminded a licensed landscape architect must do the
landscape plans. Applicant asked to articulate and undulate the elevations more.
The circles are not Mediterranean. Could add banding on the columns. Type ‘D’
buffer along US 41 has palms soldiered. This is prohibited. Not more than 50” of
required buffer trees may be palms. Need to look at room around dumpsters – is
there enough room for dump truck to maneuver – also can a fire truck maneuver
here. Required buffers not provided on all sides where required. Required hedge
100% exotic – does not meet native requirements. 50% of required general trees
need to be on the front half of the property. Dry detention area is not planted
with marsh grasses as required. No internal landscaping shown. Parking lot
islands not minimum of 18’ wide as required by LDC. Applicant should have Fire
Dept. review plan. Applicant agreed to return with front façade changes,
landscape plans and signage.
Comments/Suggestions:
• Landscaping and buffering not shown and needs to comply with Chapter 34 of the
LDC.
• Trees need to be 45 gallon, 12-14’.
• Applicant was reminded a licensed landscape architect must do the landscape
plans
• Applicant asked to articulate and undulate the elevations more.
• Type ‘D’ buffer along US 41 has palms soldiered. This is prohibited.
• Have Fire Dept. review plans
• Required hedge 100% exotic – does not meet native requirements
• 50% of required general trees need to be on the front half of the property
• Dry detention area is not planted with marsh grasses as required
• Parking lot islands not minimum of 18’ wide as required by LDC.
• Applicant agreed to return with front façade changes, landscape plans and
signage
New Business:
Neal Noethlich provided committee members with a copy of
Chapter 33 of the LDC which is going
to be approved.
Bill Prysi stated Tina Matta of Gravina Smith and Barraco & Associated would
like to provide a David Graham Award. A committee will be formed with members
from ECPP and EDRC. Discussion ensued whether one award should be presented or
up to 3, perhaps one for each part of a project – landscaping, design? Bill to
keep the committee apprised.
_____________________________________________________________
Meeting adjourned.
Next Meeting: Next EDRC Meeting will be held on Wednesday,
January 11, 2006, 5:00 P.M. at The
Rapallo ClubHouse |
