June 2006 EDRC Minutes

Email this Page

Meeting Minutes
ESTERO DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE

Public Meeting
June 14, 2006
5:00 P.M.
The Rapallo Clubhouse

Members in Attendance: Gordon Lyons, Al O’Donnell, Tom O’Dea, Bill Prysi, Gerald Simons, Joe McHarris

Members Absent: Jim Wallace Wayne Robinson Nancy Cohen

Minutes By: Terri Melna

Meeting called to order.

Opening Remarks:

It was announced that Gerald Simons, an architect, has been appointed as a new member of the Committee, bringing the Committee up to the full 8 seats.

Frank LaRosa from Lehigh Acres Design Review Committee is a guest at tonight’s meeting.

Approval of the minutes of the May 10th 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

Fee: N/A

Presentation by: Tom Schneider, Simon Properties

Discussion:

Mr. Schneider announced the DRA had approval letter for the hardscape, fountains, amenities, lighting and graphics and he would be presenting those in a slide presentation. He also announced that the sign for Bed, Bath and Beyond has been changed per comments received previously from this Committee. The slide presentation included the Lake Shops Phase 1, Pedestrian Corridor of Phase 2, Main Street Phase 2, hardscape including the vehicular bridge. The bridges are all constructed from a Brazilian hardwood and will have lighting. Beaches, seating, planting pots and bike racks were shown. There will be kiosks. Graphics including directional signage was shown. Lighting fixtures will be dark bronze in color and there will be fans under the colonnades.

An exhibit showing a section of the landscaping of the US 41 berm was shown. This is a typical section. More cabbage palms are being clustered, some of the trees have increased height and more color in the shrubs and groundcover are being added. The Committee wanted to know if the Applicant intended to modify their Development Order to reflect the changes in the landscaping; however, it was deemed the as-builts would suffice for this purpose.

Applicant: Tangomar at Coconut Crossing

Fee: Paid

Presentation by: James Kosluchar, Hole Montes

Discussion:
This project will include 8 buildings which will have 2 levels of parking and 3 levels of living. There will be 6 units per floor ranging from 1600 SF to 2000 SF. Ralph Gilberti from Art Concepts showed the clubhouse/fitness center and explained the architectural features. Applicant was going for the exposed rafter look on the residential buildings. Committee felt the fascia needs to be built up to make the roof appear substantial and that the roof needs to extend beyond the corbels at the towers to again “beef up” the roof line. Colors appear too pastel in the copies provided to the Committee. Committee felt the clubhouse architecture was more elaborate than the residential buildings and Applicant indicated this was so because of costs. Agreed to look at making banding thicker and roof lines. Committee agreed front elevations were fine, but that the back side looks flat and needs more articulation. There is no detailing. The base on the back and sides will be heavily landscaped, but needs detailing. Landscape architect agreed more shrubs would be added along the base of the back and will add more color. This site has restrictions due to the drainage and utility easements on the property. Will look at adding some more under story shrubs and add trees where possible between the buildings. Signage has not yet been determined and Committee requested Applicant return when they have location and type of sign.

Applicant: Estero Park Commons Building

Fee: Paid

Presentation by: Rick Berlanski, Hole Montes and Richard Losee of J. McGarvey Construction

Discussion:
This is Phase 4 of the Corkscrew Palms project. Have changed the plans from 2 buildings in an L shape to one 2-story building. Will consist of the same square footage. Applicant reminded the trees need to meet the code of 45 gallon and so should remove the note on his plans regarding the 10’ trees. Colors will match the existing buildings on the site. It was felt by some that the building lacks sufficient detail and that the back side of the building was monotonous. The Applicant indicated this building had more than the existing buildings on the site and the Committee approved those buildings. It was mentioned that Estero is constantly “raising the bar”. Applicant is working on a tight time frame due to tenants; however, it was agreed that the Applicant would look at making some changes and that the Committee would provide a letter to get them into the Development Order process with the County.

Applicant: Steak N’ Shake

Fee: N/A – return project

Presentation by: Mark Drew, AIM Engineering

Discussion:
This is a return project. Landscaping comments have been addressed. Added more sabals. Comments regarding the overhang areas on the rear side have been addressed. The sloped roof comments have been addressed by the Applicant changing the square footage of the building from 4600 to 5100 square feet. The length of the side roof line is 160’ and needs to be broken up. Committee felt building lacks Mediterranean styling. Applicant agreed to look at adding medallions or appliqués to the front. The black and white awning is a trademark of Steak N’ Shake. Committee felt if the side awning were removed, it would help and give more opportunity for the project to gain the Mediterranean flavor needed. Applicant agreed to return with revised elevations and the Committee agreed to provide a letter to get them going in the County process.

Applicant: Coconut Road MPD – CVS Pharmacy

Fee: N/A – return project

Presentation by: James Kosluchar, Hole Montes

Discussion:
Landscaping comments were addressed. Committee would have preferred to have the previously submitted elevations on hand to compare what changes have been made. However, Committee felt the project lacked Mediterranean styling. The previous plans provided too much and the building was too busy and needed to be toned down. Applicant agreed to return.

New Business:

It was announced that the Committee had met with Simon and Oakbrook regarding the design review process. The history of Coconut Point is that it is an approved DRI and the developers would form design review committees to review each tenant’s buildings and make comments. This has been happening with quarterly updates being given to the EDRC. However, these reviews do not include public comment whereas at EDRC meetings, the public has an opportunity to see and comment on projects. As we go forward, it has been agreed that within 2 months of the DO submittal to the County, the tenant will present directly to the EDRC. In this manner, comments from the EDRC can be addressed at the same time as any comments from Lee County. It was determined EDRC did not need to see all plans, just architectural plans and elevations, building colors, signage, landscape plans, and the site plan.