129

To:
From:
Submitted by:
Subject:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Council Report
October 8, 2013
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jason Stilwell, City Administrator
Rob Mullane, AICP, Community Planning and Building Director
Marc Wiener, Senior Planner
Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to
deny a Design Study Application (DS 13-33) for the replacement of an
existing wood shingle roof with composition shingles on a residence
located on Dolores Street 4 parcels southeast of lOth Avenue, in the
Single Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District. The application is being
appealed by the property owner, David Goldenson.
Recommendation: Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny
DS 13-33.
Executive Summary: The project site is located on Dolores Street 4 parcels southeast of Tenth
Avenue. The property is developed with a two-story residence that is
clad with board and batten siding and a wood shingle roof. The roof has
rolled eaves with wood shingles that curve around the edges.
Analysis/Discussion:
The appellant is proposing to replace the existing wood-shingle roof with
composition shingles. A Design Study (DS 13-33) application to replace
the roofing materials was considered by the Planning Commission on
May 1, 2013, and again on June 12, 2013. The proposal was
unanimously denied by the Planning Commission at the meeting on June
12, 2013.
Initial Staff Analysis and Planning Commission Review
With regard to roofing material, Section 9.8 of the Residential Design
Guidelines states:
1
130
9.8 Roof materials should be consistent with the architectural style of
the building and with the context of the neighborhood.
Wood shingles and shakes are preferred materials for most types of
architecture typical of Carmel (i.e., Arts and Crafts, English Revival
and Tudor Revival).
Composition shingles that convey a color and texture similar to that
of wood shingles may be considered on some architectural styles
characteristic of more recent eras.
This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at two
separate hearings. At the first meeting on May 1, 2013, staff noted that
the existing wood shingle roof is a prominent architectural feature of the
residence, and the manner in which the wood shingles curve around the
edges is unique and represents skilled workmanship. Staff recommended
that for this particular residence, wood shingles be mai ntained over
composition shingles.
The applicant had indicated that replacing the roof with wood shingles is
highly expensive and not within their budget. The installation would
require that the wood shingles be soaked and bent on site by hand. The
composition shingle roofing could bend around the eaves without the
additional labor associated with a wood shingle roof.
The applicant is proposing 'President ial' brand composition shingles,
which is considered a high-quality composition-shingle product. The
' Presidential' brand composition shingles are thicker than standard
composition shingles and have a staggered pattern, similar to the wood
shingles on the existing residence.
On May 1, 2013, the Planning Commission continued the application with
a request to visit another project site in the City that had used the
proposed 'Presidential' brand composition shingles. On June 12, 2013,
the Planning Commission toured the Coachman's Inn, which is located on
San Carlos Street 2 parcels southeast of Seventh Avenue. The
Coachman's Inn had recently replaced their roof with ' Presi dential' brand
composition shingles identical to what is being proposed for the subject
residence.
2
131
At the Planning Commission's hearing on June 12, 2013, the Commission
voted to deny the proposal for composition shingles. The primary basis
for denial was that the proposed composition shingles did not convey a
texture similar to wood, as recommend by Residential Design Guideline
Section 9.8. The Commission was also concerned that the proposal
would have a negative impact on the overall architecture and appearance
of the residence. The Planning Commission acknowledged that cost did
not factor into their decision. The City is not compelled to consider cost
when reviewing Design Study applications.
Appeal
The appellant is concerned with the cost of the wood shingles, in
particular the labor associated with applying the shingles around the
rolled eaves. The appellant has also stated that there are several other
residences in Carmel-by-the-Sea that have rolled eaves with composition
shingle roofing. However, as of the date of this staff report, no specific
examples have been provided by the appellant.
Staff Analysis of Appeal
On January 25, 2012, the Planning Commission determined that all
requests for replacement of wood shingles/shakes with composition
shingles should be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission wanted to ensure that the use of composition shingles
would not negatively impact community character.
In some instances, proposal s to replace wood shakes or shingles with
composition shingles have been approved when it is determined that the
proposal is not detrimental to the architecture of the building or its
appearance. Each project is treated based on its unique circumstances,
and for this project, the Commissi on could not support the proposed
composition-shingle roofing material. Staff concurs with the Planning
Commission' s decision, which is consistent with the guidance in
Residential Design Guideline Section 9.8 (see above).
Previous Council
Action/Decision History:
This Design Study (DS 13-33) application was considered by the Planning
Commission on May 1, 2013, and on June 12, 2013. The request was
unanimously denied by a 5-0 vote on June 12, 2013.
3
132
Attachments:
Attachment "A"- Appeal Application
Attachment "B"- PC Staff Report dated 6/12/13
Attachment "C"- PC Minutes dated 6/12/13
Attachment "D" - PC Staff Report dated 5/1/13
Attachment "E"- PC Minutes dated 6/1/13
Attachment "F" - Photographs
Reviewed by:
~
City Administrator
. ~
City Attorney Administrative Services 0
Asst. City Admin. D Dir of CPB
~
Dir of Public Svcs 0
Public Safety Dir D Library Dir 0 Other 0
4
133
Attachment "A" - Appeal Application
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
(FILING FEE: $295 .oo)

ro( u;(r?
Appellant: bqv1J.. C/Jei!1.(0it1
Property owner: 1avt R. "\ . r;;Ve11 "-P/.1
Mailing Address: (Jo . &ox
7
NY ;J.{lJS.
Phones: Day${ J) p.J-: fcfp{?" 7/# -.(lfc./-
Fmc: ( ):-.--..!:H:L..f{'-=-'t;,____
t. (jdie. U.biA @61JJ.i.J. M
Date Board heard the matter: 'JU kll.- 11- 21; I 3.
Appeals to the City Council mu.st be made in wrilfng in the office of the City Cleric within
10 working dllp foUowing lite dllM of lldion by 1M Plllnning Commission and paying
the requiredfilingfoe as established by City Council resolution.
Physical location of property that is the subject of appeal:
S:"(/P'IttGl-H lJolores
If you were NOT the original applicant or the applicant's representative, please state the
evidence that you are an aggrieved party: -.
(CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE)
134
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL:. (State the specific basis for your appeal, such as errors or
omissions you believe were committed by the Commission in reaching its decision, etc.)

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY TIIA T Tim FOREGOING IS TRUE
AND CORRECT:
DATEDAT: tJj ,TinS-AYOF r,;l'fl= ,;.err-;p/3

of appellant
M vJ S2\t-\ 1

$295 .00 fee received: (Staff Initial) Receipt #:
AITEST:
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
Article 9, Section 7, of the Constitution of the State of California authorizes a city to
impose fees. Also see California government Code, Section 54344.
IMPORT ANT: If the appellant wishes to submit materials for duplication and
inclusion in the City of Cannel-by-the-Sea's Council agenda packet, the materials must
be submitted to the City Clerk by working days after the decision of the
Commission. This matter is tentatively scheduled to be heard on
135
Grounds for Appeal of denial of Design Study No. DS13-33 on June 12, 2013
My roof, needing replacement, has wood shingle rolled eaves. Due to the expense, I
want to replace wood shingles with a composite material comparable in thickness and
color. This composite material is designed to give the appearance of wood shingles. I
also understand that the composite roof provides better protection against fire hazard.
I was unable to attend the meeting and watched the video. The Board heard comments
against the proposal from a person (Roberta ?) in the audience who said
houses on both sides of mine have wood shingles and that most of the houses in my
immediate area have wood shingles. This is incorrect and I will furnish photos of these
homes.
My roofing contractor has photos of houses in Carmel with rolled eaves of composite
material in Carmel. This gives me the impression that previous requests for this change
have been approved. I will furnish photos of these houses,
We have owned this bouse for over 20 years. I take pride in my home and would not do
anything that would detract from its appearance.
136
Attachment "B"- Planning Commission Staff Report dated 6112113
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA CHECKLIST
MEETING DATE: 12 June 2013
FIRST HEARING: X
ITEM NO: DS 13-33
SUBJECT:
BLOCK: 116 LOT: ~
CONTINUED FROM: N/A
OWNER: David Goldenson
STREAMLINING DEADLINE: 5116/ 13
Consideration of a Design Study application for the replacement of an existing wood
shake roof with composition shingles on a residence located in the Single Family
Residential (R -1) District.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Exempt (Class 3 -New Construction)
LOCATION: ZONING:
4 SE of 10
111
on Dolores R-1
ISSUES:
1. Does the proposed design comply with the Residential Design Objectives (CMC 17.1 0.1)
and the Residential Design Guidelines?
OPTIONS:
1. Approve the application as submitted.
2. Approve the application with special conditions.
3. Continue the application with a request for changes.
4. Deny the application.
RECOMMENDATION:
Determine the appropriate action.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report dated 12 June 2013. 3 Photographs (Coachman's Inn).
2. Photographs (House).
STAFF CONTACT: Marc Wiener, Senior Planner
137
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING
STAFF REPORT Project Denied by the Planning Commission on 6/12/13
APPLICATION: DS 13-33
BLOCK: 116
LOCATION: 4 SE of 1 0
1
h on Dolores
REQUEST:
APPLICANT: David Goldenson
LOT: 8
Consideration of a Design Study application for the replacement of an existing wood
shingle roof with composition shake on a residence located in the Single Family
Residential (R -1) District.
BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This site is located on Dolores Street four southeast of Tenth Avenue. The propetty is
developed with a two story residence clad with board and batten siding and a wood shake
roof. The roof has rolled eaves and the wood shakes curve around the edges. The
applicant is proposing to replace the existing shakes with a composition shingle roof.
This project was reviewed at the Planning Commission meeting on 1 May 2013. The
Commission continued the application so that more information could be provided on the
proposed roofing material and other available products. Staff notes that the applicant was
unable to attend the last meeting to answer questions.
EVALUATION:
Roofing Material: The applicant is proposing Presidential Shake brand composition
shingles. At the first meeting staff agreed to find an example in town of where this type
of roofing was used so that the Commission could evaluate its use on an entire roof as
opposed to only viewing a small sample. Since then it has been identified that the same
type of roofing was recently approved by the Planning Commission to be used on the
Coachman' s Inn.
The applicant has indicated that the Presidential Shake brand roofing is one of the highest
quality composition shingle products. The shingles are thicker than standard shingles and
would have a staggered pattern, similar to the shingles on the existing residence.
At the first meeting it was noted that the existing wood shake roof is a prominent
architectural feature of the residence. The manner in which the shakes curve around the
edges is unique and represents skilled workmanship. The installation would require that
the shakes be soaked and bent on site by hand.
DS 13-33 (Goldenson)
138
DS 13-33 (Goldenson)
12 June 2013
Staff Report
Page2
The current wood shakes are superior to the proposed composition shingles. However,
the applicant has indicated that is not within their budget to duplicate the existing roof.
Staff notes that the Planning Commission is not supposed to consider cost when making
decisions about a project.
Staff only recommends approval of the compos1t10n shingle roofing if it can be
demonstrated that it would present an appearance similar to the existing wood shakes and
would not be detrimental to the appearance of the residence. The Commission will have
the opportunity to visit the Coachman's Inn on the tour so that it can view the proposed
roofing.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review the sample and determine if the material is appropriate.
139
Attachment "C" - Planning Commission Minutes 6/ 12/ 13
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
PLANNING COMMISSON- MINUTES
JUNE 12, 2013
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commission Members: Dallas, Goodhue, LePage, Reimers,
Paterson
STAFF PRESENT: Marc Wiener, Acting Senior Planner
Leslie Fenton, Administrative Coordinator
II. TOUR OF INSPECTION
The Commission toured the following sites: Faxon, Nelson, Forest Hill Park, Goldenson,
Mitchell/ Lewis, Wulff, Michiels, Smith, Massa.
ill. ROLLCALL
IV. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Members of the audience joined Commission Members in the pledge of allegiance.
V. ANNOUNCEMENTS/EXTRAORDINARY BUSINESS
Marc Wiener, Acting Senior Planner, announced that Council granted the appeal for DR
12-26 (Kimball/Campbell) and that the wine sub-committee had met.
Commissioner Reimers announced that she would like to agendize for a future meeting a
discussion on what is closing time.
VI. APPEARANCES
Barbara Livingston appeared before the Commissioner.
140
Commissioner LEPAGE moved to continue the application and have applicant return
with a revised parking plan.
Motion withdrawn.
Commissioner LEPAGE moved to approve the application and have applicant work
with staff on revised parking plan to incorporate more open landscaping areas,
seconded by GOODHUE and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Goodhue, LePage, Paterson
None
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Dallas, Reimers
None
4. DS 13-33
David Goldenson
E/s Dolores 4 S 1 O'h
Block 116, Lot(s) 8
Consideration of a Design Study application
for the replacement of an existing wood shake
roof with composition shingles on a residence
located in the Single Family Residential (R-1)
District.
Marc Wiener, Acting Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Paterson opened
the public hearing at 6:33 p.m. Don Cox and Roberta Miller appeared before the
Commission. There being no other appearances, the public hearing was closed at
6:40p.m
Commissioner LEPAGE moved to deny the application, seconded by GOODHUE and
carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Dallas, Goodhue, LePage, Reimers, Paterson
None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
5. DS 13-17 (Faxon)
Jag Real Estate Holdings
E/s Guadalupe 4 N 6
111
Block 63, Lot(s) 14
Consideration of Design Study (Concept),
Demolition Permit and Coastal Development
Permit applications for the construction of a
new residence located in the Single Family
Residential (R -1) District.
Marc Wiener, Acting Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Paterson opened
the public hearing at 6:54p.m. Adrienne Lopez, Joe Faxon, Lorna Clairbond, Jim
Wilcox, Barbara Brooks, Lynette Zimmerman and Barbara Livingston appeared before
the Commission. There being no other appearances, the public hearing was closed at
7:30p.m
Planning Commission - Minutes
June 12, 2013
6
141
Attachment "D"- PC Staff Report dated 5/ 1/ 13
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA CHECKLIST
MEETING DATE: 1 May 2013 BLOCK: 116 LOT: B_
FIRST HEARING: X
ITEM NO: DS 13-33
SUBJECT:
CONTINUED FROM: N/ A
OWNER: David Goldenson
STREAMLINING DEADLINE: 5116/13
Consideration of a Design Study application for the replacement of an existing wood
shake roof with composition shingles on a residence located in the Single Family
Residential (R -1) District.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Exempt (Class 3 - New Construction)
LOCATION: ZONING:
4 SE of 1Oth on Dolores R-1
ISSUES:
I. Does the proposed design comply with the Residential Design Objectives (CMC 17.10.1)
and the Residential Design Guidelines?
OPTIONS:
1. Approve the application as submitted.
2. Approve the application with special conditions.
3. Continue the application with a request for changes.
4. Deny the application.
RECOMMENDATION:
Determine the appropriate action.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report dated 1 May 2013.
2. Photograph.
STAFF CONTACT: Marc Wiener, Senior Planner
142
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING
STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION: DS 13-33
BLOCK: 116
LOCATION: 4 SE of l0
1
h on Dolores
REQUEST:
APPLICANT: David Goldenson
LOT: 8
Consideration of a Design Study application for the replacement of an existing wood
shingle roof with composition shake on a residence located in the Single Family
Residential (R-1) District.
BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This site is located on Dolores Street four southeast of Tenth Avenue. The property is
developed with a two story residence clad with board and batten siding and a wood shake
roof. The roof has rolled eaves and the wood shakes curve around the edges. The
applicant is proposing to replace the existing shakes with a composition shingle roof.
On 25 January 2012 the Planning Commission determined that all requests for
replacement of wood shingles/shakes with composition shingles should be reviewed by
the Commission. The Commission wanted to ensure that the use of composition shingles
would not negatively impact community character.
EVALUATION:
Section 9.8 of the Residential Design Guidelines states the following:
9.8 Roof materials should be consistent with the architectural style of the
building and with the context of the neighborhood.
Wood shingles and shakes are preferred materials for most types of
architecture typical of Carmel (i.e., Arts and Crafts, English Revival and
Tudor Revival).
Composition shingles that convey a color and texture similar to that of
wood shingles may be considered on some architectural styles
characteristic of more recent eras.
The existing wood shake roof is a prominent architectural feature of the residence. The
manner in which the shakes curve around the edges is unique and represents skilled
workmanship. Staff would prefer the use of wood shakes over composition shingles for
this style of residence. However, the applicant has indicated that replacing the roof with
wood shakes is highly expensive and not in their budget. The installation would require
that the shakes be soaked and bent on site by hand.
143
DS 13-33 (Goldenson)
1 May 2013
Staff Report
Page 2
The composition shingle roofing can bend around the eaves without the added labor
associated with a wood shake roof. The applicant will bring a sample of the roofing
material to the meeting for the Commission to review. Staff recommends approval if the
composition shingle roofing if it can be demonstrated that it would present an appearance
similar to the existing wood shakes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review the sample and determine if the material is appropriate.
144
Attachment "E" - Planning Commission Minutes 5/ 1113
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
PLANNING COMMISSION -SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
MAY 1, 2013
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commission Members: Goodhue, LePage, Reimers, Paterson
ABSENT: Commission Members: Dallas
STAFF PRESENT: Marc Wiener, Acting Senior Planner
Leslie Fenton, Administrative Coordinator
Mike Branson, City Forester
II. TOUR OF INSPECTION
The Commission toured the following sites: Heyermann/Siebert, Goldenson, Green,
Vais, Fiallo/Martinez, Moresco and Lazarre.
lli. ROLL CALL
IV. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Members of the audience joined Commission Members in the pledge of allegiance.
V. ANNOUNCEMENTS/EXTRAORDINARY BUSINESS
Commissioner Paterson announced that he would like to recommend that the Wine Policy
sub-committee reconvene and review the current policy.
VI. APPEARANCES
Barbara Livingston appeared before the Commission.
VII. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Consideration of minutes from April 10, 2013, Regular Meeting.
2. SI 13-10
OWRF Cannel LLC
Mission/Junipero bt. Ocean & 7tll
Block 78, Lot(s) All
Consideration of an application for a metal
business sign at a site located in the Central
Commercial (CC) District.
145
Mike Branson, City Forester, presented the staff report. Chair Paterson opened the public
hearing at 4:50. There being no appearances, the public hearing was closed at 4:50p.m.
Commissioner LEPAGE moved to recommend that Council adopt the Ordinance,
seconded by REIMERS and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
2. DS 13-33
Goodhue, LePage, Reimers, Paterson
None
Dallas
None
David Goldenson
E/s Dolores 4 S 1Oth
Block 116, Lot(s) 8
Consideration of a Design Study application
for the replacement of an existing wood shake
roof with composition shingle on a residence
located in the Single Family Residential (R-1)
District.
Marc Wiener, Acting Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Paterson opened
the public hearing at 4:53. There being no appearances, the public hearing was closed at
4:53p.m.
Commissioner REIMES moved to continue the application, seconded by LEPAGE and
carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
3. DS13-12
Goodhue, LePage, Reimers, Paterson
None
Dallas
None
Barbara Siebert/Chery! Heyermann
E/s Dolores 5 S 1 0
111
Consideration of Design Study (Final),
Demolition Permit and Coastal Development
Permit applications for the construction of a
new residence located in the Single Family
Residential (R-1) District.
Block 116, Lot(s) 12
Marc Wiener, Acting Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Paterson opened
the public hearing at 5:00p.m. Craig Holdren and Ron Brown appeared before the
Commission. There being no other appearances, the public hearing was closed at 5:11
p.m.
Commissioner REIMERS moved to approve the application with staff's Special
Conditions with recognition of protecting the view shed from the east, seconded by
LEPAGE and carried by the following roll call vote:
Planning Commission - Special Meeting Minutes
May I, 2013
3
146
Attachment "F" - Photographs of Goldenson Residence
Front of residence facing southeast
Front of residence facing northeast