Design Review Board asks for more site visuals, bridging and drainage details on 871 Summit Road rebuild

The Design Review Board on Feb. 24 continued a concept review for a proposed tear‑down and new house at 871 Summit Road in a hillside design district, asking the applicant for more site context, section drawings and details for a proposed driveway bridge and entry gate.

Applicant representatives including Mark Woodke and Kyle Dixon (Windward Design Services) described a project sited on a knoll above Montecito Golf Course that would demolish a 1,142‑square‑foot single‑story residence and construct a new two‑story, 4,926‑square‑foot home with a 1,432‑square‑foot basement and a new attached three‑car garage. Documents submitted for concept review list a combined floor area of 6,058 square feet on a 92,783‑square‑foot lot (about 108% of the project guideline FAR). The property is within the Hillside Design District and staff said future PDA (planned development) findings for sloped lots will be required.

Board members asked for more photographic context from Summit Road and adjacent properties, and for photo‑matched streetscape and site section drawings that show how the new home will sit relative to immediate neighbors and public viewpoints. Several members also requested detailed gateway and bridge elevations and materials; the project proposes a new vehicular bridge across an arroyo and a driveway that did not previously exist. Mark Woodke described the site as heavily forested and noted the existing garage at the street that the owner intends to retain; he said the project was designed as comparatively low, thin building modules that connect courtyards and views toward the ocean.

Neighbor Chris Melton of 865 Summit Road, who lives immediately to the north, told the board he is “pretty much here because I'd like to preserve my ocean view” and raised concerns about water flow through the low‑lying parts of the site, stating that his main concern “is not to block the drainage of basically the creek or the ground water coming down through that area. It's a very wet area and there's a lot of water that comes down through there especially in the winter time.”

Board members and staff also discussed tree removals tied to the proposed motor court and bridge, the proposed stone exterior material and the relationship between openings and masonry massing. Several board members urged the applicant to show the project’s gate and bridge details and to coordinate gate materials with the house palette.

The board unanimously continued the item and asked the applicant to provide a set of deliverables for the next hearing: existing and proposed site photos (photo‑matched) from Summit Road and other public viewpoints; site sections north‑to‑south illustrating how the house and terraces relate to neighboring properties; elevations and material palettes for the proposed gate, bridge and site walls; a comprehensive landscape plan and a tree‑removal/demolition plan; and clarified fenestration details showing window head heights and lintel conditions. The board also asked the applicant to document the existing garage and explain whether any future alterations are planned.

The motion to continue passed 5–0 (Board members Mosley, Richards, Grafaiti, Vice Chair Sherry and Chair Lewis). The board did not approve design details; staff will review drainage and stormwater compliance as part of permitting.