Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Design topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architectural board approves revised plans for 8819 Powell with lower roof and 1-foot raised heel
Summary
The Brentwood Architectural Review Board approved revised plans for a single-family home at 8819 Powell, requiring the raised-heel truss be reduced to 1 foot (12 inches) and directing the applicant to lower front gable pitches to 8/12 to reduce perceived massing; the vote was unanimous.
The Brentwood Architectural Review Board voted unanimously to approve revised drawings for a single-family house at 8819 Powell after the applicant agreed to reduce roof height and adjust the porch and gable proportions.
"My name is JR Mayer with Prestige Custom Homes presenting the single family home at 8819 Powell," the applicant said during the board's review. Board members pressed for changes after earlier concern that the roofline read higher than neighboring, predominantly one-story homes.
The board directed the applicant to reduce the raised-heel truss to 1 foot (12 inches) and to lower the front-gable pitch to an 8/12 slope on the hip and side gables to reduce the building's apparent mass without reducing interior square footage. Chair Matt Forman summarized the direction: "We're gonna lower the raised heel to 1 foot," and members agreed to allow a tolerance of "1 foot or less TBD" to give the applicant's engineers room to finalize truss details.
Members weighed the tradeoffs between structural/insulation benefits of a raised-heel truss and neighborhood scale, noting a raised heel can add about a foot to the apparent elevation. Several board members suggested incremental reductions (for example 10–12 inches) and asked the applicant to consult truss engineers to confirm the final geometry and flashing details.
No public commenters addressed the Powell submission during the meeting. A motion to approve the revised drawings "as noted" passed on a roll call: Carl Carlin, Paul Turner and Chair Matt Forman each voted yes.
The board's approval covered architectural review only; members and staff reiterated that civil engineering, drainage and building-permit questions (including flashing, grading and stormwater measures) remain subject to separate permitting and inspections.
The board asked staff to annotate the approved set with the agreed wind/roof instructions so those comments are available at building-permit review.
