Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA March 3, 2020 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:30 p.m. #1 CONSENT AGENDA A. David & Diane Zimmer – 5924 High Drive Putting Green B. Richard & Karen Luchinsky – 2401 W 70th Street Replace pool paving C. Kelly & Adam Wells – 2511 W 64th Street Replace door and windows #2 James McGinness & Nancy Lombardino * New outdoor fireplace 5400 State Line Road CONT’D TO APRIL 14TH Continued from December 17th ARB mtg #3 Valerie Brandmeyer Replace roof, doors, and windows 3200 W 67th Street Continued from February 18th ARB mtg #4 Ajay Bansal & Aditi Gupta Replace doors and windows 2409 W 70th Street Continued from February 18th ARB mtg #5 Cory & Mallory Van Dyke New covered front porch and walkway 2208 Tomahawk Road #6 Andy & Megan Pence New patio, deck, and retaining wall 2941 Verona Road #7 Judy Gahagan Addition, front courtyard, rear patio, 6305 Aberdeen Road & cosmetic modifications #8 Leonard & Sheila Fleske * New Residence 2221 W 63rd Street * Variance required The Mission Hills Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) provides that the BZA shall determine whether or not an ARB decision was reasonable based upon the evidence presented to the ARB and the record of the ARB proceedings. Testimony at the BZA hearing will be limited to a discussion of the evidence presented to the ARB. No new evidence will be considered. #1 Consent Agenda A. David & Diane Zimmer 5924 High Drive The Zimmers are proposing a putting green in their rear yard. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The Zimmers are proposing a new artificial turf putting green in their rear yard. The ARB had approved the putting green at a previous meeting; however, it had not been noticed as a substantial construction project. Substantial Construction notices have now been sent. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. March 3, 2020 B. Richard & Karen Luchinsky 2401 West 70th Street The Luchinskys are proposing to replace the existing paving around their pool with new bluestone paving. Additional new landscaping will be provided along the rear edge of the pool. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The pool and pool deck are an existing non-conforming structure. The overall shape of the patio/pool deck is not being altered as part of this project. In addition to the pool deck, a new French drain system will be added at the rear of the property and tied into an existing system. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of Code Section 5-121.D that requires all outdoor recreational facilities, such as pools, to be a minimum of 20 feet from the rear or side property line. As it exists, the pool is located less than 20 feet from the rear line. However, Code Section 5- 128.C.1 allows the replacement of certain existing nonconforming structures without a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals. A variance is not required. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. March 3, 2020 C. Kelly & Adam Wells 2511 West 64th Street The Wellses are proposing an interior remodel that includes the replacement of a door and windows at the rear and side of their home. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: At the west side of the house, an existing door is being replaced with a new all-glass door. An adjacent window is being replaced with a new, slightly smaller, window of the same style. At the rear of the house, an existing double-hung window is being replaced with a new unit of the same size and style. A pair of casement windows is being replaced with a single fixed window that had a muntin pattern to match the rest of the house. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. March 3, 2020 #2 James McGinness & Nancy Lombardino * 5400 State Line Road The property owners are proposing a new outdoor fireplace on an existing patio. This project was continued at the December 17th ARB meeting, at the owner’s request. The ARB required that the fireplace be relocated to a location that does not require a variance. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed fireplace is constructed with stone and brick and stands 12 feet tall at its highest point. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of Code section 5-120 C which requires accessory structures be located a minimum of 10 feet from the side property line. The fireplace is proposed at 4 feet from the property line. A variance of 6 feet is required. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. * A variance is required. March 3, 2020 #3 Valerie Brandmeyer 3200 West 67th Street Ms. Brandmeyer is proposing an interior remodel that includes replacing the roof, doors and windows. This project was continued at the February 18th ARB meeting so the design could be modified. New drawings will be provided at the meeting. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The materials of the new roof have not been indicated; clarification is required. At the rear of the house, an existing sliding glass door is being replaced with a new single 6- panel door. Also at the rear of the house, an existing triple panel door will be replaced with a horizontal clear-view window. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: Section 2.7.1 D on page 96 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for windows and doors. This section suggests that windows should match the given style of building chosen. The proposal to change from divided light doors to a clear view window is not in keeping with the home’s traditional appearance. This recommendation has not been met. March 3, 2020 #4 Ajay Bansal & Aditi Gupta 2409 West 70th Street The Bansal/Guptas are proposing an interior remodel that includes replacing doors and windows at the back of the house. This project was continued at the February 18th ARB meeting so the design could be modified. New drawings will be provided at the meeting. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: At the rear of the house, multiple windows, doors and trim will be removed. One door will remain and be reinstalled as a full glass door. Two sets of triple sliding glass doors will be added. Another large section of windows will be replaced with a single clear-view horizontal window. Above the horizontal window is a new copper exhaust hood. It is not clear how far from the house the hood will extend. Clarification is required. In addition to the items listed above, a section of brick walkway will be removed. New stoops will be added to correspond with the new doors. The materials for these new stoops has not been indicated. Clarification is required. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: Section 2.7.1 D on page 96 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for windows and doors. This section suggests that windows should match the given style of building chosen. All of the proposed windows are doors are clear-view which is not in keeping with the home’s traditional appearance. This recommendation has not been met. March 3, 2020 #5 Cory C. & Mallory Van Dyke 2208 Tomahawk Road The Van Dykes are proposing a new covered front porch and walkway. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The front porch is a low concrete stoop with brick edging. The roof is gabled with pitches that match the main house. The roof structure is supported on square columns and includes pilasters at the main house. A new walkway is proposed to connect the driveway to the new porch. The width of this walkway is not indicated. Clarification is required. Ordinance Compliance: While the porch is greater than 60 square feet, less than 60 square feet of the porch protrudes into the minimum front yard. There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. March 3, 2020 #6 Andy & Megan Pence 2941 Verona Road The Pences are proposing a new bluestone patio and composition deck in their side yard and a new stone retaining wall in their front yard. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new deck will attach to an existing composition deck at the side of the house. A new stair will connect the deck to a new bluestone patio. A second, smaller patio is proposed at the side of the house, with a new steppingstone walkway accessing the side yard. Several existing brick patios and walks, in the same area, will be removed. The new retaining wall is 2 feet 3 inches tall at its highest point. It will be located between the existing circle driveway and the house. Two small plinths are proposed near the house to hold decorative urns. A small portion of the existing driveway will be removed to make way for the new wall. The front stoop will also be repaved with bluestone. As part of the project, the 4-foot tall side yard fence will be modified to run straight across the yard, aligned with the front of the house. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. March 3, 2020 #7 Judy Gahagan 6305 Aberdeen Road Ms. Gahagan is proposing a whole house remodel that includes a new addition at the rear of the house, a front courtyard, a new rear patio, and various cosmetic modifications. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: All of the home’s existing siding will be replaced with new stucco. Similarly, all of the windows will be replaced with new units of a different style, size and configuration. The existing driveway will be replaced with a new concrete driveway, in the same configuration. At the front of the house, a new front door is proposed along with a new entry courtyard. The main wall of the courtyard aligns with the front of the house. The courtyard wall will be clad with stucco to match the house. Light fixtures are proposed at the entrance pilasters. A new, smaller, cupola will replace the existing at the front wing. A new concrete walkway is proposed to connect to the existing driveway. The new addition is at the south side of the rear of the house. It is a single-story structure with materials and fenestration to match the main house. A new brick chimney is proposed at the rear of the new addition. The new rear patio is located in the space between the two rear wings. A stucco wall, to match the front courtyard wall, is proposed at the rear of the patio. Light fixtures are proposed on the stucco wall. At the south side of the house, a new patio and side entrance is proposed. An existing side door was existing. Now a small portico is proposed to cover the entrance. A steppingstone walkway connects the new patio to the side entrance in the new addition. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. March 3, 2020 #8 Leonard & Sheila Fleske 2221 West 63rd Street The Fleskes are proposing a new 5,125 sq. ft. Hampton Style home with a 4,065 sq. ft. footprint. The footprint consists of 3,850 sq. ft. of first floor space, a 576 sq. ft. garage, and 215 sq. ft. of covered porches. An additional 1,275 sq. ft. are proposed on the second floor. The project includes a front entry garage and a front auto-court. The proposed project is a substantial construction matter and was noticed as such. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The main mass of the house is one-story with second floor dormers. The main mass is flanked on the left by a single-story wing. Due to the slope of the property, a large amount of the stone foundation is exposed. The right-side wing contains the two-car garage. The house is sided primarily with shingle siding. Stone is being indicated for exposed foundations and wainscoting at the front of the house. The lot has a significant slope down from west to east. A large retaining wall is proposed along the west side and rear of the house to provide a flat spot to site the house. The new first floor elevation is approximately the same as the previous house, but the main mass has been moved slightly west toward the center of the lot. The main floor sits approximately 16 feet lower than the home to the right (west) and the main ridge is approximately 7 feet lower. Windows are a combination of double-hung and casements, with the casements being used at strategic locations, all with muntin bars. At the front of the house, windows stack from the first to second floor. The window arrangement remains fairly formal at the sides and rear. All of the windows have extensive trim. The roof is composite shingles with most having a 12/12 pitch. Two large areas on the wings reduce down to flat roofs. A concrete driveway is proposed at 12 feet wide at the entrance and widens into an auto-court near the house. To accommodate the auto-court, a series of retaining walls are being proposed along the east side of the driveway. At the rear of the house, a large patio with a built-in grill and water feature is being proposed. The rear and side yards are being terraced, due to the lot slope. The outer retaining wall is proposed as stacked stone using large stones. A second, inner wall is proposed as a mortared stone wall to match the foundation walls. A pervious gravel path connects the main patio to the front driveway. Another pervious pea gravel patio is proposed to the east of the main patio. At the west side of the house, across from the garage is a small mechanical yard that is recessed into the terraced retaining walls. This will house the homes A/C units and a generator. March 3, 2020 Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of Code Section 5-119.C which forbids accessory structures in the front yard. The proposed walls around the auto-court do not meet the definition of a retaining wall or courtyard wall. A variance is required. Design Guideline Review: Section 2.3 on pages 64 through 67 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Neighborhood Estates character area. Subsection A suggests that the main mass of the house should be between 40% and 50% of the lot width. At 39 feet wide (21%), the main mass is narrower than recommended, however due to the odd shape of the lot and the narrow buildable area, the ARB might find this acceptable. This section goes on to suggest that the depth of the main mass should be 25% of the lot width. The depth of the main mass is roughly equal to the width. Discussion is recommended. Subsection B suggests that front wings have a width clearly less than the main mass with the total of all wings being less than 50% of the main mass width. The wings combined are wider than the main mass. This recommendation has not been met. Subsection C recommends side wings should be set back behind the front of the main mass. The left side wing is set back a few feet from the front of the house, but the right wing aligns with the front of the house. This recommendation has not been met. This section also recommends that side wings located in the Secondary Building Area be limited to 2 stories and 30 feet in height. This recommendation has been met. This section goes on to recommend that side wings located in the Conditional Building Area be limited to 1 ½ stories with 12 foot eaves and a maximum height of 24 feet. These recommendations have been met. Subsection D recommends rear wings located in the Second Building Area have a height up to 2 stories and be no more than 30 feet tall. This recommendation has been met. This section also recommends that rear wings be limited to two. This recommendation has been met. Subsection F recommends that dormer orientation be taken into consideration especially when located in the Secondary or Conditional Building Areas. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.6.4 on page 89 of the Design Guidelines provides recommendations for lot coverage. The section suggests that lot coverage be limited and should not exceed an increase of 50% over the average percentage maximum lot coverage that is being used by the neighboring properties. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.2 A on page 101 recommends garages be set behind the façade of the main house mass. The garage wing aligns with the front of the house. This recommendation has not been met. Section 2.7.2 B 2 on page 103 recommends the width of direct driveways not exceed 12 feet within 30 feet of the curb. This recommendation has been met. March 3, 2020 Section 2.7.3 B 2 on page 107 recommends that retaining walls at frontages be discouraged and if they are located within the front yard they should be limited to 2 feet tall. The height of the walls around the auto-court has not been indicated, but does exceed 2 feet. This recommendation has not been met. PRP Recommendation: The PRP reviewed the project on January 29th and again on February 5th. The PRP discussed the Design Guideline issues above and found that due to the uniqueness of the lot and difficult access to the lot, the discrepancies were acceptable. The PRP like the overall design of the project but did recommend a few changes to the project that all were addressed. The only issue still remaining were some detailing issues at the front of the house. The PRP recommends that the project be approved with the following changes: The front dormer shall be reduced in size to make it more in proportion to the first-floor window below and a second option be presented for the front tower that reduces the size of the front panels. Updated drawings that meet these recommendations have been provided to the ARB. March 3, 2020  Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-4 Lot Area: 28,178 SF Lot Width: 183’ Ordinance Allowable/Required by Ord Proposed Maximum Height: 35’ 33.75 Above Average Grade Minimum Front Yard: 60’ 62.1’ Minimum Side Yard (Left): 27.45’ 65.7’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 27.45’ 27.5’ Minimum Rear Yard: 22.28’ (At Closest Point) 32.4’ (15% of Lot Depth for Corner Lots) Lot Coverage: 6,554 4,065 = 62.0% of Ordinance Max Existing Lot Address Lot Area LC by Ordinance % max used Coverage 2221 W 63rd St 28,178 1,486 6,554 22.7% 6235 Mission Dr 15,893 2,437 4,402 55.4% 6200 Mission Dr 28,452 1,958 6,599 29.7% 2223 W 63rd St 14,492 2,058 4,129 49.8% 2227 W 63rd St 14,775 2,008 4,185 48.0% 2200 Tomahawk 17,822 2,809 4,767 58.9% 2112 Tomahawk 18,389 2,654 4,872 54.5% 2100 Tomahawk 34,103 2,596 7,484 34.7% Average 44.2% 50% Increase 66.3% 2221 W 63rd St 28,178 Proposed = 4,065 6,554 62.0% Recommended Lot Coverage as reduced by 150% Rule 4,347 93.5% March 3, 2020