Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA November 10th, 2020 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. #1 CONSENT AGENDA A. Bill & Sue Douglas − 5832 High Drive Changes to previously approved project B. Paul Jager − 6505 High Drive A/C replacement C. Curt & Jennifer Krizek − 3515 West 64th Street Changes to previously approved patio D. William Lynn − 2301 West 63rd Street New driveway, gate and walkway E. Bruce & Elizabeth Pendleton − 6444 Indian Lane Replacement of windows and adding bay window F. Michael & Cathy Schultz − 2209 Arno Road Changes to previously approved project #2 Gregg Johnson Proposed sculpture in front yard 2530 West 63rd Street Continued from October 27th meeting #3 Catherine Allin Replacing retaining wall and fence 2902 West 67th Terrace Continued from October 27th meeting #4 Lynne Beaver Replace driveway & add rear patio 6449 Verona Road Continued from October 27th meeting #5 Jeffrey Goldstein Replacing rear and side windows 6215 Ensley Lane #6 Jeffrey & Annie Anderson Patio extension / New fence return and generator pad 3322 West 68th Street / Modification of existing driveway #7 Jimmy & Cortney Edwards Outdoor Kitchen 2200 West 70th Street #8 Mike & Allison Hughes Replacing rear windows 3841 West 64th Street #9 Chris Hermreck Replacing rear windows 2319 West 70th Terrace #10 Kai & Susanne Ringenson * New deck over patio 6525 Willow Lane *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. Bill & Sue Ann Douglas 5832 High Drive The Douglases are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved project. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The front door has been changed from a wooden door with horizontal grooves to a wooden door with decorative panels in a different style. At the north/right side of the home, the grouping of windows on the right middle side of the elevation have been changed from a series of 6 windows to a shorter version with 3 windows and a more substantial header. 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. November 10, 2020 B. Paul Jager 6505 High Drive The Jagers are proposing to replace their existing A/C Unit with a new unit in the same location. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed unit is located on the right side of the house. Please note that the view from the street has been adequately screened with vegetation. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of Code Section 5-120.C that requires all accessory structures to be a minimum of 10 feet from the side property 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. November 10, 2020 C. Curt & Jennifer Krizek 3515 West 64th Street The Krizeks are proposing to expand a previously approved patio by 4 feet. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The patio is located at the center of the rear yard. 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. November 10, 2020 D. William Lynn 2301 West 63rd Street Mr. Lynn is proposing to replace his existing driveway with a new driveway with a brick border, add a driveway gate, and reconfigure a brick walkway Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new driveway will be in the same location as the existing driveway. The driveway is approximately 16 feet wide at the front property line. The proposed driveway gate is 40 inches tall at its highest points and is designed to match the existing courtyard gate. A new brick inlay will be added to the driveway at the gate’s location. A brick walkway will be reconfigured to avoid interfering with the gate in its open condition. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: Section 2.7.2.B.1 recommends drive widths should not be more than 12 feet wide at the property line. This recommendation has not been met. Discussion is recommended. Please note, this is an existing condition. November 10, 2020 E. Bruce & Elizabeth Pendleton 6444 Indian Lane The Pendletons are proposing an interior remodel that includes the replacement of several windows and the addition of a new boxed bay window. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed boxed bay window is located at the east/right side of the house, over an existing screened porch. All the other windows to be replaced will be replaced with units of the same size and style. Please note, the design is reusing drawings which indicate other elements that were previously approved. Only the highlighted items are included in this review. 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. November 10, 2020 F. Michael & Cathy Schultz 2209 Arno Road The Schultzes are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved project. A window on the east side of the house has been eliminated from the project scope. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: At the east side of the house, the original approval included two existing windows being relocated and a new matching window added. The Schultzes have decided not to add the third window. The other two will be relocated as planned. 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. November 10, 2020 #2 Gregg Johnson 2530 West 63rd Street Mr. Johnson is proposing a new sculpture in his front yard. Code section 5-103.13 states that when art is attached to a structure that is required for support, it shall be subject to ARB review. The project was continued at the October 27th meeting at the owner’s request. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed sculpture is located in the front yard in a planting bed between the main house and an existing circle drive. Ordinance Compliance: Since code section 5-103.13 and 5-103.119 define the sculpture as a structure, the project is in violation of code section 5-119 C which forbids structures in the front yard. Please note that 5-119 C 3 provides an exception for art, but only when not attached to a structure. A variance is required. 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. November 10, 2020 #3 Catherine Allin 2902 West 67th Terrace Ms. Allin is proposing to replace an existing retaining wall and fence along the east side of her property. The project was continued from the October 27th ARB meeting so that samples of a different manufactured stone could be placed on site for review by the Board. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: Creekside Summary of Project: The Allins have a failing railroad tie retaining wall along the side of their property that is adjacent to a creek wall near the street. They are proposing to replace the wall with a new concrete pavestone retaining wall. The fence to be replaced is the side return near the proposed wall. The proposed fence is a pre- approved style that is being located 15 feet back from the front plane 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: Section 2.7.3 D on page 110 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for Grading and retaining. This section suggest grading to preserve natural landforms and only use retaining walls when necessary and strongly discourages retaining walls in front yards. It goes on to suggest that if a retaining wall is necessary, it should be limited in height and designed to harmonize with the naturalistic landscape of the lot and made of natural, rustic materials. The proposed concrete wall does not meet these recommendations. Discussion is recommended. November 10, 2020 #4 Lynne Beaver 6449 Verona Road Ms. Beaver is proposing to replace her existing circle driveway with a new driveway in a similar configuration. She is also proposing a new patio at the rear of the house. Continued from the October 27th ARB meeting so that a new site plan could be provided with the requested changes. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The circle driveway will be replaced in kind with the following exceptions: the new driveway will be concrete, the width near the house will be reduced and the left side will be straightened to follow the property line. The new patio is a freeform shape that will replace an existing rectilinear patio. It is not clear if the existing retaining wall will stay or be removed. 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 2.3 on pages 64 through 67 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Neighborhood Estates character area. Subsection G recommends that circle driveways have an interior green no less than 80 feet wide with a depth no less than half the width. The proposed interior green is 88 feet wide and 40 feet deep. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.2.B.1 recommends drive widths should not be more than 12 feet wide at the property line. This recommendation has not been met. Discussion is recommended. Please note, this is an existing condition. Section 2.7.1.A on page 106 of the Design Guidelines recommends that LS-3 lots have a minimum greenspace area no less than 65% of the total lot area. For this lot, that is 14,224 SF of greenspace, 12,968 SF has been provided. This is 1,256 SF less than the recommended area. This recommendation has not been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(20)/LS-3 Lot Area: 21,882 SF Ordinance Allowable/Required Provided Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ (By Ordinance) 18.92’ Patio Minimum rear Yard: 20’ (By Ordinance) 26.99’ Greenspace: 65% = 14,224 SF 12,968 SF = 59.3% November 10, 2020 #5 Jeffrey Goldstein 6215 Ensley Lane Mr. Goldstein is replacing several windows at the rear and side of his home. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new windows are the same size as the existing, but some of the styles are changing. At the side of the house a triple casement is being proposed as a double casement and at the rear of the house a quadruple casement is proposed as a single picture window. None of the proposed windows include muntin bars. 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 muntins should be provided to match the architectural style of the house. The house currently has a variety of muntin styles, and the proposed windows do not help to unify the home’s windows. The recommendation has not been met. November 10, 2020 #6 Jeffrey & Annie Anderson 3322 West 68th Street The Andersons are proposing a patio extension, new fence returns, and generator pad. They also propose to modify their existing circle driveway. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed patio extension is at the rear of the existing stone patio. The proposed generator pad is located at the back side of the detached garage. Please note that the detached garage and associated hardscape were previously approved. The driveway modifications include narrowing the west drive approach to 12 feet wide and narrowing the east drive approach to 13 feet wide. Near the house, the driveway will widen to 18 feet wide. The fence returns are located at the front of the side wings on both sides of the house and at the front of the detached garage. The fences are similar to a pre-approved style and meet all required setbacks. 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.A on page 106 of the Design Guidelines recommends that LS-5 lots have a minimum greenspace area no less than 65% of the total lot area. For this lot, that is 20,419 SF of greenspace. Before the patio and generator pad addition, the property had 18,794 square feet of greenspace or 59.8%. The patio and pad reduce that area by 738 square feet, leaving 18,056 sq. ft. of greenspace or 57.5%. This recommendation has not been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-5 Lot Area: 31,414 SF Ordinance Allowable/Required by Ord Proposed Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 15’ 46.16’ Patio Minimum Side Yard: 15’ 50.48’ Minimum Greenspace: 65% (20,419 SF) 57.5% (18,056 SF) November 10, 2020 #7 Jimmy & Cortney Edwards 2200 West 70th Street The Edwards are proposing an outdoor kitchen. Outdoor kitchens are substantial construction matters as defined by Code sections 5-103.78 and 5- 103.122 and was noticed as such. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The outdoor kitchen consists of a small counter at the back of the screened porch chimney. It features a built-in grill. Please note that the screened porch and patio were reviewed at a previous meeting. 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. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-3 Lot Area: 20,258 SF Lot Width: 130’ Ordinance Allowable/Required Provided Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ (By Ordinance) 20.7’ (Existing) Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ (By Ordinance) 20.35’ (Existing) Minimum Combined Side Yards: 39’ 41.05’ (Existing) (30% of Mean Lot Width) Lot Coverage: 5,211 SF 3,676 SF (70% of Max) Greenspace: 65% = 13,168 SF 13,630 SF = 67.3% November 10, 2020 #8 Mike & Allison Hughes 3841 West 64th Street The Hughes are proposing to replace windows at the rear of their home. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: All of the windows being replaced are similar to the existing, with a few exceptions. All of the proposed windows will be a bronze color, the transoms at windows #6 will be eliminated and a taller unit will be installed, and window #5 is being changed from a quad to a triple unit. 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. November 10, 2020 #9 Chris Hermreck 2319 West 70th Terrace The Hermrecks are proposing to replace windows at the rear of their home. 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, a pair of casement windows and a pair of double-hung windows will be replaced with a triple casement window. Since the proposed window is so wide, each sash of the window will be wider than it is tall. That changes the muntin spacing to be square or slightly rectangular where each pane is wider than it is tall. 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 recommends that windows have vertical proportions. It goes on to suggest that window muntin spacing be consistent throughout the house. Discussion is recommended. November 10, 2020 #10 Kai & Susanne Ringenson* 6525 Willow Lane The Ringensons are proposing a new deck over the top of their existing patio. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The Ringensons are proposing a new deck over their existing rear yard patio. The proposed deck is cedar and will follow the exact shape of the patio. Along the north and east sides of the deck, a 6 foot high privacy lattice is proposed. The remaining sides will have a 3 foot high picket railing. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of Code Section 5-120.D which requires patios and decks, with an LS-1 lot size, to have a minimum side yard setback of 15 feet. A variance of 7.19 feet is required. The project is further in violation of Code Section 5-121.D which requires patios and decks, with an LS-1 lot size, to have a minimum rear yard setback of 15 feet. A variance of 9.63 feet is required. Please note the existing patio is an existing non-conforming use that is in violation of these same code sections. Design Guideline Review: Section 2.7.1.A on page 106 of the Design Guidelines recommends that LS-1 lots have a minimum greenspace area no less than 60% of the total lot area. For this lot, that is 9,285 SF of greenspace, 8,651 SF has been provided. This is 634 SF less than the recommended area. This recommendation has not been met. Please note this is an existing condition. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-1 Lot Area: 15,475 SF Ordinance Allowable/Required by Ord Proposed Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 15’ 5.37’ (Existing) Patio Minimum Side Yard: 15’ 7.19’ (Existing) Minimum Greenspace: 60% (9,285 SF) 55.9% (8,651 SF) * A variance is required. November 10, 2020