Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA March 16, 2021 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. Please join the meeting from your PC, tablet or smartphone at https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/345504621 You can also dial in using your phone at (Toll Free): 1 (866) 899-4679 or 1 (571) 317-3116 with Access Code: 345-504-621 Note for those calling in: The City does not want any board member or attendee to incur any cost to participate in the meeting. If you do not pay a fee for using the long distance service on your telephone, please consider using the long-distance phone number instead of the toll-free number as the City incurs a cost for each toll-free call that is placed. #1 Robert Green Enclosing screened porch 2318 West 59th Street #2 Dustin & Katherine Stiles Replacing siding with new faux shake shingles 6624 Rainbow Avenue #3 Jeff & Tricia Reeder Interior remodel and various exterior modifications 6509 High Drive #4 Bethany & Stephen Reintjes * Garage addition; window replacement 6438 Sagamore Road #5 David & Brooke Ward 2-story garage addition and home addition / site 2840 Verona Road improvements *Variance required. † Substantial Construction 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 Robert Green 2318 West 59th Street The Greens are proposing to enclose their existing screened porch. Summary of Property:  Character Area: Neighborhood Estates  Location of Common Green Space: Front  Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The existing screens will be replaced with new casement windows to match the existing house. At the west elevation, the screens will be infilled with solid walls with siding to match the existing house. All other architectural detailing is remaining unchanged. 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 16, 2021 #2 Dustin & Katherine Stiles 6624 Rainbow Avenue The Stiles are proposing to replace all their existing siding with new faux shake shingles. Summary of Property:  Character Area: Suburban  Location of Common Green Space: Front  Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The existing home has a combination of horizontal lap siding, vertical siding, and brick. All of the vertical and horizontal lap siding will be replaced with Hardie shake shingles. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: While not specifically forbidden, the ARB has typically rejected several of the Hardie shingle products due to their flat appearance. This is especially true of the panelized products. Sample/mockup review is recommended. March 16, 2021 #3 Jeff & Tricia Reeder 6509 High Drive The Readers are proposing an interior remodel that includes various exterior modifications. 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 new addition is proposed at the north side of the existing rear wing. The addition is confined to the second floor and will be supported by columns at the first. All detailing and fenestration matches the existing house. Doors are proposed at the first floor. Also, at the rear/east elevation, an existing notch on the second floor will be filled in to be flush with the remainder of the east and north elevations. No new fenestration is proposed. At the east and south sides of the house, new windows and doors are proposed at the first and second floors. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. March 16, 2021 #4 Bethany & Stephen Reintjes* 6438 Sagamore Road The Reintjeses are proposing to incorporate an existing storage area into their existing garage. As part of the project, new windows are being added to the north elevation. Summary of Property:  Character Area: Suburban  Location of Common Green Space: Front  Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The existing storage area is directly adjacent the existing garage at the rear of the house. The Reintjes are proposing to replace this portion of the house along with the front façade of the existing garage. The gable over the garage will be replaced with a new eyebrow roof that integrates into the roof over the storage area. The storage area doors will be eliminated along with the existing garage doors. Two new garage doors will be added. The existing brick siding will be eliminated and replaced with shingle siding to match the second story. The brick at the back of the garage will remain. At the north side of the house, an existing greenhouse window will be removed and two new double-hung windows will be added in its place. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of Code Section 5-121 A 1 (a) which requires the rear yard have a minimum depth of 20% of the depth of the lot at any given point. At its closest point the existing house is 19.3 feet from the rear property line; 26.4 feet is required. A variance of 7.1 feet is required. Code Section 5-128.C.2 allows for alterations to a nonconforming structure without requiring a variance from the BZA provided that the alteration does not increase the building footprint or height of the nonconforming portion of the structure. Since the rear extension is taller than the existing storage area, the proposed project does not meet these criteria and requires approval from the Board of Zoning Appeals. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 10,226 sf House Footprint: 2,231 sf Driveway: 2,192 sf Patios and walkways: 735 sf Remaining Greenspace: 5,068 sf Design Guideline Review: Section 2.6.4.A on page 89 discourages overbuilding by suggesting that homes avoid reaching more than 2 minimum/maximum setbacks or limits. The existing house violates the minimum rear yard setback and minimum greenspace requirement. This recommendation has not been met. * A variance is required March 16, 2021 Section 2.7.1 D on page 96 recommends that all window muntins on the home be the same pattern and proportion, with few exceptions. The two new proposed windows have horizonal window panes where the existing house has a combination of vertical or square panes. This recommendation has not been met. Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-1 properties have a greenspace no less than 60% of the lot area. This recommendation has not been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(10) LS-1 Lot Area: 10,226 SF Lot Width: 78.75’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 10.1’ (No Change) Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 16.1’ (No Change) Minimum Combined Side Yards: 25% = 19.69’ 26.2’ (No Change) Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 26.4’ 19.3’ (No Change) Maximum Lot Coverage: 3,246’ 2,231 SF (No Change) Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 6,136 sf 5,068 sf = 49.6% March 16, 2021 #5 David & Brooke Ward 2840 Verona Road The Wards are proposing an interior renovation with a new 1,340 sq. ft. 2-story garage addition and a 570 sq. ft. home addition. Various site improvements are proposed as part of the project. Summary of Property:  Character Area: Countryside Estates  Location of Common Green Space: Front  Any Special Frontages: Hillside Lot Coverage Review: Main floor living area: 3,062 sf Main floor garage area: 1,350 sf Covered porches: 838 sf Total Lot Coverage: 5,250 sf Summary of Project: At the front of the house, a new courtyard is proposed outside of a secondary entrance. A new roof covering will also be added to this entrance door. A new walkway will be added to connect the courtyard to the existing circle driveway. They are proposing to widen the existing circle driveway near the house. A new retaining wall is proposed across from the main entrance. Due to the slope of the property, the street side of the wall is the higher elevation and only 6 inches of wall will be visible above grade. A new walkway is proposed to connect the circle driveway to the main entrance. The proposed additions are located at the north side of the house. The garage wing is a full 2- stories with gables on the east, west and south sides. All materials, detailing and fenestration matches the main house. Due to the slope of the property, the garage wing is 3 -stories tall at the rear. The proposed wing connects back to the main house through a rear expansion to the side wing. The driveway near the garage doors will be replaced and reconfigured to allow access to the new garage. The retaining walls along the north side of the driveway will also be reconfigured. Directly to the rear of the new addition, a new terrace is proposed. This will be a lawn area that has been made level with the addition of multiple retaining walls. To the side of the new addition is a utility yard that is surrounded by a stone site wall. Due to the slope of the lot, the yard is integrated into a set of site stairs that connects the driveway to the lower lawn. The utility yard is set at an intermediate landing level. A new monumental stair is proposed to connect the terrace level down to the rear yard. This stair is more of a landscape feature than a traditional stair. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. March 16, 2021 Greenspace Review: Lot area: 93,246 sf House Footprint: 5,250 sf Driveway and walkways: 10,101 sf Remaining Greenspace: 77,895 sf Design Guideline Review: Section 2.2 on pages 60 through 63 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Countryside Estates character area. Subsection C suggests that all side wings be located in the Primary Building Area. They should have a depth and height clearly less than the main mass. They should also be set behind the front plane of the main mass. This recommendation has been met. Subsection F suggests that dormers located on wings or accessory buildings located in the Secondary or Conditional Building Areas should not be oriented toward any neighboring lots. This recommendation has been met. Subsection H allows for compound wings where a secondary wing is attached to a primary wing. The primary wing should follow all the requirements stated above and the secondary wing should be clearly subordinate to the primary wing. 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. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-6 and 7 properties have a greenspace no less than 70% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(E1) LS-7 Lot Area: 93,246 sf Lot Width: 209’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10% = 20.9’ 47.3’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10% = 20.9’ 31.3’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 30% = 113’ >211’ Maximum Lot Coverage: Minimum Greenspace: 70% = 65,272 sf 77,895 sf = 83.5% Drainage Study Required if any answer below is “Yes” Yes/No Is the project adding 1,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface? Yes Will the project cause the greenspace to be less than recommended by the Design Guidelines? No Will the project cause the greenspace to be within 3% of what is recommended by the Design No Guidelines? March 16, 2021