Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA May 11, 2021 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone at https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/981472565 You can also dial in using your phone at (Toll Free): 1 (866) 899-4679 or United States: 1 (571) 317-3116 using Access Code: 981-472-565 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 Consent Agenda A. David & Diane Zimmer – 5924 High Drive Changes to previously approved gate B. David Hinchman – 6430 Willow Lane Multiple window modifications #2 Dustin & Katherine Stiles Replace siding with faux shingles / Replace windows 6624 Rainbow Avenue Cont’d from April 27th ARB mtg #3 David & Diane Zimmer* Changes to previously approved fence 5924 High Drive Cont’d from April 27th ARB mtg #4 Lauren Allen * Artificial turf 6405 High Drive Cont’d from April 27th ARB mtg #5 Leslie Dicker Small driveway extension 2401 West 68th Street #6 Jeffrey & Annie Anderson † New generator, patio expansion, fence, stone walls, 3322 West 68th Street fire pit and outdoor kitchen #7 Linda Watson New DaVinci roof 2100 Arno Road #8 Timothy & Molly Shapker † New patios with outdoor kitchen 2311 West 70th Terrace #9 Drake & Kate Scott * Multiple additions and a new deck 6627 Belinder Avenue #10 Top Choice Contracting LLC † New home and swimming pool 2117 Drury Lane Cont’d from April 13th and April 27th Mtgs *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 Consent Agenda A. David & Diane Zimmer 5924 High Drive The Zimmers are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved iron gates. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The Zimmers are now proposing decorative wooden gates with iron insets. Each gate has an arched top and stands 7 feet tall at the highest point. Please note that gates do not have height restrictions. The proposed hardware is iron to match the insets. 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. May 11, 2021 B. David Hinchman 6430 Willow Lane Mr. Hinchman is proposing multiple window modifications to his home. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Traditional Neighborhood • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: At the front of the house, the shutters on two existing windows are being removed to make way for two new windows on either side of the existing windows. The garage door will also be replaced with a new wood garage door with frosted windows. At the rear of the house, two new storm windows are proposed at existing windows. 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. May 11, 2021 #2 Dustin & Katherine Stiles 6624 Rainbow Avenue The Stiles are proposing to replace all their existing siding with new faux shake shingles. They would also like to replace all the windows on the front of the home and the easterly most window on the north side. This project was tentatively continued at the March 30th meeting so a sample/mockup could be provided to the City for the City Architect and/or City Planner to review. NOTE: A sample of the proposed siding was provided and was not approved by the City Architect or City Planner. A different product will be proposed. 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. The windows will be the same size and location as the existing windows. The windows will be changed from true divided light to simulated divided light. One window has a 60/40 split between the lower and upper sash and is being replaced with a 50/50 split. There is a triple window that is being replaced with a single fixed window. 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. May 11, 2021 #3 David & Diane Zimmer * 5924 High Drive The Zimmers are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved fence project. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: Portions of the fence interfere with an existing tree. The fence construction in this area does not match the pre-approved fence style. Portions of the fence exceed the 6-foot maximum height allowed in the rear yard. The ARB can approve up to a 7-foot fence in the rear yard. Portions of the fence exceed the 6-foot maximum height allowed in the side yard. A shallow swale follows the property line which makes the fence taller on the neighbor’s side. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of City Code Section 5-135 B 2 which limits the height of fences in the side yard to 6 feet. The tallest location found was 7 foot 2 inches. A variance of 14 inches is required. Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. * A variance is required. May 11, 2021 #4 Lauren Allen * 6405 High Drive Ms. Allen is proposing to replace a portion of her rear yard with 1,100 sq. ft. of synthetic turf material. The primary blade/yarn material is polyethylene. This project was continued at the April 27th ARB meeting so an alternate material could be found and the overall area reduced. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Traditional Neighborhood • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The location to be replaced is a free form shape at the center of the rear yard. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of City Code Section 5-132 B 8 (b) that limits the amount of artificial turf in the rear yard to 250 square feet or less. 1,100 square feet are proposed. A variance of 850 square feet is required. The project is further in violation of Code Section 5-132 B 8 (c) which prohibits blade/yarn material to be polyethylene or polyethylene blends. A variance 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. May 11, 2021 #5 Leslie Dicker 2401 West 68th Street Ms. Dicker is proposing a small extension next to her existing circle driveway. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed extension is approximately 100 square feet and is located across from the front door. The surface is cast stone blocks set in sand. 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 72 through 75 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Suburban character area. Subsection G suggests that circle driveways have an interior green no less than 40 feet from back of curb. As proposed, the distance from the new patio to the back of curb is approximately 22 feet. Discussion is recommended. May 11, 2021 #6 Jeffrey & Annie Anderson 3322 West 68th Street The Andersons are returning to the ARB with a new generator, patio expansion, fence, stone walls, fire pit and an outdoor kitchen. This 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 Andersons have been previously approved for a patio extension at the rear of the house. They are now planning to encircle the new patio with 18” tall stone seat walls that match an existing stone wall on the property. At the existing patio, the previously approved fountain has been omitted and a new outdoor grill is proposed. The grill is incorporated into the stone perimeter wall. At the center of the new patio, a new fire pit is proposed. It is to be constructed with an 18” seat wall to match the rest of the patio. Please note, the fire pit is located less than 15 feet from the house; as such it is in violation of the Building Code and cannot be built at this location. 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. The revised design omits the fountain and adds additional planting areas that increased the greenspace by approximately 70 sq. ft. This brings the total greenspace area to 18,126 sq. ft. 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) 57.7% (18,126 SF) May 11, 2021 #7 Linda Watson 2100 Arno Road Ms. Watson is proposing to replace her existing cedar shake roof with a new Davinci Shake roof. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The Davinci faux shake roof is not a pre-approved roofing material and requires ARB 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. May 11, 2021 #8 Timothy & Molly Schapker 2311 West 70th Terrace The Schapkers are proposing new patios in their rear yard that include an outdoor kitchen. This 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 upper patio is located toward the center of the house and the lower is located behind the garage. The two patios are connected by a walkway and steps. Both patios are constructed of concrete pavers. The outdoor kitchen is located at the upper patio. The base cabinet is constructed of the same concrete pavers as the fire pit seat wall. 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. May 11, 2021 #9 Drake & Kate Scott * 6627 Belinder Avenue The Scotts are proposing multiple additions and a new deck. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed “hot tub” deck is located at the right side of the house, behind an existing wing. It consists of a low stair-stepping deck surrounded on one end by a privacy fence. The first addition is located at the rear of the house near the center of the main mass. The rear wall of the house will be extended 6 feet into the rear yard. All siding, detailing and fenestration match the existing house. The existing roof will be extended over the new addition. The second addition is a new screened porch set behind the existing garage and will encapsulate the existing rear patio. The roof is detailed to match the existing. A small portion of the new addition will extend over the existing garage and feature clerestory screens. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of Code Section 5-120 A 1. (b) that requires the sum width of the side yards, of an LS-3 lot, be no less than 30% of the lot width. For this lot, 31.2’ is required, but 26.6 feet have been provided. Please note, this is the existing condition, however the proposed porch addition extenda the issue on the left side of the house. Design Guideline Review: Section 2.5 on pages 72 through 75 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Suburban character area. Subsection C suggests that side wings, located in the conditional building area should have a height up to 1 story and 16 feet with no second-floor dormers that overlook the neighbors. These recommendations have been met. Subsection D suggests that rear wings located in the secondary building areas can be up to 1 1/2 stories and 24 feet tall but clearly less than the main mass and no more than 30 feet deep. The proposed rear wing is incorporated into the main mass and meets these recommendations. 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. * A variance is required. May 11, 2021 Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-3, 4 and 5 properties have a greenspace no less than 65% of the lot area. This recommendation has not been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-3 Lot Area: 20,957 sf Lot Width: 104.0’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ 13.0’ Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 11.0’ (Existing) Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 15.6’ (Existing) Minimum Combined Side Yards: 30% = 31.2’ 26.6’ (Existing) Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 45.0’ 74.0’ Patio/Deck Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 21.7’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 5335.3 sf 4,174 sf Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 13,622 sf 62.2% = 13,034 sf Drainage Study Required if any answer below is “Yes” Yes/No Is the project adding 1,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface? No Will the project cause the greenspace to be less than recommended by the Design Guidelines? Yes Will the project cause the greenspace to be within 3% of what is recommended by the Design N/A Guidelines? May 11, 2021 #10 Top Choice Contracting LLC 2117 Drury Lane The new owners are proposing a new 2-story home with a 3,636 sq. ft. footprint. The footprint consists of 2,547 sq. ft. of first floor living space, and an 880 sq. ft. 3-car garage. The project includes a swimming pool with a large patio and an auto-court driveway. The proposed project is a substantial construction matter and was noticed as such. The project was continued at the March 2nd ARB meeting with the requirement that the project return to the PRP for further review. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The house is a contemporary style sided in a combination of stone and stucco. The main mass of the house is 2 stories. The main mass is flanked on both sides and the front by one-story side wings. The windows are all clear-view and most are fixed. The window arrangement is fairly formal on all sides of the house. The roof is comprised of multiple planes that all appear to have the same pitch. The new first floor elevation is approximately 2 feet higher than the existing grade. The main floor sits 5 feet higher than the house to the right and 5 feet lower than the home to the left. The main ridge is 7.4 feet higher than the home to the right and 4 feet lower than the home to the left. Due to the different styles of the adjacent homes, eave lines are significantly different with the proposed house having eaves 14 feet higher than the home to the right and 5 feet lower than the home to the left. Significant grading is proposed at the southwest corner of the lot. An auto-court is located near the garages and is positioned to accommodate all three garages. A hammer-head portion of the auto-court extends in front of the house along the front walkway. The pool is proposed at the rear of the main mass. It is surrounded on all sides by a new terrace. A retaining wall is proposed at the west side. There is no indication of a code compliant pool barrier at this time. Pool equipment location is shown to the south of the single-car garage and we assume A/C units will be located there as well, but clarification is required. Update: Revised drawings have been provided. Eaves were extended, the ridge line lowered, and windows were changed. The front entry was revised and a 6” metal trim piece was added at the eave line. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. May 11, 2021 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 48 feet wide (45%), the main meets this recommendation. This section goes on to suggest that the depth of the main mass should be 25% of the lot width. At 50 feet deep, the depth of the main mass is significantly more than 25% of the lot width. Subsection B suggests that front wings have a width not to exceed 50% of the main mass width. This recommendation has been met. Subsection D suggests that rear wings located in the primary or secondary building areas can be up to 2 stories and 30 feet tall providing that their height is less than the main mass. This recommendation has been met. This section goes on to suggest that rear wings should have a width clearly less than the main mass and should not exceed 50% of the main mass width. 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. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.2.B on page 102 recommends drives be no more than 12 feet wide at the front property line. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-1 properties have a minimum of 60% greenspace. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.6.4.A on page 89 discourages overbuilding by suggesting that homes avoid reaching more than 2 minimum/maximum setbacks or limits. This recommendation has been met. Professional Review Panel Recommendation: The Professional Review Panel recommends approval. See PRP Recommendation. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(20)/LS-1 Lot Area: 15,983 SF Lot Width: 106’ May 11, 2021  Ordinance Allowable/Required by Ord Proposed Maximum Height: 35’ 24’-10” Minimum Front Yard: 50’ 50’ Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 11.1’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 16.5’ 25% Combined Side Yards: 26.5’ 27.6’ Minimum Rear Yard: (20%) 30’ (At closest point) 46.5’ Lot Coverage Limit: 4,420 SF 3,395 SF Minimum Greenspace Required: 60% (9,591 SF) 9,675 SF = 60.5% Existing Address Lot Area Lot LC by Ordinance % max used Coverage 2117 Drury Ln 15,983 2,761 4,420 62.47% 2100 Drury Ln 18,125 2,212 4,823 45.86% 2032 Drury Ln 13,036 1,998 3,836 52.09% 2020 Drury Ln 21,745 2,994 5,474 54.69% 2035 Drury Ln 13,967 1,825 4,024 45.35% 6101 High Dr 21,239 2,438 5,385 45.27% 6105 High Dr 15,384 1,734 4,304 40.29% 2112 Brookwood 19,653 4,406 5,102 86.35% 2100 Brookwood 14,744 3,052 4,179 73.04% 2040 Brookwood 14,345 1,973 4,100 48.13% Average 55.35% 50% Increase 83.03% Allowable LC reduced by 150% Rule 3,670 = 2117 Drury Ln Proposed = 3,395 76.8% of City Ordinance Limit 92.5% of Design Guideline Limit May 11, 2021