Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA August 17, 2021 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. The meeting will be held in-person at City Hall. If you wish to join virtually, you can find the login on the City Calendar at www.missionhillsks.gov #1 Consent Agenda A. Mission Hills Country Club – 5400 Mission Drive Replacing existing tennis court B. Daniel & Marie Pfeifer – 6730 Tomahawk Road Replacing roof over front porch C. Scott Allen – 5830 High Drive Adding circle drive and replace front sidewalk #2 Tanya Trost Circle driveway and patio extension 2520 West 63rd Street Project cont’d from Aug 3rd meeting #3 David & Diane Zimmer* Light fixtures on front walls 5924 High Drive Project cont’d from Aug 3rd meeting #4 Kevin Yoder Roof replacement 6420 Wenonga Terrace #5 Sal Cessor Replacing existing driveway 2833 Tomahawk Cir #6 Scott & Kathy McAdams Replacing existing driveway 6416 Ensley Lane #7 Jeremy & Nancy Stewart Modifications to rear and sides of home 3317 Tomahawk Road #8 Jeffrey Leinbach Rear addition 3820 West 65th Terrace #9 Joshua & Stacy Herron † New pool / Covered pool terrace / Outdoor 2624 Verona Road fireplace / Outdoor kitchen / Artificial turf #10 Resolution Authorizing Administrative Approval of Certain Exterior Work *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. Mission Hills Country Club 5400 Mission Drive The Mission Hills Country Club is proposing to replace its existing tennis court with a new court in the same location. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Golf Club District • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed court is the same size and layout as the existing court. 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. August 17, 2021 B. Daniel & Marie Pfeifer 6730 Tomahawk Road The Pfeifers are requesting approval of a roof replacement over their front porch. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new roof is standing seam in copper. 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. August 17, 2021 C. Scott Allan 5830 High Drive The Allans are proposing to add a circle driveway and replace their front sidewalk. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new sidewalk and patio will replace the existing in the same footprints. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 18,728 sf House Footprint: 1,674 sf Detached garage: 1,010 sf Patios: 777 sf Sidewalk: 206 sf Existing Driveway: 2,816 sf Proposed Circle Driveway: 945 sf Remaining Greenspace: 11,300 sf 60.3% 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 suggests that circle driveways should have an interior green no less than 80 feet wide and 40 feet deep. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-1 and 2 properties have a greenspace no less than 60% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(10)/LS-2 Lot Area: 18,728 sf Lot Width: 100.5’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 11,237 sf 11,300 = 60.3% 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? No Will the project cause the greenspace to be within 3% of what is recommended by the Design Yes Guidelines? August 17, 2021 #2 Tanya Trost 2520 West 63rd Street The Trosts are proposing a new circle driveway and patio extension. This project was continued at the August 3rd meeting so the driveway could be reconfigured to improve the amount greenspace. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new driveway connects the existing 20.5-foot wide driveway to a new drive approach. The interior green is 62 feet wide and 36 feet deep. They are also proposing an additional concrete step around their previously approved patio. The new step is proposed to be at grade so it will be level with the adjacent yard; however, the grade changes required to make that step at grade is not reflected on the proposed site plan. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 22,150 sf House Footprint (with Patios): 5,095 sf Additional Patio: 100 sf Existing Driveway: 2,400 sf Additional Driveway: 1,130 sf Remaining Greenspace: 13,425 sf 60.6% 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 suggests that circle driveways should have an interior green no less than 80 feet wide and 40 feet deep. This recommendation has not been met. 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(30)/LS-3 Lot Area: 22,150 sf Lot Width: 111.94’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 14,398 sf 13,425 sf = 60.6% 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? Yes Will the project cause the greenspace to be within 3% of what is recommended by the Design Yes Guidelines? August 17, 2021 #3 David & Diane Zimmer* 5924 High Drive The Zimmers are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved addition project. This project was continued at the August 3rd meeting so the precise location of the proposed light fixture could be provided, or an alternate design presented 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 original brick return wall on the south side of the home included a lantern light. The Zimmers are proposing to reinstall this type of fixture on the new wall. Additionally, they are proposing to add another light on the opposite wall for symmetry. The new fixtures will match the previous fixtures. The light fixtures will be placed on the far end of each of the walls. Ordinance Compliance: Mission Hills Code Section 5-120.C indicates that no structure except a driveway, small dish antenna, walkway, fence, wall, retaining wall, or gate shall be located closer than 10 feet from the side property line. Mission Hills Code Section 5-132. B.4.d.i indicates that lights on walls that were previously permitted by the City may be replaced in the same location with a light of the same style and size. The light on the south wall existed on the previous wall and can be replaced in the same location on the wall if it is the same style and size. There was not a light on the previous wood fence on the north side of the home, so that light will require a variance. The distance from the light to the side property line has not been indicated so the exact variance amount is unknown. Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. August 17, 2021 #4 Kevin Yoder 6420 Wenonga Terrace The Yoders are proposing to replace their roof. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed new roof is Davinci Bellaforte Faux Shake shingles in an Aged Cedar color. A sample is available at City Hall. 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. August 17, 2021 #5 Sal Cessor 2833 Tomahawk Cir Mr. Cessor is proposing to replace his existing direct driveway. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new concrete driveway will replace the existing in the same footprint. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 26,915 sf House Footprint: 4,219 sf Patios: 576 sf Driveway: 2,016 sf Remaining Greenspace: 20,104 sf 74.7% Design Guideline Review: Section 2.3 on pages 64 through 67 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Neighborhood Estates character area. Section 2.7.2.B recommends that the drive width be no more than 12 feet until it is 30 ft. back from the curb. This recommendation has not been met. 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 been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(20)/LS-4 Lot Area: 26,915 sf Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 17,495 sf 20,104 sf = 74.7% 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? No Will the project cause the greenspace to be within 3% of what is recommended by the Design No Guidelines? August 17, 2021 #6 Scott & Kathy McAdams 6416 Ensley Lane The owners are proposing to replace their existing driveway. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Traditional Neighborhood • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new concrete driveway will replace the existing in the same footprint. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 10,780 sf House Footprint: 2,544 sf Patios: 0 sf Sidewalk: 169 sf Driveway: 829 sf Remaining Greenspace: 7,238 sf 67.1% Design Guideline Review: Section 2.7.2 B. 2. on page 103 recommends that the width of drives should not exceed 12 feet within 30 feet of the curb. This recommendation has not been met. Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-1 and 2 properties have a greenspace no less than 60% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(10)/LS-1 Lot Area: 12,280 sf Lot Width: 75’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 6,468 sf 7,238 sf = 67.1% 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? No Will the project cause the greenspace to be within 3% of what is recommended by the Design No Guidelines? August 17, 2021 #7 Jeremy & Nancy Stewart 3317 Tomahawk Road The Stewarts are proposing an interior renovation that includes modifications to the rear and sides of their home. 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 windows will be replaced as part of the project. The new windows will match the existing size and style. At the rear of the house, an existing bay window and a chimney will be removed. The area of the bay will be filled in to match the existing siding. A new boxed bay window is proposed where the chimney was removed. An existing second floor window will be relocated to where the chimney was removed. At the east end of the rear elevation, a second-floor addition will be added over the top of an existing covered porch. A new low slope roof will tie into the existing roof. The porch roof deck is being reduced to a new standing seam copper roof. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: The proposed changes do not affect the existing footprint or greenspace. 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 C suggests that side wings located in the secondary building area should have a height up to 2- stories and 30 feet, but clearly less than the main mass. This recommendation has been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16) LS-3 Lot Area: 24,090 Lot Width: 120’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): LS-1,2,3 = 10’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Right): LS-1,2,3 = 10’ No Change Minimum Combined Side Yards: LS-3 = 30% No Change Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) LS-1,2,3 = 20% No Change Minimum Greenspace: LS-3,4,5 = 65% No Change 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? No Will the project cause the greenspace to be within 3% of what is recommended by the Design No Guidelines? August 17, 2021 #8 Jeffrey Leinbach 3820 West 65th Terrace The Leinbachs are proposing an interior remodel and a new rear addition. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The configuration of the existing house has a covered rear porch set between two gabled rear wings. The Leinbach’s proposed addition mimics those gables, with a new gabled rear wing that extends out the rear of the house. All detailing, materials, and fenestration matches the existing house. The Leinbachs are also proposing two new skylights at the existing covered porch. These are not clearly delineated on the rear elevation. At the front of the house, new windows and doors are proposed at the front porch and kitchen. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 20,934 sf House Footprint: 4,040 sf Addition: 486 sf Driveway: 950 sf Patios and walkways: 702 sf Remaining Greenspace: 14,756 sf 70.5% Design Guideline Review: Section 2.5 on pages 72 through 75 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Suburban character area. Subsection D suggests that rear wings located in the Conditional Building Area should have a height not to exceed 1 story and 16 feet. The depth should not exceed 24 feet. No more than 1 wing should encroach into the conditional building area. The proposed depth is slightly deeper than recommended. Discussion is recommended. 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. 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 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-3, 4 and 5 properties have a greenspace no less than 65% of the lot area. August 17, 2021  Lot Information Zoning: R-1(20)/LS-3 Lot Area: 20,934 Lot Width: 138’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ Minimum Side Yard (Left): 12’ (Existing) LS-1,2,3 = 10’ 21’ at new addition Minimum Side Yard (Right): LS-1,2,3 = 10’ 38’ (Existing) Minimum Combined Side Yards: 30% = 41.4’ 50’ (Existing) Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 30’ 38’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 5,331 sf 4,564 sf Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 13,607 14,756 sf = 70.5% Drainage Study Required if any answer below is “Yes” Yes/No Is the project adding 1,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface? No 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? Existing Lot Address Lot Area LC by Ordinance % max used Coverage 3820 W 65th Ter 20,934 4,040 5,331 75.78% 3810 W 65th Ter 20,322 3,724 5,223 71.31% 3811 W 65th Ter 20,456 2,635 5,246 50.22% 3821 W 65th Ter 24,766 3,297 5,992 55.02% 3727 W 65th St 20,898 3,194 5,325 59.98% 3801 W 65th St 20,920 2,106 5,329 39.52% 6510 Indian Ln 20,817 4,009 5,311 75.49% Average 61.05% 50% Increase 91.57% Allowable LC reduced by 150% Rule = 4,882 3820 W 65th Ter Proposed = 4,564 85.9% of City Ordinance Limit 93.5% of Design Guideline Limit August 17, 2021 #9 Joshua & Stacy Herron 2624 Verona Road The Herrons are proposing a new pool, covered pool terrace, outdoor fireplace, outdoor kitchen, and an artificial turf putting green in their rear yard. The project is a substantial construction matter as defined by City Code Sections 5-103.75 and 5-103.122 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 proposed covered pool terrace is attached to the rear of the house. The lower level features the outdoor kitchen integrated into a retaining wall at the west end and a fireplace at the east end. An open pergola covers the outdoor kitchen area. A large brick column, the brick fireplace, and an arcade of wood columns support the roof deck that is also an elevated patio. Another fireplace is located at the east end. The upper terrace is accessed via a stair behind the fireplace. The pool is located directly behind the terrace and features a bluestone patio. Due to the slope of the property, retaining walls on both sides of the pool allow it to be recessed into the landscape. The pool equipment location has not been indicated. The proposed artificial turf putting green is located in the northeast corner of the property. Ordinance Compliance: The putting green is defined as an Outdoor Recreation Facility per code section 5-103.78. The putting green is in violation of 5-121.D which requires a minimum 20-foot setback from the side or rear property line, for Outdoor Recreational Facilities. A setback of 15 feet has been provided from the side. A variance of 5 feet is required. A setback of 16 feet has been provided from the rear. A variance of 4 feet is required. The putting green has been moved to meet the setbacks so no variance is required. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 33,361 sf Existing House Footprint: 3,263 sf Existing Driveway: 5,756 sf Existing Trampoline: 150 sf New Covered Terrace: 761 sf New Pool and Terrace 1,521 sf New Putting Green: 220 sf Remaining Greenspace: 21,690 sf 65% Code Section 5-132. B.8 lists specific regulations regarding artificial turf. Artificial Turf shall only be installed in rear yards and shall be adequately screened to the extent practical that prevents artificial turf from being observed from any street or adjacent property. Clarification is required. Artificial Turf is limited to 250 sq. ft. of coverage. This recommendation has been met. Code Section 5-132. B.8(c) lists acceptable turf material. Specifications for the artificial turf material have not been submitted. Clarification is required. Design Guideline Review: Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-5 properties have a greenspace no less than 65% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. August 17, 2021  Lot Information Zoning: R-1(30)/LS-5 Lot Area: 33,361 sf Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Patio Minimum Side Yard: 56.5’ (Right) 20’ 64.9’ (Left) Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 33.9’ (to pool deck) Outdoor Recreation Facility Side Yard: 20’ 20’ (Putting Green) Outdoor Recreation Facility Rear Yard: 20’ 22’ (Putting Green) Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 21,685 sf 21,690 sf = 65% 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 Yes Guidelines? August 17, 2021