Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA April 26, 2022 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. #1 Consent Agenda A. Mission Hills Country Club – 5400 Mission Drive Acoustic fence B. Jason Walker – 2026 West 63rd Street Replace existing front door C. John Vaglio & Kami Bremyer – 6130 Mission Drive Changes to previously approved project D. Nick & Clare Blasi – 6640 Indian Lane Changes to previously approved project #2 Bill & Sue Ann Douglas Changes to previously approved project 5832 High Drive Continued from March 29th mtg #3 Jennifer Weiford New rear patio 2009 West 68th Street #4 Matt McInnes Interior remodel with changes to front façade 6440 Ensley Lane #5 Nick & Kate Jones* Changes to previously approved project 3838 West 64th Street #6 Niles & Lindsay Jager † Two new additions / Pool / Generator 5840 Mission Drive *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 MHCC is proposing an acoustic fence along the side of their existing pickleball court. Summary of Project: The proposed fence is located along the east and part of the north side of their existing pickleball courts. The fence stands 10 feet tall and is covered in black acoustic fabric. 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. April 26, 2022 B. Jason Walker 2026 West 63rd Street The Walkers are proposing to replace their existing front door. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: Intersection Green Summary of Project: The proposed front door is a 5-light contemporary door that is similar to other recently approved doors on the home. 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. April 26, 2022 C. John Vaglio & Kami Bremyer 6130 Mission Drive The Vaglio/Bremyers 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: Creekside Summary of Project: In November of 2021, the Vaglio/Bremyers were approved for a new bluestone patio, formal garden, and driveway associated with a future detached garage. They are now proposing to change the patio to limestone paving. A retaining wall at the east side of the patio is being extended to compensate for existing grade. The formal garden has been eliminated from the project scope. The driveway for the future garage has been reduced in scope and the future garage has been reoriented accordingly. The proposed changes increase the amount of available greenspace. 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. April 26, 2022 D. Nick & Clare Blasi 6640 Indian Lane The Blasis are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved landscape plan and south retaining wall. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: Intersection Green Summary of Project: The location of the stacked stone wall along the south portion of the property varies from what was previously approved by the ARB. The Blasis would like it approved in its existing location. The boxwoods along the south and west retaining walls will be removed and the Holly trees moved closer to the walls. The trunks of the Holly trees along 67th Street will be 11 ft. from the curb. The planting bed in that location will be reduced so that it begins 10 ft. from the curb. The removed boxwoods will be planted at other locations on the property. It appears that new plantings at the southwest corner of the property will be in the City’s right-of-way. Clarification is required. Other miscellaneous planting changes are proposed. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City’s Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City’s Design Guidelines. April 26, 2022 #2 Bill & Sue Ann Douglas 5832 High Drive The Douglases are returning to the ARB to with changes to their previously approved project and to present their landscape plan as required. This project has been continued multiple times so the site plan could be revised. The project was continued at the March 29th meeting at the owner’s request. The project was continued at the April 12th meeting so the plan could be revised to meet the 60% greenspace requirement. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The Douglases are proposing to add a hammerhead in the front yard and relocate their front walkway. The size of the hammerhead has been reduced since the last submittal. They are also proposing to remove their rear patio and add a stone landing at the bottom of the exterior stairs. They are proposing to remove their rear patio to add more greenspace. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: The Design Guidelines recommend that 60% of the property be greenspace. The new home was approved before the greenspace recommendation was adopted but it was approved on the condition that the greenspace be 60% of the lot area. Douglases’ architects had indicated that the approved plan had 60.6% greenspace. Calculations by the Douglases’ landscape designer indicate that the originally approved plan has 59.96% greenspace. The owners are proposing changes that will cause the greenspace to be below the recommended greenspace area. This recommendation has not been met. The Design Guidelines recommend that whenever possible, a widened back out and maneuvering area adjacent to the garage door(s) should be behind the front building line. If it is not possible to be placed behind the front building line, it should be located between the main driveway and the nearest side property line. If there is not enough space between the main driveway and the side property line, the back out and maneuvering area can be located off the main driveway on the interior of the property as long as it is not directly in front of the home’s main entry. The size of these driveway expansion areas located in front of the front building line should be no more than 10 ft. x 20 ft. The area of hardscape added to the driveway for parking is approximately 12 ft. x. 14 ft. This recommendation has not been met. Greenspace Review: Matt Alberts (Douglas Contractor) Calcs for originally approved plan (see site plan) 3,106.49 sf 3,793.05 sf 95.93 sf 12.82 sf 7,008.29 sf non-greenspace 10,494.71 sf greenspace = 59.96%* *Douglases’ architects had indicated 60.6% greenspace on originally approved plan. April 26, 2022 Proposed greenspace based on changes: Hardscape removed 165 sf - rear patio 160 sf - original sidewalk 325 sf Hardscape added 14 sf - paver landing at rear terrace 166 sf reconfigured sidewalk 177 sf hammerhead 357 sf Greenspace removed - 32 sf Final greenspace - 10,462.71 sf = 59.78% April 26, 2022 #3 Jennifer Weiford 2009 West 68th Street Ms. Weiford is proposing a new rear patio. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Traditional • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed patio is located at the center of the rear of the house. It is surrounded on all sides by low stone walls. The walls are to be constructed of cultured stone and the patio will be concrete pavers. The proposed patio replaces an existing freeform patio in roughly the same area. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 19,287 sf House Footprint: 4,292 sf Driveway: 1,500 sf Proposed Patios and walkways: 927 sf Remaining Greenspace: 12,568 sf Design Guideline Review: Accurate greenspace calculations were not provided, nor was a complete site survey. The greenspace review is a best estimate calculated by City staff. There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. Lot Information Zoning: LS-2 Lot Area: 19,267 sf Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 53.9’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 20’ Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 11,560 12,568 = 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? No Will the project cause the greenspace to be less than recommended by the Design Guidelines? No Has there been a documented drainage complaint against the property? No *See the Mission Hills website for drainage study requirements – www.missionhillsks.gov *The Architectural Review Board may require the drainage study be submitted before they act on the proposed project. April 26, 2022 #4 Matt McInnes 6440 Ensley Lane Mr. McInnes is proposing an interior remodel that includes changes to the front façade. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: At the front of the house, Mr. McInnes is proposing to replace a portion of the existing brick with thin stone veneer. The brick archway, at the front door, will remain. The front door is to be replaced with a new door and sidelights. A bay window to the right of the front door will be removed and replaced with a quadruple casement window. Two other windows on the front façade will be replaced with new taller units. All windows are in keeping with the existing house style. New light fixtures are proposed at the front door. 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 III A on page of 92 of the design guidelines specifically discourages the use of thin stone veneer. Discussion is recommended. April 26, 2022 #5 Nick & Kate Jones * 3838 West 64th Street The Joneses 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 Lot Coverage Review: Main floor living area: 2,826 sf Main floor garage area: (New) 1,056 sf Covered porches: (new) 372 sf Total Lot Coverage: 4,254 sf Summary of Project: The Joneses are proposing a new storage room at the back of their previously approved garage. It aligns with the rearmost wall of the garage. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of City Code Section 5-121.A.1.(b) that requires LS-5 lots to have a rear yard setback 30% of the lot depth. A variance of 15.5 feet is required. Code Section 5-128.C.2 allows for the reconstruction of an existing non-conforming structure, provided that the footprint or height is not increased. The added room increases the footprint of the noncompliant structure. As such, this exception does not apply. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 38,552 sf (per property survey) House Footprint: 4,254 sf Driveway and walkway: 5,844 sf Existing Pool/Patio: 2,857 sf Existing Sport Court: 1,810 sf Misc. Stoops and Pads (Existing) 88 sf Provided Greenspace: 23,707 sf (61.4%) Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(30)/LS-5 Lot Area: 38,552 sf Lot Width: 150’ * A variance is required. April 26, 2022  Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10% = 15’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10% = 15’ No Change Minimum Combined Side Yards: N/A Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 30% = 75.6’ 60.1’ Side Yard: 15’ 16’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 32’ Lot Coverage 3,918 sf 3,419 sf Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 8,057 sf 8,070 sf = 60.1% 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 Has there been a documented drainage issue for this property? No April 26, 2022 #6 Niles & Lindsay Jager 5840 Mission Drive The Jagers are proposing two new additions, a new pool, and a new generator. The project is considered substantial construction and was noticed as such. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Countryside Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The first addition is on the southwest corner of the house above an existing raised terrace. The main floor will be a covered terrace with a second floor above. All materials, detailing and fenestration match the existing house. The second addition is on the northwest corner of the house. It consists of a new second floor over an existing side wing. All materials, detailing and fenestration match the existing house. The proposed pool/terrace is located to the south of an existing rear wing and extends to the south side of the house. The terrace material is not listed, nor is the location of the pool equipment. Clarification is required. A new stair is proposed to connect the existing elevated terrace to the new pool terrace. It is metal and will be supported on brackets off the existing stone terrace wall. All the terrace railings will be replaced to match the new stair. The proposed generator is located at the rear of the rear wing and is enclosed by an iron fence to match the existing. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 24,707 sf per property survey House Footprint: 4,058 sf Existing Driveway and Front Stoop: 4,540 sf Existing Terrace 745 sf Proposed Pool/Terrace: 1,255 sf Proposed Generator Pad: 49 sf Remaining Greenspace: 14,060 sf (56.9%) 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. These recommendations have 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. April 26, 2022  Lot Information Zoning: R-1(20)LS-3 Lot Area: 24,707 sf Lot Width: 175’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10; 37.4’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 53.5’ Minimum Combined Side Yards: 30% = 52.5’ 90.9’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 29’ 35.25’ Patio/Pool Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 35.2’ Patio/Pool Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 20’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 5,982 sf 4,058 sf Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 16,060 sf 14,069 sf = 56.9% 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 Has there been a documented drainage complaint against the property? Yes *See the Mission Hills website for drainage study requirements – www.missionhillsks.gov *The Architectural Review Board may require the drainage study be submitted before they act on the proposed project. April 26, 2022