Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA September 27, 2022 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. #1 Farid Namin Circle driveway 6520 State Line Road Continued from 9.13.22 meeting #2 James Blankenship Window replacements 6500 High Drive Continued from 9.13.22 meeting #3 Daniel & Marie Pfeifer Changes to previously approved project 6730 Tomahawk Road #4 Mike & Lori Engle Changes to previously approved project 2710 West 66th Terrace #5 Carolyn & Patrick Seago † Pool / Patio / Landscaping walls / Walkway and 2102 West 69th Terrace driveway modifications #6 Gabe & Megan Egli *† House remodel / Additions / Covered porch / 2810 West 68th Street Outdoor kitchen #7 Thomas & Caroline Wagstaff Hardscape plan / Changes to previously approved 5550 High Drive project *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 Farid Namin 6520 State Line Road Mr. Namin is proposing a new circle driveway. This project was continued at the August 16th and 30th meetings so the owner could clear up other outstanding permit issues. The ARB also requested that the driveway be redesigned to reduce the new drive width to be no more than 12 feet at the property line. This project was continued at the September 13th meeting due to lack of representation. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The new circle drive will be formed by connecting a new 18-foot wide drive to their existing 18 foot- wide driveway. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 16,267 sf House Footprint: 2,794 sf Existing Rear Deck: 300 sf Existing Driveway: 1,150 sf Proposed Additional Driveway: 1,562 sf Remaining Greenspace: 10,461 sf (64.3%) Design Guideline Review: Section 2.5 on pages 72 through 75 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Suburban character area. Subsection G suggests that driveways occupy as little of the Primary Landscape Area as possible. On lots wider than 140 feet the driveway should be located off the side property line a distance no less than 8% of the lot width. Circle driveways should have an interior green with a width no less than 80 feet wide, measured at the front property line, and depth of 40 feet measured from the curb. The proposed driveway has an interior green 45 feet wide and 51’-5” deep. This recommendation has not been met. Section 2.7.2.B on page 102 recommends drives to be no more than 12 feet wide at the front property line. 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. Please note, the owner did not include any rear decks or patios in their greenspace study. September 27, 2022  Lot Information Zoning: R1(16)/LS-2 Lot Area: 16,267 sf Lot Width: 116.2’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 9,760 sf 10,461 sf = 64.3% Drainage Study Required if any answer below is “Yes” Yes/No Is the project adding 1,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface? Yes Will the project cause the greenspace to be less than recommended by the Design Guidelines? No EXCEPT NO STUDY REQUIRED IF: 1) replacing existing impervious surface in approximately same footprint, and 2) project will not decrease existing greenspace on site Is there a documented drainage issue for this 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 September 27, 2022 #2 James Blankenship 6500 High Drive Mr. Blankenship is proposing to replace eleven windows at the front and side of his house. This project was continued at the September 13th meeting due to lack of representation. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Traditional • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: All eleven of the proposed windows match the size and style of the existing windows. 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 recommends that window muntins be simulated divided lites with muntins applied at the exterior, at the insulated air space, and at the interior of the window. The proposed windows only have muntins on the interior face. This recommendation has not been met. September 27, 2022 #3 Daniel & Marie Pfeifer 6730 Tomahawk Road The Pfeifers 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: At the November 11, 2021 ARB meeting, the Pfiefers were approved for a new patio at the rear of their home. They are now proposing to expand the extent of the patio and include a new walkway along the side 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.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-3 Lot Area: 22,647 sf Lot Width: 107.8’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 24.1’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ >92’ Minimum Greenspace: 65% (14,330 sf) 66.7% (15,098sf) 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 September 27, 2022 #4 Mike & Lori Engle 2710 West 66th Terrace The Engles are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved outdoor fireplace. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The original approval was for an outdoor fireplace that was 10’-3” tall. The Engles are now proposing the fireplace be 13’-3” tall. The change is required to meet Building Code requirements. 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. September 27, 2022  † #5 Carolyn & Patrick Seago 2102 West 69th Terrace The Seagos are proposing a new swimming pool and patio with various landscaping walls in their rear yard. They are also proposing to remove their existing circle driveway and add a new front walkway. Swimming pools are substantial construction matters and the project was noticed as such. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed pool is located behind the main mass of the house. It is surrounded on all sides by a pool deck/patio. A second utility patio is located near the house. A retaining wall is proposed to span the width of the lot approximately 4 feet from the rear property line. The wall will stand one foot tall and partially level out the rear yard. A second wall is proposed at the east side of the lot. It makes a large sweeping arc and connects back to the rear of the house. The height of this wall varies from 1 to 3 feet with the top of the wall staying level. All the walls are proposed as dry stack stone. In considering the proposed retaining walls, the ARB shall examine factors listed in Code Section 5-137.B. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 22,270 sf House Footprint: 3,262 sf Driveway: 2,225 sf Pool & Pool Deck: 1,336 sf Back Patio: 251 sf Sidewalks: 396 sf Steps and Walls: 236 sf Window Well 9 sf Grade Inlet: 20 sf Remaining Greenspace: 14,535 sf (65.3%) Design Guideline Review: Section 2.5 on pages 72 through 75 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Suburban character area. September 27, 2022 Subsection G suggests that driveways occupy as little of the Primary Landscape Area as possible. Elimination of the circle driveway significantly improves the greenspace for the lot. Section 2.7.2.B on page 102 recommends drives to 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 a property of this size have 65% greenspace. This recommendation has been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-3 Lot Area: 22,270 sf Lot Width: 135.0’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 29.0’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 29.5’ Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 14,475.5 sf 14,535 sf = 65.3% Drainage Study Required if any answer below is “Yes” Yes/No Is the project adding 1,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface? Yes Will the project cause the greenspace to be less than recommended by the Design Guidelines? No EXCEPT NO STUDY REQUIRED IF: 1) replacing existing impervious surface in approximately same footprint, and 2) project will not decrease existing greenspace on site Is there a documented drainage issue for this 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 September 27, 2022  † #6 Gabe & Megan Egli * 2810 West 68th Street The Eglis are proposing a whole house remodel that includes additions to the rear and front of the home. The roof structure will be changed to a lower pitch allowing for a more prominent second floor. A new covered porch and outdoor kitchen are proposed as part of the project. Outdoor kitchens are substantial construction matters as defined by Code Section 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 Lot Coverage Review: Existing House: 2,056 sf Additions: 178 sf Covered porches: 324 sf Detached Accessory Buildings: 0 sf Total Lot Coverage: 2,558 sf Summary of Project: At the front of the house, an existing mansard roof is being changed to a full gable with large windows. The roof of the adjacent side wing is being removed and the eave lines are proposed to be raised to the second-floor plate line. The new roof will have a significantly lower pitch to have a main ridge that aligns with the new gable roof. A new flat awning roof is proposed over the front door. The existing brick siding will be maintained, and all new walls and the gable will be sided with lap siding or Shou Sugi Ban siding (charred siding.) At the rear of the house, a new two-story addition is proposed near the center of the house. A new covered porch extends out from the rear of the house. The proposed outdoor kitchen is located within this porch. The kitchen consists of a concrete base cabinet with a grill and sink. All of the home’s windows will be replaced with new clear-view units. This is in keeping with the contemporary design intent. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of city code section 5-121 D that requires patios to have a minimum side yard setback of 20 feet. A variance of 0.3 feet is required. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 18,293 sf House Footprint: 2,558 sf Driveway and Front Walkway: 2,110 sf Patios and walkways: 543 sf Remaining Greenspace: 13,082 sf (71.5%) September 27, 2022 Design Guideline Review: Section 2.6.2 on page 79 provides recommendation for adjustments for narrow lots. This section recommends that floor elevations and plate heights are in scale with the neighboring homes. With the change and roof pitch and dramatic increase in eave height, the proposed house will no longer be in scale with the adjacent ranch homes. Discussion is recommended. Section 2.7.1 B on page 94 suggests that the number of different roof pitches should be limited to two. None of the roof pitches are noted, nor has a roof plan been provided. Discussion is recommended. Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-1 and 2 properties have greenspace no less than 60% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-2 Lot Area: 18,293 sf Lot Width: 130’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 46.8’ (Existing) Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 17.9’ (Existing) Minimum Combined Side Yards: 25% = 32.5’ 64.7’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 26.6’ 48.1’ Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 19.7’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 35.9’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 5,037 sf 2,558 sf Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 10,976 sf 13,082 sf = 71.5% 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 EXCEPT NO STUDY REQUIRED IF: 1) replacing existing impervious surface in approximately same footprint, and 2) project will not decrease existing greenspace on site Is there a documented drainage issue for this 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 September 27, 2022 #7 Thomas & Caroline Wagstaff 5550 High Drive The Wagstaffs are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved project. At the January 18, 2022 meeting, the ARB approved the proposed additions to the house, but tabled review of the hardscape requesting updated drawings. The Wagstaffs are now presenting their hardscape, in addition to a few changes to the previously approved additions. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Sides • Any Special Frontages: Intersection Green Lot Coverage Review: Existing Home: 1,903 sf Proposed Additions 569 sf Total Lot Coverage: 2,472sf Summary of Project: On the north elevation of the house, the Wagstaffs are now proposing a new door and sidelight. The design is in keeping with the rest of the house. The proposed patio is located at the south side of the house near the new addition. It is a large rectilinear patio constructed of bluestone with a brick boarder. A large planting area is proposed between the house and the new patio. A new 38” tall, 33” wide fountain is proposed within the planting bed. The plans include concept drawings for a future outdoor fireplace that is not being reviewed at this time. The Wagstaffs’ existing driveway is partially located on the neighboring property to the north. The Wagstaffs are proposing to reconfigure their driveway to place it entirely within their property. To accomplish this, the driveway is be moved to the south, decreasing an existing planting/yard area on the north side of the house. The revised drive approach will be 12 feet wide at the property line. The drive will narrow to 10 feet wide until widening back out at the garage. The Wagstaffs are proposing a curb and 3 feet tall fence along the north side of the driveway that will terminate at an existing retaining wall. A large section of the east end of the driveway is being removed to provide additional planting area. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review: Lot area: 15,744 sf per GBA boundary survey House Footprint: 2,472 sf Existing Driveway: 1903 sf Removal of Existing Driveway - 278 sf Proposed Driveway Addition: 98 sf September 27, 2022  Other flatwork additions: 48 sf New Patios and walkways: 481 sf Remaining Greenspace: 11,020 sf (69.9%) 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 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 2.6.4 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 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-1 and LS-2 properties have a greenspace no less than 60% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(30)/LS-1 Lot Area: 15,744 sf Lot Width: 150’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): Set by Utility Easement 26’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 34.4’ (Existing) Minimum Combined Side Yards: 25% = 37.5’ 40.4’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 28.8’ 67’ Patio Minimum Side Yard: 15’ >30’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 15’ 50’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 4,374 sf 2,462 sf Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 9,446 sf 11,020 sf = 11,020 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? No September 27, 2022