Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA January 2, 2024 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. #1 Jennifer Murphy Removal of an exterior door 2519 W 70th Terrace #2 Robyn Attaway REQUEST CONTINUANCE Two windows on front of home 2711 W 68th Street TO JANUARY 16TH #3 Shane Schaffer* Two new pole lights in front yard 6506 State Line Road #4 Timothy & Amantha Burgess* Patio / Outdoor kitchen / Pergola / Replacing pool 6535 Belinder Avenue coping and patio Continued from December 12th ARB mtg #5 Property Owner† REQUEST CONTINUANCE New house / Pool / Outdoor kitchen 2111 Stratford Road TO JANUARY 16TH Continued from December 12th ARB mtg *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 Jennifer Murphy 2519 W 70th Terrace Ms. Murphy is proposing an interior remodel that includes the removal of an exterior door. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The door to be removed is at the rear of the house at a walkway to her detached garage. The door will be in- filled to match the adjacent siding. 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. January 2, 2024 #2 Robyn Attaway 2711 W 68th Street Ms. Attaway is requesting ARB approval for two windows installed without ARB review. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The windows are located at the front of the house beside the existing front door. The new clear-view double- hung windows replace two larger casement 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 recommends that all window muntins on the home be the same pattern and proportion, with few exceptions. The existing home has a mishmash of window styles and muntin patterns. Most of the windows have a single horizontal muntin in each sash, others have full colonial-style snap-ins and others are clear-view. Discussion is recommended. January 2, 2024 #3 Shane Schaffer * 6506 State Line Road Mr. Schaffer is proposing new light fixtures in his front yard. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed fixtures are contemporary coach lamps set upon a 7-foot-tall light pole. The proposed location is near the front property line on each side of the house. Ordinance Compliance: The project violates city code section 5-132.B.4 which requires yard lights to have a single, non-decorative pole, no more than 4 inches in diameter and 6 feet in height. The proposal has two poles that are 12 inches in diameter and 7 feet tall. This section goes on to allow a single head that is no more than 18 inches tall. The proposal is for two heads that are 20 inches tall. A variance is required. This section does allow for two fixtures when they are installed on a courtyard wall. Design Guideline Review: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Design Guidelines. * A variance is required. January 2, 2024 #4 Timothy & Amantha Burgess * 6535 Belinder Avenue The Burgesses are proposing a new patio room, outdoor kitchen, and pergola at the back of their home. They are also proposing to replace their existing pool coping and replace a section of patio. This project was continued at the 12/12/2023 meeting so the window muntin patterns could be better defined. The ARB also requested that the site plan be updated to more accurately indicate the existing pool/patio conditions as well as the proposed. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed patio room is a new rear wing at the northeast corner of the house. The north and east sides have large fixed clear-view windows and the south side is a series of large glass doors. The rest of the materials and detailing match the main house. A new fireplace is proposed at the north elevation. The proposed pergola stretches from the new patio room wing to an existing rear wing at the opposite end of the house. The pergola lines up with the existing eave line except for a section at the rear entry that bumps up another 3’-7”. The pergola extends approximately 8 feet from the face of the eaves. The patio area under the pergola is being replaced with a new patio at the same elevation as the patio room floor. This is approximately 18 inches above the existing pool deck. A new patio addition is proposed at the north side of the pool. The outdoor kitchen is a simple stone counter with stainless steel appliances. It is located under the pergola. Update 12/27/2023 Updated plans have been provided that clearly illustrate the proposed muntin patterns as required by the ARB. The site plan has also been updated, but not dimensioned. Ordinance Compliance: The project is in violation of city code section 5-120 A 1 (c) which requires LS-5 lots to have a minimum side yard setback of no less than 15% of the lot width. A variance of 5.1 feet is required. Please note that the proposed addition aligns with the existing house. The project is further in violation of code section 5-120 D which requires patios and pool decks to be located at least 20 feet from the side or rear property line. The pool patio extension at the north side of the pool is only 12 feet from the property line. A variance of 8 feet is required. Greenspace Review SF Lot Area: 34,720 House Footprint: -3,989 Driveway: -3,683 Patios & Walkways: -708 Pool & Patio -2,028 Remaining Greenspace: 24,312 * Multiple variances are required. January 2, 2024 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 D recommends that rear wings located in the Primary or Secondary Building Areas be no more than 2 stories and 30 ft. tall and should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. Rear wings should have a width clearly less than the main mass and should not exceed 50% of the main mass width. No more than 2 rear wings are recommended in the Secondary Building Area. Spacing between wings should be no less than the eave height of the taller wing or half the length of the longer wing. Rear wings located in the Conditional Building Area are allowed if they meet the special conditions in Section 2.6.4 (pg. 88). If allowed, no more than one shall encroach into the Conditional Building Area. These recommendations have been met. 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. All of the proposed windows are clear view, while the existing windows have muntins. Discussion is recommended. 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(30)/LS-5 Lot Area: 34,720 SF Lot Width: 124’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ No Change Minimum Side Yard (Left): 15% = 18.6’ 13.5’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 15% = 18.6’ No Change Minimum Combined Side Yards: N/A Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 30% = 89.6’ 104.5’ Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 12’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ >67’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 7,798 SF 3,989 SF Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 22,568 SF 24,312 SF = 70.0% 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 surfaces in approximately the same footprint, No and 2) The project will not decrease existing greenspace on site No Is there a documented drainage issue for this property? *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 January 2, 2024 #5 Property Owner † REQUEST CONTINUANCE 2111 Stratford Road The owners are proposing a new 2-story home with a 4,306 sq. ft. footprint. The footprint consists of 2,482 sq. ft. of first-floor living space, an 868 sq. ft. 3-car garage, and 918 sq. ft. of covered porches. The project includes a swimming pool, an outdoor kitchen, and a backup generator. This project was continued at the 12/12/2023 meeting at the owner’s request. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Lot Coverage Review SF Main Floor Living Area: 2,482 Main Floor Garage Area: 956 Covered Porches: 868 Detached Accessory Buildings: 0 Total Lot Coverage: 4,306 Summary of Project: The proposed house is a Tudor revival style. It is sided with a combination of timbered stucco and shingle siding. Brick and stone accents are provided at selected elements. The windows all are fixed or casements with Colonial muntin grids. The window arrangement is formal at the front of the house and becomes less so at the rear and the sides. All details and materials are in keeping with the selected design style. A small first-floor porch is proposed at the front of the house. It sits behind the front building plane so there are no issues with its location. A second-floor front balcony is proposed over the front entry. Again, this location is allowed by ordinance. The driveway is a simple direct driveway that connects to a small auto court on the east side of the house and provides access to the two garages. A concrete walkway connects the driveway to the home’s front entry. Due to the slope of the property, the home has a full walk-out basement. The proposed pool is located at this lower level. A low retaining wall is indicated along the west side of the pool allowing it to be recessed into the grade so the southern edge is at the existing grade. A brick and stone staircase connects the lower patio to a first-floor terrace. The outdoor kitchen is located at the terrace level, along with the screened porch. The proposed generator and A/C equipment are located at the southeast corner of the house. The pool equipment is located under the garage in the same area. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review SF Lot Area: 22,715 House Footprint: -4,306 Driveway: -2,005 Porches: -246 Pool Patio: -1,302 Equipment Pads: -55 January 2, 2024  Remaining Greenspace: 14,801 Percentage 65.2% 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 recommends that the main mass of the house should not exceed 50% of the lot width. At 57’- 1” (49%) this recommendation has been met. This section goes on to recommend that the depth of the main mass should not exceed 40 ft. At 26 feet deep, this recommendation has been met. Subsection B recommends that the total width of all front wings not exceed 50% of the main mass width. The depth should not be greater than the width. The height must be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass; however, exceptions are allowed for tall front gables on Tudor homes. The location should be near the front building line. These recommendations have been met. Subsection C recommends that side wings should be set at a minimum of 3 ft. from the front and rear façade of the main mass. Side wings should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. The garage wing is set back from the front façade but aligns with the proposed rear wing. This recommendation has not been met. Subsection D recommends that rear wings be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. Portions of the rear wing match the height of the main mass. The section goes on to recommend that rear wings should have a width clearly less than the main mass and should not exceed 50% of the main mass width. Spacing between wings should be no less than the eave height of the taller wing. The proposed house has a single large rear wing the full width of the main mass and incorporates the garage side wing making it wider than the main mass. These recommendations have not been met. Subsection F recommends 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 G recommends 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. These recommendations have 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. The proposed side wing is attached to a non-compliant wing so this recommendation cannot be fully evaluated. Subsection I recommends that roofs have a maximum height of 1.5 times the height of the façade below the eave. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.6.4 on page 89 of the Design Guidelines provides recommendations for lot coverage. The section recommends 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 2.6.4.A on page 89 discourages overbuilding by recommending that homes avoid reaching more than 2 minimum/maximum setbacks or limits. This recommendation has been met. This section also recommends the conditional building area be free of the main mass and wings. A small portion of the rear terrace extends less than a foot into the conditional building area. This recommendation has been met. January 2, 2024 Section 2.7.1 B on page 94 recommends that the number of different roof pitches should be limited to two. The project primarily uses 12/12 and 15.5/12. The dormers use a lower slope which is customary in Tudor design. A low-slope roof is used between the two main gables at the rear elevation. This recommendation has not been met. 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. 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 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 LS-3, 4, and 5 properties have a greenspace no less than 65% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.3.E.2 on page 111 gives recommendations for terraces. These recommendations have been met. PRP Recommendation: [Insert PRP recommendation] Lot Information Zoning: R-1(25)/LS-3 Lot Area: 22,715 sf Lot Width: 116’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ 33.8’ Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 18.5’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 23..6’ Minimum Combined Side Yards: 30% = 34.8’ 42.1’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 39’ 50’ Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 20.0’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 24.5’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 5,643 sf 4,306 sf Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 14,764 sf 14,801 sf = 65.1% Neighbor Comparison Neighbor to Left Proposed Neighbor to Right Primary Eave Height Above Finished Grade: 20.5’ First Floor Elevation: 932.5’ 939.5’ 939.9’ Top of Foundation Elevation: 938.2’ Second Floor Plate Height Eave Height 941.7 958.75’ 957.1’ Ridge Height: 961.0’ 971.8’ 969.2’ January 2, 2024  Site Elements Driveway width at Property Line: 12.0’ Driveway width at the house. Varies Circle Drive Interior Green N/A Second Floor Plate Height 9.1’ Drainage Study Required if any answer below is “Yes” Yes/No Is the project adding 1,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface? 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 surfaces in approximately the same footprint, No and 2) project will not decrease existing greenspace on site No 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 Existing Lot Address Lot Area LC by Ordinance % max used Coverage 2111 Stratford Road 22,715 2,041 5,643 36.17% 2100 Stratford Road 44,256 7,068 8,970 78.80% 2201 Stratford Road 31,169 4,038 7,030 57.44% 2110 Stratford Road 27,616 2,808 6,463 43.45% 2220 Stratford Road 25,038 3,182 6,038 52.70% 6000 High Drive 28,671 3,551 6,634 53.53% Average 53.68% 50% Increase 80.52% 2111 Stratford 22,715 Proposed: 4,306 5,643 76.3% Recommended Lot Coverage as reduced by 150% Rule: January 2, 2024