Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA December 3, 2024 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:30 p.m. #1 Mark Callison Changes to previously approved project 2200 W 56th Street #2 Hunter & Anne Harris Changes to previously approved project 6400 Indian Lane #3 Reddin Living Trust New patio, outdoor kitchen, fire pit, generator, 5515 Mission Drive retaining wall, walkway, and drive apron #4 Holli & Chip Zuck New screened porch 6505 Willow Lane #5 Martin & Elizabeth Beerman † New pool, patio, and pool house/cabana 6408 Verona Road #6 Heather & Chandler McCray † CONTINUED TO JANUARY 14TH New home 3002 W 66th Terrace *Variance required from the Board of Zoning Appeals † 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 Mark Callison 2200 W 56th Street The Callisons are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved patio project. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The original approval included a new freestanding spa. They are now proposing a built-in unit. They are also proposing stainless steel kitchen accessories at the outdoor kitchen instead of the previously approved wood. On the west side of the house, the owners are proposing to replace an existing set of stairs with a new narrow terrace to house a built-in grill. The terrace is five feet wide and sits approximately six feet high. A new trash enclosure is proposed at the rear of the new terrace. Ordinance Compliance: Code Section 5-103.79 defines a patio as “a level, unenclosed, surfaced are that is wider than five feet located at the finished grade.” Since the proposed patio is only 5 feet wide, but not located at finished grade, it does not meet any clear definition, other than a structure. The minimum setback for a structure is 10 feet. 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. December 3, 2024 #2 Hunter & Anne Harris 6400 Indian Lane The Harrises are returning to the ARB with changes to their previously approved new home. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Sides • Any Special Frontages: Intersection Green Summary of Project: The Harrises are proposing to shift the previously approved pool six feet to the west and to remove the outdoor shower and the associated path. They are also proposing to move the pool deck, walkway, and private terrace approximately 16 inches to the south. A new walkway is proposed to connect the pool deck to the exterior basement stairs. Lastly, they are proposing to enlarge the pool equipment area to accommodate the generator being relocated from the west elevation. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Design Guideline Review: The proposed changes result in a net gain of 20 square feet of greenspace. 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. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(30)/LS-6 Lot Area: 42,408 sf Lot Width: 246.5’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 27,565 sf 27,938 SF = 65.9% December 3, 2024 #3 Reddin Living Trust 5515 Mission Drive The property owner is proposing a new walkway, patio, outdoor kitchen, fire pit and retaining walls in their rear yard. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: All sides • Any Special Frontages: Creekside/Edge Frontage Summary of Project: The patio is located at the center of the rear yard and positioned close to the house. It is a simple paver patio with a continuous border. The outdoor kitchen is located at the southwest corner of the new patio and consists of a stone base with a stone countertop and stainless-steel appliances. The firepit is made of faux stone and is located in the southeast corner of the patio. The walkways are pavers matching the patio. One connects the driveway to the front door, and the other connects to the patio. The retaining wall is located between the patio and the existing creek. The owners are requesting the option to construct the wall using either rock boulders or concrete blocks with a thin stone veneer. The wall stands approximately three feet tall. The plans indicate additional scope items that are not shown on the permit application, including pavers at the driveway entry apron located on City property and a generator near the garage. Clarification is required. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review SF Lot Area: 40,093 House Lot Coverage: -3,409 Driveway: -908 Walkways: -1,000 Patio: -875 Remaining Greenspace: 33,901 Greenspace Percentage: 84.6% 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(16)/LS-5 Lot Area: 40,093 sf Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 68.07’ Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 47.00’ Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 26,060 sf 33,901 sf = 84.6% December 3, 2024 #4 Holli & Chip Zuck 6505 Willow Lane The Zucks are proposing a new screened porch at the rear of their home. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed screened porch is located at the rear of the existing house. An existing patio will be removed to make way for the new structure. The roof structure for the porch, is supported by an arcade of columns. The walls of the porch are inset from the columns. The whole addition is built on a new wood deck platform. The south end of the porch will be sided with plank siding to match the existing house. A portion of the existing homes’ north elevation will be resided with plank siding to match the existing. The rear of the porch will be sided with stone veneer. This corresponds to an internal fireplace. There is no indication of a chimney nor any footing to support the stone. Clarification is required. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review SF Lot Area: 14,660 House Footprint: -2,731 Driveway, walkways: -1,099 New Porch: -699 Remaining Greenspace: 10,131 Greenspace Percentage: 69.1% 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 recommends that rear wings located in the Primary Building Area can have an unlimited depth, but the total width of rear wings should not exceed 50% of the main mass width. This recommendation has not been met. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-1 Lot Area: 14,660 sf Lot Width: Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowed/Required Provided Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ No Change (19’ at addition) Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ No Change (33.4’ at addition) Minimum Combined Side Yards: 25% No Change Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 25.6’ 36.3’ Greenspace: 60% = 8,796 sf 10,131 sf = 69.1% December 3, 2024 #5 Martin & Elizabeth Beerman † 6615 Belinder Avenue The Beermans are proposing a new pool, patio, and pool house/cabana. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The Beermans’ existing home includes a deep rear wing. The proposed pool and patio will be located to the south of the rear wing. The proposed pool house/cabana is located on the south side of the proposed patio. The west pool house/cabana is open on three sides, with the west end, closest to the house, being enclosed for storage. The east end of the open cabana features an outside fireplace. The west end features outdoor cabinetry. The pool is a simple rectangle with a spa located in the southwest corner. The pool is surrounded on three sides with the new patio. The east end calls for four columns with scuppers. No detailed drawings or elevations have been provided for these columns. Clarification is required. The proposed pool equipment is located on the south side of the pool house in a small utility yard enclosed by a fence. The existing rear porch and roof are being extended approximately 5 feet to the rear to connect to an existing door. All materials and detailing match the main house. The outdoor kitchen is located near the house at the west end of the patio. It consists of a simple stone base with a stone countertop and a stainless-steel grill. The minimal grading information provided indicates a slope of approximately 3 feet across the project but no new grading is proposed. Greenspace Review SF Lot Area: 41,744 Ex. Rear Patio Area being removed 1,708.58 Proposed Rear Pool & Patio Area 3,187.83 Remaining Greenspace: 27,178 Greenspace Percentage: 65.1% Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. 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 E recommends that detached accessory buildings, located in the Conditional Building or Primary Landscape Areas are limited to 1 story with 10-ft. maximum eave heights with a maximum area of 720 sq. ft. if allowed under Section 2.6.4 (pg. 88). There should be no more than 2 detached accessory buildings per lot. These recommendations have been met. December 3, 2024 Section 2.7.3.A on page 106 recommends that LS-3, 4 and 5 properties have a greenspace area no less than 65% of the lot area. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.3 D on page 110 provides specific recommendations about altering grade and topography. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(30)/LS-5 Lot Area (per replat) 41,744 SF Lot Width: 131’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Accessory Building Height: 24’ 17’ Accessory Building Minimum Side Yard Setback: 20’ 20’/20’3” (With open sides) Accessory Building Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 20’ 36.2’ (With open sides) Accessory Building Maximum Area: 720 SF 662 SF Pool/Patio Side Setback: 20’ 39.1 Pool/Patio Rear Setback: 20’ 73.1’ Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 26,987 SF 27,178 SF = 65.1% 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 surface in approximately same footprint, and No 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. December 3, 2024 #6 Heather & Chandler McCray† Continued to January 14th 3002 W 66th Terrace The McCrays are proposing a new 1-story home with a 4,443 sq. ft. footprint. The footprint consists of 2,911 sq. ft. of first floor living space, a 931 sq. ft. 3-car garage, and 601 sq. ft. of covered porches. The project includes a small patio. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Lot Coverage Review SF Main Floor Living Area: 2,911 Main Floor Garage Area: 931 Covered Porches: 601 Detached Accessory Buildings: 0 Total Lot Coverage: 4,443 Summary of Project: The Mediterranean-style home is entirely stucco with a clay tile roof. All the windows feature deep insets with rolled stucco trim. Nearly all the windows have arched tops or are set in arched-top nooks. The garage is located in a prominent front/side wing. Another large, covered porch wing is situated at the center of the main structure. A front/side wing is also located at the west end of the house. The space between the front wings creates a courtyard for the front entry. Instead of a traditional wall, a hedgerow is proposed to enclose the courtyard. The rear of the house is heavily fenestrated and includes a large, covered porch that extends deep into the backyard. A modest, freeform patio wraps around the rear of the home. The property is enclosed by a six-foot privacy fence featuring stucco columns at the primary corners and around the garages. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review SF Lot Area: 21,667 House Footprint: -4,443 Driveway: -1,556 Walkways: -420 Patios: -524 Mechanical Pads -28 Window Wells: -158 Remaining Greenspace: 14,538 Greenspace Percentage: 67.0% Design Guideline Review: Section 2.5 on pages 72 through 75 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Suburban character area. December 3, 2024 Subsection A recommends that the main mass should be located entirely in the Primary Building Area. Its width should not exceed 50% of the lot width and not exceed 65 ft. At 52 feet this recommendation has been met. This section goes on to recommend that the depth of the main mass should not exceed 40 ft. At 40 feet deep, this recommendation has been met. Lastly, this section recommends that the height be restricted to 2 stories and 30 feet. At 1-story and 22.5 feet tall, this recommendation has been met. With few exceptions, the main mass should be the tallest, widest and most highly visible massing element of the home. A minimum of 50% of the front facade should be visible from the street. Front projections such as porches, stoops, bay windows and chimneys that are 6 ft. deep or less are considered part of the visible main mass front facade. Front porches deeper than 6 ft. that are 75% open on the street-facing side are considered part of the visible main mass front facade. While the main mass is obscured, this recommendation has been met. Subsection B recommends that the total width of front wings not exceed 50% of the main mass width. The depth should not be greater than the main mass. The height is limited to 1 ½ stories and should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. The garage wing width is more than 50% of the main mass width, but the portion in front of the main mass is less than 50%. This recommendation has been met. Subsection C recommends that side wings be inset a minimum of 3 ft. from the front and rear facades of the main mass. Side wings that extend in front of or behind the main mass should extend at least 3 ft. past the main mass façade. This recommendation has been met. Side wings in the Primary and Secondary Building Areas are limited to 1 ½ stories and 24 ft. in height and should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. They should also be set behind the front plane of the main mass. This recommendation has been met. Side wings located in the Conditional Building Area are allowed if they meet the special conditions in Section 2.6.4 (pg. 88). Only one is allowed. If allowed, the height is limited to 1 story and 16 ft. and should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. Side wings in the Conditional Building Area should contain no second floor or dormer windows that overlook the neighbors. The existing utility easements can be considered a special lot condition allowing for the house to be located in the Conditional Building Area. Subsection D recommends that rear wings located in the Conditional Building Area are allowed if they meet the special conditions in Section 2.6.4 (pg. 88). No more than one shall encroach into the Conditional Building Area. The rear wing should not exceed 1 story and 16 ft. in height and should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. The depth should not exceed 24 feet. These recommendations have been met. Subsection G recommends that driveways occupy as little of the Primary Landscape Area as possible. On lots wider than 140 ft., the driveway should be located off the side property line a distance no less than 8% of the lot width. The proposed driveway is less than 8% from the side of the lot. This was to maintain the existing curb cut. The driveway quickly shifts towards the center of the lot as it approaches the garages. 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. Section 2.7.1 B on page 94 recommends that the number of different roof pitches should be limited to two. This recommendation has been met. December 3, 2024 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 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 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 D on page 110 provides specific recommendations about altering grade and topography. Minimal grading is proposed. Section 2.7.3 E on page 111 provides specific recommendations for courtyards. Courtyards should engage the main mass of the principal building and provide access to the main entry. They should be oriented toward the street. Their depth should be between 8 and 16 feet and the width should be greater than the depth but less than the width of the home’s main mass. The walls should be between 16 and 36 inches. Entry posts should be limited to 4 feet tall. This recommendation has been met. Section 2.7.3 E on page 111 provides specific recommendations for Patios and Outdoor Recreational Facilities. This section recommends that these elements follow the zoning regulations to help mitigate water runoff and minimize noise from entertainment areas. This recommendation has been met. PRP Recommendation: [PRP review not yet completed.] Lot Information Zoning: R-1(16)/LS-3 Lot Area: 21,667 SF Lot Width: 145.8’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ 22.5’ Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 10’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 10’ 47.8’ Minimum Combined Side Yards: 30% = 43.74’ 57.8’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 30.2’ 31.2’ Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 23’ (Scaled) Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 26’ (Scaled) Maximum Lot Coverage: 5,460 SF 4,443 SF Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 14,083 SF 14,538 SF = 67.0% Neighbor Comparison Neighbor to Left Proposed Neighbor to Right Highest Ridge Above Finished 937 947 949.75 Grade: Primary Eave Height Above 930.5 936 942.5 Finished Grade: First Floor Elevation: 922.9 (per survey) 926.5 935.5 Top of Foundation Elevation: 921.5 (per survey) 924.5 935 December 3, 2024  Site Elements Driveway width at Property Line: 10’ Driveway width at house. 32’ Circle Drive Interior Green N/A Second Floor Plate Height N/A 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 No 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 LC by Address Lot Area % max used Coverage Ordinance 3002 W 66th Ter 21,667 2,606 5,460 47.73% 3001 Tomahawk Rd 22,798 3,737 5,657 66.06% 3007 Tomahawk Rd 20,702 4,090 5,290 77.31% 3105 Tomahawk Rd 19,232 2,912 5,026 57.94% 2910 W 66th Ter 21,195 3,458 5,377 64.31% 2902 W 66th Ter 20,064 3,493 5,176 67.48% 2911 W 66th Ter 20,075 3,933 5,178 75.95% 3003 W 66th Ter 24,810 4,794 5,999 79.91% 3011 W 66th Ter 24,843 3,541 6,005 58.97% 2909 W 66th St 23,003 2,884 5,692 50.67% 2901 W 66th St 21,933 3,036 5,507 55.13% Average 63.77% 50% Increase 95.65% Allowable LC reduced by 150% Rule 5,223 = 3002 W 66th Ter Proposed = 4,606 84.4% of City Ordinance Limit 88.2% of Design Guideline Limit December 3, 2024