Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA December 17, 2024 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:30 p.m. #1 Kirk & Stesha Black Changes to previously approved project 3012 W 67th Terrace #2 Erin & Bret Knighton Changes to previously approved project 2040 W 59th Street #3 Ahead Engineering Small cell cellular antennas Multiple Locations Continued from November 19th mtg #4 MOJO Built, LLC † New Home 6419 Sagamore Road Continued from November 19th mtg #5 Holli & Chip Zuck Withdrew New screened porch 6505 Willow Lance Continued from December 3rd mtg #6 Andrew Nosti † Continue to January 14th mtg New Home 5509 Mission Drive *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 Kirk & Stesha Black 3012 W 67th Terrace The Blacks are returning to the ARB with changed to their previously approved project. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: At the June 27, 2023 ARB meeting, the ARB approved multiple changes but denied the addition of shutters at the front windows and required that the built-in grill be relocated with a change in materials. The Blacks are returning to the ARB to propose eliminating the front shutters as requested. They are also proposing to move the built-in grill 2 inches to meet the manufacturer’s installation instructions. Since the grill will still be in the same spot in lieu of replacing it, they are proposing to paint the stone to match the painted stone on the main house. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the 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 17, 2024 #2 Erin & Bret Knighton 2040 W 59th Street The Knightons are returning to the ARB with modifications to their previously approved project. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: Corner Lot Summary of Project: The Knightens are proposing to reduce the scope their previously approved project by eliminating the garage expansion, second floor addition, and sunroom conversion. The reduction in scope affects the design on the west covered porch addition. A cantilevered bay is proposed in an existing alcove, along with a covered side porch. New windows are proposed on the west side of the house. The existing brick patio is to be converted into a concrete patio. A new extension is proposed to the north end of the driveway. A new basketball goal will be installed in the extension. 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 Lot Information Zoning: R-1(30)/LS-5 Lot Area: 32,988 SF Lot Width: 200’ Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowed/Required Provided Minimum Side Yard (Left): ½ Neighbor’s Front = 28’-5” 66.1. (Existing) Minimum Side Yard (Right): 15% = 30’ 58.8’ (Existing) Minimum Combined Side Yards: N/A Patio Minimum Side Yard: 20’ 17’8” Patio Minimum Rear Yard: 20’ 10’5.5” Lot Coverage: 7,313 SF 4,195 SF Greenspace: 65% = 21,443 SF 21,598 SF = 65.5% December 17, 2024 #3 Ahead Engineering Various Right of Ways (ROW) and Utility Easements Ahead Engineering is proposing to install small cell node cellular antennas at multiple locations around the City to create a network of seven small cell wireless facilities attached to streetlights (5) and utility poles (2), at locations shown on the attached map. This project was continued from the November 5th and 19th ARB meeting. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Suburban • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The nodes consist of an antenna that is approximately 2 feet tall and 15 inches in diameter. The antenna will be installed at the top of either a telephone pole or light pole, depending on the location. Each node will also include an equipment box and a power meter. At most locations all of this equipment will be installed on the associated pole. A small electrical transformer will be ground set near the pole in select locations. The table below shows the locations, current height of existing poles and height of proposed replacement poles and antenna. Current Proposed Proposed Location Pole Type top of Pole top of Pole top of Antenna 1 – State Park Road Wood Utility Pole 38’8” 43’ 46’3” 2 – 2040 W. 59th Street Streetlight 29”8” 30’ 33’ 2 – 2035 W 59th Street (alt) Streetlight 30’ 33’ 3 – Island (6036 Mission Drive) Streetlight 25’8” 30’ 33’ 4 – 2411 W. 65th Street Streetlight 25’ 30’ 33’ 4 – 2300 W 65th Street (Alt) Streetlight N/A 30’ 33’ 5 – 2901 Tomahawk Circle Streetlight 24’10” 30’ 33’ 6 – 6630 Rainbow Wood Utility Pole 28’5” 34’ 37’3” 7 – 3030 W. 69th Street Streetlight 25’2” 30’ 33’ Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. The City has hired a consultant to complete an independent third-party review of the structural design as well as the emissions, to be certain all applicable standards have been met. Design Guideline Review: Design Guidelines do not apply to utility projects. December 17, 2024 #4 MOJO Built, LLC † 6419 Sagamore Road The owners are proposing a new 2-story home with a 2,334 sq. ft. footprint. The footprint consists of 1,414 sq. ft. of first floor living space, a 2-car garage, and 263 sq. ft. of covered porches. † This project is a substantial project and was noticed as such. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Traditional • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: Corner Lot Coverage Review SF Building Footprint: 2020 Front Porch: 34 Side Porch: 56 Covered Deck: 158 Total Lot Coverage: 2,268 Summary of Project: The home is Tudor style. It is sided with a combination of stucco and brick. The stucco includes timber detailing. The window arrangement is formal on all sides with all windows having a Colonial muntin pattern. All windows have extensive trim. Windows in brick include rowlock sills and soldier headers. The box bay window, at the rear of the house, has smooth cementitious panels that will be painted to match the adjacent stucco. The screened porch/covered deck is elevated over the rear patio and supported on wood columns with brackets. Similar brackets are proposed at the roof eyebrows and the porches. No HVAC equipment has been indicated. A generator is proposed at the south side of the house below the screened porch. Ordinance Compliance: There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the City of Mission Hills Code of Ordinances. Greenspace Review SF Lot Area: 12,068 House Footprint: -2,020 Porches: -90 Rear Deck: -158 Driveway: -463 Front Walkway: -233 Generator Pad: -13 Side Retaining Wall: -25 Remaining Greenspace: 9,066 = 75.12% Design Guideline Review: Section 2.4 on pages 68 through 71 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Traditional Neighborhood character area. December 17, 2024 Subsection A recommends that the main mass width be no more than 60% of the lot width and no more than 50 feet. At 44 feet this recommendation has been met. This section goes on to recommend that the depth of the main mass should not exceed 35 ft. At 34.5 feet deep, this recommendation has been met. The main mass height should be no more than 2 stories and 30 ft. At 29.5 feet and 1 ½ stories, these recommendations have been met. This section (for homes in the Traditional Neighborhood) allows the main mass to extend to the minimum side yard setback. However, Section 2.6.3.A gives recommendations for corner lots. This section recommends that the main mass be located entirely within the Primary Building Area. The main mass is located within the Conditional Building Area on the north side. This recommendation has not been met. Also, “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.” These recommendations have been met. Subsection B recommends that only one front wing be allowed, and its width should not exceed 50% of the main mass width. The depth should not be greater than the width. The height is limited to 1 ½ stories and should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. Exceptions are large front gables on Tudor homes and other central entry projections that are common on styles such as Mediterranean Revival, French Country, and Craftsman; and for "Gable-Front-and-Wing" style of homes where a single gabled-wing is added to one end of the front of the home. The location should be near the front building line. These recommendations have been met. Subsection D recommends that only one rear wing be allowed on a property. A rear wing located in the Primary or Secondary Building Areas should be no more than 1 ½ stories and 24 ft. in height and should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. A rear wing should have a width of no more than 24 ft. A rear wing that extends into the Conditional Building Area is allowed if it meets the special conditions in Section 2.6.4 (pg. 88). Only one is allowed. If allowed in the Conditional Building Area by the Architectural Review Board, the wing height should not exceed 1 ½ stories and 24 ft. with eaves no taller than 12 ft. It should be at least 3 ft. shorter than the main mass. All of these recommendations have been met, except for the height. Due to the slope of the property, a full walk-out basement has been provided which makes the rear wing approximately 36 feet tall. Discussion is recommended. 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. The proposed driveway is a direct drive as is typical of the Traditional neighborhood character area. Subsection I for roofs: Maximum height: 1.5 times that of the height of the façade below the eave, except for one-story homes which can be 2 times that of the façade height below the eave. Consider adding front dormers or other front projections to break up a roof height between 1.5 and 2 times taller than the front façade and/or roofs wider than 50 ft. These recommendations have been met. Section 2.6.2 on page 79 provides specific recommendations for adjustments to narrow lots (less than 130 ft. wide) OR houses less than 30 ft. apart. The proposed home is 20.5 feet from the house to the north. The eave and ridge heights of the proposed home are comparable to the ridge and eave heights of the adjacent house. December 17, 2024 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. The home has two primary pitches. However, one dormer on the south side has a lower pitch. This recommendation has not been met. Section 2.7.1.C on page 95 provides specific recommendations for projecting elements. This recommendation has 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. The garage is incorporated into the main mass. Section 2.7.2.B on page 102 recommends drives to be no more than 12 feet wide at the property line. At 15 feet, 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. Section 2.7.3 D on page 110 provides specific recommendations about altering grade and topography. The only significant grading proposed is where the existing driveway was removed. The proposed grading creates a swale that directs water around the house to the street and away from the neighbors. City Arborist Review: Tree inventory of the property above has been made. The Mojo Built site plan for tree removal has been approved and the trees that are not removed will require protection from construction, per City Ordinance 509-4. During the utility shut off a large Pin Oak located up front up was harmed and sustained considerable root damage. Mojo Built has been notified and the city will require them to remove the tree and replace the tree with two approved trees on sight by the end of the building process. PRP Recommendation: [PRP recommendation not yet complete.] Lot Information Zoning: R-1(10)/LS-1 Lot Area: 12,068 SF Lot Width: 84’-4” Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ 30’2” Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 10’1” Minimum Side Yard (Right): 25’ (Platted) 26.0’ Minimum Combined Side Yards: 25% = 21’ 36.5’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 15% = 20.51’ 33.3’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 3,636 SF 2,268 SF Minimum Greenspace: 7,241 SF = 60% 9,066 SF = 75.12% December 17, 2024  Neighbor Comparison Neighbor to Left Proposed Neighbor to Rear Primary Eave Height Above 17’ 18’ 8.5’ Finished Grade: First Floor Elevation: 945.0’ 946.7’ 938.2’ Top of Foundation Elevation: 944.1’ 946.5’ 937.1’ Second Floor Plate Height Approx. 953’ 957.78’ N/A Eave Height 959.8 963.2’ 945.4’ Ridge Height: 967.1’ 976’ 961.0’ Site Elements Driveway width at Property Line: 15’ Driveway width at house. 18’ Circle Drive Interior Green n/a Second Floor Plate Height 10’-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. Existing Lot Address Lot Area LC by Ordinance % max used Coverage 6419 Sagamore Rd 12,068 1,373 3,636 37.8% 6412 Sagamore Rd 10,124 2,539 3,218 78.9% 6416 Sagamore Rd 9,730 2,291 3,130 73.2% 6420 Sagamore Rd 9,664 2,242 3,115 72.0% 6426 Sagamore Rd 9,811 2,093 3,148 66.5% 6409 Sagamore Rd 20,968 2,466 5,337 46.2% 6415 Sagamore Rd 13,900 2,084 4,011 52.0% 6427 Sagamore Rd 12,646 1,793 3,756 47.7% 6421 Overbrook Rd 26,792 2,659 6,329 42.0% 6428 Overbrook Rd 7,989 1,351 2,729 49.5% Average 56.6% 50% Increase 84.9% Recommended Lot Coverage as reduced by 150% Rule: 3,085 Proposed: 2,268 76% December 17, 2024