Architectural Review Board (ARB)

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA January 14, 2025 3:00 p.m. Pre-meeting to begin at 2:00 p.m. #1 Kansas City Country Club New cart path and planters / Patio replacement 6200 Indian Lane #2 Allison & Andrew Remak Second floor addition 6439 Overbrook Road #3 Ahead Engineering CONTINUED TO JANUARY 28th Small cell cellular antennas Multiple Locations Continued from December 17th mtg #4 MOJO Built, LLC † New Home 6419 Sagamore Road Continued from December 17th mtg #5 Heather & Chandler McCray † New Home 3002 W 66th Terrace Continued from December 3rd mtg #6 Andrew Nosti † CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 11th New Home 5509 Mission Drive Continued from December 17th mtg *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 Kansas City Country Club 6200 Indian Lane The Kansas City Country Club is proposing new cart paths, planters, and a patio replacement. Summary of Project: The Club is proposing a reconfiguration of the cart paths near the club. The new paths are in a similar location. The new paths are proposed as concrete with brick banding. A significant section of the path will be widened to allow for cart parking. Along with the cart paths, several new/replaced retaining/planter walls are proposed near the existing club house. The proposed walls are all stone to match the existing walls. An existing brick patio, near the #1 tee box, will be re-laid in the same configuration. 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. January 14, 2025 #2 Andrew & Allison Remak 6439 Overbrook Road The Remaks are proposing an interior remodel that includes a small second-floor addition at the rear of the house. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Neighborhood Estates • Location of Common Green Space: Front • Any Special Frontages: None Summary of Project: The proposed addition is located over the top of an existing first floor rear wing. The rear of the addition aligns with the rear of the existing wing. The addition has a small cantilever to the side. The cantilever will include wood brackets. All details, materials and fenestration match the main house. 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 Design Guidelines. January 14, 2025 #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 December 17th 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. January 14, 2025 #4 MOJO Built, LLC 6419 Sagamore Road The owners are proposing a new 2-story home with a 2,238 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. UPDATE: At the December 17th meeting, the brick color was changed to dark red. The ARB requested that two windows be added to the north elevation with the possibility of changing the window that the PRP requested, the owner consider changing the timbering to be 6-inches wide, and consider changing the shed dormer on the rear elevation to be a gabled dormer. New plans were submitted that include two new windows on the north elevation, 6-inch wide timbering, and the rear shed dormer changed to a gabled dormer. Summary of Property: • Character Area: Traditional • Location of Common Green Space: Front & Side • Any Special Frontages: Corner Lot Coverage Review SF Main Floor Living Area: 1,499 Garage: 521 Front Porch: 14 Side Porch: 56 Covered Deck: 158 Total Lot Coverage: 2,248 Summary of Project: The home is Tudor style. It is sided with a combination of stucco and dark red 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 cut stone 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. The HVAC equipment and a generator is located on the south side of the house near the patio under 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 -165 Driveway: -463 Front Walkway: -232 Generator Pad: -13 Side Retaining Wall: -25 Remaining Greenspace: 9,059 = 75.1% January 14, 2025 Design Guideline Review: Section 2.4 on pages 68 through 71 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Traditional Neighborhood character area. 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. January 14, 2025 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. 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. Section 2.7.1.C on page 95 provides specific recommendations for projecting elements. This recommendation has been mostly met. The screened in porch has a flat roof, and one dormer on the south side of the house has a low slop faux copper roof. 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: The PRP recommends approval with the addition of a window on the north elevation at the stair tower landing, and the timbering to be painted a contracting color from the field stucco. Lot Information Zoning: R-1(10)/LS-1 Lot Area: 12,068 SF Lot Width: 84’-4” January 14, 2025  Ordinance/Design Guideline Allowable/Required Provided Maximum Height: 35’ 30’2” Minimum Side Yard (Left): 10’ 10.5’ Minimum Side Yard (Right): 25’ (Platted) 26.0’ Minimum Combined Side Yards: 25% = 21’ 36.5’ Minimum Rear Yard: (At closest point) 20% = 27.35’ 33.3’ Maximum Lot Coverage: 3,636 SF 2,248 SF Minimum Greenspace: 60% = 7,241 SF 9,059 SF = 75.1% 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. January 14, 2025  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: 2,238 73% of 150% rule January 14, 2025 #5 Heather & Chandler McCray 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: 2,916 Main Floor Garage Area: 931 Covered Porches: 566 Detached Accessory Buildings: 0 Total Lot Coverage: 4,413 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: -4,413 Driveway: -1,556 Walkways: -420 Patios: -524 Mechanical Pads -28 Window Wells: -158 Remaining Greenspace: 14,568 Greenspace Percentage: 67.2% Design Guideline Review: Section 2.5 on pages 72 through 75 of the Design Guidelines provides specific recommendations for the Suburban character area. January 14, 2025 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. January 14, 2025 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: The PRP met multiple times on this property and required significant modifications. The PRP recommends approval of this version as submitted. 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’ 20.9’ 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 4,413 SF Minimum Greenspace: 65% = 14,083 SF 14.568 SF = 67.2% 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 January 14, 2025  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 = 4,413 80.8% of City Ordinance Limit 84.5% of Design Guideline Limit January 14, 2025