HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1994/01/26 (4)
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of January 26, 1994
Page 1
1.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Site Plan and Architectural Review: DRC.94-1O;
Construction of 51 single-family dwellings on the
undeveloped portion of the Bayona neighborhood
within Rancho Del Rev . Kaufman and Broad
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting site plan and architectural approval for the construction of 51
homes on the undeveloped portion of the Bayona neighborhood located within the Rancho
Del Rey Planned Community (see locator).
Site plan and architectural review for single family deyelopment is normally undertaken
by the Zoning Administrator. In this case. the matter has been referred directly to the
Planning Commission because of the level of neighborhood concern.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution approving the site plan and
architecture for DRC-94.1O based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained
therein.
C. DISCUSSION
On August 30. 1991, the 91-lot Bayona neighborhood received site plan and architectural
approval by the Zoning Administrator. Subsequently. 40 homes were constructed by
McMillin Communities. The 51 remaining lots are the subject matter of this application.
Kaufman and Broad purchased the remaining lots and in September 1993. they presented
a proposal to develop the remaining portion of Bayona with a new housing product. The
new homes feature well articulated facades and accent architectural treatments. as well
as a well.coordinated color and materials composition. However. these new homes are
different from the existing Bayona homes in design and color composition.
Based on these differences. the staff suggested that the developer meet with the existing
Bayona residents to introduce the new design prior to a Zoning Administrator decision
on the project. At the meeting. the residents raised two major issues: the architectural
compatibility of the new homes with the existing neighborhood. and the quality and price
of the new homes in relationship to their existing homes.
Subsequent to the meeting. the residents appeared in front of the City Council to express
their concern. They stated that the new homes needed to be architecturally compatible
with their existing homes in order to maintain the character and value of their
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of January 26, 1994
Page 2
neighborhood. As a result, the Council directed staff to meet with the residents to
acquaint them with the planning process, including any appeal procedures.
Accordingly, a meeting was held with the Bayona residents on January 5, 1994. The
staff, the applicant (Kaufman and Broad), and representatives of McMillin Communities
met with the residents to determine if their concerns could be resolved to the satisfaction
of all parties. Kaufman and Broad presented revised drawings illustrating a number of
refinements that they believed addressed issues raised by the residents at the previous
meeting and in earlier written correspondence (please see attached). The building
modifications included the deletion of decorative material, such as stone veneer and
brick, and an increase in the number of homes with a barrel.type roof tile instead of the
use of a flat tile.
The residents welcomed the architectural changes, but indicated that the changes were
insufficient to resolve the substantial differences in the finish materials, landscaping, and
interior amenities between their homes and the new homes proposed by Kaufman and
Broad. They indicated that the differences in architectural treatment and quality of the
finish product would produce a distinctive change in neighborhood character and could
result in a devaluation of their property values.
The residents also indicated that before they could endorse the project, the stucco and
roof color scheme would need to be changed to harmonize with the existing
neighborhood color theme, and that individual home landscape design would need to be
incorporated as part of the development proposal as was done in their existing
neighborhood.
Based on these unresolved concerns, the Zoning Administrator has forwarded the project
to the Planning Commission for consideration.
D. ANALYSIS
The new housing design features similar articulation and architectural treatment, but has
certain features such as the flat tile roofs, front porches, slightly longer overhangs, lattice
work, and other minor differences which are not a part of the existing Bayona homes.
Another difference is the proposed color scheme. The existing residences use a pastel
color stucco with contrasting accent color fascias and trim and the garage doors and
accents are painted the same color. The proposed new product features compatible earth
tones but the garage doors are painted white on all models.
The Rancho Del Rey Design Guidelines suggest that architectural styles not be mixed
within a single project (neighborhood) and that each parcel maintain internal consistency.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of January 26, 1994
Page 3
Although the proposed project is noticeably different, the architectural style is similar
and, in our opinion, compatible with the existing neighborhood. However, in order to
create a better transition between the two projects, it is recommended that flat roof tile
material be replaced with barrel tile four lots on each side of the street next to the
existing homes, and roof tile colors be carefully coordinated with the colors used on the
balance of the existing homes. In addition, one vacant lot exists at the comer of Elsa
Drive and Rancho Del Rey Parkway which the applicant has agreed to duplicate colors
and materials to match the existing houses on Elsa Drive.
Based on the drawings of the project and the photographs of similar homes built by
Kaufman and Broad in other communities, staff finds the project appropriate for the site,
architecturally harmonious with the existing Bayona homes, and therefore in compliance
with the site plan and architectural principles established in section 19.14.470 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code (see attached). Based on these findings, staff recommends
approval of the project subject to the conditions listed in the attached draft Planning
Commission Resolution.
(b:\drc-94lO.pch)
RESOLUTION NO. DRC-94-10
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURE
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 51 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AT
NEIGHBORHOOD 1561 (BAYONA) WITHIN THE RANCHO DEL
REY PLANNED COMMUNITY.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for Zoning Administrator site plan and architectural
approval was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on September 24, 1994
by Kaufman and Broad, and
WHEREAS, said application requested site plan and architectural approval for the construction
of 51 single family homes on the undeveloped portion of neighborhood 1561 (Bayona) of the
Rancho Del Rey planned community, and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator considered the site plan and architecture for the
proposed development, but due to the concerns expressed by the residents of the area, and pursuant
to Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.14.050, referred this item to the Planning Commission,
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department set the time and place for a hearing on said site plan
and architectural review application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given
by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners
within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property and the 40 developed lots within the
Bayona neigborhood at least ten days prior to the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m.,
January 26, 1994 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the existing
Environmental Impact Reports provide an adequate environmental analysis for the consideration of
this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION finds as
follows:
1. That the proposed development is in substantial compliance with the site
development regulations established in the Rancho Del Rey planned Community
District Regulations and is consistent with the applicable design guidelines.
2. Based on the illustrations presented at the meeting, and as conditioned, the project
site plan and architectural prerequisites set forth in the Chula Vista Municipal Code
Section 19.14.470 have been satisfied.
Resolution No. DRC.94-1O
Page 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby approves the site
plan and architecture of the proposed project subject to the following conditions:
a. Lots 24-27 and 4649 shall be developed with models using the barrel type
roof in colors similar to the ones used in the exiting Bayona homes.
b. The trellis featured on the base of the entry porch of plan 1 shall be replaced
with a material more compatible with the existing residences, satisfactory to
the Director of Planning.
c. Where an offset in the front yard building setback is proposed between
adjoining parcels it shall a minimum of five feet. No more than 3 buildings
on adjoining parcels shall be constructed along the same setback line.
d. A fencing program depicting the type of fences to be used along the canyon
edge and street frontage shall be submitted to the Director of Planning for
review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.
e. The optional wood deck shown on plans 2, 3 and 4 shall be a standard
feature on lots facing the canyon or public right of way.
f. The corner Lot 1 at Elsa Drive and Rancho Del Rey Parkway shall finished
with colors and materials matching the existing homes on Elsa Drive.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA,
this 26th day of January, 1994 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Thomas A. Martin, Chairman
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
(b:\drc-9410.res)
-L
-------
---
------
PROJECT
LOCATION
E\.. ~E'/ PAR
~~tlCtlO 0
INDICAn:~
[;;.'(17rlhl~ f2.0IDe:.N~
...
U
C
.
'\
. r
EAST
-H-
STREET
.L
/
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~ APPLICANT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
BA YONA SUBDIVISON
ADDRESS: EI Rancho Del Rey Neighborhood 1561
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH 1" = 400' DRC - 94 - 10
CHULS VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 19.14.470
Site Plan and Architectural Approval
Principles to be Observed
19.14.470 Site plan and an:bitectunI approval-!'rinciples to be obsenecL
In canying out the purpose of this division, the zoning administrator shall consider in each specific
case any or all of the following principles as may be appropriate:
A. It is not a purpose of this division that control of design character should be so rigidly enforced that
individual initiative is stifled in the layout of any particular building or site and substantial additional
expense incurred; rather, it is the intent of this division that any control exercised be the minimum
necessary to achieve the over-all objective of this division.
B. Good design character is based upon the suitability of building and site design for Its purposes; upon
the appropriate use of sound materials; and upon the principles of harmony and proportion in the
over-all design.
C. Good design character is not, in itself, more expensive than poor design, and is not dependent upon
the particular style of design selected.
D. The siting of any structure on the property, as compared to the siting of other structUreS in the
immediate neighborhood, shall be considered.
E. The size, location, design, color, number, lighting and materials of all signs and outdoor advertising
structures shall be reviewed. No sign shall be approved in excess of the maximum limits set by any
ordinance of the city.
F. Landscaping in accordance with the landscaping manual of the city shall be required on the lite and
shall be in keeping with the character or design of the site and existing trees shall be preserved ~
whenever possible.
G. Ingress, egress and internal traffic circulation shall be so designed as to promote convenience and
safety.
H. All the facton specified in this section shall be related to the setting or established character of the
neighborhood or surrounding area.
I. Undergrounding of overhead utilities may be required by the zoning administrator subject to approval
of the planning commission.
(Ord. 1653 II, 1975; Ord. 135611 (pan), 1971; Ord 121211 (part), 1969; prior code 133.1313W(5)).
(R 6/93)
1126
.
EXISTING BAYONA NEIGHBORHOOD
HOMES
---~.-.
-
--~-
-
-"..------<
-
-
1
n.___~__
i
,
I
- ~ ----
--.-
----
-
,
~
~
----
i
;
-~
--~_._-,,---,"~-
..,....--'".----..--."
-~"----_.~----'~--------
----.-----------
n.J
.--..----
__._mo_
--~_..._-~_.
.~----,---~~
PROPOSED KAUFMAN AND BROAD
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
DRC-94-10
-_..__.......-'""...-......"'-_.._.-_..__._....-...,..._-_..._..-_..._---..~...._...,......----.--....."'.......-...--
. . . -:I' . . . . .. ........... .............
d
:<Jj~ ~j
. ~ ~
. ., ~ .
. . . . . j.
. ---.-
"'>-
. C..w
. z c:!
<..0
. c::::w
C
,
. . . .
-
-
>-- Z
OJ 0
-
~ r./J
-
> ,...-,
..J 5 ='
='
W 0
0 i",
0 :.:..:
0 ~ z
- --
a ~
::r:
u z
Z <(
r./J
<r: II
~
~
. . . . . .
.~.
. -.
: ;~ '. :
. . . . .
.__.........,_........_..L..""'....._....,_........_....__........._........._.........., .........,_........_.-,,-.._.._..~................,_........-......................"'~"'_..-...._.
M" 0
'I, "
r. .'"
I ~, 'I
I ,,'--'
I . g
,Pi..
4---J
I
"
,.,
:~~~i
. ~ ;
. .. =:i'
. . . . . j
t-'
I'
I
I
:;'1::
~'!;:
I '"
~
I -
1L+-' ~
~
, ' .
~
~
"'>-
-C:J
~c:::
~.J
~.U.J
-0
;:
.r-,It
f
.u- ,~:
,r- ,i~
,..1
~
I ,,!
; ".1':
i' ; I:
I,
,I
C'It: I
~D
~:;;
(" I
-
"
<
~
"
~
"
-
-
3
.L'.iZ
l
,
.o',i.
.r',t
kr::IT '~~
! ,._ .' II
,~-ftT :: \ I
II ',> i .
r-+--( ,
, -
/
~
-
-W'
; : i
~', I'
,
m-
~
~
~
~
:r.
<
'"
~
. . . . . . .
. . . . .
t
I , I
~ ~
I
~I
:-1
I ~1
, ,
~
.., ~
z ~
< ~
, .
'^ '^ ;I~
~
~ N 2!
Ui ~
t ~, ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~:
"
~ "
I
"'I!
?,I
I
I
-
>..
..
J.
"
;:
?:
~
-
<ll~ ~
,.,
... -s
1
=
.....~"...," ..""...,_........_...""C;.."_ ~.....,_.n....._"_"......"""'...,_.."'''_ ...w ~,_...u,. "....., "'''''..."_........,.''',.''...m''''''~A.'...~......,,..."......'''........,-........'"-'''~"''.....''''''''; -".."IJ'" ..,....""'.........--
0;>-
=UJ
"'0<:
.z -'
<(UJ
.0<:0
__ ,-...A..(
",_'"- ,.. 'r'
~
.
...
:>
..
.,
'.
,
" c
. .'
"
,:1
~
::::
'"
:>
.1
I
.~
.. '.r. .
. ~.
~ .....,
.
"
__..._..,_......._..,"_____...____"'__.___......L__.......____...___._......~..,__.._.__......",lI._..._..__
"
"
~o
. ., :::J
. ~ '"!
. ~
. ., ~
d
'"
=
~:,
. ~.
< -,
, .
~
><>
0'"
Z"
<(..J
e:::~
E8
I
81
,
~
~
;::
;>
'.'
~
:z
"
'"
'.
r-
I
I
I
Q
~
;>
~ ~
w ~
'" ;::
'\ <( ~
CJ :;j
'" :.:J
..,
"
'"
~
,
_._..-......._........._'"',...._...~.......-.........-,,_........__._.......""--_.._..--..._-_.........---...-..--.....-.-..-..--.
."
,.,
~~ ~
;:j
-' ~
.. ~
,.,
"
Q",
c::;
z-
<-'
,.....w
-~
m~~W~1:r
c'
"
----
----~I
J8=
._1 1
-------
i
,
:;,W~
_~______n___n~
'j--~ ::---~
,l.
a,~
;;::,:;,
q
-",
..:.
-.unu__n__
-
~
:~
.,,:~
_un~___u.~__
i!\II1" ::
,t:~ :~~~
-",
--~
----:.,.----_.
>,
;7;-
:lL
-
_______.~_un_
..:.
~
~/
~'.
--~~
~L~
~.i-,~
...... V'. ~
~ c::
, .
~ ~
!
z
-<
-
~
-
...""
'j
z
-<
-
---....-
~l
~-<
-",
'j
z
<;
0.
.;......1
g
,__...___.._"'L..._.......,_~
_.....__..__._...._...,__......._._.......__...~~_..__....,____.__.....'"~IOI_...........__,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
" .
"
.<11' 2.
::J "
. , <];
. ~ ;
. ., -:j'
. . . . . j
I"
-A Ip:oJ:ti~ ~
-I'
>.tdJ
~=
"'>-
~L.tJ
'2'0<
<..J
O<W
o
.9-,<.; .1)1-,"-
o
,.,
.~-,l\S
.Ol,n
,,0-,"-:
. . . . . .
M
,
- I
-tt "
,
-LI
I"
I ~I
<' I I
~ ~l I
<:
j< 3 I
'I
i~1
~i r
'.
~i ill . , . ,
~~.;b~
l
, .~'.~
1
'"
":'
-
"
.,
-
~
I.
.---i-.__
~
-
-"
~~
r ;;
10",
I
I..!::::::-=..
"
'./)
"
"
1
I I
~~
-
L-
e' ~
"
;:j
!O ~
-
.t
~. -
~
. "'" j
. z~
< ~
.0: .
:r;;:r. :r;
:q ~ ~
:X)::o ::::
'^
Z'
91 ~ g ~
~i :: ~ ~
~L ~ ~
-
-
~
~
-
~
-
~
;;:
,~...'.. -..-.,,_...~..__.. ".-, .........-
-~
"
.~~ .~
. '.::!
. .. ::;
j
~
~>:
v::::
z-
< -,
~~
;''-!
--
"," ,-
'-,,,
.........",.u..,'_N._~........_..., ..."""_........_...~_"'_"'_.....n...~.....__,......__..._.._.___..... ..~....,..____
. .....
~!_-
"T .~
N"'; :ii
~ :;;
,I
\IJ/ ,- - - - ---
':1. _.. ..}:. ..;,'"
~~ If"_..:-o-
, .,
1M.' '<- .~ .
~ r, ,
",
<<:
:: z
:<; ~
"
:<:: ;?,
"
GJ
"",~,
'('J(, -,~1t
'"","" I'.
I )j '"
,,'
H
, "1(
, ,,-
/ -,
".
,.
,: .:~
.1
v
z
~
v
C
~
"!
w:i
'\
__..___..._....,..__....,_... ..._.__"'__..............L.......,_........_.__..__.....~.........~...,__..._.__.... ..~.._.._._--
"
,.,
~"
.. ~
~ <J!
;:j
.. ~
"
~
c-
;::[;j
Z::t
<..0
::<W
Q
-
=
~
m
EB
I
I
I
z
g
'-
~
~
-
::<
<(
w
::<
z
C
1:
'<
;>
'"
iiJ
w
c
i/j
'-
"-
~
~~ ~
~,
. ~
< ~.
, .
~
;;::
:>,
~
s
z
'"
::<
--..----_...~---_...-.--...__._...........-----.--..-_........_----_.--......-..----
.,
<n. ~
::5
., "!!
;:j
.. ~
j
=
9;>-
-UJ
u"
z
<-'
~;Ij
-c
~
~
~~';
. .
~
<~
.~
, .
u
z
.,
-
-
-
z
.,
-
-
'",
z
.,
-
"
'"
,........_"...".....,,_...~...-..."'"
"""'" "",.....,_....._-...,,_.....~...... ,-,._~....~.~,~._, ~.._....., _...~...-_.-..-...,-,....._-~..,......".".,.......~...-..."."....-........., "'",.,,"".~,-._..."'''''I
,-;j
<11:
.:2
.,.
"'
"'
~
-
..
-.
-.,
" >-
~ c.;
z '"
<
'" '"
~
{
,)1-:,
~~,j
~ ~
-: .
:r.:r. ~I
;Ii ~ ;\
~i ~ ~ ]
-- -+-
~, "
"::1 " /.
21 ~ ~ ~I
/ 'r. Z I
.
:- ~ I
.-.1:
,I\.~;
r
i~
r:::z~
~
rr;:r:=clt
--4-l-
. - ,
~
,~,.
r-'~
:~
f-------i
.
~ -
~':
2". -'.:'.~/~.'i,,:
!...-' :.: ',' '. /.. .,
I-"\.'~j;,.'. "
, 0,
2,
~~
{
,
-
Uc
,..J
;J
/
/
-z
~;::
,
"
;:
"
...i&j
)10
128
~~
..
LH-~;
;lor -
+ 1=
,I
==:j:,
~
:0:
-
"
~~..{
IJI-i
~ .'...
'~
~
~
:0:
_.--1-~
--
-
I
I
Jl--'\
I' "
I
/
ld
.1
c'
-
~
g
---...
-
~
~
:;:
......._.. ..~...,_......_""........., ._"'.,_......~_..,,__........._.....-~....~..,.."" ,......,_........_. _"""'...__~..~....__.....,_......._...._.._.... -."'...,w_........_.
,.,
<Jj' 5
., "Ii
;:j
.. ~
j
(/
.../
. ,
I! '..
I . A'
, ( ~I J
I
.~
. I _
~: ;;
~ "J.
,= .
'/'"
;:>:
z:;:
<
::::;;::
4-
::0
<:;
:
/
">
/
>:
~
/'
)"
.
-If ,."
,;
,
~\~/ / '~
, ,7.c
'\., ":t I , -
~."..' ,.
" .
,:. ./...J,-
I
~
J
...r'
'7
__.._.....,__...__~..__.....,_......._"__..__._._......,_...__..._.__...__.................,__.._.__.....,.u...,.._...__
. . .. ......................
. . . ':I'
>~U~I
.~~.
,.J
. . . . . ~
2;:
-Ul
~'"
<..J
",Ul
o
,
v
I ,
I '
r----;-
I i
i
,
I
;;:
~
'"
~
'"
~
'"
;;:
:>
~
Ul
:::
:r.
t::
!;;:
'"
. . . . . .
~
,
,
,
,
,
L
j
~
.~
. -
(""'~ ~
. -$'-
~ .....,
.:;: .
. . . .
'v
I "
~
d
r:il
...--,.
~
;;:
:>
~
,d
"
~~
I
I I ~
~~r1
."
15
:r.
>.
q
=
""""...,,,.___..._,,,,~__,,.,,.,__... .....~_.......-.__._"........t-._........_.__..__""....____..._.__......",,,.._.._...__
"
,.,
<11. 3
~ <J!
;:j
.. ~
d
~
;r
"",,,:'..:.1
::...,.,..".
z-
:5a
-c:o
~~i
-' ,
~ ~
u
z
<;
-
~
z
<;
-
-
., -<
z
<;
'-
..
0
'"
CORRESPONDENCE
RECEIVED
BY THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
01/17/94 11:21
....-
'fi'619 ^'7 7680
~TD SA1\ DIEGO
Ial001
p
, " ,'.,:ON
~iC '~~'
.. f - " \'~a.~I'\Ot\\\ .
____ 1
1 1'1'1.", ,1>,,0 (,
0"'0-'- r' '
P---.' " ~---
......... I.' .
January 17 , 1994
,,~,\;. j ".~
" .c~~cqS
P".,.,.,t " ,," - ..:~:~S5'('Ig
..._ . 'I~' J.
be1.,)~~ ~ ~. .. (":,~ ,..(I']S.
.rrl n' ..~..U,.,.;\'I::I
(io91::o....\. <.-
RECE;VE:u
J,~N 1 '1 1994
Chair Person and
Member of the Planning Commission
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Ave
Chula vista, ca. 91910
PLANN,NG
Dear Sir or Madam;
I am writing this letter to convey my concern regarding the Kaufman & Broad
development proposal and to request your support to protect the quality of our
community and the value of our homBs.
Before I purchased my property at The Rancho del Rey development, I
considered several other areas including Eastlake and Rancho Bernardo. I chose
The Rancho Del Rey, Sayona neighbOrhood because I knew the quality of
McMillin homes and the fact that Bayona was designed by a well known
architectural firm and not by in house designer as many developers do. I was told
that the neighborhood consisted of 91 lots and 4 different models all illustrated in
the plat plan approved by the City of Chula Vista on October 18, 1990, see
enclosed document.
My decision to purchase my home in Sayona, was based on the strong
residential flavor, the neighborhood integrity, the quality of materials, the
character and pleasant harmony of colors and the well design landscape, which
together produce an elegant and pleasant atmosphere that my family and I
enjoyed. I am very positive that this development is unique and well thought out.
This excellent architectural design also contributes to the enhancement of the
City.
To my surprise, on December 8, 1993, only 4 months after I moved to this
development, I received an invitation to preview a new housing product for the
remaining portion of the neighborhood and to meet the new developer Kaufman
& Broad.
This proposed homes projected not only a different architecture, but incompatible
color scheme. the interior and exterior finishes, the amenities and architectural
design qualities are inferior to the quality found in our homes. At this time we see
our neighborhood threatened to be substantially changed by the introduction of
this new development.
01/17/94 11:21
. ~.
'5'619 277 7680
~TD SA?> DIEGO
I4i 002
Page 2
Chair Person
Members of the Planning Commission
Because the developer is stripping his product of quality amenities and finishes
that are standard in our homes, this new product is expected to be considerably
less expensive than the existing homes which will have a detrimental effect in
value of our homes. For this reason we asking for your support to save our
neighborhood and the value our homes. each of the existing residents may lose
all our equity, if this project is approved.
As homeowners our main concern is not who is going to finish the development
of the remaining lots, but that the development adhere to the already established
neighborhood character and integrity. Therefore, we urge you to deny the project
and direct the developer to revise his plans to reflect the established architectural
character, color scheme and landscaping of the eayona neighborhood, which we
call home.
Thank you for your consideration and assistance to this matter. If you wish to
contact me, may do 50 at 713 Esla Drive, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Telephone No.
(619) 482-5554
~ery truly YOu~S ~ /
I '~Yr(l~ .e;11~,r'1:,.jt7
arnlro G. Hem z
Sayona homeowner
cc: Mayor
Tim Nader
Council
Leonard Moore
Jerry Rindone
Shirley Horton
Robert Fox
t _A YONA HOMEOWNERS ALLlANC...
954 NORELLA STREET
CHULA VISTA. CA 91910
Dee 1 1, 1993
Dear Mayor Tim Nader;
Cc: Mayor Tim Nader
Cc: Councilman Leonard Moore
Cc: Councilman Jerry Rindone
Cc: Councilwoman Shirley Horton
Cc: Councilman Robert Fox
Cc: Design Review Coordinator J. Luis Hernandez
A
N
As homeowners of the Bayona development in Rancho Del Rey. we have been
coalesced into action by the imminent plans by Kaufman & Broad to develop homes
in our immediate area that do not adhere to the original master plan for the area.
nn
===1~
-<-<
(")0
r- ."
mC":)
:::o~
~E
V'> r-
C?,~:
. ,
~.:.:.:,
n-.;r--
~
:::0
fTI
(")
fTI
<
ITI
C
~
-
..
a
-
The master plan called for the eyentual completion of Bayona by the McMillan
Development. Inc. as a architecturally harmonious tract of homes that suggested
Mediterranean influences. The newly proposed homes to be built by Kaufman &
Broad in no way retain this architectural harmony: They are of an entirely different
conceptual origin. differing in colorations, geometry, materials, etc.
.-
The proposed homes. if they are completed as proposed would have severely
negati~e affects on the aesthetics as well as the uniqueness of the Bayona community.
"We are taking this opportunity to formally ask that a public hearin!! be granted to us,
the homeowner 0 We the homeowners of Bayona haye also signed the
a ac cd petition form to demonstrate our conviction that this is indeed a matter of
great importance to us. We look forward to hearing from you as to when a hearing
can be arranged.
Cordially.
The Bayona Home"l\\ rs Alliance
f' .
( ~
c:.:c'
c:;&; 7-f5~ ('I ) w~rrn:1 ~
f!7 ~-
0~<1~~J~ ~.
f<': ~~~
._. .' .. ~ ~ [. ~... i'" 1', "r'[^'I'\!'!'"'
{*.,. ..... .. ..: ~'~'I,;.....~I _~Ii~;;II
t... .~ _ w ~_.,.... -...r ....
/.n- ItI)9~
.'
(
~A YONA HOMEOWNERS ALLlANCt:
954 NORELLA STREET
CHULA VISTA. CA 91910
25i
26-
7:1.
28.
29'-
30. .
31..
32-
33. 1
34.
DRESS C{.56, {lJuytlLLA
DRESS C!6r AJi>l1.6z,l.J}
DRESS 17D IJDt2Ec.LA JT.
DRESS "\14 t='Ot.~\.L.' ">1'
ADDRESS 971 ft~U4 jf .
DRESS 'ts'1 d&-<Ll,^ M.
DRESS C>fScf /v""..{J/(a Sf .
DRESS q~ f IJ I'Rdl f! :5-1-.
ADDRESS q/.,f V.~I'("!l4 .5-1 .
ADDRESS 1Gs;' ,JO(Z~ .sT
DRESS 'leI" )C1rf'Rlult 57-
DRESS 4'tjt'J NOREL/.A. 50,
ADDRESS 9~f) ,A.!N.J..II", 57
DRESS <rl'd7wAd4./ P
DRESS 7c/; t&~b"C-
DRE~I EJLdf ~I/t
DRE _ ~+ e Lo..Jt (,rV
DREss7u r..<;LA ~'('\I(-
~:: 7~ :di~ ~:. .
DRESS 7/7 ~Ci- ~r-
DRESS 7 j:j .,- I r, -JJ t.
DRESS '1/3 5..:'; (./Jv\ r.
DRESS 7 OX- ~ .\-~ 1;>'2...
DRESS 7/;;' 6"yt., j),..
DRESS 7/& C~~ 4....
DRESS l' ~ ~I.. ~ j)I\.lJi
DRESS 7~ S- 6'$/' ')0"''< e~f)' ~Id
ADDRESS 12.5 fslA Or C I.lli..k li.:W\,
DRESS TJA fi./!. 4. ...th. e... .(/. .:~/ 1(-0
DREss7,~q E~'I.-A bp. OV QIC(1.!l..
DRESS 7-15' F.Jlfl 0/1,. <..\1 S I 'i to
DRESS 145 Uta. 0.,uA. (:1 Q,9/0
DREss.,511; N (\( e , , t! S +
(
.., ,iONA HOMEOWNERS ALLIANCE"'"
954 NORELLA STREET
CHULA VISTA. CA 91910
ADDRESS ?b9 rv()(2CU,fj -ri
DRESS ql"," foJo~U-h> ,s./
DRESS 99 ,J[)/U.rc.....A'> ~.
DRESS {, 0 Ntp d 1r. C-r-
DRESS ';'3-5 ~5L./T C~: ~&
DRESS '733 f'dcc V40, . 1/
DRESS 75etf:.'~'Ti
DRESS '1'1'1 ?! -ph .sf.
ADDRESS 95>-/ JU.rf'f,c.; Sr.
ADDRESS :>5" Ail.!t:.GLL./f ~ T:
DRESS (? I C/o..L 7, J
DRESS <fi.( fY~ 0 (11' .' 'lJ'k,
DRESS ift~f~()Q~l.-L,A ~~~LLJ'~M
DRESS 7 J/-!; OL /lIt.- .'
DREss-5')'t N~{tGut .>-rflcc"1
DRESS '~O ~ ~ ~~.
DRESS~ o'li. \)~.,;.;;- ,
ADDRESS 7 b:2. E-SL.A ,)1:.
DRESS t" ~k ~' .
DRESS . .~ t ~:: )-.--.
DRESS 7. v'.
DRESS 1S'4 M~ {-f
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS .
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
ADDRESS
87.
88.
89. .
90.
91. ~
9
93.
94.
95.
96-
W,
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
.~ ....."....,~..,
.1
i
950 Norella Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
December 12, 1993
DEC 1 3 1993
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Hernandez:
The proposed development for Rancho Del Rey is not compatible with the
appearance of the existing Bayona homes. This will be especially
apparent on Norella Street where the two dissimilar projects will
coexist on the same street. Also, a single oddball house has been
proposed for the north end of Esla street. This house will literally
stand out like a sore thumb if built as proposed.
As a Bayona homeowner, I welcome the completion of the Bayona project.
However, the proposal should be denied until the following problems
can be addressed:
. The proposed "stone and brick masonry trim" and "elevated
covered front porches" are totally out of character for the
neighborhood. All of Rancho Del Ray is done in a Spanish
motif.
. The proposed flat concrete roof tiles should be replaced
with curved tiles in the same color, size, and shape as all
the other homes in the Bayona project.
. The new houses should be painted in color schemes agreeable
with the existing homes on the same street.
. The new construction should have landscaping that fits in
with the landscaping of the rest of the street.
Those of us who bought into the Bayona development agreed to extensive
and detailed CC&Rs because we enjoyed the harmonious look of a master
planned community. We are concerned that this project may severely
reduce the property value of our investments. Please study the
project's compatibility with and impact upon existing homes before
approving it. Thank you.
7e/,elY, !l '"
~-~
M:rvin'\imkin
---
Case No: DRC-94-10
\--1) a1
E
Q;:0
C)~
VJ~
~
t::
......
J-
4
L..L ~
> - >-..
~ -$ cV~
'>--.. ""-.c.
:;\ -u -t- ~
~ 'lJ E
~ ~ i.
-..jl ~ ~ '?
'0 - r- '--'
'<) -.s;: 0\
- ~ ~"-'tS
oJ ~ 4'
C '- -.......:l c
~3 VI;::
~ 0' ~
~ 4-
Q ~ !-
~ ~ <lJ
VJ f-;
V\ ~
()
(
"
-
~
-
E5LA
~
f.-
Lt.
,~
c
~
~
~~
V L-
~11
<::!-'(;)
<V\j
'=-
...:L
""
~
.<;.)
-~
'- u +
3 -..f f1 4.J
\r1 f6{,~ t,.!
~ >~++
~ i. ,,~ lt1
Q"i- ,(
-c~v-!!
c) L..J::. oJ
~ '- + '-
-c. 0) '- Q
f- -..;:;j ~ <:
:;-
~
t
~
(j ~
~:~
-~ -C
"-t;
'-
~
-
~
'-
Q
"-
Z ~ ~
-I-:....a.:;:.
)( .f
Q) Q.J I~
<J U\ ~
-C ~ w
t-
".
t..
F'.l
I'EC 16 '0,3 Or: 210,1'11'1 F'Ole'. )UTH BAy'
. .,,'i '>"I"ON
...._n I
w~.not"i.d.
lima is \~
Otho,,:
December 13, 1993
Mayor Tim Nader
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula vista, CA 91910
P:aa~~J ch~ck your mr,.,gSag9~
bef;')!'9 C:'3.!;:~1~ V.!ord ~.)roce5SIJ1g
(E:;o.ard.i"~ 'fI:;..O',,:,Llg nX2G.
. .
Dear Mayor Nader,
We are writing to you in regards to the notice we received on the
site plan and architecture proposed construction of 51 single
family dwellings (Case No. DRC-94-10) On the remaining lots of
the subdivision presently known as the Neighborhood 1561 (Bayona)
in the Rancho Del Rey Planned Community. Before you consider
this plan, please hear out our concerns as one of the Eayona
Homeowners.
Last Wednesday, December 8, we (the Bayona Homeol,ner.s) were
invited to preview the proposed plan in the Bayona neighborhood
by Kaufman and Broad and the McMillin group at Rancho Del Rey.
To our amazement, the plans and arohiteotural designs of the
proposed dwellings are completely differently, they don't have
the same style, quality and features as the houses that are
already built. The proposed dwellings are muoh smaller than the
previously approved plans in the Bayona neighborhood. Kaufman
and Broad will start building these completely different houses
from where the Bayona development had stopped which is half of
Norella Street (see exhibit 1). As you can see from exhibit 2
(designs of present homes in the Bayona neighborhood), the plans
of Kaufman and Broad does not blend with our present
neighborhood.
As a military family who's been stationed overseas for over 8
years, we were excited to finally settle down in a quite
community like Rancho Del Rey. When we bought our house which
was in November 1992, we were never told by Rancho Del Rey's
sales representative, Jerrie Brizzie, that there might be
problems with the Bayona development. What we were told and led
to believe was that most of the houses were already sold (all the
lots in Norella St.) except for 3 or 4 houses. When we finally
arrived from overseas and saw our house for the first time, we
were surprised that only half of Norella Street was developed.
That was when we found out that Rancho Del Rey was having
financial problems due to their partner, HomeFed. We understood
the situation and we didn't mind that MCMillin stopped the
development in our neighborhood for the mean time. We were never
informed that the McMillin group might not continue with the
approved Bayona plans.
DEC 15
',-'---'
:>.:'
07: 271'11.'1 "'0 I C'-
\..
JTH B,W
P.2
t
Now that McMillin has bought HomFed's share, they are bringing in
Kaufman and Broad to continue the project in our neighborhood
with completely different plans from what we were presented
initially when we were buying our houses. NOW that d~velopment
is starting again, our main concern is the difference in style,
quality and featureS of the proposed dwellings from the present
Spanish style houses in our neighborhood. The proposed
developmen~ will start in the midale of Norell a St. The proposea
houses also have a price range of below $200,000. As you can see
with exhibit 3 (price range of present homeS in ~he Bayona
neighborhood) the average value of houses is about $230,000
because of the unique style and quality of our homes. Picture a
street (Norella st) in which half is Bayona quality and half of
it is completely different. What do you think will happen if
your house is valued at $230,000 and then another house down the
road is only valued at $180,0007 If the proposed plan of Kaufman
and Broad is approved, the value of all the houses in the Bayona
neighborhood will go down. We are hoping that McMillin will
reconsider and will go ahead with the previously approved plan in
the Bayona neighborhood.
Please, we urge you to consider our concerns and the rest of the
Bayona neighborhood. We voiced out our ooncerns to the McMillin
representative, the Senior Vice-President in Charge of Marketing,
and to the Kaufman and Broad representative during our meeting
last December 8. We were all told tha~ the McMillin group will
get back with us in regards to our concerns, but up to now we
haven't heard anything from them. We are all upset and
disgruntled about the change in plans. We were misinformed and
misled bY the Sales Department of Rancho Del Rey and they are
playing around with our biggest asset - our homes! So you are
our last resort, please hear our concerns and help us. Before
you approve the proposed plan of Kaufman and Broad, have an open
forum with the Bayona homeowners or just visit the site and
you'll see in person what the proposed change in the plan will do
to our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
-(rV"L Q: ~. fW~ ~n)
Mr. and Mrs. Florante Sabino
958 Norella st,
Chula vista, CA 91910
~
.
December 13,91910
Mr. J. Luis Hernandez
Design Review Coordinator/Associate planner
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Planning Department
276 Fourth Ave
Chula vista, ca. 91910
Dear Mr. Hernandez;
Last Wednesday, December 8, we were invited to preview the proposed
architectural design for the new dwellings to be built in our neighborhood by
Kaufman and broad of San Diego Incoo At this time we would like to expressed
three reasons why this proposed 51 single family dwellings should not be
approved by the City..
1. We strongly believed that the existing design is unique and contribute to
the enhancement of the City.. Our houses features excellent architectural design
qualities. We strongly suggest that the amenities our houses have be consider
before approving this new development proposal. Our houses as we understand
were design by an architectural firm who took the time to analyzed, researched
and studied the City's residential neighborhoods.
2. As homeowners our main concern lies on the inferior quality of design
and inferior quality on the product, means cheaper houses, which translate to a
depreciation of our properties value.
3. As you are aware, on October 18, 1990, your department approved the
Sayona development, and for reasons unknown to us this proposed and
approved development has not been completed. We want you to exercise your
design review power to maintain the quality of our neighborhood.
l
"
Page 2
Mr. Hernandez
Our understanding is that Kaufman and Broad will finish the development, but we
do not see the same product. At this time we urge you not to apDroved
Kaufman and Broad proposed project.
~ery truly y~urs' .P r
I!'('MIVV .b'r(j~M(J7
a 0 Hernan
Bayona Homeowner
cc: Mayor
Tim Nader
Council
Leonard Moore
Jerry Rindone
Shirley Horton
Robert Fox
C-15-
';::' ~,
-.-".., L...1-'
.1. ::;::,
. ..:.:- __I
r- . r,r'\
I ;) 10\:;'J
\..
-H~;l
" ~
.
,
,
.1
TfO E:sla Drive
Chula vista, CA.
I
.--December 15, 1993
91910
~
,--
r,::::--- .
I l
\..__',"~""O'_
Mayor Tim Nader
276 4th Avenue
Chu1a Vista, CA. 91910
Dear Mr. Nader:
As a Bayona homeowner, my husband and I have concerns regarding
the proposed new homes to be built in our neighborhood. Aside
from ol\r concerns regarding the value of our home investment,
we request that you consider these issues: the proposed house3
have brick and stone masonry, raised enclosed front porches,
flat til~ roofa (vs. barrel tiles) and other features which do
not blend with the SpaniSh style, Bayona homes; the color schemes
and landscaping will not match our existing homes: and the fact
that we, the homeowners of Bayonal invested our hard-earned
money believing the neighborhood would develop with the same
high quality Bayona homes. At the time we were considering
buying our home, we were ahown future blueprints and a video
of the Bayona home plans which left me with the impression of a
neighborhood one could be proud to be a part of because of the
dedication to enhancing the quality of homes. The current pro-
posed homes in our opinion, do not have the features which match
our Bayona home.
I thank you for your consideration regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
~dJc?mJ~
Catherine Dominguez
/ \.
\.
To: City of Chula Vista
Mayor, City Council
and Planning Commission
DfC] December-15,1993
5 199.~
I am a home owner at 949 Norella Street in the Bayona
community. When my wife and I purchased the home in June of
this year, we were assured by a representative of the McMillan
Company that they were going to continue to build more McMillan
houses (Bayona Phase II) on the empty lots of our street. However,
on December 7, 1993, McMillan informed us that the lots were sold
to a different company, Kaufman and Broad. Kaufman and Broad are
intending to build a different style of homes in our community
which will be called "California Castille," a completely different
title from "Bayona." Furthermore, the proposed "California
Castille" is going to split our community in half, on the same
street! This seems so awkward and incredible to us. The new
proposed homes will also be about 30 to 60 thousand dollars less
expensive than the homes in the Bayona community. Our homes are
of a contemporary Mediterranean style where the proposed homes
tend to look more traditional with dark brick and stone masonary,
raised enclosed front porches, flat tile roofs, and they are
smaller in square footage. The difference would be very obvious!
The City of Chula Vista must stop the new proposal and offer
a similar type of construction to the existing houses. We, the
people of Bayona, are angry and frustrated over this matter. We
are going to lose on the value of our homes. We are in favor of
new construction but not if the new houses are not similar to the
'" ,
existing Bayona community. As our city officials, we urge and
trust that you will help us in this matter.
/ SincerelY,}~, ./ /
l/tf?i~9r1?P77 N~.,..('~
~~--/U~,~A/
Homayoun Nabizadeh
Oralia Nabizadeh
949 Norella St.
C . V ., Ca. 91 91 0
t
Appendix C
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
Kaufman and Broad of San Diego, Inc., a California corporation
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
RAncho Del Rey Investors, L.P., a California limited partnership
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than IDS of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Kaufman and Broad of San Diego, Inc. is a subsidiary corporation of Kaufman and Broad
Home Corporation, a publicly traded corporation.
3. If any person identified pursuant to (11 above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
not applicable
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Conmissions, Conmittees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No xx If yes, please indicate person(s)
- -
Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
socIa I club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other
political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit."
(~: Attach additional pages as
necessary.~ I ~
Slgnat~f app'flca ate
Kaufman and Broad of San Diego,
Gre~g Linhoff
Pr In or type name ot app 11cant
Inc.
WPC 0701P
A-110