HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/04/11 Board of Appeals & Advisors Minutes
"
..
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
~e~!!_!!!_!~~~___~~~!~~~~~~_~~~~~_~_~_~!_~~~!!~_~~~~!~~~_~~!!~!~2___~:QQ_e:~:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Nash, Board Members Winkelman, Reynolds,
McArthur and Lo Cicero
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Welsh (Excused Illness) Board Member Lee (Excused)
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Director of Building and Housing Larsen
l. CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Nash called the meeting to order at 5:07 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: Members present constituted a quorum.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MSUC Lo Cicero/Winkelman (5-0) to approve the minutes
of March 14, 1988
4. OLD BUSINESS:
CASE NO. 7-88 - 344 F Street
~ne applicant submitted a request for approval of existing handicapped
parking to serve a new building in the Town Centre Area.
Director of Building and Housing Larsen displayed plans of the architect's
proposed access to the parking structure which consisted of a pedestrian
bridge from the third floor of the proposed building to the upper level of
the parking structure. This proposed pedestrian passage does not meet the
handicap access requirements. Alternatives are: (1) provide an on-site
location immediately adjacent to the new building for handicapped and (2)
change the access bridge profile to the parking structure to enter the
building at the second level with a ramp access meeting handicapped require-
ments. Discussion ensued and the State Building Code (Part 2, Title 24,
Chapter 2-71, Site Development Requirements for Handicapped Accessibility)
was reviewed.
MSUC Winkelman/Reynolds (4-0) (Vice Chairman Nash abstaining) to request
specific design and alternatives for access for the handicapped from the
second floor of the structure to the parking structure and from into the
rear of the building adjacent to the alleyway. Continue hearing on the
applicant's request until such time that the alternatives are explored with
the stipulation that if it meets the satisfaction of the Design Review
Committee and the Building Official for compliance, it will not have to
come back to the Board of Appeals and Advisors. If neither of the alterna-
tives is satisfactory, the applicant can come back to the Board and request
a review for a hardship case.
-
^ CI
^..JW
A_>
AUO
^Z~
A::> a..
ADa..
AU<t
N A
..... A
..... A '"
W 0 0 0
0'0<'" -r N -D
~ ""WZ N 0 N
I- ,-"W · ·
- I <t:E N N
> ZE
- V'I ",,<to
I- ..J :DEU
U <t a- u..
<1 W ..... '"
a.. I-
0< a.. VZ 0 0 0
C <1 VWI- -r N '"
VEV'I N 0 N
Z "- VI-w · ·
0 D V",O N N
- V<tO
'" a va..w
- '" Vwo::
> <1 va
- a
a .D
"" I- I- 0 0 0
roZw '" N i)
I w <.0 N 0 N
r-",o · ·
""0::0 N N
",Oco
.....U V'I ~ '"
~ 21- .....
0:: 0-
1-<1 -..J
u..:E I- -
'-"E V'I r- ..J r- r- <1.D .
"'0 Z "'<1 -r ~ I-<1Z
OV'l D I 0 <") ,'" wl-O
co - -DI- · · 0-:"""-
..J V'I O:>U ..... ..... a..::>1-
..J<t 0 V'I a-<t O<V'lU
<10< ..... - ..... W ::>
ow ..... E I-w<>,
Zz: :E z:r:l-
zw a - I- V'I
<1<.0 I- U Z
Z WV'I a
W '" ..Jwu
:E coZ
l- V> <1-"-
0:: 0 Z:ED
<1 '" DO<
a.. <1 V> W V>
W 0 <11-:::1
Co co WWO
",or
I-
V'lOW
WZE
V> :::1<1
W - 0
U >v>Z
- V> CLL.i4
> Z 0< :::I
0< a a.. a V>
W - u..J
V> l- V> <1
U ~z-
Z <>' Z "",00::
0 V> W 0 W_W
- W r "- a..1-1-
I- U I- a..U<1
<t - a "- <t::>E
U > VI a '"
0 >- ex 0 0< "- I- W
Z "- W Z <t Z OV>....
0 ::> >- V> <1 ..J a z<
-r "- V> ..J - ODZ
..... 0 V> W V> a I- ",-ue<
I 0 ..J <1 W LU a a.. <1 w
"'" ..... "'" ..J ~ - >- aWl-
'" U a ..J ..J '" :::O::¡:...J
:E a W ..J a.. <1 U 1-<
0:: Z Z a.. a.. .... VI W
0 ::> W :E ::> co W r,,-,,-
u.. u.. c:> W VI .... a t-D:J