No Fence Permit??

The Hawk Fire affected tens of thousands of residents. I apologize for my absence but I felt the need to livestream for three days straight once I saw the plumes of smoke billowing up from the mountain. The City provided no centralized news outlet. People looked to social media and amateurs like myself to keep informed. I collected and disseminated information to the public, and I am so grateful for the hundreds of viewers who found my stream helpful, including two very good friends who told me if I hadn't streamed, they would not have packed and evacuated as early as they did. I am glad they are now safe, and my heart goes out to those injured, and whose homes were destroyed by this human-caused event.

Now that things are mostly back to normal, I have an update for the campaign:

The picture above was taken in 2022, on July 4th, a national holiday. Why did the city lock up the riverwalk during a day when cyclists and tourist access should be the #1 priority for downtown?

Moreover, was this thing even permitted??

It was brought to my attention that there may not be a permit for the two fences on AT&T's property, adjacent to the Mr. Schenk's. A public records request returned permits for AT&T's 48" tall yard fence (APN 011-121-07) and Mr. Schenk's fence (APN 011-121-06), but none were on file for the two AT&T access control fences, installed 2021-2022 during the pandemic.

This is important because if it weren't for the two AT&T fences, it is unlikely Mr. Schenk would have even given consideration to installing and locking his own.

The two AT&T fences and gates are in violation of code. The gates are 4-5 feet wide, but Title 18 requires a 12' clearance to maintain emergency vehicular access. This is also a requirement by the Army Corp of Engineers and Truckee River Flood Management Authority.

Additionally, the fences endanger the easement agreement held with AT&T, which terminates if locked for 2 years. Additionally, the fences interfere with "free use and enjoyment of the easement," which is another violation of the agreement. Bikes cannot fit without risking collisions, and the enclosed cage these fences create makes the arcade dangerous for users from would-be assailants and has enabled territorial disputes and assaults.

So for all of these reasons, the question of what public process these gates received prior to their installation becomes very important. If the gates and fences on AT&T's property were installed, who installed them? When? Whose property are they? Who is responsible? If the city installed them, are they not required to obtain permits and follow RMC Title 8 and Title 18 for nuissances and setback requirements?

And finally: What park? The City has stated it opens and closes "during park hours" to control access, but there is no park located on AT&T's property. Moreover, the head of the Parks Division confirmed that the Truckee River Path remains accessible 24/7 so long as it is lighted. This path has always been lighted. It was even part of a beautification project in 1999.

So if these two fences weren't permitted, violate code, and have encouraged additional code violations on adjacent properties, how can the city allow them to remain? The Truckee Riverwalk must be free for the public to use, free from obstructions, and these two AT&T fences should be removed immediately.