Agda Pkt 2026.05.04 Special Council Meeting

Browse Search

address. By demolishing the unpermitted enclosure as part of the broader ADU project, the property returns to a fully permitted, Article 33– compliant configuration. The City’s own Acting City Engineer accepted the nonconforming- structure argument on the record at a meeting of January 30, 2024. Audio recording and full transcript exist (Exhibit JJ). Mr. O’Connell stated: “We can call that wall a pre-existing non-conforming structure. And I think that’s a decent argument to make… I can consider that.” He further confirmed that the original garage is not in the easement: “normally they wouldn’t have dedicated any sort of easement with the building in it, so you should be fine.” The Hogan Retracement Survey (Exhibit F) shows the original 1951 garage eave sits approximately seven feet inside the property line from the recorded easement — and the easement itself was not created until 1971, twenty years after the garage was built. The City Engineer’s own words, captured on tape, confirm what the licensed survey shows. Council should weigh that on-the-record concession against later City positions advanced by lower-level staff. 4. The Permit Delay Has a Specific Cause: A Separate City Dispute Over Pre-Existing Structures The forty-one-month permit delay is not random and is not Respondents’ fault. It has a specific cause that bears on the relief Respondents seek here. At the rear of 2455 Carson Street there is a CMU wall and, separately, a chain-link fence and gate the City installed approximately 1971 to access the storm drainage channel. The wall and the gate have been the subject of a separate dispute between Respondents and the City’s Engineering Division for several years. That dispute concerns where the structures sit relative to recorded easements, whether engineering inspection confirms structural condition, and what corrective action, if any, the City may require. The City Attorney has bifurcated that dispute to a separate 6.A. - Page 22 of 64 24