Magistrate finds dock work at 405 Meadowlark to be unpermitted, orders permit or statute by June 25

The magistrate took up a separate notice of violation for 405 Meadowlark (case 202600378), where the owner had performed dock work post‑storm. Respondent counsel contended a statute may permit certain storm‑related work without a local permit; the City’s deputy building official advised that the statute cited does not apply and that a permit is required for the dock work.

After discussion, the magistrate found that a violation had occurred but deferred imposition of fines and costs for now. The magistrate gave the owner a deadline to secure a permit or to provide the controlling statutory authority that would exempt the work. City permitting staff reported a permit application had been submitted (application filed 04/01) but was pending review and required corrections; the City asked for 30 days, then proposed a longer follow‑up schedule given calendar constraints. The parties agreed to a virtual follow‑up on June 25 for a status update.

City counsel emphasized the safety and permitting requirements for docks and said staff would return with the building department's determination if there remained any question about whether the cited statute applied. The magistrate said that if a statute exempting the work exists, the owner should provide it at the next hearing; otherwise the owner must show substantial progress toward securing the permit. The magistrate made clear that the City regarded dock work as permit‑requiring activity and that compliance or an exemption must be shown at follow up.

No fines or costs were assessed at the hearing; the magistrate reiterated that failure to secure a permit or produce statutory authority by the follow‑up date could prompt enforcement action at the June 25 hearing.