[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6220279,"mediaKeyId","3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c","parentId",3617831,"title","Council holds public hearing on interim R-7 zoning allowing townhomes; permanent codework to follow","audioSeconds",223,"startMs",8058240,"endMs",8282046,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c&start=8058&end=8282","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c/thumbnail_8058240.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6220279/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Council-holds-public-hearing-on-interim-R-7-zoning-allowing-townhomes-permanent-codework-to-follow","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220279-9d8df6925fa0db539b0c8d7dc7889a2e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181477&Signature=IwQQwvHTfrRV9W~37m9gHRYwLHO5pv1InRYPRSNLRTiOadoRUByErm7f-rwwrfYU8jwAcD9mgYfFC8h0hRNYurxMgBAsATR0szChlUTmM9OxZjnYuyqQbPFBIvQ9zCEGR7wqNFFPKlN1DJ4k1S7HghPkwcWbh32r1eJ-iwFY1AYEntsDg3jl4kj2Eax~yKirmkUo2XFYLZppVRXwEln0C1D-EznMcRjdGTnKatePoiFwLzRfDaltSsG46OE027kTq72zFMLW0HZctzuVCAkkpTz8rV~7DJKTcfqBl0q7zNRBuDdjENIDIgZynEM-q4pLpdZazMmROOP2yfpmcFESjw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Monroe City, WA","date","2025-05-30T23:09:48Z","article","Monroe City Council held a public hearing May 20 on an interim ordinance that adds townhomes (attached dwelling units) as a permitted use in the R-7 zoning district. The interim ordinance, adopted March 25, 2025, takes immediate effect while staff prepares a permanent ordinance.

Why it matters: The change implements the city's housing policy goals in Imagine Monroe and the 2024 comprehensive plan by creating a zoning category intended to increase middle-housing options. Using an interim ordinance lets the city act quickly while it completes the standard code-amendment process for a permanent rule.

What the interim ordinance does

- Adds attached dwelling units (townhomes) as a permitted use in the R-7 district.
- Inserts bulk and dimensional standards for attached units into the land-use tables (lot dimensions, setbacks, lot coverage, etc.).
- Adds design standards for townhome development to Chapter 22.42.

Public hearing and next steps

- The hearing on the adopted interim ordinance was required within 60 days of adoption; staff opened and closed the hearing on May 20 and invited public comment. No additional action was required that night beyond the public hearing record.

- Staff will draft a permanent ordinance and return within the required timeline (six months) to complete the ordinary code amendment process.

Speakers

- Anita Marrero, Staff member (presenter)

Authorities

- Interim Ordinance No. 002/2025 (adopted March 25, 2025)

Clarifying details

- The interim ordinance is intended as a stopgap to authorize townhomes in R-7 while the permanent code is developed; staff has six months to return with the permanent ordinance.

Next steps

- Staff will prepare the permanent ordinance and return to council for the standard code-amendment process before the interim measure expires.

Provenance: the interim ordinance adoption (March 25) and the May 20 hearing (required by state rules) were part of the city's phased implementation of middle-housing policy.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","May 20, 2025 Monroe WA City Council Special Workshop and Regular Business Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","An interim ordinance creating R-7 zoning permitting townhomes was the subject of a May 20 public hearing required within 60 days of ordinance adoption; council closed the hearing and staff will prepare a permanent ordinance over the next six months.","taxTitle","Monroe City, Snohomish County, Washington","taxId",71110,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6220284,"Council approves first reading to allow conversion of older commercial buildings to housing under state law",1569,4345235,5915005,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c&start=4345&end=5915","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c/thumbnail_4345235.jpg","/articles/6220284/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Council-approves-first-reading-to-allow-conversion-of-older-commercial-buildings-to-housing-under-state-law","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220284-328d12fa37d2098e5700e0ccb2464b08/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181477&Signature=N18cNKTa8N8eNfCrm3a01YUu6pqi3g-m6QxYkIF0hi24L-lY5EPFmEog6ltdm~E8lW-12IqO6pU9OUb5z7bQkW9cf9acPs8g2h5MJDwXKSeeWUk9A9dppKiu-ohyJ50tAlOGBSwMdCTgJDEPTUIgNBPOyene-3dOue4nOE6ncnk6qMHBGR4b-sNW1f7dvRmbNZjhGpNKUw6hDPhpjHPQlNhCWU1J96p1FDHlFQH4vqs6J58kNSGTfbTtocj4VIEuJ9fEwRQVMq4eLLB0LX3Sal71e8o9~4SGaGcN3iFUSRatk8mUnnGXfzOlgb0N02zXoeiJA6Anv4gtEXH37NjFQw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Monroe City Council voted on May 20 to approve first reading of an ordinance implementing House Bill 1042, which removes certain local barriers to converting existing commercial or mixed-use buildings to residential uses.

Staff presented background and required code changes. William Barr told council that HB 1042 defines an \"existing building\" as one completed at least three years earlier and directs cities to allow a 50% greater residential density when a conversion takes place entirely within an existing commercial or mixed-use building. The law also prohibits local governments from imposing certain additional requirements on these conversions: cities may not require additional parking for the converted area, cannot impose extra exterior-design standards for the converted portion (except along a designated major pedestrian corridor), cannot require additional transportation studies or SEPA review for conversions beyond what would be required for a new building in the same location, and cannot deny conversions based solely on existing nonconformities (for example, setbacks that predate current code).

Why it matters: enabling interior conversions of underused commercial buildings is intended to increase housing supply while reducing sprawl by reusing existing built stock. Monroe staff identified several local older buildings that could be candidates and estimated limited local uptake based on comparable-sized cities, but noted conversion costs (insulation, windows, mechanicals, structural or seismic upgrades) may be significant for property owners.

Council action

- Councilmember Beaumont moved, and Councilmember Walker seconded, approval of the ordinance for first reading. The motion passed 7-0. The ordinance language will return for second reading and adoption on June 10 so the city meets state implementation timelines.

Notable points from staff presentation and public comment

- HB 1042 requires cities to allow a 50% increase in density for conversions done entirely within existing commercial buildings (example: a building that could support 10 units may be allowed 15 via internal conversion).

- The law limits local ability to add parking, design, or environmental review requirements for the converted areas, though cities may require existing on-site parking be retained.

- Staff noted potential high upgrade costs for a conversion (energy upgrades, mechanicals, possible seismic work). Staff also cited outside examples: Seattle projects expect about a dozen such conversions in seven years, Bellevue fewer than five; for Monroe staff estimated the city might see fewer than one over seven years, but stressed uncertainty.

- Public comment: Stacy McGregor (resident) asked council to consider allowing two-unit conversions for some historic single-family homes rather than a three-unit minimum in specific neighborhood commercial zones; staff acknowledged the concern and will continue review as code changes progress.

Next steps

- Second reading and potential adoption scheduled for June 10, 2025. If approved, the new local code amendments will align Monroe with state law requirements on conversions.

Speakers

- William Barr, Staff member (presenter)
- Stacy McGregor, Resident (public comment)

Authorities

- House Bill 1042 (use of existing buildings for residential purposes), passed 07/23/2023
- Monroe Municipal Code chapters proposed for amendment (22.22, 22.26, 22.42, 22.44, 22.78) as listed in the ordinance title presented at first reading

Provenance

- Topic introduced during the public hearing and first reading at the May 20 meeting; the ordinance passed first reading (7-0) and will return for second reading on June 10.

Tags: HB1042, conversion, commercial-to-residential, Monroe City","Monroe City Council approved first reading of an ordinance to implement House Bill 1042, which eases conversion of existing commercial or mixed-use buildings to residential use, including a 50% density increase for conversions, and limiting local extra requirements; final adoption expected June 10.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6220289,"Monroe keeps ADU hearing open, asks staff to study mixed-use allowances and height limits under new state ADU law",2088,5943450,8032255,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c&start=5943&end=8032","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c/thumbnail_5943450.jpg","/articles/6220289/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Monroe-keeps-ADU-hearing-open-asks-staff-to-study-mixed-use-allowances-and-height-limits-under-new-state-ADU-law","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220289-84e6e963c44b9d3b24e0d0d883a92538/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181477&Signature=ILdkssYdzMfUN0REbb6r~NuMjsUiCGy2MKoPyc-6py1WGVJho8~Iz2LqjI4xOXObs-4VQKv9QTTCs8sWBVPl90tiGihm99T4qreNjzSSVDVMv2nq8RrzYyW0CpXZgPl6a4Buky8-CkPkfs6jEzQPr-eZl7aqw9Czvt~Bd0xTAQcLl4KRH-S5T4YWcdGBCcdYnOgNOAc0ANkINch6QYtaimhmqmXmIdL8N0M6dzVcQfU~RcP~TWgvHExkyPR8zzbaJMT2BqfEQn~FqF716nN7wksBL6EHv6x1AuMNz4SHCxYYql-SitH8BlSUf8SUNHYjrQEDg5pJj1X05-5THkMntQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Monroe City Council held a public hearing on May 20 and left the matter open, asking staff to return June 10 with options to implement Washington's new ADU statute while protecting downtown character and homeowners.

Staff presented draft amendments to implement House Bill 1337 (codified at RCW 36.78.680 and .681), which requires cities to remove certain barriers to accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and caps some fees for ADUs. Amy Bright summarized the required changes: remove owner-occupancy rules, allow up to two ADUs on lots that permit single-family homes (in attached/detached combinations), set a minimum maximum allowed ADU size of 1,000 square feet or 50% of the primary unit's floor area (whichever is larger), and permit detached ADUs in setbacks in specific alley-facing situations.

Why it matters: The state law takes effect July 1, 2025. Local code decisions will determine how ADUs are sited, sized and permitted in Monroe's existing neighborhoods and downtown. The council asked staff to refine the draft to better protect historic downtown character while complying with the statute.

Key details on the proposed amendments

- Owner-occupancy: staff proposed removing the current local owner-occupancy requirement, as required by state law.

- Number and configuration: the draft allows two ADUs on qualifying single-family lots in the permitted configurations stated in state law (one attached + one detached, or two attached, or two detached).

- Size: the planning commission recommended the maximum ADU size be the larger of 1,000 square feet or 50% of the primary dwelling's floor area (excluding garage).

- Height and design: state law prohibits local roof-height limits for ADUs under 24 feet unless the zone's established maximum is lower; staff proposed aligning accessory height with the primary structure. Council members asked staff to evaluate a 24-foot cap for detached ADUs, especially downtown, to avoid ADUs that visually dominate historic single-story homes.

- Parking and transit: staff recommended continuing to require one additional off-street stall per ADU because Monroe presently has no qualifying \"major transit stop\" within a half-mile (a statutory exemption applies to ADUs within a half-mile of a qualifying transit stop).

- Permit processing and critical areas: staff proposed streamlining permitting by changing ADU land-use review from a Type 2 to a Type 1 process and including a limited critical-area exemption for ADUs at least 250 feet from a critical area.

Public comment and council direction

- Residents raised downtown preservation and historic-home concerns. Stacy McGregor, a downtown homeowner, told council she owns a 1926 historic house in the neighborhood commercial zone and asked council to permit two-unit conversions that preserve the residential character. McGregor asked that the city allow basement or garage apartments as two units rather than forcing a three-unit minimum for converted residential buildings in certain zones.

- Council members asked staff to bring back analyses and ordinance language for three topics: (1) allowing ADUs in mixed-use neighborhoods or otherwise enabling conversions in legally nonconforming historic single-family homes in mixed-use zones, (2) studying a 24-foot roof-height limit for detached ADUs in sensitive areas (noting the statutory 24-foot floor), and (3) options to preserve downtown design character (e.g., matching materials and scale) while meeting the statute.

Outcome

- Council kept the public hearing open and asked staff to return June 10 with revised language and supporting analysis. Staff emphasized the statute will supersede conflicting local rules if the city does not adopt compliant amendments before the statutory deadline.

Speakers

- Amy Bright, Staff member (presenter)
- Stacy McGregor, Resident (public comment)
- Multiple council members and planning commissioners participated in questions and remarks.

Authorities

- Statute: House Bill 1337 (codified at RCW 36.78.680 and RCW 36.78.681) requiring minimum ADU regulatory standards and fee caps.
- Local code sections proposed for amendment: Monroe Municipal Code chapters relating to ADUs, permits and critical areas (e.g., MMC 22.80, MMC 22.42).

Clarifying details

- Deadline: the city must adopt implementing amendments no later than June 30, 2025, or the state statute's provisions will preempt conflicting local rules.
- Permit processing: staff proposed changing ADU land-use review from Type 2 to Type 1 to streamline approvals.
- Transit exemption: Monroe currently has no bus stop that meets the statutory definition of a \"major transit stop\" (regular service every 30 minutes), so the staff recommended continuing a one-stall-per-ADU parking requirement for now.

Next steps

- Staff will return on June 10 with amended ordinance language and analyses showing the implications of allowing ADUs in mixed-use zones, a 24-foot height option for detached ADUs, and design alternatives for downtown to preserve scale and materials.

Provenance

- Topic introduced by Amy Bright at the start of the ADU hearing (transcript block beginning 00:59:03) and the hearing was left open at the end of the May 20 meeting for continuation on June 10.

Tags: ADU, HB1337, permit processing, Monroe City, design standards","At a May 20 public hearing, council opened first reading on ADU permit-processing code amendments required by House Bill 1337, kept the hearing open to June 10 and asked staff to analyze allowing ADUs in mixed-use zones, a 24-foot detached-ADU height limit, and downtown design protections.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6220294,"Monroe council directs staff to return with ADU fee options after sharp debate over system development charges",3566,49475,3615704,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c&start=49&end=3615","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3617831-959c1aded561f2b8bf905463cd21cc3c/thumbnail_49475.jpg","/articles/6220294/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Monroe-council-directs-staff-to-return-with-ADU-fee-options-after-sharp-debate-over-system-development-charges","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6220294-81d3193abb18b524765dee4eb15165d9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181477&Signature=IPazi4LyP0xlp1yjp~9rfyqkwtqymwhvgvTiATvPjsgLzpaRHmqaJlcRiSpXKb5QEabc2XP54B6r2Uw3YAlgdNg7BOpgzQQ1QXGXuREvZJn1nHM5B0usgNwQb~mLeXLePt1k7sURVl-BMubl-Fx3zl1yg14kvI~CWdY3fvu7F3phbm2E2sdCgS6Uu7P3IufqP-n40y-u8SVVextB9plcD~DvtQ-zLmbA9BWg8fqcrymlqssrxBPwRmdUmuWWoggqGuIVn8XphnfDvYBwGjdzvYefw9ppXvNr5ia2FBDWSPEvEua1kLU-jLcKrO6njuakOl2viEGTakYuDEgsImpy3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Monroe City Council members told staff on May 20 to return with alternative fee approaches for accessory dwelling units, including a deferred-charge option modeled on Arlington's policy and a 50% park/transportation-fee cap, after a lengthy discussion about who should pay for added utility and infrastructure costs.

The workshop focused on whether ADUs should be assessed system development charges (SDCs) and connection charges for water and sewer, park impact fees capped by state law at 50% of the primary unit's fee, and transportation impact fees (TIFs). Amy Bright and a city staff team described the policy choices and the technical basis for existing fees; Jacob (staff member) outlined how Monroe currently calculates SDCs by dwelling unit and noted that \"accessory dwelling units are exempt from system development charges at this time.\" Council members pressed staff over whether charging SDCs on existing connections would discourage ADU construction.

Why it matters: The state's recent ADU law (House Bill 1337, codified at RCW 36.78.680 and .681) lowers some local barriers to ADU construction beginning July 1, 2025. Cities must decide how to apply capital-cost recovery fees when ADU growth increases demand on sewer, water, parks and streets; those choices affect the affordability and feasibility of ADUs for homeowners.

Most important facts

- Staff presented options ranging from continuing the current exemption (no SDCs for ADUs) to charging full SDCs plus physical connection charges. Alternatives included: (a) a full-charge P3 committee recommendation (SDCs + physical connection charge), (b) a 50% SDC reduction, and (c) the Arlington model (defer some fees until sale/condominiumization of a detached ADU).

- Several council members, led by Councilmember Gamble, argued that charging SDCs on an ADU that shares an existing utility connection would \"make it worse for our residents\" and could recreate the high-fee barrier the city previously removed; Gamble said: \"Is that what we're proposing now? Which is an impact fee charge on an existing connection on a single family unit of upwards of 17,000 to $19,000.\" (Councilmember Gamble)

- Staff warned of operational complications when detached ADUs share a primary meter or side sewer: disputes over who pays for repairs, nonpayment shutoffs, and upsizing or refurbishment of old side sewers that may be needed to serve additional units.

- On parks and TIFs: staff noted the law caps park and transportation impact fees for ADUs at 50% of the primary unit's charge. Examples given in the presentation: a 50% TIF scenario would assess an ADU roughly $3,728 if the primary is a single-family residence (or $2,116 if the primary is a multifamily building). Park per-capita math produced smaller per-unit amounts (for example, a studio ADU per the staff table computed to $16.36 at a 50% reduction in the illustrative table).

Council direction and formal action

- During the workshop staff asked for council direction; a majority expressed interest in two options to be brought back for ordinance language: the Arlington-style deferred-charge approach and a 50% fee reduction option. Councilmember Walker asked staff to return with the Arlington model and a 50% option; council consensus supported asking staff to prepare those approaches.

- On transportation impact fees specifically, Councilmember Walker moved to advance the P3 committee recommendation (the 50%-of-primary-unit approach that P3 recommended for TIFs). The motion, seconded by Councilmember Beaumont, passed by a 4-3 vote. Mayor Jeffrey Thomas announced: \"Motion passes with council members Hanford, Scarborough, and Gamble voting against.\"

Discussion highlights and concerns

- Several council members said the city's long-standing goal has been to encourage ADUs to increase housing supply and offer family-care options; they warned that high upfront fees would deter those outcomes. \"When we're trying to make Monroe affordable and... help with affordable housing in our city and make it easy,\" Councilmember Hanford said, \"I don't think the numbers are gonna spike because we've already been a city that welcomed ADUs.\"

- Other council members emphasized potential developer behavior: if ADUs can be condominiumized and sold separately, developers could build at scale and avoid fees under certain approaches; staff and Councilmember Walker asked staff to model the fiscal impact of a possible larger buildout (\"a thousand ADUs\") and to include capacity and worst-/best-case scenarios tied to water and wastewater plant limits.

- Staff noted some neighboring jurisdictions took different paths: Snohomish and Edmonds charge SDCs at permit phase, while Arlington deferred certain charges until sale or condominiumization, a hybrid approach that several councilmembers cited as attractive.

Next steps

- Staff will return with draft ordinance language for the two options the council asked to see (Arlington-style deferred charge and a 50% reduction approach), and with additional analysis on system capacity, potential revenue impacts, and design/implementation details such as required physical upgrades to side sewers.

- The council set hearings and readings to consider fee changes in June; July 1 is the effective date of relevant state law, so timing plays a role in the council's scheduling.

Speakers

- Amy Bright, Staff member (presenter)
- Jacob, Staff member (presenter)
- Scott, Staff member (public works comments)
- Ben Swanson, Staff member (parks presentation)
- Councilmember Gamble, Councilmember
- Councilmember Walker, Councilmember
- Councilmember Hanford, Councilmember
- Councilmember Fisher, Councilmember
- Councilmember Fulcher, Councilmember
- Councilmember Scarborough, Councilmember
- Councilmember Beaumont, Councilmember
- Jeffrey Thomas, Mayor

Authorities

- Ordinances/Policies: Monroe Municipal Code (MMC) 13.02.010 (system development charge basis) referenced by staff
- State law: House Bill 1337 (ADU changes), codified as RCW 36.78.680 and RCW 36.78.681 (impact-fee limits for ADUs)
- Fiscal/analysis source: FCS Group SDC analysis (2024)

Actions

- Motion: advance the P3 recommendation for transportation impact fees (50% of primary-unit TIF). Mover: Councilmember Walker. Second: Councilmember Beaumont. Outcome: Passed 4-3. Names voting against: Councilmembers Hanford, Scarborough, Gamble.
- Direction (not a formal vote): Council asked staff to return with two ordinance options for ADU fees: the Arlington deferred-charge model and a 50% reduction option for parks/transportation fees (and related SDC options).

Discussion vs. decision

- Discussion points: whether to charge SDCs on existing connections; effect on ADU affordability and incentives; condominiumization and developer behavior; potential private property disputes over shared meters/side sewers.
- Directions: staff to produce ordinance drafts and capacity/revenue analyses for chosen options.
- Decisions: Advance P3 recommendation for transportation impact fees (50% TIF) by a formal council vote (4-3).

Clarifying details

- July 1, 2025: the new state ADU law goes into effect (as stated by staff).
- Staff cited an FCS Group 2024 SDC fiscal analysis as the basis for current charges.
- Illustrative fee figures discussed on the record: possible water/sewer/connection combined charges in the range of \"upwards of $17,000 to $19,000\" for some ADU scenarios; combined impacts (including other fees) cited by council members in the discussion as reaching about $23,000 in some examples (figures described during the workshop by council members and staff).
- Park-impact example (illustrative table): staff showed a 50% reduced per-capita park fee producing small per-unit numbers (example: $16.36 for a studio at 50% in the staff table).

Proper names

- Monroe City (agency)
- FCS Group (consultant)
- Snohomish (city)
- Arlington (city)
- Edmonds (city)

Community relevance

- Geographies: Monroe City
- Funding sources under discussion: system development charges (SDCs), physical connection charges, park impact fees, transportation impact fees
- Impact groups: single-family homeowners, renters in ADUs, developers, utility ratepayers

Meeting context

- Engagement level: extended workshop discussion with multiple council members, staff presenters and public comments; the planning/committee recommendation (P3) formed the basis of the formal vote.
- Implementation risk: medium (policy changes require ordinance drafting and may change development economics and operations for utilities).","At a May 20 special workshop, Monroe City Council asked staff to return with alternative approaches to utility system development charges, park impact fees and transportation impact fees for accessory dwelling units, and later voted to advance the planning committee's transportation recommendation over objections from three members.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council holds public hearing on interim R-7 zoning allowing townhomes; permanent codework to follow

Council approves first reading to allow conversion of older commercial buildings to housing under state law

Monroe keeps ADU hearing open, asks staff to study mixed-use allowances and height limits under new state ADU law

Monroe council directs staff to return with ADU fee options after sharp debate over system development charges