[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-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",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_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",6203913,"mediaKeyId","3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b","parentId",3781124,"title","Planning commission adopts unit‑lot subdivision changes despite concerns over separate utility hookups","audioSeconds",454,"startMs",95000,"endMs",549000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b&start=95&end=549","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b/thumbnail_95000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6203913/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Planning-commission-adopts-unitlot-subdivision-changes-despite-concerns-over-separate-utility-hookups","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6203913-79e0672bb255a7504b315458c1219583/orig.mp4?Expires=1771061454&Signature=ZcHtZgKB0Rx1o94Qd5bwKkpmTX~U-~Mmj83upvcY1UPhdchXRNcmSsd6lmKw0lEfn7h1NwZFaJDa5728swRNUa9RGXCWxUFjG5dLiynXpDUQPukq63UrWf~31F7tj5VQLXgCdDl0heE4trM30JDd1sQE87oFcdOMA12ttA9WwEowkEmF2rYA2XEEa34KI4GLeK7y4lcy9GYPi2QqvBymyPorqD995FDHqXTQ8MC~cPEHRw3kx69FIll6gHCIgn-Csx2jONhz2TmgGx2zAtbcaZpaE6XSGnp-djn5xXaB4stEc1EyR4nxRov4Rt8O4pounPdWCNqDTwNpDuE8-B9l2A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Monroe City, WA","date","2025-06-12T08:50:00.047Z","article","The Monroe Planning Commission on June 9 adopted findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that the City Council approve amendments to Chapter 22.68 of the Monroe Municipal Code to implement unit‑lot subdivisions as required by ESSB 5258.

The amendments are intended to implement state law and add related minor edits to Chapter 22.12 (definitions) and Chapter 22.84 (permit processing). Planner Nida told commissioners the item was introduced March 10, discussed at the commission April 14, held a public hearing May 12 and is tentatively scheduled for a City Council public hearing on June 24, 2025.

Why it matters: the ULS changes make it easier, in code, to split a parent parcel into smaller “child” lots intended to support housing infill and ADUs. Commissioners warned one engineering requirement — that each separate lot must have its own water and sewer connection — could substantially raise development costs for small builders, potentially undermining the code’s intent to reduce barriers for smaller housing projects.

Details and debate
Planner Nida said the city’s engineering code (chapter 23.1) currently requires a separate utility connection for each newly created lot, and that engineering is willing to work with developers on solutions but will require separate metering under today’s standards. Nida also said the planning record included one public comment after the deadline from the Snohomish County Association of Realtors largely supporting the amendments but urging flexibility on shared and sub‑metered utilities.

“...the cost of individual sewer hookups and lines will obstruct small builders. This is an additional permitting cost, and it's also a lot of extra labor and materials, which will be—it'll add tens of thousands of dollars to each structure built if we have separate sewers,” Commissioner Kelsey said during discussion.

Commissioners asked staff whether the utility requirement is a zoning code item or an engineering/public‑works standard. Staff responded that the separate‑meter requirement is an engineering standard and would require public works/engineering code changes to allow shared or sub‑metered systems. Planner Nida said she will follow up with engineering and can invite engineering staff to a future meeting to explain options and costs.

Outcome and next steps
A motion to adopt the commission’s findings of fact and conclusions of law and to recommend that City Council approve the proposed amendments carried 5–1. The commission authorized the chair to sign the findings on the commission’s behalf and directed staff to include the commission’s utility concerns in the packet sent to council. Staff said they may have additional time to incorporate the commission’s comments before the council public hearing and that further discussion with engineering is planned.

The item now moves to the Monroe City Council for a tentative public hearing on June 24, 2025; final action there will determine whether engineering code changes are necessary to implement any flexibility on shared utilities.

The commission’s vote approved the findings and recommendation only; no changes to engineering code were adopted at the meeting.

What to watch for: whether City Council includes specific language or referrals to engineering/public‑works standards that would allow shared or sub‑metered utilities for unit‑lot subdivisions, and any subsequent amendments to chapter 23.1 (public works/engineering).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Monroe WA Planning Commission Meeting June 9, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Monroe Planning Commission on June 9 adopted findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that the City Council approve unit‑lot subdivision code amendments required by ESSB 5258, while flagging concerns that an engineering requirement for separate utility hookups could substantially increase costs for small developers.","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},6203895,"Community Development report: April permitting highlights and updates on Monroe 30 and other annexations",475,4555000,5030000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b&start=4555&end=5030","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b/thumbnail_4555000.jpg","/articles/6203895/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Community-Development-report-April-permitting-highlights-and-updates-on-Monroe-30-and-other-annexations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6203895-53b5f5d409a8579cf5936e06a6b27a5f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771061454&Signature=hZ42EpQpLWMEfwZ9XLexw5O4gKd-HXyLAZHi1VxYZqRfmYV5YturGrNawvFA~GpKCcX2fCmX8WX7rGNQdtG-u6v172L5RLiVER~~Fc4pO1m-bGhdM7zuBmZBMJJrSrdvr8raVRrXcs5y-Uopoc3wFt2oPzbvBq9NFMuF~qEeYoFWGeVeU8qnS-buslKBuGXsiuc6PBGsCP~YZccPZO4ShBBhzlTU8VIcK-umSsLtXn9tOk7cqsttHc1IP-Cmufi~gggO-UFS3CvpeqaYULqis-9GaAH-z2PMbztsTefoxr032qCj~kBCyfi3sMNQdrrYoA3NC8186GW48B7-q6W0hA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Community Development staff presented the department’s April 2025 report to the Planning Commission on June 9, summarizing permitting activity, staffing and annexation updates.

Key permitting and staffing highlights
Staff reported three pre‑application meetings in April (a potential ADU conversion of a carport, work at the wastewater treatment plant, and a potential coffee shop at 409 N. Kelsey Street). Building permit activity in April included issuance of 23 residential permits. The department processed seven temporary fireworks‑stand permits for Independence Day sales. Building official Stacy Criswell attended the International Code Council conference in April on scholarship.

Staffing: the new site plan reviewer/hearing examiner position was filled; the new hire was expected to begin in mid‑June.

Annexations and Monroe 30 update
Staff described two annexation matters:
- Corner annexation: the City Council held a public hearing and forwarded the annexation to the Snohomish Boundary Review Board (BRB). The annexation met the criteria for exemption and staff expected timely BRB action.
- Monroe 30 annexation: staff said the BRB declined to invoke jurisdiction (in effect allowing the annexation to proceed). Before the council can adopt the annexation ordinance, council asked for mechanisms to ensure an identified 5‑acre park in the adopted parks plan is provided as the development proceeds. Staff said the applicants have agreed to the 5‑acre tract and are proposing a mix of detached housing and townhomes; a pre‑annexation development agreement is scheduled for City Council consideration at an upcoming public hearing.

Staff explained the annexation process to commissioners: a petition method can start with a 10% notice of intent, then a council review and public hearing, then a binding petition requiring signatures representing 60% ownership/value, followed by council adoption and (if contested) Boundary Review Board review; if the BRB does not act, the annexation proceeds to council adoption.

Why it matters: annexations change service boundaries, tax obligations and where the city’s comprehensive plan and development regulations will apply. The Monroe 30 annexation in particular includes commitments about parkland and housing type that Council will consider in its public hearing.

Next steps: Monroe 30 will be before City Council for a pre‑annexation development‑agreement public hearing; if council approves, the annexation ordinance may follow for final action.","Staff presented the April 2025 Community Development report, noting 23 residential permits issued, pre‑application activity, recruitment updates and ongoing annexation work. The Monroe 30 annexation has cleared Boundary Review Board jurisdiction and will appear before City Council on a pre‑annexation development agreement and final ordinance.",{"_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},6203898,"Commission begins multi‑month update of critical‑areas regulations; focus on best available science and avoidance",151,3741000,3892000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b&start=3741&end=3892","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b/thumbnail_3741000.jpg","/articles/6203898/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Commission-begins-multimonth-update-of-criticalareas-regulations-focus-on-best-available-science-and-avoidance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6203898-fe25a147d7dcbeff40fe5c2bdd563ebc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771061454&Signature=alNrthBTbGhFR5phGfaFrhx9-4oKOSjRcqnJcfqAKxZSKe82S1t0JC1ce2v5sjCLuRTJ6da6xpbfcKcN-l2OpHK-MAL85exJjyC-nqdPPQKMjYcoZ219liJT977Te~cDf63dB52-f4wIeOPtHtgpNWuuKz5K9m~JZztkNRzyTpjZGiff8ol~jKduII12xIkLYv8~uyHF5pPBSDp7cNl85H90hh3krsGhzXa7~4BSuxgngSJfUXGxRDyq03owUEgiiOX7H7vI5kUgaTjtFOX2WQZ45gZzANbDQ9MJn4XA26FqABw8hhgYqTbDvxrw1JO48yQqPG7kk3uEy6F9Y9Cf7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Planning staff introduced the start of a multi‑month update to Monroe’s critical‑areas regulations on June 9, telling the Planning Commission the work is required as part of the city’s periodic comprehensive‑plan review and must be adopted by the end of the year (with limited extra time if progress is demonstrated).

Planner Kate said the update will emphasize best available science, add or revise definitions, consolidate citations to external mapping resources (Department of Ecology, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Snohomish County), and strengthen the code’s emphasis on avoidance and function when projects intersect wetlands, streams, steep slopes, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas.

Staff noted the following items in the draft materials and discussion:
- Definitions and mapping: staff has organized existing critical‑areas definitions in Title 22 and will add references to external best‑available‑science sources and local maps for wetlands, streams, steep slopes and other resources.
- Critical aquifer recharge areas: staff reported Snohomish County mapping currently indicates no critical aquifer recharge areas inside Monroe city limits, but said it will follow up to confirm that status and account for any private wells or special districts.
- Buffers and density transfer: staff said buffer requirements show no large changes in the initial review but highlighted that density transfer rules (allowing density to move from constrained to unconstrained areas) will receive focused review.
- Schedule: Kate said the work will come back to the commission in chunks, with formal review planned for September–October and final City Council adoption aimed before year end.

Why it matters: updates to critical‑areas rules affect where and how development can occur, how mitigation is prioritized (avoidance first), and how property owners and applicants plan around environmental constraints.

Next steps: staff will consult subject‑matter experts (Department of Fish and Wildlife has already reached out) and bring proposed code amendments in stages this summer and fall.","Staff introduced a multi‑month program to update Monroe's critical‑areas regulations to reflect updated state guidance, best available science, and new emphasis on avoidance and function. Staff plans to bring defined code changes in stages with formal review this fall and final adoption before year end.",{"_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},6203903,"Staff outlines SB 5290‑driven permit processing changes, new timelines and fee refund concept",318,1976000,2294000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b&start=1976&end=2294","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b/thumbnail_1976000.jpg","/articles/6203903/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Staff-outlines-SB-5290driven-permit-processing-changes-new-timelines-and-fee-refund-concept","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6203903-3793e44a4d6895efca5a049c6cd5aaf9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771061454&Signature=O13XBp2SZhKoCdGTdAJV8gMmnZ-VbEGoCYu~PLOjJ6wB0lVxgtpQPyr-mgyjNiB4v7VMsmemxF87XVOohuiG47r~9KUp0UfxoFZLycoNnMlMiLkfCBvjJofGxyidbtuXwLM5-o47jGo-5y~YzmEQuKvN2Slh3fHeiOluaMTJfvEXCI8GAThiEVcSKnlgJIjb-5TW0-NUgj0e6a9RDw7fM8GZFdWbNEYxUlwuK65laFqYFMIdt9EaTPSV4ZiVoiFSv0iMPfFmFOgXto7HaE99llSMzxzYP1cpOhEKMGQ9EEvox1Io3hRYaGyQgC66px8maawU9Asm9pqT6TswF~e3Vg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City planning staff presented an extensive draft of proposed amendments on June 9 intended to align Monroe’s land‑use permit processing with recent state guidance (Washington Senate Bill 5290) and to clarify internal processes, notice procedures and appeal routes.

Planner Kate said the changes are process‑focused rather than substantive land‑use rewrites and are intended to match new state timelines and definitions for project permit applications. Staff plans to finalize the draft and submit it to the Department of Commerce after one more review cycle with the commission.

What staff proposes
- New permit categories and clarified timeframes: staff proposes clearer permit “types” and associated review clocks to reflect state law. For example, a Type 1 administrative permit would have a 65‑day review clock; Type 2 (notice of application) would have 100 days; applications requiring a public hearing could have a 170‑day clock. Subdivision/short‑plat state clocks remain separate.
- Definitions and record types: the draft adds definitions to distinguish open‑record and closed‑record hearings and aligns local terminology (project permit application) with state statute.
- Fee‑refund mechanism: staff proposes amendments to Chapter 3.34 (application fees) so that applicants receive partial refunds if the city exceeds adopted review timeframes. Kate explained she is finalizing language for a tiered refund (smaller refund for minor overruns, larger refund for larger overruns) and will clarify the exact thresholds before public hearing.
- Notice and agency coordination: Draft language requires targeted notice to affected utility providers and agencies (e.g., WSDOT for projects adjacent to US‑2/522, Burlington Northern Railroad where applicable, and Snohomish County for interjurisdictional projects).
- Administrative departures and sign code: staff proposes an administrative departure for design exceptions (e.g., certain sign packages) and cleanup of sign code text that duplicated processing steps handled elsewhere.
- Conflicting approvals: the draft adds an explicit provision (based on another city’s code) to address cases where different permit approvals are requested or approved for the same property; staff flagged this as a recurring administrative issue.

Commissioner questions and staff responses
Commissioners asked for clarification about the refund thresholds and staff acknowledged a prior sentence needed cleanup; staff said the intent is to have a limited tiered refund rather than full automatic reimbursement and that the city had only missed the timelines for two applications last year, both of which were handled by mutual agreement with applicants.

Lance, the city’s zoning administrator, and other commissioners asked staff to ensure decision‑maker tables and appeal routes (hearing examiner, superior court, Growth Management Hearings Board) were correctly aligned with the new permit types; Kate said those tables are updated in the draft.

Next steps
Kate said staff plans one more review with the commission, will consult city attorneys and engineering/public works as needed, and expects to return to the commission in July with a public‑hearing draft. Staff aims to submit the draft to the state Department of Commerce by the end of the week after final edits, subject to legal review.

Why it matters: SB 5290 creates new timeframes and definitions that change how quickly local governments must process certain land‑use applications and creates financial consequences (partial fee refunds) if the city exceeds those timeframes. The proposed changes reallocate work flows, attempt clearer notice/agency coordination, and create procedural certainty for applicants and staff.","City staff presented proposed code changes to align Monroe’s permit processing with Washington Senate Bill 5290, including new permit categories, defined timeframes for administrative reviews and public hearings, clarified notice requirements, and a tiered fee‑refund proposal for missed timelines.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6203908,"Planning commission backs 2025–2029 commute trip reduction plan and related code updates",131,1824000,1955000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b&start=1824&end=1955","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3781124-5de69e138a8256931a8a896efb624c5b/thumbnail_1824000.jpg","/articles/6203908/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Planning-commission-backs-20252029-commute-trip-reduction-plan-and-related-code-updates","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6203908-d944d2c69036f71d30bcb575743631aa/orig.mp4?Expires=1771061454&Signature=cQJdEKC1Vt0b3O1kSTExaI2YiME67xZ46edCQM5bDDRh5vgPNCC9P9Wq4EHRod2CYk9H5MFUvHPgeeakc5w6ySx259-2d~1oX5YREEvTdzd00Sgs8er2EXqsT3SzCD0UT97xdvs8G22mwHcXRtb5yxpuRVI7i0Tibxo3gaM3oo10t7w~GCuUg-hWBeODGcVVgC5~bPgtAX3xiDHpSqnOnXHVDcqmxGMmYRtu051vsiLi~jdJ0Uwhgx~n9QnRVnKmyEodsWLkEZym0Z5LROhE1HwPeJ4~anOlQl4CrXkCgyOjc~rro7rAir5WI84eG4rh8qq5gfXbLLaJleqT4OfDLA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Monroe Planning Commission on June 9 voted to adopt findings of fact and conclusions of law and recommended that the City Council approve proposed amendments to Chapter 22.88 of the Monroe Municipal Code and adopt the 2025–2029 City of Monroe Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) plan.

Planner Anita (presenting) said the item was introduced April 14, had a planning commission public hearing May 12 and is tentatively scheduled for a City Council public hearing on June 24, 2025. Staff reported no substantive code edits were required at the planning commission stage and that the proposed plan update is a statutory requirement.

The commission approved a motion to adopt the findings and forward the item to City Council; the motion carried after a roll call vote in which commissioners responded “aye.”

Why it matters: CTR plans are state‑required measures intended to reduce single‑occupant vehicle trips and improve commute efficiency, and local adoption updates the city’s program and code references for the next four‑year period.

Next steps: The commission authorized the chair to sign the findings and forwarded the package to City Council for its scheduled public hearing and final action.","The Monroe Planning Commission on June 9 approved findings recommending City Council adopt updates to Chapter 22.88 MMC and the City of Monroe 2025–2029 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) plan as required by state law.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission adopts unit‑lot subdivision changes despite concerns over separate utility hookups

Community Development report: April permitting highlights and updates on Monroe 30 and other annexations

Commission begins multi‑month update of critical‑areas regulations; focus on best available science and avoidance

Staff outlines SB 5290‑driven permit processing changes, new timelines and fee refund concept

Planning commission backs 2025–2029 commute trip reduction plan and related code updates