[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-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",[32,74,86,98,110],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_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":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6133121,"mediaKeyId","5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3","parentId",5705735,"title","Staff briefs new commissioners on permits, appeals and the commission's role","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",2634000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3&start=2634&end=2634","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3/thumbnail_2634000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6133121/La-Conner/Skagit-County/Washington/Staff-briefs-new-commissioners-on-permits-appeals-and-the-commissions-role","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133121-8e1a08f29fc2c2c95f0e4afa8dc6dbd6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770596419&Signature=j~VR5S-FX7tnPs9eamKSuZPoShi4CVQbs2Y0V5toLxf90wComsKQHJPixylzNkql-BPpGN9UtZ~qgDJkTJdvip0sf6znaucmOk2JuBveJpCssj9UcA8OrvPjZn~HOD4e1iqMTeL5Bb2bavJSrhV~DgZcGNVekKdgzeWYPVKS2UpsHT7bPRPv3idhN6Ub5~NQGe5I5tQQJiCkyeaNb9LZADj~IjdUPPJMimOd0wW1Qv~H8sgqaF69Wlfnj4F81HU~AyB8GqYSkcGRa5vM69wSHSfhufAO~pVMkC~9HWWW9RJ8lJfsua--Sdt2V3VvkBmmsRKVHmCcgWUMap00yUuCMQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","La Conner, WA","date","2025-09-02T00:00:00Z","article","At the Sept. 2 meeting planning staff welcomed newly appointed commissioners and provided an overview of the planning commission's duties and limits of authority.

Staff explained that the commission has final decision‑making authority on class 3 permits commonly seen in La Conner (notably historic preservation district permits and some tree removals) and plays an advisory/recommendation role on class 4 and class 5 matters such as conditional use permits and proposed changes to the municipal code or comprehensive plan. \"The deciding authority on changes to the comprehensive plan and changes to the uniform development code are done by town council,\" staff said, and reminded commissioners that administrative (type 1 and type 2) permits are decided by staff and may be appealed to the hearing examiner.

Staff reviewed common administrative permits (building and construction permits, sign permits, floodplain permits, change of use and home‑occupation permits) and said appeals of administrative land‑use decisions go directly to the hearing examiner. Commissioners were encouraged to focus meeting time on matters where they have decision or recommendation authority rather than items reserved to staff or other bodies.

The briefing was offered as a recurring orientation topic for incoming commissioners and to reduce confusion raised during public comments about which body handles particular land‑use matters. No formal policy changes were proposed at the meeting; staff offered to return with more detail if commissioners wanted deeper discussion about the differences between public meetings and public hearings and the commission's advisory role to the hearing examiner.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Meeting - September 02, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Planning staff gave a refresher for new commissioners on the planning commission's authority: approval/denial of class 3 permits (most commonly historic preservation permits), advisory role on class 4 and class 5 matters, and the appeal routes to the hearing examiner or town council.","taxTitle","La Conner, Skagit County, Washington","taxId",60298,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6133124,"Staff outlines ADA, public‑participation recap; public works to pursue fixes",232,763000,995000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3&start=763&end=995","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3/thumbnail_763000.jpg","/articles/6133124/La-Conner/Skagit-County/Washington/Staff-outlines-ADA-publicparticipation-recap-public-works-to-pursue-fixes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133124-2941f748fa5c07eab4171c87e049e587/orig.mp4?Expires=1770596419&Signature=io5MTVKahmYHsFErKWKIWwz1Z8oNdpRJig1O17G65lv2YK3Ax~aENvT1OwIK7K9auN6xZTG7JKEUIB~irAyKJjKLkjRK12CJewahd12sKZenMNoJ22pJxsQj2oNR-bt~vyrlTBeGuXY5qgQrw8QtAiV96bz6DFoSG4srP97VjyE1eL69~qXLRem6Y8yPrfBUuRU7GFAVpIjEjWMqq7qCwUJjAdMVyueh0bjYtgSCR~HQlZNDt320IRWhZoUr3rCGKZDb5hJYKX9Ijrs8Kwp4-0tU28X6CQduoqBICNjtg~~3ldWOsSyBZSUw~l~HXltJ8nII~IcfXb~n2uM1y-mcPA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Planning staff gave the commission a status report on the town's recent public participation event (recap dated Aug. 19) and an ADA/accessibility review, saying the meeting generated a range of actionable suggestions for public‑works implementation.

Staff said the event produced many ideas captured on a map and that the most practicable near‑term fixes include installing handrails at the square, painting contrasting colors on certain steps, adding a mirror on South First to improve visibility, and addressing townhouse landscaping that reduces sight lines. \"There was a lot of really wide ranging suggestions ... some of them included motorized options, some of them non‑motorized,\" staff said, noting they had documented suggestions on a town map with sticky‑note style entries.

The planning staff added that the public‑works director is currently on vacation and staff will coordinate an implementation plan and schedule after the director returns; changes could be implemented over several months. Staff said they will provide the commission with updates and an implementation schedule once a plan is in place.

Commissioners and attendees praised turnout from the La Conner Retirement Inn and other participants and asked that staff continue to report progress. No formal action was taken at the meeting; staff requested time to coordinate with public works and return with timing and responsibilities for the proposed accessibility improvements.","Planning staff recapped an Aug. 19 public participation event and listed near‑term accessibility and streetscape fixes — handrails, contrasting step paint, mirrors for visibility and landscape maintenance — that public works will consider implementing over the coming months.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6133127,"Resident raises concern about permit to store construction materials; planning staff says only an interpretation has been made",670,120000,790000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3&start=120&end=790","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3/thumbnail_120000.jpg","/articles/6133127/La-Conner/Skagit-County/Washington/Resident-raises-concern-about-permit-to-store-construction-materials-planning-staff-says-only-an-interpretation-has-been-made","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133127-a55f6b0adbc8e2567f34c9985ace95fd/orig.mp4?Expires=1770596419&Signature=Ow2cKuy3mXR~IvctFP1ZWLW9t-VDZzbMgBDQWa08Ifib1zWwZNEEUEqEWLjEzP4mxTV4skofaTIjIvsKJ-08VU-HE20mgBgMK5zfLuOwO5y0ZThBFgABYbjwjkvI-J40lpbA4BalF0EkRMc97njc4ziDEdLW4HxV3OuSKMb3XS-PPD~Jh4HsfNdHiqPdew~eTpOaN~GblOLZRJ2CVWba4~ZDRVaLTiWv0hA5jFKCicPe94U7Om0f1D5tLk6nDe~uaeeqJyj84c4Gi6G2tOHCSp7lJtGDrFVfOYpUyKyQxcExaBsqiCFfdZal8Y5XBxL1oRK6f1RaWGYjUxuHHoOf8Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","During the public‑comment period on Sept. 2 a resident raised concerns that a permit had been issued to store construction materials on a vacant residential lot on Fifth Street, saying the use appeared to violate the zone's residential standards and noting recent heavy equipment and materials at another burned‑down site.

Planning staff responded in the meeting and said there is no permit issued at present. \"There was no permit issued for building storage at that\" site, staff said, and explained that an interpretation about allowed land uses had been made but that \"no land use decision has been made, only an interpretation.\" Staff further explained the review process: if an applicant submits the required materials and a land‑use decision is made, any party may appeal that decision to the hearing examiner within the code's appeal period. \"With any land use decision made ... there's a 10 day appeal period to the hearing examiner,\" staff said.

Staff also reminded commissioners that the planning commission has authority over some items and not others, and recommended focusing commission time on matters where the commission has either decision‑making authority or a formal recommendation role.

No formal land‑use action was taken at the meeting on this topic; the exchange was recorded as a clarification for the record and staff committed to follow up if and when a land‑use decision is formally submitted.","A resident told the commission a permit was issued allowing storage of construction materials on a residential lot; planning staff clarified no permit has been issued and explained the difference between an interpretation and a land‑use decision and the 10‑day appeal right.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_46":104,"_48":105,"_50":106,"_52":107,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":108,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":109,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6133130,"Commission conditions repaint at 313 Morris Street; staff to verify exact crimson color used",854,1872000,2726000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3&start=1872&end=2726","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3/thumbnail_1872000.jpg","/articles/6133130/La-Conner/Skagit-County/Washington/Commission-conditions-repaint-at-313-Morris-Street-staff-to-verify-exact-crimson-color-used","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133130-cc9125838fc01fd6fc80fc966469a2b3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770596419&Signature=XEiV3w4HQX6JUy27QthOZE5hZu6OPRN3VlBnW2qjSGwtgWwNDVkJ2ctzf0XFCFkNB-Qt53UUIFBSaWono4qoD0X5LAk3YVWDIYF0Y~wfgQNJ982XSGjqCttvDuKbUUIlxZj45M3w4NHR3pMTJu9s9qvhnn48QLX0AwdsE8KW6aOC4Cquaz-EohZioLD~JY1F~KD2PC0c95AqGPZ811QmjiG8IWDyZ1kpdH9BasQdINXnZMqCd-LB83NFigW43PfYQyWIG-xorCyJSqCKhqk6lcIRNmCig5-GcJ8ztLEnAchHQX8nY7~GPZVkVGSOfpdqEuuN3inoB17c6d5oooQgtw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The O'Connor Planning Commission on Sept. 2 took up historic design review LU25‑41 for 313 Morris Street and voted to proceed with approval of the proposed gray repaint for part of the façade while asking staff to verify the exact crimson color proposed for the other portion.

Planning staff reported that the applicant submitted historic color chips drawn from standard collections and proposed painting the front of the building a dark crimson with a dark gray for adjoining surfaces. Staff also reported evidence that portions of the building appear to have been repainted already without an approved permit. \"I don't believe any exterior paint changes have been approved because of this building yet,\" staff said, and added that code enforcement would follow up; \"there may end up being a doubling of permit fees if they went ahead and painted this without approval.\"

Members of the public and the commission asked for exact color identifiers (hex codes or manufacturer codes) because screen and sample differences can change the perceived tone. A public commenter said the town has historically accepted Sherwin‑Williams and Benjamin Moore historic color collections and noted existing examples on Main Street. Staff said they will check submitted hex codes and confirm whether the color on the building matches the submitted chip.

After discussion the commission made a motion to approve the gray repaint portion and to seek confirmed color codes and a timeline for any repaint already completed; the motion passed by voice vote. Staff said the code enforcement officer will separately pursue compliance issues related to any unpermitted repainting and that the commission can revisit the matter if color verification shows noncompliance.

The commission also asked staff to require precise paint identifiers on future applications to avoid ambiguity in approval documents. Staff agreed to return with the verified hex codes and any enforcement actions at the next planning commission meeting.","The commission accepted a repaint application for 313 Morris Street but asked staff to verify the exact crimson paint and to follow up on a possible unapproved repaint already applied to the building.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_46":116,"_48":117,"_50":118,"_52":119,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":120,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":121,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6133133,"Planning commission approves 514–516 Rose Street design despite preservation siding rule",1098,918000,2016000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3&start=918&end=2016","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5705735-9bf17440100b8aa4714c033955cf14f3/thumbnail_918000.jpg","/articles/6133133/La-Conner/Skagit-County/Washington/Planning-commission-approves-514516-Rose-Street-design-despite-preservation-siding-rule","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6133133-beb20d7f3af4518d299f1635e4d58cfe/orig.mp4?Expires=1770596419&Signature=iPpQyqx~st9ifNi6KyoxMm6--ptemDknqgk0kZBufcMdT8gAGXNZDhXWjocdsmhmlwZpbCXJjbuvrLkh1dirV04Avu5LYUrFVK3s~CAkj3nPCUAWvSwU7NHvar39vQ0rE164yDZGI8pRmqS4jaZ1EfNkLoGfmyAsfCeVzh7wWNgy9eUesdLU7YNcpmCf54z3r-HV3naTPZePM~J1sJlCT6romebxEpbqdHIY5TWVpRSTJ1xNj3w1Uv5lL2gnctWY4C~Cp8Bbw5Dts4klC8s1H7MqDcVGZiUxNcrGwTy5RDTx9oHh-SBTFYh3GczJKOsMKrSbvkJtJiRe01Kc5R56uw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The O'Connor Planning Commission on Sept. 2 approved historic design review application LU25‑39 for a new house at 514–516 Rose Street, voting to allow the applicant's proposed vertical siding and horizontal windows despite staff advice that vertical siding is not appropriate in the town's historic preservation district.

Planning staff told the commission the primary land‑use concern was exterior aesthetics and cited the historic preservation rules that prefer horizontal wood siding. \"Horizontal wood siding in 4 to 6 inch shiplap or clapboard is preferred,\" staff said, and added that \"vertical siding is listed as not appropriate\" in the district guidance. Staff recommended a condition that the applicant modify siding to a code‑appropriate material but noted the decision to approve or deny rests with the commission.

Commissioners discussed the proposal at length. Some members said the proposed horizontal windows would be compatible with the neighborhood; others said the location near the district edge and nearby modern buildings lessened the risk of setting a precedent. After discussion a commissioner moved to approve the application as presented; another commissioner seconded. The commission recorded the motion as carried by voice vote, 4–0.

The action was an approval of LU25‑39 HDR (historic design review). Staff had told the commission that previous approvals around town included cases where vertical siding exists, but emphasized that past inconsistency does not alter the written code. Staff also reminded the commission that administrative land‑use decisions and appeals follow the code's appeal process.

Commissioners and members of the public had asked questions about the evidence of vertical siding on nearby buildings and whether the code's descriptions and accompanying images should be interpreted narrowly or with flexibility. Staff repeatedly referred to the municipal historic code's siding guidance as the controlling written standard.

The commission's approval resolves the immediate permit application for the 514–516 Rose Street project; the transcript does not show any subsequent appeal filed at the meeting. Staff said they can only attach conditions; the commission applied its discretion to approve with the siding as proposed. The application will proceed under the commission's decision and any required follow‑up building or administrative permits.

The planning director had told members and speakers that administrative land‑use decisions carry a post‑decision appeal window, and that is the route available to any party that believes a decision was made in error.

Looking ahead, staff said the code language and how it is applied to examples on the ground remains a point commissioners may return to when considering future revisions to the historic preservation chapter of the municipal code.","The O'Connor Planning Commission approved historic design review LU25‑39 for 514–516 Rose Street, allowing the applicant's proposed vertical siding and horizontal windows after debate over whether vertical siding complies with the town's historic preservation code.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Staff briefs new commissioners on permits, appeals and the commission's role

Staff outlines ADA, public‑participation recap; public works to pursue fixes

Resident raises concern about permit to store construction materials; planning staff says only an interpretation has been made

Commission conditions repaint at 313 Morris Street; staff to verify exact crimson color used

Planning commission approves 514–516 Rose Street design despite preservation siding rule