[{"_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",6363000,"mediaKeyId","2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f","parentId",2166982,"title","Commission hears 2025 planning work program: ADU rules, conversions, Monroe 30 annexation and timelines","audioSeconds",197,"startMs",2255000,"endMs",2452000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f&start=2255&end=2452","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f/thumbnail_2255000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6363000/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Commission-hears-2025-planning-work-program-ADU-rules-conversions-Monroe-30-annexation-and-timelines","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363000-f1e37d3054eda7b157dce7ad9759a963/orig.mp4?Expires=1776424477&Signature=HeJVXNK-q6Ey9xu0u--vRzI1m4B6EfUXR-VbF5m-b79c8HVynLndZg4X~9vkd~4KOYWTieeWQqvcBgH6VXF1mgj57H4hXq~67e0n3Tdfuznxl1SGtGW0hNrZPDNysD4iz-81OohVrzQIDp~Rt8lg8UWHm-fNNb0M3C6jKzfBZNMQ-79qqM~l07QJXUFGX0onITPtUD2o749Mu89hcp2uonSBr0EPvWr3NebLtLBAMop2MV9onbdIMFwfVTeD2vif-FLXXXlTVJHBhlru6f5ss3DANwVQ~t8i44rr1lf3aQlDPlzrC1DxeeSsLVaeTSnI~U6lWxGwRac17sUK2Zprzw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Monroe City, WA","date","2025-01-30T12:29:54.447Z","article","Planning staff presented a draft 2025 work program and timelines, identifying staff leads and statutory due dates for several code amendments and state‑mandated items.

Kate and other planners reviewed items they said the department expects to deliver this year: accessory dwelling unit (ADU) code amendments (due by June 30), conversion of structures to residential (a companion code change), updates to the city’s critical areas chapter (state‑mandated updates due by year‑end), a commute‑trip reduction update required by state law, interim R‑7 regulations to permit townhomes while “middle housing” code updates proceed, and follow‑up work on Phase 2 of the comprehensive plan (overlays for North Kelsey and commercial corridors). Kate assigned staff leads for each task (Amy Bright for ADUs, Leanne Barr for conversions, Anita for the commute‑trip plan and other items) and said some items will require multiple public hearings.

Staff said the Monroe 30 annexation recently cleared the Boundary Review Board but still needs local steps (public hearing before council and follow‑up stormwater comments), and that an interim R‑7 regulation is being considered to allow townhomes in R‑7 while the middle‑housing project is finalized. Staff said ADU and conversion updates are on an accelerated timeline and will result in multiple public hearings; they advised the commission to expect “full meetings” through June.

The commission discussed sequencing, potential bundling of public hearings where legally permissible, and staffing capacity. Staff noted some items (for example, the ADU and conversion packages) could be scheduled together because they overlap, but each code amendment must have its own legal notice and public hearing record.

Staff also provided routine department performance numbers for context: 804 building permits issued in 2024, 2,049 building inspections, and business license activity summarized for November–December. Staff highlighted active projects including a 39‑lot “Monroe West” preliminary plat in completeness review and a proposed preschool in a former pharmacy building.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Monroe, WA Planning Commission - January 27, 2025 Regular Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","Staff presented a draft 2025 work program that lists required state and local code updates — including ADU rules (due June 30), conversions of structures to residential, critical areas updates, commute‑trip planning and an interim R‑7 to support the Monroe 30 annexation — and assigned staff leads and tentative hearing schedules.","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},6363009,"Planning commission moves to align zoning with Monroe 2044 plan, proposes citywide rezone and map adjustments",1111,163000,1274000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f&start=163&end=1274","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f/thumbnail_163000.jpg","/articles/6363009/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Planning-commission-moves-to-align-zoning-with-Monroe-2044-plan-proposes-citywide-rezone-and-map-adjustments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363009-c4e2952d4623fd717af0bd64def77b74/orig.mp4?Expires=1776424477&Signature=Lvbxb-YpCje6l6Ny0W36QNM6PO2kI3cWs1CZfc4WAuywc16hVsA3mxiohIJuaAehP6~xu0C9TAkHgTDVAPG~ZR8bheRILXy48iZco92pQto9ssGKpFnEF2244OFfeb78N77WoJft8MRB4UqZCjsFLnUU-dZGIm7Ri2M5knUg3EcS4YdImV4xjo0MocABOOgAW~qJrli~ivzQq~XjD3BF4hNnisOWG64ey4eUE6rHEIlylsEc4UrwQ7npcY8cIL7EihLC-ATf4zd0yyLkd1hxzx92Q1zdqYPISpl0Cyc46mKpwKi8QuJRE1jCrKbXXdAvJ8psQimFOaDE4mSPXUmIag__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Planning staff on Monday outlined the first phase of implementing the Monroe 2044 comprehensive plan, proposing a citywide rezone that would remove the R‑4 (four dwelling units per acre) designation across much of the city, increase large swaths to R‑7 (a higher maximum density), and convert specific areas to mixed‑use designations intended to allow attached housing and limited commercial uses.

Kate, a planner with the city, told the Planning Commission that Phase 1 focuses on “low‑hanging fruit” to bring zoning into consistency with the adopted future land use map. Staff said the proposed actions include changing residential R‑4 parcels to R‑7 in several neighborhoods (including Friedlands and Foothills), creating mixed‑use general or neighborhood designations north of U.S. 2 and along parts of Main Street/State Route 2, and removing the Transportation zoning district that currently covers right‑of‑way land along the U.S. 2/State Route 522 corridors.

The city’s presentation emphasized that many existing developments already exceed an R‑4 density under planned residential developments (PRDs); staff said the rezone reflects built conditions and would increase permitted maximum density but does not create minimum density requirements. “Most of those developments are greater density than 4 units per acre already,” Kate said of the Frylands and Eaglemont areas.

Staff described several targeted map corrections being proposed as part of Phase 1. One correction would rezone a small triangle of parcels formerly used by a roofing company on North Kelsey back to general commercial, restoring the zoning consistent with how the site has been used. Another change would redesignate the site currently used as a food bank from residential to mixed‑use neighborhood to align it with adjacent public‑use properties such as the Boys & Girls Club, the senior center and a nearby park.

The Transportation zoning district would be removed from the code, staff said, because it covers right‑of‑way where typical development cannot occur and can create confusion in code interpretation. Staff said they will follow up with the city attorney to confirm how right‑of‑way jurisdiction should be handled in the municipal code.

Staff also discussed the airport overlay that currently limits height and intensity in a large portion of the city. Kate said the planned unit development (PUD) that has discussed buying airport property has not closed escrow; if the property is sold and the airport closed following state and federal procedures, the council could repeal the airport overlay but any change to citywide height limits would require a follow‑up code amendment.

A public hearing on the proposed Phase 1 rezone was scheduled as tentative on February 24; staff said additional refinements and legal review (including consultation with the city attorney and state reviewers) are needed before formal action is taken.

Commissioners asked about specific map fixes and whether the changes would alter the city’s land capacity for housing and commercial uses. Staff replied the council removed two areas from mixed‑use earlier in the process but that there remains sufficient capacity to meet the plan’s 2044 targets, and that the city regularly updates its comprehensive plan (typically every 10 years) so future adjustments are expected.

The presentation included references to specific code chapters and the packet pages where proposed municipal code amendments appear; staff said some chapters would see only limited changes (for example, elimination of R‑4 references), while others (definitions, bulk standards, and the zoning map chapter) will show detailed edits.

The commission did not take a final vote on the rezone at Monday’s meeting; staff said the item will return for additional review and public hearing once legal and interagency reviews are complete.","Planning staff presented a Phase 1 citywide rezone to implement the Monroe 2044 comprehensive plan, proposing to eliminate much of the R‑4 zoning, increase many areas to R‑7, add mixed‑use designations in targeted corridors and remove a Transportation zoning district.",{"_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},6362996,"Commission approves minutes and delays election of chair and vice chair to next meeting",128,26000,154000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f&start=26&end=154","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f/thumbnail_26000.jpg","/articles/6362996/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Commission-approves-minutes-and-delays-election-of-chair-and-vice-chair-to-next-meeting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6362996-b8a598906f7d1a8592047df521a7b326/orig.mp4?Expires=1776424477&Signature=JQdV0N-3urVWUrXU0vlJEpOz4yCXrq8SjP6IpC8fNKARtdVjb0ldEIiivq5SeKAIr7Wfm4YbR1RDmlF2AXs1gGFE218cfPkMJQELGOOVQ96FsYaxwhSVb1X1zuvxsySRHjvX-BrNw1pdYQkSXiKx-ehz-4pphhKFGvpRCSOTgH6sRf6rwybIh1d5tq0ye~geULYBmPdG87MTkYXeToR~zGzg47NWpcPw6z1TfxXC-5l2dK8tATAIPTWgod3mY9izUREAE7myGYf9guCLYAgo3GuZw7Malm-Wh8G4eT5REuFpqeFdBshZ55CjkociwGHnKTvbrJNF5CYNtkbQV-qurA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning Commission approved the minutes of Nov. 25, 2024 and Dec. 9, 2024 at the start of the meeting. Commissioners recorded aye votes for both approvals. The transcript does not record named movers or seconders for the motions.

On the agenda item to elect a chair and vice chair, staff noted the mayor had submitted three applications to fill two vacancies. Commissioner Melanie indicated a willingness to continue in a leadership role, but commissioners agreed to delay the election to the next meeting to allow more information about candidates. A motion to continue the election to the next meeting was moved and seconded and carried by voice vote. The commission also postponed agenda item 7.2 to the next meeting at staff request.

The meeting adjourned by unanimous voice vote at the end of the session.","The Planning Commission approved minutes for Nov. 25 and Dec. 9, 2024 and voted to postpone election of chair and vice chair until the next meeting pending mayoral applications to fill two vacancies.",{"_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},6363005,"Commissioners briefed on new state permitting clocks under House Bill 5290 and local code implications",534,1300000,1834000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f&start=1300&end=1834","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166982-53da062f47c58c7aebd927afd5d0e42f/thumbnail_1300000.jpg","/articles/6363005/Monroe-City/Snohomish-County/Washington/Commissioners-briefed-on-new-state-permitting-clocks-under-House-Bill-5290-and-local-code-implications","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363005-ec5b88bc24def48d8fbd0a1f3c94cd9a/orig.mp4?Expires=1776424477&Signature=Da2jUcnk-U8WiWFfPxr5E707BJl6IXpFEaMJ1xXtQShEkg2BHFo5TNjIXxj0mw1exIL8tRL9s5~MltJ5RcZvaOH4jFF~Gy7RBztSBOMByyvWm25aSc0qF6zkvoZrP8y-daPmcNgoRGnO6I1qO~P8P1-eDkjNcCYFaqOQkNrny6ZROI7QYTEMLgkxLG7H5bgtEDAWunkBzjk0sNbHh5d1pskrR19hyglNc5OcyODULpvMvQGDaBZKHqriDithgvAHdvRj2PGN9DhIABA7OyGmGx0TSlzUwhWVyBQMOt3Aj93kNQugokkhm8DJHIjU9cp99EpHP1X6EWNbdulWH1T-1Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City planning staff reviewed a state law change that took effect Jan. 1 and described local code changes, time clocks and operational adjustments the Planning Commission will consider this year.

Kate and Hannah summarized House Bill 5290 (referred to by staff as the new local permitting law), emphasizing three calendar‑day review categories: administrative permits without notice (65 days), administrative decisions with notice but without a hearing (100 days), and permits requiring notice and a public hearing (170 days). Staff said the law uses calendar days and that the new clocks apply once an application is deemed complete.

Staff explained consequences for missed deadlines: the city must refund portion(s) of collected fees (a percentage varies by which clock is missed and by how much). Staff said the city can still reduce up‑front fee collection or hold back a portion of a fee, but if the jurisdiction misses a clock the statute requires partial refunds. Kate said staff will need to amend Title 3 (fees) and other code sections to comply with the new law and to set internal procedures for reporting to the Washington State Department of Commerce.

Commissioners raised practical questions about how the clock interacts with existing statutory review periods that already apply to some items (for example, final subdivisions have a 30‑day clock and preliminary subdivisions a 90‑day clock). Staff said the new law does not supersede those existing timelines in all cases and that they will include footnotes in the proposed code to reflect the interaction between old and new timeframes.

Staff also described stop‑the‑clock situations that remain in current practice: staff can stop the clock to request missing information, to address required corrections during a notice of application period, or where the applicant needs to resolve issues. Kate said those exceptions persist, but there are new reporting obligations and a requirement to refund fees when the city misses statutory timeframes.

Staff recommended some internal permit‑type reclassifications to align with the new law and improve transparency. Examples included moving administrative interpretations to a noticed decision (so neighbors can be alerted when an interpretation could affect a property), creating an express SEPA‑exempt site‑plan path for straightforward site plans, and treating accessory dwelling unit (ADU) reviews as a simpler Type 1 action where possible now that state ADU requirements have loosened.

Hannah and Kate said the department is preparing required reports to the Department of Commerce summarizing 2024 land use permits and processing times, and that staff will return with proposed code language and fee changes for the commission’s review.

Commissioners asked whether missing the time frame causes automatic approval; staff said missing a statutory decision deadline can lead to “deemed approval” under existing state law for some permit types, and that the new law focuses on refunding fees rather than removing the city’s ability to continue substantive review in all cases.","Staff reviewed House Bill 5290 implementation: new calendar‑day review clocks (65/100/170 days depending on permit type), reporting requirements to the Department of Commerce, and fee‑refund provisions when the city misses deadlines; commissioners discussed stop‑the‑clock exceptions and next steps for code and fee updates.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission hears 2025 planning work program: ADU rules, conversions, Monroe 30 annexation and timelines

Planning commission moves to align zoning with Monroe 2044 plan, proposes citywide rezone and map adjustments

Commission approves minutes and delays election of chair and vice chair to next meeting

Commissioners briefed on new state permitting clocks under House Bill 5290 and local code implications