Monroe City Zoning Code
22.84 Permit
Processing
22.84.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to combine and consolidate the application, review, and decision processes for projects in the city of Monroe in a manner that is clear, concise, and consistent. It is further intended to comply with state regulations for combining and expediting project review and integrating environmental review and land use development plans. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))
22.84.020 Applicability.
A. All project permit proposals and approvals are subject to the provisions of this chapter unless specifically exempted by the following subsection.
B. Exemptions. The following permits and approvals are excluded from the procedures set forth in this title:
1. Street vacations shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 35.79 RCW and Chapter 12.24 MMC, Vacation of Rights-of-Way;
2. Right-of-way permits shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 12.36 MMC, Public Right-of-Way Disturbance and Restoration;
3. Special event permits shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 5.28 MMC, Special Events;
4. Building permits that are exempt from environmental review under Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 22.78 MMC, State Environmental Policy Act, or where environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits;
5. Construction, civil, and engineering plans;
6. Permits or approvals relating to the use of public areas or facilities; and
7. Wireless communication facilities that meet the regulatory requirements of Chapter 22.62 MMC, Wireless Communication Facilities (WCF), and consistent with federal laws. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))
22.84.030 Types of project permits.
For the purpose of project permit processing, all project permit applications shall be classified as one of the following: Type I, Type II, Type III, Type IV, Type V, or Type VI.
A. Type I Permits. Type I permits set forth in Table 22.84.060(B)(1): Project Permit Types are minor administrative actions, and are not subject to public notice or a public hearing. Decisions on Type I actions are made by the zoning administrator. Type I project permits include the following actions:
1. Accessory dwelling units shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.16.050, Accessory dwelling units.
2. Administrative interpretations shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.10.060(A)(4).
3. Final binding site plan reviews shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.070, Binding site plans.
4. Boundary line revisions shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.060, Boundary line revisions.
5. Land clearing/forest practices permits that are exempt from review under SEPA shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.86 MMC, Land Clearing and Forest Practices.
6. Final short subdivisions shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.040(E), Final Subdivision Process for Preliminary Subdivision and Short Subdivision.
7. Final subdivisions shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.040(E), Final Subdivision Process for Preliminary Subdivision and Short Subdivision.
8. Site plan reviews that are exempt from SEPA shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.58 MMC, Site Plan Review.
9. Temporary use permits shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.60 MMC, Temporary Uses.
B. Type II Permits. Type II permits set forth in Table 22.84.060(B)(1): Project Permit Types are major administrative actions subject to public notice. A public hearing is not required. Decisions on Type II actions are made by the zoning administrator. Type II permits include the following actions:
1. Design Review. Administrative departures shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.42.100(A).
2. Preliminary binding site plans for less than ten lots shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.070, Binding site plans.
3. Land clearing/forest practices permits that are not exempt from review under SEPA shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.86 MMC, Land Clearing and Forest Practices.
4. SEPA threshold determinations shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.78.080, Threshold determinations.
5. Shoreline substantial development permits shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.82.110, Review process and criteria for substantial development permits.
6. Preliminary short subdivisions shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.040(B), Preliminary Subdivisions and Short Subdivisions.
7. Single-family dwelling exception to development moratoria shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.86 MMC, Land Clearing and Forest Practices.
8. Site plan reviews that are not exempt from SEPA shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.58 MMC, Site Plan Review.
9. Temporary encampments shall meet the requirements of Chapter 22.90 MMC, Temporary Encampments.
C. Type III Permits. Type III permits set forth in Table 22.84.060(B)(1): Project Permit Types are quasi-judicial actions subject to public notice and a public hearing. Decisions on Type III actions are made by the hearing examiner after consideration of a recommendation from the zoning administrator, unless otherwise specified in Table 22.84.060(B)(2): Decision-Making and Appeal Authorities. Type III permits include the following actions:
1. Administrative approval when a conflict of interest exists.
2. Preliminary binding site plans for ten or more lots shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.070, Binding site plans.
3. Conditional use permits shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.64 MMC, Conditional Use Permits.
4. Reasonable use exceptions shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.80.050(C)(2), Reasonable Use Exception.
5. Removals of a six-year development moratorium shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.86 MMC, Land Clearing and Forest Practices.
6. Shoreline conditional use permits shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.82.120(A), Shoreline Conditional Use Permits.
7. Shoreline variances shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.82.120(B), Shoreline Variances.
8. Site-specific zoning map amendment (site-specific rezone) shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.72.040.
9. Preliminary subdivisions shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 22.68.040(B), Preliminary Subdivisions and Short Subdivisions.
10. Project permit revocations and/or modifications shall meet the requirements set forth in MMC 22.10.100.
11. Variances shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.66 MMC, Variances.
12. Variances from flood hazard regulations shall meet the requirements set out in MMC 14.01.160, Variances.
D. Type IV Permits. All Type IV actions set forth in Table 22.84.060(B)(1): Project Permit Types are quasi-judicial actions subject to public notice and a public hearing. Decisions on Type IV actions are made by the city council with hearing examiner recommendation. Type IV permits include the following actions:
1. Site-specific rezones shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.72 MMC, Amendments to Unified Development Regulations. The hearing examiner will hold the open record predecision hearing and forward a recommendation to the city council for final action.
E. Type V Permits. All Type V actions set forth in Table 22.84.060(B)(1): Project Permit Types are quasi-judicial or legislative, as applicable, where the review and decision is made by the city council. Type V permits include the following actions:
1. Development agreements.
2. Annexations.
F. Type VI Permits. All Type VI actions set forth in Table 22.84.060(B)(1): Project Permit Types are legislative actions and are not subject to the procedures in this chapter unless otherwise specified. Type VI permit applications are subject to the following procedural requirements:
1. The planning commission shall hold a minimum of one public hearing on the application, unless otherwise specified in this chapter.
2. The planning commission shall make a written recommendation to the city council regarding Type VI actions at the close of their final public hearing or at their next scheduled meeting. The written recommendation to the city council shall be one of the following:
a. Recommendation for additional time and/or resources on the application;
b. Recommendation of approval of the legislative action;
c. Recommendation of approval of the legislative action with modifications;
d. Recommendation of denial of the legislative action.
3. Type VI applications require a minimum of one public hearing before the city council, held in accordance with established rules. The city council shall consider the recommendation of the planning commission and the public testimony in making its legislative decision.
4. The legislative action shall meet the process and criteria for the specific decision as set out in this title.
5. Type VI permits include the following actions:
a. Comprehensive plan amendments, including amendments to the future land use map, shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.74 MMC, Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
b. Unified development regulation amendments and citywide rezones shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 22.72 MMC, Amendments to Unified Development Regulations.
c. Repealed by Ord. 020/2025.
d. Preannexation zoning shall meet the requirements set out in Chapter 35A.14 RCW. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 009/2025 § 7 (Exh. F); Ord. 001/2025 § 3 (Exh. B); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))
22.84.040 Application and review process.
A. Application Forms. All applications for permits and other city approvals under the development regulations shall be submitted on forms provided by the department of community development. All applications shall be acknowledged by the property owner(s) and any interested parties, if applicable.
B. Consolidated Permit Processing. The city shall consolidate all project permit applications for a development proposal to integrate the development permit and environmental review processes, while avoiding duplication of the review processes. An applicant may request in writing that their permit reviews remain unconsolidated. Upon receiving a written request, the zoning administrator may allow for the permit applications to remain unconsolidated and be reviewed separately.
1. An application that involves two or more procedures may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any part of the application or processed individually under each of the procedures identified by code. If the application is processed under the individual procedure option, the highest numbered type procedure must be processed before the subsequent lower numbered procedure. If multiple applications are submitted concurrently, the city shall process as a consolidated application unless notified otherwise by the applicant.
2. SEPA review shall be conducted concurrently with project review except where exempted by Chapter 22.78 MMC or a determination of significance is issued requiring the preparation of an environmental impact statement, MMC 22.78.130, Environmental impact statements (EIS) and other environmental documents, and Chapter 43.21C RCW, State Environmental Policy.
3. Applications processed in accordance with this subsection (B), Consolidated Permit Processing, which have the same numbered procedure but are assigned to different hearing bodies, shall be consolidated and heard by the highest decision-making authority. The city council is the highest decision-making authority, followed by the hearing examiner, and then the zoning administrator.
4. Consolidated project permit applications are allowed a maximum of one open record public hearing.
C. Preapplication Meetings.
1. A preapplication meeting is optional, but encouraged, for applications for Type I and Type II permits.
2. Applications for Type III through VI permits will not be accepted until the applicant has attended a preapplication meeting. This requirement may be waived by the zoning administrator.
3. The purpose of the preapplication meeting is to discuss the proposal, permit requirements, fees, review process, applicable plans, policies, and regulations.
4. The zoning administrator shall establish procedures, reasonable schedules, and staff participation for preapplication meetings.
5. The applicant shall be responsible for all staff costs related to the preapplication meeting.
6. Preapplication meetings are nonbinding, and shall not prevent the city from enforcing all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of application.
D. Project Permit Applications.
1. All applications submitted for review under this title shall include all the materials and information described in subsections (D)(1)(a) through (D)(1)(l) of this section. The zoning administrator may also require such additional information as reasonably necessary to fully and properly evaluate the proposal. The following materials shall be submitted with a project permit application unless waived by the zoning administrator pursuant to subsection (D)(3) of this section:
a. The title and location of the proposed development, together with the names, addresses and telephone numbers of the record owner or owners of the land, and of the applicant, and, if applicable, the names, addresses and telephone numbers of any architect, planner, designer or engineer responsible for the preparation of the plan, and of any authorized representative of the applicant;
b. The proposed use or uses of the land and buildings;
c. A site plan drawing or drawings at an engineering scale that allows the full development to be shown on a single page, either ANSI D (twenty-two inches by thirty-four inches) or ARCH D (twenty-four inches by thirty-six inches). Additional drawings may be needed at a scale of not less than one inch for each fifty feet (1:50) which shall include or show:
i. The location of all existing and proposed structures, including, but not limited to, buildings, fences, culverts, bridges, roads and streets on the subject property;
ii. The boundaries of the property proposed to be developed;
iii. All proposed and existing buildings and setback lines;
iv. All areas, if any, to be preserved as buffers or to be dedicated to a public, private, or community use or for open space under the provisions of this or any other city ordinance, information regarding percentage of area covered, locations, and general types of landscaping;
v. All existing and proposed easements;
vi. The locations and size of all existing and proposed utility structures and lines;
vii. The stormwater drainage systems for existing and proposed structures, including the location and extent of curbs and gutters;
viii. All means of vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress to and from the site and the size and location of driveways, streets and roads;
ix. The location and design of off-street parking areas showing their size and locations of internal circulation and parking spaces;
x. Traffic volumes and flows estimated to be generated by the proposed development on adjacent roads;
xi. Location and extent of street dedication, widening or other road improvements;
xii. Location and extent of acceleration and deceleration lanes, if needed;
xiii. Location of traffic-control devices on and off the site;
xiv. The location of all loading spaces, including, but not limited to, loading platforms and loading docks where trucks will load or unload; and
xv. Location and area, in square feet, of all signs.
d. Topographic map or maps which delineate contours, both existing and proposed, at intervals of two feet and which locate existing lakes, streams and forested areas on the subject site and extending ten feet onto adjacent parcels;
e. The existing zoning district of the proposed development site and any other zoning district within three hundred feet of the site;
f. The proposed number of square feet in paved or covered surfaces, whether covered by buildings, driveways, parking lots or any other structure covering land, and the total amount of square feet in the entire proposed development site;
g. The proposed number of dwelling units and number of bedrooms in the development;
h. The proposed number of square feet in gross floor area for each commercial and industrial use;
i. A description of each commercial and industrial use;
j. The written approvals of the Snohomish health district, if required;
k. Lighting plan consistent with the requirements of Chapter 15.15 MMC, Lighting Standards, if required; and
l. Critical areas report, if required.
2. The applicant shall apply for all permits identified in the preapplication meeting, or as otherwise specified by the zoning administrator.
3. The zoning administrator shall have the authority to prepare and revise submittal requirements.
E. Project Permit Application Completeness. Upon receiving a date-stamped application, and payment of required fees, including but not limited to hearing examiner and third-party critical areas consultant deposits when applicable, the city shall route the application to the development review committee (DRC), described below, for review; within twenty-eight days, the city shall provide the applicant with a written determination that the application is complete or incomplete and that the procedural submission requirements of the local government have not been met. If the city has not issued a letter of completeness or incompleteness within twenty-eight days, the application is deemed procedurally complete on the twenty-ninth day. This does not preclude the city from requesting additional information or studies to make a written decision on the permit application.
1. Determination of Completeness.
a. A project permit application shall be declared complete only when it meets the procedural submission requirements outlined in the project permit application for the requested land use action that includes, but is not limited to:
i. A fully completed, signed, and acknowledged development application and all applicable review fees.
ii. A fully completed, signed, and acknowledged environmental checklist for projects subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act.
iii. The information specified for the desired project in the appropriate chapters of this code and as identified in subsection (D)(1) of this section.
b. Following a determination of completeness, the city shall provide the applicant written comments that identify specific issues not in compliance with city regulations and standards. If the applicant does not respond to the requested corrections within thirty days of notice, the city may close the application due to inactivity.
2. Determination of Incompleteness.
a. For applications determined to be incomplete, the city shall identify, in writing, the specific requirements or information necessary to constitute a complete application.
b. If the requested additional information is not submitted within thirty days of determining the application is incomplete, the application file shall be closed.
c. Upon submittal of the additional information, the city shall, within fourteen days, issue a letter of completeness or identify what additional information is required to complete the application.
d. If the city does not provide the determination required by this section within fourteen days, the application shall be deemed complete on the fifteenth day for purposes of further processing.
F. Review by Affected Urban Service Providers. Upon receipt of project permit applications, all applications will be sent to affected urban service providers and other governmental agencies for review and comment. This includes, but is not limited to:
1. Public and private utility and service providers. This includes, but is not limited to, the Snohomish Public Utility District, Puget Sound Energy, Williams Northwest Pipeline, Roosevelt Water District, etc.
2. Washington State Department of Transportation for all project permit applications that include and/or are adjacent to US 2, State Route 522, State Route 203, and/or the US 2 Bypass.
3. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway for all project permit applications that include and/or are adjacent to the BNSF railroad tracks, railroad crossing, or right-of-way.
4. Snohomish County for all project permit applications that include and/or are adjacent to land within Snohomish County or within an identified traffic concurrency zone or corridor.
G. Development Review Committee.
1. The development review committee (DRC) is composed of city department heads or designees and the Snohomish Regional Fire and Rescue district, and any other entities or agencies as deemed appropriate by the zoning administrator.
2. The DRC shall review the development application for compliance with city plans and regulations, coordinate necessary permit reviews, and identify the development’s environmental impacts.
3. The zoning administrator or their designee shall route project permit applications to all affected city departments for review and comment. Timing of such routing shall be determined in consultation with the DRC. Project permit applications shall be reviewed in accordance with applicable city policies and regulations. The zoning administrator shall set out time periods for review by affected departments and distribute information at DRC meetings.
H. Time Limits/Review Clock. All review clocks are based on calendar days.
1. The city shall issue a notice of final decision on a project permit application for a preliminary long or short subdivision within ninety days from the date of filing, pursuant to RCW 59.17.140(2).
2. The city shall issue a notice of final decision on a project permit application for a final subdivision or short subdivision within thirty days from the date of filing, pursuant to RCW 59.17.140(2).
3. The city shall issue a notice of final decision on all other project permit applications as follows, after the applicant is notified that the application is complete:
a. Sixty-five calendar days for applications that do not require public notice;
b. One hundred calendar days for applications that require notice of application, but do not require a public hearing; and
c. One hundred seventy calendar days for applications that require public notice and a public hearing.
4. The city shall exclude the following periods from the time limits of this subsection (H):
a. Any time between the day that the city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application and the day when responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant.
b. The time periods for a local government to process a permit shall start over if an applicant proposes a change in use that adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original application that would make the application fail to meet the determination of procedural completeness for the new use, as required by the local government under RCW 36.70B.070.
c. Any time required for the preparation and review of an environmental impact statement.
d. Any time required to complete the process for the siting of an essential public facility.
e. Any extension of time mutually agreed to, in writing, by the city and the applicant.
f. Any time period after an applicant informs the local government, in writing, that they would like to temporarily suspend review of the review project permit application until the time that the applicant notifies the local government, in writing, that they would like to resume the application.
g. Any time required for any administrative appeal of project permits, if applicable.
5. Types V and VI permit types are exempt from the time limits/review clock of this chapter. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 001/2025 § 3 (Exh. B); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))
22.84.050 Public notice requirements.
A. Notice of Application. A notice of application shall be issued in accordance with the provisions of this subsection.
1. The notice of application shall include, but is not limited to:
a. The file number;
b. The name, address, and phone number of applicant or applicant’s representative;
c. The date of application, the date of the notice of completeness, and the date of the notice of application;
d. A description of the proposed project action and a list of the project permits included in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested under RCW 36.70B.070;
e. The identification of other required permits not included in the application, to the extent known by the city;
f. A vicinity map;
g. The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed;
h. A statement of the duration of the public comment period;
i. A statement of the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of hearings, request a copy of the decision once made, and any appeal rights;
j. The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if applicable;
k. Any other information determined appropriate by the city; and
l. Identification of the responsible city official.
2. Time Frame for Issuance of Notice of Application.
a. The city shall issue a notice of application within fourteen days after the city has made a determination of completeness of a project permit application.
b. If an open record public hearing is required for the requested project permit(s), the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen days before the hearing.
3. Public Comment on the Notice of Application.
a. The public comment period for a notice of application shall be a minimum of fourteen days and a maximum of twenty-eight days after notice issuance as determined appropriate by the zoning administrator.
b. All public comments received on the notice of application must be received by City Hall by five p.m. on the last day of the comment period. Comments may be mailed, emailed, or personally delivered. Comments should be as specific as possible and shall include the name and address of the commenting party.
c. The notice of application shall be distributed in accordance with subsection (E) of this section.
4. Except for a determination of significance (DS) or when issuing a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) under the optional DNS provisions, the city shall not issue its threshold determination or issue a decision or recommendation on a project permit until the expiration of the public comment period on the notice of application.
5. If the city issues a DS concurrently with the notice of application, the notice of application shall be combined with the DS and scoping notice. The DS and scoping notice may be issued before the notice of application.
B. SEPA Notification. Notification of a SEPA determination shall be in accordance with Chapter 22.78 MMC, State Environmental Policy Act, and the following:
1. Determinations of nonsignificance and mitigated determinations of nonsignificance shall be published in the city’s newspaper of record a minimum of fourteen days before the comment period ends, if there is a comment period, or on the day of issuance, if there is no comment period.
2. Determinations of nonsignificance and mitigated determinations of nonsignificance shall be provided to the city’s agency mailing list, the applicant, and parties of record in accordance with the timelines set out in MMC 22.84.040(H).
C. Notice of Public Hearing/Public Meeting.
1. The notice given of a public hearing/meeting required by this chapter shall contain:
a. The name, address, and phone number of the applicant or the applicant’s representative;
b. The date, time, and place of the hearing;
c. A description of the subject property reasonably sufficient to inform the public of its location, including but not limited to the use of a map or address and an assessor’s parcel number;
d. The nature of the proposed use of development;
e. A statement that all interested persons may appear and provide testimony or comments, including the last date and time written comments may be submitted;
f. When information may be examined, and when and how written comments may be submitted;
g. The name and the telephone number of the city staff to contact where additional information may be obtained;
h. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents, and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection;
i. A statement that a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at City Hall at least seven days before the hearing and that copies will be provided at cost.
2. Notice of a public hearing/meeting shall be published one time in the city’s newspaper of record a minimum of ten days before the public hearing/meeting date.
3. Continuations. If, for any reason, a meeting or hearing on a pending action cannot be completed on the date set in the public notice, the meeting or hearing may be continued to a date certain and no further notice under this section is required.
D. Notice of Decision. The city shall provide a written notice of decision that also includes a statement of any SEPA threshold determination made and the procedures for administrative appeal. The notice shall be provided to the applicant and any person who, before the rendering of the decision, requested notice of decision or submitted substantive comments on the application. The staff report can be the notice of decision.
E. Methods of Public Noticing.
1. Posting of the property for Type II, III, and IV project permit applications shall consist of one or more notice boards posted at least ten days before the date of hearing, or at least fourteen days before the end of any required comment period, as follows:
a. A single notice board shall be placed by the city at the midpoint of the site street frontage or otherwise for maximum visibility and where it is visible to pedestrians.
b. Additional notice boards may be required when the site does not abut a public road or if large site abuts more than one public road; or if the zoning administrator determines that additional notice boards are necessary to provide adequate public notice.
2. Published notice is required for all public hearings and shall include the information listed in subsection (C) of this section.
3. All actions requiring posting shall be posted in two places in the city. The Monroe Library and City Hall are the preferred locations.
4. Mailed Notice.
a. The notice of application and/or public hearing notices shall be mailed to:
i. The applicant;
ii. All owners of property within five hundred feet of the subject property. The records of the Snohomish County assessor’s office shall be used for determining the property owners of record within five hundred feet of the subject property. If the owner of the property that is the subject of the application owns an adjacent parcel(s), notice shall be given to any property owners within five hundred feet of that adjacent parcel.
iii. Any person who submitted written comments or who provided testimony at a public hearing on the application or who requested to be a party of record.
b. Preliminary Plat Actions. Preliminary plats require the following additional notice:
i. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat and notice of public hearing shall be given to Snohomish County.
ii. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat located adjacent to US 2 and SR 522 shall be given to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), who must respond within fifteen days of such notice. A notice of public hearing shall also be provided to the WSDOT.
c. All public notices shall be:
i. Deemed to have been provided or received on the date the notice is deposited in the mail or personally delivered, whichever occurs first.
ii. Considered supplementary to posted or published notice.
iii. Deemed satisfactory despite the failure of one or more owners, tenants, or residents to receive mailed notice.
5. Notices shall be mailed, posted, and published not less than fourteen days before the close of a comment period on a notice of application and not less than ten days before the public hearing date. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 001/2025 § 3 (Exh. B); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))
22.84.060 Project permit review.
A. Consistency with Applicable Regulations and Plans.
1. When the city receives a project permit application, consistency between the proposed project and the applicable regulations in this chapter and the policies set out in the Monroe comprehensive plan shall be determined through staff review of the project and the issuance of a permit or the preparation of a staff report to the decision body.
2. During project permit application review, the city shall determine whether the items listed in this section, as defined in the development regulations, are applicable to the proposed project and if the proposed project meets the development regulations. In the absence of applicable development regulations, the city shall determine whether the items listed in this section are defined in the city’s adopted comprehensive plan and if the proposed project meets the comprehensive plan policies. This determination of consistency shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
a. The type of land use permitted at the site, including uses that may be allowed under certain circumstances, if the criteria for their approval have been satisfied;
b. The density and applicable bulk requirements of the development; and
c. Availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities identified in the comprehensive plan, if the plan or development regulations provide for funding of these facilities, as required by Chapter 36.70A RCW; and
d. Character of the development, such as development standards.
3. The project permit application shall be reviewed for consistency with all criteria set out in this title for the project permit application type(s).
B. Project Permit Applications. The following tables (Table 22.84.060(B)(1): Project Permit Types, Table 22.84.060(B)(2): Decision-Making and Appeal Authorities, and Table 22.84.060(B)(3): Required Procedures for Project Permit Applications) set out the required project permit decision-making and appeal processes.
Table 22.84.060(B)(1). Project Permit Types
Type I | Type II | Type III | Type IV | Type V | Type VI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Accessory Dwelling Unit | Administrative Approval (When a Conflict of Interest Exists) | Site-Specific Zoning Map Amendment4 (Site-Specific Rezone) | Annexation | Area-Wide Zoning Map Amendment (Area-Wide Rezone) | |
Binding Site Plan (10+ Lots) – Preliminary | Development Agreement | Comprehensive Plan Amendment | |||
Administrative Interpretation, MMC 22.10.060(A)(4) | Conditional Use | Preannexation Zoning 3 | |||
Binding Site Plan – Final | Critical Areas Reasonable Use Exception | Unified Development Regulations Amendment | |||
Boundary Line Revision | Binding Site Plan (<10 lots) – Preliminary | Removal of a Six-Year Development Moratorium | |||
Land Clearing/Forest Practices (SEPA Exempt) | Design Review Administrative Departures MMC 22.42.100(A) | Shoreline Conditional Use Permit 2 | |||
Short Subdivision – Final | Land Clearing/Forest Practices (Not SEPA Exempt) | Shoreline Variance 2 | |||
Site Plan Review (SEPA Exempt) | SEPA Threshold Determination/EIS Adequacy 1 | Subdivision – Preliminary | |||
Subdivision – Final | Shoreline Substantial Development | Variance | |||
Temporary Use | Short Subdivision – Preliminary | Variance from Flood Hazard Regulation | |||
Single-Family Dwelling Exception to Development Moratoria | Project Permit Revocation or Modification | ||||
Site Plan Review (Requires SEPA) | |||||
Temporary Encampments 4 |
Table Notes:
1Appeals based on the substantive authority of SEPA for conditions imposed outside the threshold determination process are appealable to the city council, as required by RCW 43.21C.060. Otherwise, appeals of SEPA threshold determinations and EIS adequacy are considered procedural determinations and therefore appealable to the hearing examiner per WAC 197-11-680(3)(iv).
2Shoreline conditional use permits and variances require final approval by the Department of Ecology per Chapter 22.82 MMC, Shoreline Management.
3City council shall hold two public hearings for a preannexation zoning application, as consistent with RCW 35A.14.340.
4Appeal to superior court.
Table 22.84.060(B)(2). Decision-Making and Appeal Authorities
Type I and Building Permits | Type II | Type III | Type IV | Type V | Type VI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Final Decision Authority | Zoning Administrator or Building Official | Zoning Administrator | Hearing Examiner | City Council | City Council | City Council |
Recommending Authority | N/A | N/A | Zoning Administrator | Hearing Examiner | N/A | Planning Commission |
Appeal Authority | Hearing Examiner | Hearing Examiner, except shoreline permits to Washington Shoreline Hearings Board | Snohomish County Superior Court, except shoreline permits to Washington Shoreline Hearings Board | Snohomish County Superior Court | Growth Management Hearings Board (RCW 36.70A.280 et seq.) or Snohomish County Superior Court (Chapter 7.16 RCW), as applicable |
Table 22.84.060(B)(3). Hearings
Type I and Building Permits | Type II | Type III | Type IV | Type V | Type VI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Public Hearing Before Decision | N/A | N/A | Open Record | Open Record at Hearing Examiner Closed Record before City Council | Open Record | Open Record |
Appeals: Public Hearing Type | Open Record | Open Record | Closed Record | None, appeal to Superior Court | None, appeal to Superior Court | None, appeal to Growth Management Hearings Board |
Table 22.84.060(B)(4). Required Procedures for Project Permit Applications
Procedure | Type I | Type II | Type III | Type IV | Type V | Type VI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Preapplication Meeting | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes 2 |
Notice of Completeness | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes 2 |
Notice of Application | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes 2 |
SEPA Determination 1 | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Notice of Hearing | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Notice of Decision | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Notes:
1In accordance with MMC 22.78.100, Use of exemptions, SEPA review is not required for projects that are deemed categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800.
2This requirement only applies to project-specific proposals.
C. Third Party Review. The zoning administrator or their designee shall route project permit applications to consultants as the zoning administrator determines necessary. All costs of consultant review shall be billed to the project applicant.
D. Final Decision. The final decision of the council or other decision body shall be effective on the date stated in the decision, motion, resolution, or ordinance. The date from which appeal periods shall be calculated is the date of issuance of the decision, as defined in MMC 22.12.040.
E. Project Permit Approval Expiration. The project permit shall be valid as outlined below in Table 22.84.060(E): Project Permit Approval Expiration from the date of issuance of the decision. The project is required to have development permits issued, or have final approval for preliminary and short subdivisions, before the end of the approval period.
Table 22.84.060(E). Project Permit Approval Expiration
Permit Type | Approval Period | One Extension Allowed |
|---|---|---|
Conditional Use Permits | 5 years | 1 year |
Shoreline Permits | 2 years | 1 year |
Preliminary Short Subdivisions | 3 years | 1 year |
Preliminary Subdivisions | 5 years | 1 year |
All Land Use Project Permits Not Otherwise Listed | 2 years | 1 year |
Building Permit | Per Chapter 15.04 MMC | Per Chapter 15.04 MMC |
F. Extensions. Extensions to the approval expiration may be granted by the zoning administrator, provided one or more of the following criteria are met:
1. The construction permits can or will be issued within thirty days of the approval expiration; or
2. The city and/or other public agency’s capital project needs to be completed ahead of the required improvements to allow for logical sequence of construction to prevent damage or disruption to the improvements being made; or
3. Expiration of the approval will create an unnecessary and unusual hardship to the applicant that is not self-created.
4. An extension to the approval expiration shall not be granted by the zoning administrator unless all of the following criteria are met:
a. The need for the extension is not the result of deliberate actions of the applicant; and
b. The public health, safety, and welfare are not endangered by allowing the extension.
G. Substantial Revisions or Modifications to Proposal.
1. A revision or modification to the contents of an application before or after issuance of the permit, either voluntarily or to conform with applicable standards and requirements, shall be deemed a new application for the purpose of vesting when the revision or modification would result in a significant increase in a project’s impacts, as determined by the zoning administrator. In reaching a decision on whether a revision is significant, the zoning administrator’s consideration shall include, but not be limited to, the magnitude of the revision and the effect on the environment; the environmental sensitivity of the site; any changes in location of significant elements of the project and their relationships to public facilities; the impact of the revision on the review clock; and impacts to surrounding lands and land uses.
2. Written notice of such determination of substantial revision or modification shall be provided to the applicant and to all parties of record.
3. Any revision or modification deemed by the zoning administrator to be substantial shall conform to the time periods set forth in MMC 22.84.040(H)(4). The review cycle for the revised project application shall begin with the date the revised project application is determined to be complete. The revised project application shall be subject to all laws, regulations, and standards in effect on the date of receipt of a complete, revised project application.
H. Effect of Irreconcilable Applications on the Same Property.
1. If an applicant submits an application that cannot be reconciled with a previously submitted application, preliminary or approved, on the same property, the previously submitted or approved application shall be deemed withdrawn by the applicant and it shall be rendered null and void. The zoning administrator shall notify the applicant that the previously submitted application has been deemed voided and will not be processed any further; original permit fees paid will not be returned. Withdrawal shall be deemed to occur even when the city has finished processing the previously submitted application.
2. Many inconsistencies between applications can be reconciled through corrections that are made during the development review process. This section is not intended to treat all inconsistencies as effecting a withdrawal of the earlier application.
3. Without limiting the generality of subsection (A) of this section, the following examples are intended to illustrate whether a subsequent application shall be deemed irreconcilable with an earlier application:
a. Examples of Irreconcilable Applications That Result in Withdrawal.
i. Applicant submits an application for a four-lot short plat on a particular property. Subsequently, another application is submitted for a three-lot short plat on the same property. Assuming there is not enough land area for seven lots, the two applications are irreconcilable because one could not construct both short plats. Hence, the prior application for a four-lot short plat is deemed withdrawn.
ii. Applicant submits a design review application for a twenty-unit multifamily housing development. Subsequently, another design review application is submitted for a thirty-unit multifamily housing development whose footprint would substantially overlap with the footprint of the structure shown for the twenty-unit application. Because both structures would occupy substantially the same space, they are irreconcilable and the twenty-unit application would be deemed withdrawn.
b. Examples of Applications That May Be Inconsistent but Are Not Irreconcilable Resulting in Withdrawal.
i. Applicant submits an application for a four-lot short plat on a particular property. Subsequently, a building permit application is submitted for a single-family home, the footprint of which would encroach into the setbacks as measured from the proposed short plat lot lines. Because the building permit application could be corrected to properly locate the footprint, the applications are reconcilable and do not cause a withdrawal of the short plat application.
ii. Applicant submits a landscaping plan that is insubstantially inconsistent with civil site-improvement plans that are submitted for the same property. If the two sets of plans can be reconciled by submitting a corrected version of at least one of the two plans, then staff would seek corrections and withdrawal would not be deemed to occur.
4. This administrative determination is appealable to the hearing examiner following the Type I and II review process and appeals. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 009/2025 § 7 (Exh. F); Ord. 001/2025 § 3 (Exh. B); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))
22.84.070 Open record public hearings.
Public hearings on all Type III through VI project permit applications, as defined in MMC 22.84.030(C) through (F), or on applications as otherwise required by code, shall be conducted in accordance with this chapter.
A. Responsibilities of Zoning Administrator. The zoning administrator shall:
1. Schedule an application for public review and/or public hearing.
2. Provide public notice, as required by MMC 22.84.050(C).
3. Prepare a staff report on the application, providing all pertinent information, including recommendations on project permits in the consolidated permit process that do not require an open record public hearing. The report shall state any mitigation required or proposed under the development regulations or the city’s authority under SEPA. The staff report may constitute the permit and the notice of decision.
B. Joint Public Hearings.
1. The zoning administrator may combine a public hearing on a project permit application with a hearing held by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency on the proposed action.
2. The applicant may request that the public hearing on a permit application be combined with a hearing held by another government agency if the joint hearing can be held within the time periods set forth in this title.
3. A joint public hearing may be held with another local, state, regional, federal or other agency and the city, as long as:
a. The other agency is not expressly prohibited by statute from doing so;
b. Sufficient notice of the hearing is given to meet each of the agencies’ adopted notice requirements as set forth in statute, ordinance, or rule;
c. The agency has received the necessary information about the proposed project from the applicant in enough time to hold its hearing at the same time as the city’s hearing; and
d. The hearing is held within the incorporated city limits.
C. Ethics. The hearing body shall be subject to the code of ethics (RCW 35A.42.020), prohibitions on conflict of interest (RCW 35A.42.020 and Chapter 42.23 RCW), open public meetings act (Chapter 42.30 RCW), and appearance of fairness (Chapter 42.36 RCW) as the same now exist or may hereafter be amended. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))
22.84.080 Appeals.
A. General Provisions. Decisions on project permit applications and building permits shall be appealable, as provided in this section and consistent with MMC Table 22.84.060(B)(2). Those project permit, building permit, and development decisions that are subject to an appeal shall become final unless an appeal is filled within the designated time to file an appeal.
1. Standing to Initiate Appeal. Only parties of record have standing to appeal the decision-maker’s decision.
2. Consolidation of Appeals. All appeals of project permit application decisions, other than an appeal of determination of significance (DS), shall be considered together in a consolidated appeal. If an appeal of a SEPA threshold determination is filed and action on the project permit involves a predecision hearing, the appeal hearing and predecision hearing shall be combined.
3. Time to File.
a. Appeal of Type I and II Project Permits and Building Permits. Appeal of Type I or Type II project permit final decisions or building permit decisions shall be to the hearing examiner. Appeals shall be filed within fourteen days following the issuance of the notice of decision. A decision involving a SEPA determination of nonsignificance which required public comments shall have the appeal period extended an additional seven days. An appeal of the decision, together with the appeal fee, must be received at City Hall before five p.m. on the last business day of the appeal period.
b. Appeal of Type III, IV, and V Project Permits. Type III, Type IV, and Type V project permit final decisions shall be filed in Snohomish County superior court by filing a land use petition within twenty-one days pursuant to Chapter 36.70C RCW, or, in the case of a shoreline permit, to the Shoreline Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58.140.
c. Appeal of Type VI Project Permits. Type VI project permit final decisions shall be filed with the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board by filing a petition within sixty days after publication of the adopting ordinance or summary of the ordinance pursuant to RCW 36.70A.290 (Growth management hearings board – Petitions – Evidence).
d. Computation of Time. For the purposes of computing the time for filing an appeal, the day the decision-maker’s decision is rendered shall not be included. The last day of the appeal period shall be included unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or a day designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by the city’s ordinances as a legal holiday, then that day also is excluded and the filing must be completed by five p.m. on the next business day.
4. Content of Appeal. Appeals shall be in writing, be accompanied by the appeal fee, and contain the following information:
a. Appellant’s name, address and phone number;
b. Identification of the application which is the subject of the appeal;
c. Appellant’s statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the appeal is based;
d. The relief sought;
e. A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the contents to be true, signed by the appellant.
5. Effect. The timely filing of an appeal shall stay the effective date of the decision-maker’s decision until such time as the appeal is adjudicated or withdrawn.
6. Burden of Proof. The appellant shall have the burden of proof by a preponderance of evidence that the decision was not supported by substantial evidence, except SEPA threshold determinations, as to which the appellant shall have the burden of proof by a clearly erroneous standard.
B. Appeal of Type I and II Administrative Project Permits and Building Permits. Applicants or parties of record may appeal Type I and II administrative approvals and building permits in writing to the appeal authority specified in Table 22.84.060(B)(2): Decision-Making and Appeal Authorities.
1. Notice of Appeal. The zoning administrator shall provide public notice of the appeal, as provided in MMC 22.84.050.
2. Procedures for Open Record Hearing. Appeals of administrative approvals that did not include a predecision hearing shall be considered an open record hearing. The provisions of MMC 22.84.070 shall apply.
3. Procedures for Closed Record Hearing. Appeals of administrative approvals that were subject to an open record predecision hearing shall be considered in a closed record hearing. The provisions of MMC 22.84.070 shall apply to a closed record hearing, provided the closed record decision shall be on the record before the hearing body, and no new evidence shall be presented.
4. Decision. The hearing body may affirm, reverse in whole or in part, or may modify the permit or decision being appealed, or may remand the matter back to city staff with directions for further processing. If the application is remanded back to city staff for further processing, the hearing body’s decision shall not be considered a final decision, except for purposes of application time limitations. If a new decision is issued by the city, a new appeal period shall commence consistent with the provisions of this chapter.
C. SEPA Appeals. Appeals of environmental determinations under SEPA shall be processed subject to the applicable provisions of MMC 22.78.180, SEPA administrative appeals, RCW 43.21C.075, Appeals, and WAC 197-11-680, Appeals.
D. Appeal of Type III, IV, and V Quasi-Judicial Project Permits. The city’s final decision on an application may be appealed by a party of record, with standing, to file a land use petition in Snohomish County court. Such petition must be filed within twenty-one days of issuance of the decision, as provided in Chapter 36.70C RCW.
1. Notice of the appeal and any other pleadings to be filed with the court shall be served on the city as required by law.
2. The cost of transcribing and preparing all records ordered certified by the court or desired by the appellant for such appeal shall be borne by the appellant. The appellant shall post with the city clerk or their designee before the preparation of any records an advance fee deposit in the amount specified by the city clerk or their designee. Any overage will be promptly returned to the appellant.
E. Appeal of Type VI Legislative Project Permits. The city’s final decision on legislative actions relating to the comprehensive plan, development regulations, or amendments thereto, application may be appealed by a party of record, with standing, to file an appeal with the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board, consistent with Chapter 36.70A.290 RCW. Such petition must be filed within sixty days after publication.
1. Notice of the appeal and any other pleadings to be filed with the court shall be served on the city as required by law.
2. The cost of transcribing and preparing all records ordered certified by the court or desired by the appellant for such appeal shall be borne by the appellant. The appellant shall post with the city clerk or their designee before the preparation of any records an advance fee deposit in the amount specified by the city clerk or their designee. Any overage will be promptly returned to the appellant. (Ord. 020/2025 § 12 (Exh. K); Ord. 001/2025 § 3 (Exh. B); Ord. 005/2019 § 10 (Exh. B))