MARYSVILLE — A 59-home development in Marysville is set to move forward after the city hearing examiner granted it preliminary approval on Monday.
The decision comes after a group of neighbors, known as the 35th Avenue Community Action Group, rose in opposition to the new homes and appealed the city’s finding that the development would not adversely impact the environment. The hearing examiner, Kevin McDonald, also upheld the city’s finding, known as a mitigated determination of nonsignificance, on Monday.
The neighborhood group “failed to demonstrate that the addition of 59 dwelling units would result in significant adverse impacts” to vehicle access, traffic and water quality, McDonald wrote in his decision.
The preliminary approval allows the developer to pursue grading and right-of-way permits to start groundwork construction at the site, city of Marysville spokesperson Connie Mennie wrote in an email. Construction could include site clearing, utility installation and frontage improvements.
The neighborhood group has two options following the hearing examiner’s decision. The group could file a written request for reconsideration within 14 days to the city’s community development director, which would only be granted if “a legal error has occurred or a material factual issue has been overlooked that would change the previous decision,” city law reads.
The group could also appeal to the Snohomish County Superior Court.
In a statement, the 35th Avenue Community Action group said it was “deeply disappointed” by the decision. Neighbors had raised concerns over the development since September 2024.
“This ruling prioritizes large developers over the well-being of local residents, threatening the safety, character, and overall quality of life in our neighborhoods,” the statement read. “During his State of the City Address on January 28, 2025, Mayor Nehring declared that there was ‘no greater priority than public safety.’ Yet, the city’s actions tell a different story. Time and again, the city has sided with developers, disregarding community concerns and worsening issues like traffic congestion, emergency access, and infrastructure strain.”
Residents spoke out against the development at a City Council meeting on Jan. 27. Marysville’s mayor, Jon Nehring, said the city’s hands were tied due to state law.
“I think everybody up here sympathizes with what you’re going through,” Nehring said at the Jan. 27 council meeting. “We don’t like the fact that local control in this state has been taken, in many instances, from the local elected officials.”
The state legislature passed the Growth Management Act in 1990 to encourage development in urban areas and reduce urban sprawl. The law requires fast-growing cities like Marysville to create comprehensive plans to allow for an increase in housing and tries to mitigate the negative environmental impacts of low-density sprawl.
Building more housing is key to increasing affordability. Marysville needs to allow for about 622 new housing units every year to keep up with demand, according to its latest comprehensive plan. By law, the city can’t deny developments that meet code requirements, Mennie previously said in an email.
At the Jan. 27 council meeting, Nehring said the Growth Management Act should be “revised, at least, if not repealed.”
Regarding vehicle access, neighbors argued current congestion limits access to their properties. There is only one way in and one way out of the neighborhood with more than 150 homes, located at the intersection of 88th Street NE and 36th Avenue NE.
The neighborhood group’s descriptions of current conditions at the intersection are valid, McDonald wrote in his decision, but the applicant and the city demonstrated that existing and future conditions would not be adversely impacted by the new homes. Emergency vehicle response times would also not be significantly impacted, he wrote.
Neighbors also said the increase in car traffic from the new development would increase traffic congestion to unacceptable levels. The developers prepared multiple traffic impact studies that found otherwise, however. The hearing examiner also determined the traffic conditions would not be significantly impacted. Most housing development is also exempt from appeals to transportation impacts as long as the project complies with local and state transportation laws, due to a 2022 amendment of the Growth Management Act.
Water contamination was another concern for neighbors. Most get their water from shallow wells and worried the development would generate stormwater runoff that would contaminate them. Multiple hydrogeologists testified at the hearing that the developer’s stormwater management designs would prevent contamination.
“There is no evidence to indicate that stormwater infiltrated on the site will threaten the quality of the existing residents’ domestic well-water,” McDonald wrote in his decision.
Before receiving final approval, the developer, California-based KB Home, must fulfill a number of conditions set by the city. They include installing fire sprinklers in the new homes, paying impact fees to the city and school district and conducting a number of studies to prevent groundwater impacts.
Will Geschke: 425-339-3443; william.geschke@heraldnet.com; X: @willgeschke.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
