(1) 
The city shall consolidate development application and review in order to integrate the development permit and environmental review process, while avoiding duplication of the review processes.
(2) 
All applications for development permits, variances and other city approvals under the development code shall be submitted on forms provided by the department of community development. All applications shall be acknowledged by the property owner.
(Ord. 2852 § 10 (Exh. A), 2011)
(1) 
Informal. Applicants for development are encouraged to participate in an informal meeting prior to the formal preapplication meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss, in general terms, the proposed development, city design standards, design alternatives, and required permits and approval process.
(2) 
Formal. Every person proposing a development, with exception of building permits, in the city shall attend a preapplication meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the nature of the proposed development, application and permit requirements, fees, review process and schedule, applicable plans, policies and regulations. In order to expedite development review, the city shall invite all affected jurisdictions, agencies and/or special districts to the preapplication meeting.
(Ord. 2852 § 10 (Exh. A), 2011)
(1) 
All applications for approval under MMC Title 22 shall include the information specified in the applicable title. The director may require such additional information as reasonably necessary to fully and properly evaluate the proposal.
(2) 
The applicant shall apply for all permits identified in the preapplication meeting.
(Ord. 2852 § 10 (Exh. A), 2011)
(1) 
Within 28 days of receiving an application, the city shall review the application and, as set forth below, provide applicants with a written determination that the application is complete or incomplete.
(2) 
A project application shall be declared complete only when it contains all of the following materials:
(a) 
A fully completed, signed, and acknowledged development application and all applicable review fees.
(b) 
A fully completed, signed, and acknowledged environmental checklist for projects subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act.
(c) 
The information specified for the desired project in the appropriate chapters of the Marysville Municipal Code and as identified in MMC § 22G.010.040.
(d) 
Any supplemental information or special studies identified by the director.
(3) 
For applications determined to be incomplete, the city shall identify, in writing, the specific requirements or information necessary to constitute a complete application. Upon submittal of the additional information, the city shall, within 14 days, issue a letter of completeness or identify what additional information is required.
(Ord. 2852 § 10 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 3328 § 2 (Exh. B), 2024)
(1) 
Immediately following the issuance of a letter of completeness, the city shall schedule a meeting of the technical review committee (TRC). The TRC may be composed of representatives of all affected city departments, utility districts, the fire department, and any other entities or agencies with jurisdiction.
(2) 
The TRC shall review the development application for compliance with city plans and regulations, coordinate necessary permit reviews, and identify the development's environmental impacts.
(Ord. 2852 § 10 (Exh. A), 2011)
(1) 
Developments and planned actions subject to the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) shall be reviewed in accordance with the policies and procedures contained in Chapter 22E.030 MMC.
(2) 
SEPA review shall be conducted concurrently with development project review. The following are exempt from concurrent review:
(a) 
Projects categorically exempt from SEPA;
(b) 
Components of previously completed planned actions, to the extent permitted by law and consistent with the EIS for the planned action.
(Ord. 2852 § 10 (Exh. A), 2011)
(1) 
In those cases where a developer would be required pursuant to any applicable city code or policy to provide a traffic engineering study as a condition of development, the city engineer or his designee may evaluate whether any traffic study previously completed at public expense adequately addresses the traffic issues that would be expected to be covered in a private, site-specific study. In such cases, the city engineer may waive a developer's site-specific traffic engineering study and instead authorize the payment of a fee to be paid in lieu of such study as reimbursement of a portion of the city's costs of an engineering study.
(2) 
The fee to be reimbursed to the city shall be administratively determined in the sole discretion of the city engineer and shall be based upon the following:
(a) 
The total cost of the city's study;
(b) 
The scope and area of the city's study as compared to the area that would have been required to be studied by the private developer;
(c) 
The degree to which the city's study is expected to be used in lieu of other site-specific private developer studies in the future;
(d) 
Such other and further factors as the city engineer deems relevant.
There shall be no appeal from the decision of the city engineer. The decision of the city engineer shall be issued in writing.
(3) 
In the event the private developer disagrees with the amount determined to be reimbursed to the city, the developer may appeal the administrative determination to the city's hearing examiner pursuant to Chapter 22G.060 MMC. Said appeal shall be filed in writing with the city engineer not later than 14 calendar days from the issuance of the administrative determination. Failure to file an appeal within said time period shall be deemed as acceptance of the administrative determination. He shall conduct his own study at his own expense.
(4) 
If it is determined by the city engineer or other appropriate authority that the city study needs to be updated with respect to a particular property or use, the developer shall do so at its own expense.
(Ord. 2852 § 10 (Exh. A), 2011)