City eyeing zoning changes for storage of construction equipment

With various city and utility district construction projects in the works, Mountlake Terrace officials are considering a change in zoning codes that would allow the temporary storage of construction equipment on city and state land. The City Council will study the proposal at Thursday’s work/study session, with a public hearing and possible council vote set for Monday, Sept. 16.

The Public Facilities and Services (PFS) Zoning District Ordinance would affect only a few parcels in Mountlake Terrace, all owned by the city except for two parcels near the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center owned by the Washington State Department of Transportation.

City officials are proposing the ordinance in order for construction equipment to be legally stored on a temporary basis on the site of the former city hall building at 58th Avenue West and 232nd Street Southwest. Officials said being able to store equipment on city-owned land will help keep construction costs down for upcoming capital projects, such as proposed upgrades to 56th Avenue West.

The city’s Planning Commission recommended adoption of the proposed zoning ordinance last month. The city council meetings to consider the proposal on Thursday and to conduct a public hearing and possible vote on Monday both will be held at Mountlake Terrace Interim City Hall, 6100-219th St. S.W., Suite 200, starting at 7 p.m.


  1. Makes no difference anyway. The City Hall site has been used for that for at least 2 years, since the 2nd rejection of the Civic Center. Does the city collect rent for this use? If not, Why?

    1. I know that the site has been used for several City projects such as the new water mains that were recently installed in the Town Center. Since this is a City project the City is paying for the work to be done and the cost to store materials would more or less get passed on to the City anyway. I don’t know if the City charges the contractor to store material there or not but it’s kind of a moot point since the City will end up paying for it one way or another. While it may not be a prohibited use of the site(s) (I’d have to look in the zoning code) it also may not be an approved use. The zoning code change will simply clear up that confusion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Real first and last names — as well as city of residence — are required for all commenters.
This is so we can verify your identity before approving your comment.

By commenting here you agree to abide by our Code of Conduct. Please read our code at the bottom of this page before commenting.