In a 4-3 vote, the Medical Lake City Council cleared the way for local mini self-storage facilities and the Medical Lake School District to continue using shipping containers as storage units.
Council members Keli Shaffer, Lance Speirs and Don Kennedy voted to approve the changes at the May 7 meeting, while members Bob Maxwell, Ted Olson and Chad Pritchard voted against. With Councilman Tony Harbolt not present with an excused absence, the tiebreaking vote fell to Mayor Terri Cooper, who voted to approve.
Cooper said she appreciated and respected the work of the city’s Planning Commission, who twice reviewed the proposal, conducted public hearings and workshops and twice denied approving it — basing their decisions a lot on community aesthetics. But Cooper said the council also did a lot of work in a similar fashion, and felt with the latest addition of specific language limiting public viewing of these containers, their location in the city and how they can be used, believed amending the code to allow their use was the proper move.
“When you’re talking about a business, and there’s screening required, and the amendment is all of these would be screened, I think that’s a compromise I’m willing to make,” Cooper said.
The decision at council’s May 7 meeting approves amending the city’s municipal code section 17.42.030 to allow the use of these units, including specific siting requirements. Council instructed staff to prepare a draft ordinance codifying these standards and present it at a future meeting, possibly by May 21.
The decision has been a long time coming, beginning in October 2022 when Monark Self Storage owner Larry Stoker was contacted and told containers he recently located to his property north of State Route 902 were not allowed. City codes only allow shipping containers on a temporary basis at construction sites.
Presented with options, Stoker submitted a proposal to amend the city codes to allow the use of these containers in the C-2 (commercial) zone, subsequently modified by staff to the C-1 zone. Land use decisions go before the city’s Planning Commission first, and the commission held two workshops on the topic before a public hearing on March 23, 2023, at which staff presented their research including a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS).
According to the Department of Ecology, a MDNS requires more public process and scrutiny because adverse impacts of the proposal can be more significant.
“The lead agency issues a mitigated DNS in lieu of preparing an EIS (environmental impact statement) when there is assurance that specific enforceable mitigation will successfully reduce impacts to a nonsignificant level,” Ecology writes.
In her report to the commission, Medical Lake staff planner Elisa Rodriquez presented a proposed amendment to the municipal code regarding the use of shipping containers that included the language “Shipping containers are permitted to be placed within the [C-1] zones as accessory buildings or storage units, provided that the containers are no more than 40 feet in length, maintained and in good shape (i.e., painted, not rusted out), and are located in the rear/back of property or enclosed in a fence and visually obscured from public sight ROW (right of way) on Hwy 902. Containers may be placed as authorized by a city building permit.”
The report also contained an analysis and findings regarding how the proposed amendment addressed elements of the city’s Comprehensive Plan — Medical Lake’s main planning document. Of the 11 criteria, several were not applicable while others were deemed as “met.”
Three criteria deemed “not met” all related to Comprehensive Plan goals stressing land uses in the city should enhance the community’s overall appearance. Based on this, Rodriquez concluded Stoker’s request could not be approved and the Planning Commission agreed.
The City Council subsequently held three workshops and two public hearings before considering the proposed amendment at the Oct. 5, 2023 meeting. Public testimony strongly encouraged allowing the use of containers throughout the city, with council eventually limiting this to mini self-storage facilities and the school district.
Council modified the amendment by adding 15 requirements for the use of containers, including limiting their size to 200 square feet, painted to match the facility colors, requiring fence or hedge screening a minimum of 6 feet high and restricting their location to no closer to the street than the primary facility building. The modified proposal, was sent back to the Planning Commission for further consideration.
In testimony to the commission and to City Council, Stoker said shipping containers as storage units are much less expensive than constructed units. Construction prices have skyrocketed since 2020, with Stoker citing increases in materials of 300% and gas for transport of 250%.
Stoker also told the council at its May 7 meeting it would cost him over $300,000 to remove the containers already on his property. He added the containers are located well in the back of the lot, and that he has done much to try to beautify the facility through landscaping and upkeep.
“You cannot see them from 902,” Stoker said. “In fact, I’m opposed to putting them on 902. Don’t accuse us of trying to make this place look junky.”
He also alleged a conflict of interest among two members of the Planning Commission, noting they were Monark customers, but still voted. He also said the commission’s rehearing on Dec. 14 was quick and didn’t fully consider the proposed changes.
A review of the YouTube video of the meeting shows the commission spent just over 16 minutes on the subject, much of which was taken up by Rodriquez presentation and matters of process. Commissioner Judy Mayulianos recused herself from the discussion and vote, saying she had “very strong feelings” and nothing would change her mind on the subject.
When asked by Commissioner Carl Munson why those feelings might be a conflict, Mayulianos said “I’ve stated in a couple of meetings that I don’t trust him (Stoker)…at all. My mind is shut.”
“Well, I know where I stand,” Munson said. “I guess I could say that if something is said that I didn’t hear before, or I didn’t think of that might change my mind, but I don’t think so.”
The commission voted 4-0 to deny the ordinance, with no commission discussion taking place on the proposed changes from council.
Council discussed the ordinance at length at their May 7 meeting, taking additional public testimony including from Stoker. Most public testimony was in favor of allowing containers, with one resident, Diane Nichols, submitting written comment against.
In approving to advance the changes to an ordinance amending the municipal code, council adopted Councilwoman Shaffer’s motion that approving the 15 new requirements, despite going against the commission and staff’s decision to deny, would satisfy the Comprehensive Plan’s goals of placing a high importance on community attractiveness.
