Committee defers action on Capital Mall Triangle planned action ordinance 

Olympia's Land Use and Environment Committee took no action on the proposed Capital Mall Triangle planned action ordinance, as members want to explore options for simplifying development requirements and reducing barriers to urban-style growth in the subarea.  

At its meeting on Thursday, Feb. 20, the committee directed city senior planner, David Ginther, to bring back the planned action rrdinance and Engineering Design and Development Standards (EDDS) of the Capital Mall Triangle subarea for further discussion. 

The city is now tackling the third component of the Capital Mall Triangle. The planned action ordinance contains changes to development regulations and mitigation specified in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  

The Capital Mall Triangle project has been in the works since 2021, when the city was awarded a grant to get the initiative started.

Over the next two years, the city conducted existing conditions and market analysis studies, which laid the groundwork for developing a subarea plan and EIS.  

The final subarea plan was adopted in July 2024 after the initial research phase. The city began working on the planned action ordinance, as well as changes to the EDDS late last year. 

The ordinance includes several key changes, as noted below.

Building heights: The proposed ordinance increases maximum building heights in the high-density zones, with a 15-foot boost in the High-Density Corridor 3 zone (HDC-3) and a 30-foot increase in the HDC-4 zone. However, the ordinance maintains the existing special height limits in the municipal code for areas near lower-density residential neighborhoods, addressing concerns raised by nearby residents during the subarea planning process.  

Building stepbacks: The ordinance proposes raising the stepback requirement from three stories to six. The ordinance states that no stepbacks would be required for construction using low-carbon materials like mass timber or cross-laminated timber, aligning with climate goals.  

Affordable housing house bonus overlay: The ordinance includes a 130-foot height bonus for developments in the core of the Capital Mall Triangle subarea, but only if at least 30% of the units are affordable housing for those earning 80% or less of the area median income and remain so for 50 years.  

Commercial parking in the subarea: The proposed changes in the subarea plan eliminate the minimum parking requirement for most businesses, maintaining only one accessible space for those businesses providing parking. The change was originally applied to shopping centers, offices, retail and restaurants, but the Olympia Planning Commission expanded it to include day care facilities.  

Environmental review of transportation: It establishes a trip cap for vehicle trips generated by new development in the subarea — 1,025 a.m. peak and 1,900 p.m. peak trips. Projects below the trip cap receive a streamlined environmental review, while projects above the trip cap must undergo a full environmental review.  

EDDS revisions for block sizes: The subarea plan recommends adjusting block size standards in the EDDS. The current block size is 350-500 feet, while the new standard would be 300-400 feet. Blocks can be up to 500 feet if public cross-block pedestrian, bicycle and emergency access connections are provided.  

Barriers and flexibility 

Committee member Robert Vanderpool expressed frustration with the current restrictions and barriers to development in the Capital Mall Triangle area.

He recommended eliminating height limits, eliminating setbacks (at least in the high-density zones), removing the building coverage maximums and getting rid of minimum lot sizes.

"We need to strip it down to a point where it becomes an urban area," Vanderpool said.

He supports the Capital Mall Triangle plan, but urged the city to be less restrictive in its zoning approach.

"I want us to eliminate all the urban barriers that exist ... I think we should be flexible on lots," he said.

"When it comes to the zoning, we need to be less restrictive about building coverage, heights, lot sizes, setbacks, and allow development to occur."  

He advocated for simplifying zoning and development standards to make it easier for developers to invest in the area, emphasizing the high cost of infrastructure.

"You have to make it as easy as possible to develop because it going to cost a ton of money to get the roads built, to get the grid built, and make that investment. So to get there, I think we should get rid of as many of those barriers as possible," Vanderpool said. 

Specifically, he recommended getting rid of parking minimums altogether, rather than just reducing them as proposed.  

Committee Chair Dani Madrone asked how much of the plan is locked in by the EIS and where adjustments can still be made.

She also asked about the flexibility and "wiggle room" within the planned action ordinance, in terms of what can be changed without getting too far astray from the subarea plan and the environmental impact analysis.  

Ginther said the constraint is the mitigation specific in the EIS statement, particularly the transportation-related measures.

He said the rest of the ordinance is consistent with the subarea plan recommendations, so deviating too far from that could cause problems.  

Tim Smith, interim director of  Community Planning and Economic Development, said the city council does have the ability to make changes, but the level of flexibility depends on the specificity of the subarea plan's recommendations.

He said some modifications may align with the existing plan and be implemented quickly, while others could be required to revisit community engagement efforts and planning commission review.