Thursday, October 1, 2026
The Olympia Land Use and Environment Committee is scheduled to review proposed zoning changes that could reshape development rules for Briggs Village.
The committee meets at 4 p.m. at City Hall, Room 112, on Thursday, Sept. 25. City of Olympia staff are recommending adjustments to Olympia Municipal Code Chapter 18.05, which is related to master planned villages.
The city’s zoning rules for villages, established in 1995, creates mixed-use districts with both residential and commercial development. The city recognizes four village categories in order of increasing size and density: Neighborhood Center, Neighborhood Village, Urban Village and Community Oriented Shopping Center.
The proposed amendments target only the Urban Village zone. It is intended to include higher-density housing and a commercial core. The changes will only apply to Briggs Village, which is the only Urban Village zone in the city.
Located on 137 acres along Henderson Boulevard, development of Briggs Village began in the late 1990s. It was originally envisioned as a walkable urban village featuring a 50,000-square-foot grocery store and more than 100,000 square feet of office and retail space. The village’s residential element was 810 units.
While most of the housing has been built, commercial development has lagged, leaving the village core mostly vacant for two decades.
In 2014, facing difficulties attracting commercial tenants, the city council approved amendments that reduced the proposed grocery store size from 50,000 square feet to more than 28,000 square feet, and decreased the office and retail space from 102,000 square feet to 64,700 square feet. The residential units remain unchanged.
Despite the changes, developers continue to struggle to secure a grocery tenant. Project architect Glenn Wells noted current market conditions favor residential development, with residential units generating equal or greater returns per square foot compared to commercial space.
The COVID-19 pandemic also created a work-from-home culture in Thurston County, resulting in further weakened demand for office space.
To address the market realities, developers are seeking additional flexibility through amendments that would do the following:
Following a Jan. 27 public hearing and deliberations, the City of Olympia Planning Commission endorsed providing greater zoning flexibility.
In a March 17 letter to the city council, Chair Greg Quetin stated that this approach “would allow for responsiveness to changing community needs and better support getting housing and commercial space built.”
The planning commission recommends the following:
After reviewing a new market study submitted by the applicant, city staff proposed two adjustments to the planning commission’s recommendations:
Staffers believe these changes align with current market conditions, where housing demand is outpacing commercial demand.
12 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Southsoundguy
Central planning doesn’t work. Abolish zoning and adopt Alexandrian development patterns. Repair our land.
Wednesday, September 24, 2025 Report this
Quadlok
I want to congratulate Southsoundguy on actually making me Google something. Why he thinks either a way to conceptualize designs or the specific zoning of a city in Virginia can replace zoning is unclear to me.
The characterization of zoning as "central planning" is laughable. Its pretty clear just from what is said in the story that the issues come from market forces often resulting in suboptimal growth patterns, ie giant bedroom communities with virtually 0 services.
Wednesday, September 24, 2025 Report this
GrandyMarty
The CONCEPT that " rooftop areas may count toward open space requirements," us absolutely insulting and ableist. Speaking as a powerchair-using resident of Briggs Village. This entire reshapping of this "Village" concept feels like a spit in the face of the people who moved here wanting a walkable, rollable community.
Thursday, September 25, 2025 Report this
mhjwilson
Has anyone looked at how much zoning cost the public. If you compare Houston, Texas, which does not have zoning, with Olympia, WA, which does have zoning. I think you will find there is significant difference. I think Olympians may pay as much as $1,000 more a month. That is money that leaves the family and the community since it might be spent here in the first place. I am not an economist, a banker, or a real estate person so I am just guessing at what might be.
Thursday, September 25, 2025 Report this
BobJacobs
I was a member of the city council when the Briggs Urban Village was proposed and passed.
Staff thought it would work. Later a former planner admitted in a public hearing that they had gotten it wrong.
Why? I think it is faddishness. Urban villages were the fad at the time. Our planners wanted to get on the bandwagon. Thorough analysis was less important.
The lesson we should all take from this is to be leery of the latest fad, whether that is in urban planning, education, or elsewhere. Take the time to do deep analysis before acting. And let others test out new theories in order to get reliable information before acting.
Bob Jacobs
Thursday, September 25, 2025 Report this
Southsoundguy
Quadlok, it is a reference to Christopher Alexander and his pattern language. Look again. Zoning is absolutely central planning and no one actually owns anything except a bundle of rights aka a set of contingent liabilities.
Thursday, September 25, 2025 Report this
HappyOlympian
Exactly - "Why? I think it is faddishness. Urban villages were the fad at the time. Our planners wanted to get on the bandwagon. Thorough analysis was less important." Not to mention the city staff coming up with this glop wants to add it their resumes. Seems as tho faddishness is what runs the city and county.
Thursday, September 25, 2025 Report this
Quadlok
Southsoundguy, that was one of the two concepts I mentioned, and while it is something that can be applied to a system like zoning, it can't replace it as you seemed to suggest.
Zoning is a bit of a blunt instrument, and Briggs does show a lot of its insufficiencies. I would personally argue that it failed in this case and in general because government failed to either secure private partners to build the anchor tenants the development needed or use public funds to build them directly.
You and at least one other poster seem to be arguing for a total land use free for all; they even used Houston, a famously disconnected and hard to traverse city, as an example. While we can shrug this off as a difference in ethos, I think it is worthwhile to point out that you live here, not there. If you prefer that system to this, move. Plenty of others will come in your place.
Thursday, September 25, 2025 Report this
Southsoundguy
Why do you assume I’m advocating for a free for all? The pattern language isn’t merely a way to conceptualize, it has a praxis. I said repair the land not **** it differently.
Friday, September 26, 2025 Report this
Quadlok
Based on your past behavior mostly. What would you consider healing the land?
Friday, September 26, 2025 Report this
Southsoundguy
The patterns promote traditional development of living spaces at different scales—from regional down to an individual doorway. Modern development practices are alienating and destructive, and do not promote the creation and maintenance of healthy communities. The master plans are, in fact, tools of central planning that can never capture the nuances of life and the natural ebb and flow of a population. Instead they assume constant growth and urban/suburbanization. It’s part of a ponzi-like embedded growth obligation that municipalities require to survive. You can watch this YouTube video for a good discussion on it: https://youtu.be/ozYfet3BuN4?si=8VYkD4_TS2dR3bha. You can also read The Zoning of America on the history of ambler v Euclid to see how zoning laws were forced down our throats.
Friday, September 26, 2025 Report this
jimlazar
Hundreds of people bought homes in Briggs, based on a promise that it would include a grocery store, restaurants, and other commercial businesses. It was a great idea, and people want those businesses.
Then the Briggs family sold out to a Canadian developer who was never interested in the "Village" concept, only in maximizing his profit. So he's now asking the City to let him ignore the promises that were made when the project was started, and deny the current residents the package that they paid for.
The City should reject most of the changes, and require that the very next phase of the Briggs development include completion of the village square, including a long-term agreement with a grocery store. It would not be a Safeway, more like a Lidl or Aldi store that you see in villages throughout Europe -- big enough for what you need. But not a place to fill a Chevy Suburban with a month's groceries like people from Vesta and Matlock do when they come to Costco and Fred Meyer. .
Tuesday, October 7, 2025 Report this