Lacey declares Mullen Road parcel surplus, sells to Housing Authority of Thurston County 

Posted

A 5.32-acre site at 5025 Mullen Road SE in Lacey has been declared surplus land, and it is being sold to the Housing Authority of Thurston County for development of affordable housing. 

The Lacey City Council voted unanimously at its meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 19, to adopt Resolution 1171.

According to Community and Economic Development Director Vanessa Dolbee, the resolution authorizes the transfer of the parcel identified, as Thurston County Assessor’s Parcel No. 11828320203, for $1. The property sits near Komachin Middle School and existing residential areas, within Lacey city limits. 

The City of Lacey purchased the parcel from LOTT Clean Water Alliance for $451,322.15, following an agreement executed in April. 

The Thurston County Assessor’s Office lists the property’s 2025 market value at $1,286,700. An appraisal conducted by Anderson Appraisal Inc. on April 23, 2024, estimated the fair market value at $700,000.  

The appraisal determined the highest and best use of the site was residential development if rezoned from Open Space-Institutional to Low-Density Residential under the city’s comprehensive plan update. 

The analysis identified about 850 feet of frontage along Mullen Road SE, and concluded the site could support approximately 25 to 30 home sites once rezoned. 

“Obviously, we’re very excited about this project. We’ve been excited from day one. This council really wants to thank everyone who’s been involved with this, including LOTT. … And now we’re finally here to the point where we’re seeing this come to fruition. I am looking forward to having more affordable housing in Lacey … it’s desperately needed in our community,” Mayor Andy Ryder said.  

Property history 

The city’s decision followed nearly a year of discussion over the site’s future. 

In October 2024, The JOLT reported that city officials planned to acquire the site from LOTT and build up to 60 cottages of about 800 square feet each.  

The city then envisioned “cottage housing” integrated into the surrounding single-family neighborhood, with the Housing Authority of Thurston County as the proposed partner. 

Lacey entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with LOTT at the time and initiated environmental due diligence, including a pocket gopher analysis required for development. 

North Thurston Public Schools sold the parcel to LOTT Clean Water Alliance on Dec. 6, 2006, for $450,000. LOTT purchased the site for possible use as a water reclamation facility, but later deemed it surplus. The city then acquired it in June 2025. The land area totals 231,727 square feet. 

The appraisal completed in 2024 found the parcel could accommodate residential development once rezoned. 

The assessor’s records show values fluctuating significantly in the past decade: $206,600 in 2015, $1,465,200 in 2020, $1,127,500 in 2024 and $1,286,700 in 2025. 

Covenant, memorandum 

The restrictive covenant, to be recorded against the property, binds the land to development for affordable housing for households at or below 80% of area median income at the time of initial occupancy. 

If the property is not used for affordable housing, the site reverts to the city or requires repayment of $700,000 and escalated by 3% compounded annually from the date of transfer. 

The covenant applies to any future subdivision and runs with the land, binding all successors. Enforcement is assigned to Thurston County Superior Court. 

Meanwhile, the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the city and the Housing Authority requires the authority to conduct a neighborhood meeting before submitting any formal land use application.  

The MOU references conditional financing already identified for senior housing and specifies that a portion of the project will be designated for seniors. It also directs coordination with North Thurston Public Schools to incorporate multi-generational housing priorities. 

The MOU sets Sept. 30, 2025, as the deadline to complete the transfer unless extended by mutual agreement. 

Comments

10 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • Boatyarddog

    Affordable? 25 to 30 homes at ? Price. 80 cottage style homes 800 ft. At ? Price. Affordable to Who? Trumps Meddling in World trade affairs has Ruined all those plans. Cause NO ONE expected he'd be such a F***.

    Friday, August 22, 2025 Report this

  • The_Armed_Gardener

    Subsidized government low-life housing across from a government-controlled middle school full of vulnerable children. What could go wrong?

    Friday, August 22, 2025 Report this

  • JulesJames

    This is a clear case of misuse of the surplus process. This property was purchased by Lacey in June, then declared surplus in August. A prime piece of real estate has been given away for free. The state legislature, under the pretext of encouraging the construction of "affordable" housing, has created a system of giving government assets out via insider deals. If I were a neighbor, this needs to be a lawsuit straight up to the Supreme Court.

    Saturday, August 23, 2025 Report this

  • chrispc2u

    Great. More traffic congestion. This should have been used for a park.

    Saturday, August 23, 2025 Report this

  • HousingAuthorityofTC

    The proposed mixed income development will provide stable, long-term housing for neighbors whose issue is a fiscal problem: They cannot afford market rate housing in our community.

    Most of the homes will be dedicated to seniors, who are struggling to make ends meet on likely nothing but a Social Security benefit. Typical Social Security benefits are in the range of $1,600-$2,000/month, many are much smaller. Market rate rents in Thurston County for one-to-two-bedroom basic apartments are around $1,600-$1,800/month. For a couple with two Social Security benefits, and no other income, it is difficult. For many people it becomes a crisis after the passing of a spouse and the survivor is forced to live on only one Social Security benefit. We routinely hear from seniors facing this nightmare.

    Additional homes will serve multi-generational households with incomes up to 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI). As an example, for a family of three that is an income of up to $84,050/year. While that may sound like a lot, in the context of market rate housing costs, childcare for just one preschooler of about $1,300/month, and life’s other needs it can be a struggle. Neighbors in this struggle include para-educators, custodians, teachers, health care workers, store clerks and many other hard-working neighbors with modest paying jobs.

    The homes are intended to be affordable for seniors and families without reliance on scarce rental subsidies.

    The development will be professionally managed by a third-party private property management company, just as present Housing Authority properties are managed. Housing Authority of Thurston County developments are nice places to live and compliment the surrounding neighborhoods. In 2024 a local media reader poll voted one of the Housing Authority's properties as South Sound’s, “Best Apartment Complex.”

    Sunday, August 24, 2025 Report this

  • PamelaJHanson

    The City of Lacey should add the following to the MOU directed at the HATC in order to make the project a success: 1) A twenty-four seven "licensed" security contract requirement, 2) A crime limitation before financial penalties, and 3) An exclusion zone for the general area similar to downtown Olympia.

    Sunday, August 24, 2025 Report this

  • Boatyarddog

    Sickening to have Two commenters that continue to attack people based on their own distortions of WHO they think those People are that Might have an ability to be housed in "affordable" housing. Almost as sickening as those same minded people Voting for an Authoritarian Dictatator, to run a DEMOCRATIC Country Governing Body. They've lost any Respect anyone would give to them for their comments. MEAN Spirited Trump Syncopats. Go find another Place where that Rubbish you spew Would be Welcome. Your NOT going to find it around here

    Sunday, August 24, 2025 Report this

  • Boatyarddog

    Only BAD thing about Affordable housing is having The Chance that Unbalanced People like @ The Armed Gardener, or @ JulesJames would apply for and recieve Housing in those communities. HATERS because of Circumstances that Others Have. Trolling comments here based on Sexual orientation, Income Level, color of their skin. People that are of that kind are A Real Danger to Harmonious Communities everywhere.

    Faceless LIARS and Troublemakers. Move to FACIST FLORIDA.

    Sunday, August 24, 2025 Report this

  • Boatyarddog

    This is cyberbullying!

    @ JulesJames

    @ Armed Gardener

    ples

    Similar and opposite words

    Pronunciation

    Dictionary

    Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

    troll2

    /trōl/

    verb

    carefully and systematically search an area for something.

    "a group of companies trolling for partnership opportunities"

    fish by trailing a baited line along behind a boat.

    gerund or present participle: trolling

    "we trolled for mackerel"

    Show more

    Feedback

    Merriam-Webster

    https://www.merriam-webster.com

    TROLL Definition & Meaning

    Aug 14, 2025 — 1 ... a ... to fish for by trolling ... b ... to fish by trolling in ... troll lakes ... c ... to pull through the water in trolling ... troll a lure ... d ... to ...

    People also ask

    What is meant by trolling someone?

    AI Overview

    +4

    Trolling someone means intentionally posting inflammatory or offensive content online to provoke an emotional reaction, sow discord, or humiliate others for their own amusement or to cause disruption. Trolls often use fake identities to avoid responsibility and may engage in various behaviors, including personal attacks, spreading misinformation, or encouraging mob mentality. This disruptive online behavior is a form of cyberbullying or harassment, and it can have a significant negative impact on the target's well-being.

    Sunday, August 24, 2025 Report this

  • ejpoleii

    So, the City of Lacey "donated" nearly $500K for "affordable housing" and also tried to raise property taxes for various "park" projects. Fortunately, the latter was nixed by the voters, for the second time.

    This cozy little deal didn't need a public vote, so the council was able to slip this deal through. The only way the citizenry would know would be if they diligently studied the council agendas and meeting packages, attended meetings, or read Jolt (which does a darn good job for a non-profit).

    Voters should remember this when they vote on council members this November.

    Sunday, August 24, 2025 Report this