Thursday, October 1, 2026
.jpeg)
The Olympia Site Plan Review Committee tackled a residential development proposal that could showcase the city’s new middle housing code amendments, which are expected to go before the city council later this month.
Developers Kyle Schrader and Jeff Pantier presented plans to subdivide a 1.23-acre property at the southeast corner of Miller Avenue and Puget Street into eight lots.
The project, known as Kelsie Estates/Puget Street, would have 24 housing units, with each lot accommodating one primary residence and up to two Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).
Schrader said the intent is to demonstrate how the city's evolving housing rules could support smaller scale infill that fits within neighborhoods. The plan includes shared access drives, on-site parking and landscaped open spaces.
City planners reviewed the proposal under pending middle housing code amendments, which would expand residential density options on single-family lots.
Associate Planner Casey Mauck said the project fits within the allowable range of five to 10 primary units per acre, with ADUs counted separately under the new rules.
Mauck said developers must provide a safe walking route narrative for nearby Roosevelt Elementary School and Reeves Middle School.
While the proposal meets zoning standards, Mauck asked the developers to review setback changes, impervious surface limits and stormwater requirements under the draft middle housing code.
She said the main revision needed in the project is to ensure each lot has at least 30 feet of street frontage. While the current plans show some lots with only shared access easements, she noted these should be designed as flag lots with direct street connections.
Engineering Plans Senior Examiner Tiffani King noted utilities are available on both Miller Avenue and Puget Street, positioning the site for development. However, the city’s engineering standards have not yet been updated to align with the pending middle housing code.
Under the current rules, a single-family home and its ADU typically share a water meter and a common sewer connection. With two ADUs per lot, water capacity and connection requirements could present challenges the city needs to address.
King added while ADUs currently share utility connections with the primary home and are not charged additional connection fees, the city is reassessing whether that approach supports long-term affordability and infrastructure management.
She recommended each structure have individual water and sewer connections to avoid costly retrofits later. She cautioned that it would increase upfront fees.
King said the issue remains under discussion within the city to align engineering standards with evolving housing policies.
Principal Planner Nicole Floyd said the draft code requires each unit lot to have access and utility service, but the city has yet to determine how it will be implemented.
The middle housing code amendments are expected to reach the Olympia City Council for a first reading on Nov. 20, with possible adoption by the end of the year.
Floyd noted that reviewing the Kelsie Estates project under a draft code is unusual, but it offers an early look at how the new rules could apply when it is adopted.
“We are learning it just like you are,” said Floyd, adding many implementation details, such as how to handle shared utilities, would depend on council direction and subsequent updates to engineering standards to align with new state housing laws.
10 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Paul49Knox
This is the kind of forward thinking needed to build more cost effective housing options and avoid sprawl! Thanks to the City and creative builders!
Tuesday, November 11, 2025 Report this
CommonScense
Some duplexes in Olympia have had only one connection to utilities. The utility bill ended up being paid for by the landlord. While the landlord can charge more for rent, it was not always fair. The tenants had no incentive to be conservative in their use of water and electricity.
Those that were green minded ended up subsidizing those who consumed much more water
and electricity. The only way to be fair is to have separate meters for each ADU and the main
resident.
Tuesday, November 11, 2025 Report this
Callie
I would like to see a shared-utility exemption for people building a single ADU for a family member. The problem this creates for the next property owner can be handled - the next owner can add those utility lines and shoulder the expense, OR, the realtor can locate another family that wants to share. There are plenty of us.
Wednesday, November 12, 2025 Report this
LindaD
Allowing ADUs both increases housing and encourages local ownership vs corporate owned apartment buildings that suck our local wealth out of the community. Make it as cheap as possible to build, including an option for shared water/sewer. Owners can do separate water/sewer if they wish or future onwers can do it later.
Wednesday, November 12, 2025 Report this
RolandK
@CommonScense - The option for deduct meters exists. The deduct meter reading gets deducted from the main meter reading privately and can then be billed by the person owning the main meter. To the City only one meter is read, but each household can then be fairly billed.
Wednesday, November 12, 2025 Report this
Alex360
I appreciate the city trying to get more houses in, but without rethinking the regulations and costs so much potential will be missed. Seems like the city and planners have no sense how much they're adding to housing costs and therefore decreasing housing. What could sprinklers cost, what could another layer of insulation cost, what could independent water and sewer cost, what could another set of impact fees cost... all of a sudden they've added 100 grand to the cost of a house and wonder why no new housing is going up while house prices skyrocket and people have to move to Lacey..
Wednesday, November 12, 2025 Report this
BillSpencer
Great! let builders build. There are so many barriers to building housing in this community our "progressive" city council has not really done a whole lot about it. Like why does each lot need 30 ft. of frontage? Just BS requirements that kill projects.
Wednesday, November 12, 2025 Report this
PhyllisBooth
Just like those of us who spent years fighting the Missing Middle predicted, the Missing Middle policies will exploit the poorer neighborhoods. Builders can build houses forever and there will never be enough housing because people do not have the money to afford it. You can get rid of all the regulations and that will not help because we live in a society that values profits over people and any reduced costs will go toward profiteering. Missing Middle policies exploit poor areas and prevent starter home developments as that former zoning protection is gone. Most people want to own and control their homes, but Missing Middle policies favor rich developers and permanent renters who will never own anything, let alone the high rent.
Thursday, November 13, 2025 Report this
PhyllisBooth
It would be great to turn all these empty retail buildings into housing as a lot of it is close to bus service, already has parking lots and is walkable and close to grocery stores and other needed services. That would make more sense than invading established neighborhoods and build housing that is going to raise the taxes of home owners in poorer neighborhoods and eventually push them out economically.
Thursday, November 13, 2025 Report this
Curious
I'm disappointed that this is the showcase project, but we need this and better. This spot is along a bus route, it's near schools and parks, it could easily have been more dense with townhouses or (gasp) apartments. We need a lot more housing and we need it yesterday. But it can't be more dense with the way zoning is set up, that needs to be fixed. Housing prices will come down when there's enough homes, until then price is how they decide who gets to have a roof over their heads.
Thursday, November 13, 2025 Report this