Thursday, October 1, 2026
The Olympia Planning Commission moved to extend the public hearing on proposed amendments to the city's zoning code for urban villages after residents raised concerns about reductions in required commercial space requirements, particularly in Briggs Village.
Jackson Ewing, associate planner with the city's Community Planning and Economic Development Department, provided an overview of the proposed changes to Olympia Municipal Code (OMC) Chapter 18.05 at a planning commission meeting on Monday, Feb. 24.
The amendment would modify requirements around commercial space, residential density and building height for urban for urban villages citywide.
"There is understanding that whatever changes are made to the code will affect Briggs master plan in the future if these are recommended for approval," Ewing told the commissioners at its Monday, Feb. 24, meeting.
However, he said that will require a separate public process.
The key changes are around reducing commercial space minimums, increasing residential density and building heights, while making some uses more flexible.
According to Ewing, the amendments would set a new minimum of 52,500 square feet for commercial space in urban villages, while keeping the maximum at 225,000 square feet.
He explained that the change from the current code requires a minimum of 75 square feet of commercial space per dwelling unit. Based on the 810 residential units currently approved for Briggs Village, the 52,500 square foot minimum would result in a similar total commercial requirement as the current code.
However, the new proposal would remove the direct tie between commercial square footage and allow residential density.
The amendments would also increase the allowed percentage of multi-family housing in urban villages — 85% while reducing the required percentage of single-family homes — a minimum of 15% and a maximum of 75%. This is intended to support higher-density development in the core areas.
The proposal would allow buildings fronting the town square to increase from three to four stories in height. It would remove the current maximum density of 24 units per acre, retaining only minimum density requirements for urban villages.
Brian Faller questioned the urgency for more residential units, noting that out of the 810 units approved for Briggs Village, there are still 200 to 300 units left to be developed.
On the proposed changes to the commercial space requirements, Faller explained that the current master plan sets 94,985 square feet for commercial space. The developer is now proposing to reduce this to 52,500 square feet, which is a 45% reduction.
Faller pointed out that there is already 16,000 square feet of commercial space developed. The actual remaining commercial space under the proposal would be only 36,500 square feet, which he said would be insufficient to create a vibrant, real commercial village center.
Faller also challenged the assumption that there is a lack of commercial demand in the area. He claimed that two parcels of commercial land in Briggs Village recently sold at higher values — one for twice its assessed value and another for four times its assessed value — suggesting buyers see high potential for commercial development.
Matt Murray expressed strong support for the proposal to allow single-family homes with attached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in the Briggs development. He said this innovative approach can provide affordable rental options, while also helping homeowners with their mortgage costs.
Murray sees this as a creative solution to address some of the region's housing challenges. He said creating more housing is a more pressing need than commercial space at this time.
Jim Lazar, a former member and chair of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), advocated for retaining the commercial requirements to preserve the original vision for Briggs Village.
He argued that without the required retail space, the Briggs Village development will simply increase traffic, as residents will have to drive elsewhere for services and shopping.
Regarding housing, Lazar claimed Olympia has a surplus of market-rate apartments, with vacancy rates at their highest since 2012.
He pointed out that these available apartments tend to be large and expensive, while there is a significant shortage of smaller, more affordable options. He said there are over 200 apartments in the $1,200-$2,000 range, but only two affordable studio units.
To address this imbalance, Lazar proposed that any development exceeding 50% multifamily housing should be required to meet one of two conditions: the additional units beyond 50% must be permanently affordable housing owned by a nonprofit organization; the additional units must be 500 square feet or less in size.
A former Olympia City Council member, Holly Gadbaw, provided historical context on the development of the urban village concept in Olympia in the mid-1990s. She noted that it was a new and controversial idea at the time and faced strong opposition from surrounding neighborhoods.
As a result, the council adopted very restrictive policies, requiring that single-family housing be developed first before any multifamily or commercial uses could be built.
Gadbaw admitted the council had little experience or market data at that time to guide the implementation of the urban village model.
"The urban village did not develop as a low-income neighborhood, which residents surrounding neighborhoods feared, although I think it would be great if there were more affordable units," Gadbaw said.
She expressed support for the staff's recommended changes, such as allowing an additional story of housing in the urban center. She believed this could help attract more customers to support commercial development.
While Gadbaw recognized it may be unrealistic to expect a large grocery store given the proximity of other options, she advocated for requiring a small grocery store.
Glenn Wells, the project architect for developer Gordie Gill, explained the primary reasons the Briggs mixed-use district has not been developed over the past 24 years — the inability to find a tenant for 30,000 to 50,000-square-foot grocery store, and the low traffic counts on Henderson Boulevard.
He stated more flexibility is needed in the zoning code requirements, as the current minimums for commercial space are no longer feasible given the soft office market and challenges facing brick-and-mortar retail.
He said the developer is proposing lower commercial minimums that they believe would allow the mixed-use district to be developed, while remaining open to building more commercial if market demand supports it.
Larry Dzieza emphasized the Briggs Village has been a model for the city's 15-minute neighborhood vision, which aims to transform car-dependent areas into walkable, mixed-use communities.
"If you are ready to abandon the promised and planned urban village by converting the commercial activity through reductions and redefinitions, what hope does the rest of the city have for a 15-minute neighborhood if you can't get it done when you have a blank slate for which to work from?" he asked.
Dzieza also raised concerns about public engagement, arguing that current residents collectively have a greater financial stake in Briggs Village than the developer.
"They bought their properties under the assumptions that plan to mean something, that properties were marketed as an urban village, and the price of the properties was no doubt higher than they would have been ... they should have had a seat at the policy table, early as the developer did, and not relegated to three-minute episodes like this."
The Planning Commission spent almost two hours hearing comments from the public on the proposed amendments of OMC 18.05. Twenty-three residents spoke on the issue.
The commission unanimously voted to extend the public hearing until March 3 to allow more written comments and testimony to be heard.
5 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
RondaLarsonKramer
Jim Lazar’s suggestion is good. Also, urban villages don’t work. It was a good idea at the time, but experience shows it doesn’t work. The focus should be on increasing density in the urban centers and reducing the over-abundance of single-family zoning. The low housing supply is due to too much single family zoning.
Wednesday, February 26, 2025 Report this
KarenM
Ronda,
I agree that we should focus development in urban centers. This place has been approved and under development for many years. The part that is missing is the commercial development. This urban village already has a mix of housing types with many apartments and townhouses. There is some single family that is mostly built except a few lots in the southwest corner. Since this development is almost completely built out, it should have some nearby shopping available. Otherwise it will become just one more large residential development that generates more traffic.
Please cite where you found that urban villages don't work.
Thursday, February 27, 2025 Report this
jimlazar
Ronda: this Urban Village IS in the urbanized core. It is sandwiched between older neighborhoods in Olympia and Tumwater to the north and west, The Farm to the South, and Sten Village to the East. All of these were developed more than 20 years ago, leaving Briggs as an island in the midst of development. It is served by frequent transit. It has a bar, an ice cream parlour, and a coffee shop; it needs a couple of restaurants, a sandwich shop, a bakery and a grocery store.
Briggs is walking distance to both Pioneer elementary and Olympia high school, and not far from Washington middle school.
By contrast, the proposed Bar Holdings development between Tumwater and Tenino is walking distance to no existing schools, and served by no transit route.
People testified that they moved to Briggs Village expecting restaurants and a grocery store in walking distance, and the challenge now is holding the new developer to the promises made by Gary Briggs, the original developer.
I think that urban villages can and do work. But only if the developer is required to follow the plan to have retailers in the core of the development. I've stayed in several urban villages that work -- some intentional, some less-carefully-planned. We are planning a vacation in March to a neighborhood where we will not need a rental car, because the grocery store, restaurants, and other retail is easily walkable.
The housing shortage is NOT caused by single-family zoning. Our County buildable lands report shows that there is a surplus of developable land in every part of the County: Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater, Yelm, and even Tenino.
The legislature has effectively eliminated single-family zoning almost everywhere in the state, allowing duplexes, accessory dwelling units, and other housing options on every lot. That would be fine in most areas, where roads, parking, water, sewer, and schools are adequate, but they did not follow normal zoning procedures to ensure adequate infrastructure. That will cause problems. We have neighborhoods with narrow roads where on-street parking would block the fire engine, garbage truck, and UPS trucks, and the legislature's blanket decision even imposes denser developments in these places where the infrastructure is inadequate.
The housing "shortage" is caused by a combination of high costs for building (lumber, concrete, labor, electrical, plumbing, roofing), suddenly higher interest rates, and a large number of low-wage workers in retail and hospitality who earn less than the median wage.
The state condominium law is also an obstacle, blocking the construction of owner-occupied multi-family dwelling units. At the coop across from Briggs Village, one can buy a 1300 sf unit for $209,000. That is easily affordable to a median-wage earner, and in-reach for a two-worker household both working low-wage jobs. But there is very little of that kind of housing -- basically an apartment that you OWN, not RENT -- being built.
One solution is to de-emphasize encouragement of low-wage business development, focus on medical, financial, and government services which pay higher wages. Another is to adequately fund the State Housing Finance Authority to be able to provide first-time homebuyers with lower-interest mortgages. A third is to reform the condominium law, perhaps with a state-operated insurance program to benefit the owners while limiting the risk to builders (but that would require stricter building inspection that we currently have in any of our jurisdictions).
We do not need more single-family homes in our area. We need more condominiums, townhouses, coops, and other more dense housing. We need more senior housing. That's exactly what Briggs Village provides. We also need more smaller, one-person apartments, which is why I proposed that any increase at Briggs above the 50% limit for apartments is limited to smaller units.
But the retail is missing from Briggs Village, and I hope that the Planning Commission and City Council condition the proposed changes on completion of the retail core and requiring some smaller units to be built.
Thursday, February 27, 2025 Report this
Southsoundguy
Abolish zoning.
Thursday, February 27, 2025 Report this
HotTractor
Very thoughtful comments here. I agree with the need to supply more dense housing available with access to transportation that does not require cars generating more traffic to get to everything.
Saturday, March 1, 2025 Report this