Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alrighty. Welcome to Thursday, 03/26/2026, land use and environment committee at the LNP City Council. I'm Robert Vanderpool. If my councilmates want to introduce themselves.

Yeah. Sure. I'm Paul Behrendt, position number seven. I'm the city council, the resident of Southeast Olympia.

Right. And Clark Gilman, also on the committee. Cool.

Alright. Can I get a a motion to approve today's approve the agenda?

Yeah. I'll I'll move to approve the agenda. Second.

Alright. All here. Ayes. Aye. Aye. Alright. Cool. We have an agenda. You said we don't have any public, and we have a few public comments. We do. Yes. JJ, are you here for public comment? Nope. Okay. Okay. We've got Dan shared

a lot to talk. Dan?

Hello. Can you hear me?

Yes. We can.

Okay. Thank you for giving a giving me an opportunity to speak with you. I just wanted to talk a little bit about the preservation of manufactured housing communities and to encourage you to keep working to preserve these fragile communities. My mom lives in the Friendly Bridge community in West Olympia. She is almost 80 and has a very limited fixed income.

She can't work anymore. And she used almost all her savings to buy a small unit in that community, and she cares for it just like any other homeowner would. She's hung up her pretty stained glass. She's painted the outside and spends her days gardening out back, and she takes care of her house and knows all of her neighbors. So about a year or so ago, the community was bought by a corporation, and their very first act was to try and raise her rent by 63%.

It went from under $800 to over 1,400. This would have forced her and many other people out of their homes. But luckily, the state passed restrictions on the rental increases, and the corporation had to backtrack. However, they have signaled that if the unit's ever sold, they intend to put in place a higher rent, and it makes it very hard for current owners to sell their properties. More than one resident has told my mom that their buyers backed out upon hearing about pardon me.

Upon hearing the future rental costs. So instead of having to pay 1,800 a month as she currently pays, the new owner would have to pay over 1,400. Right now, she lives about five minutes from me by car or ten minutes by bike. So I'm able to help her with anything she needs, such as gardening or driving her to her doctor's appointments. She's right on transit line and can get to the bus stop if she needs. That means her granddaughter, doesn't have a driver's license, can get there by herself using those buses. And because those rent increases were heavily slowed, she gets to stay where she is. She keeps buying her groceries here in Olympia. She goes to the doctor here in Olympia. She buys all of her gardening supplies, her tools, and appliances right here.

And because she's here, I'm here. And I buy all of my family's groceries, toys, and tools here as well. If she is forced out, our family's decision making for our future may change drastically to the point that I can't include Olympia in those plans anymore. So, again, I urge you to please continue working on preserving these fragile communities. It's not just the people living in them. It's the people connected to them as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Dan. I appreciate that.

Thank you, Dan.

K. I don't see anybody else online. Could you wish to make

a public comment? No. You're Thank you. Oh. Alright. No other public comment. Can I can we get approval of the minutes?

So moved.

Second for the February 17 minutes.

Mhmm. Both particular ones. Uh-huh. Alright. Cool.

Alright. On to committee business. Manufactured home communities preservation discussion.

Alright. Well, thank you. For the record or for anyone online, my name is Krista Linson, a senior housing program specialist here to talk about manufactured home community preservation. So today, I'll just provide some background on some policies that regulate manufactured home parks that might be relevant for our discussion today. Some background on Olympia's parks, what are some of the issues facing manufactured home community residents, and why this is an issue that council may wish to address and possible solutions for the city to explore.

So I'll be seeking direction from land use on which, if any, of these options you'd like staff to explore further from here. So manufactured home communities are properties where there's a land owner who either rents lot space to someone who owns their manufactured home or who rents out both the home and a lot space to residents. Some of you may be familiar or not, but there's two different landlord tenant acts in Washington State. So in particular, the manufactured mobile home landlord tenant act governs tenancies where the resident owns the home but just rents a lot space. And then the Residential Landlord Tenant Act is for folks who rent both their home and the lot space, as well as all the other traditional types of rentals that you might be familiar with, like apartments and single family homes.

So the city's rental housing code or our tenant protections specifically align with those tenancies that are under the Residential Landlord Tenant Act and not for manufactured homeowners who own their home but just rent the lot space. And then Olympia's municipal code chapter 18 regulates land use and development. So in your packet, I just included some relevant codes that govern manufactured home communities in Olympia. And just wanna note that many of our existing communities are in areas that are zoned as either general commercial or high density corridors.

And

then it's very small, but there's a map in the slide about all of the known manufactured home communities that are within our city limits. So there's 12 communities in city limits with about 800 total housing units. And it there's kind of a mix within those communities. Some of them are only owner occupied. Some of them are only renter occupied, and some of them have a mix of both.

Some of those communities are very small. I think the smallest one has like five units. And then some of them are very large. I think Friendly Ridge on the West Side has between two fifty and three hundred units. Most of the communities in Olympia have manufactured homes that are affixed to a pad or foundation.

But some communities have a mix of what's known as park models or recreational vehicles. And so some of them have a mix of those two types of housing. At least one place has only RVs or travel trailers. And go to the next slide. And so in the next couple of slides, I'll just go over the problems and why council may wish to address manufactured home preservation.

As our public commenter noted, since the homeowner doesn't own the underlying land, they can be at risk of displacement if the property owner decides to increase rents beyond what residents are able to afford, or if they decide to sell the property or redevelop it to another use. When a manufactured homeowner is forced to relocate, it can be very difficult, if not impossible, due to the condition of their home to relocate. Since manufactured homes are affixed to a pad or foundation, they're not very easily movable as opposed to maybe what you know is an RV or a travel trailer. So, some cost estimates that were shared with me, from Rock Northwest for a community that had closed were about 20,000 to 30,000 per home to relocate those homes. There is some relocation assistance available through the state to residents for parks that close, but that amount ranges from about $11,000 for a single section home to $17,000 for a double or multi section home.

So as you can see, that doesn't really cover the full cost of what it costs to relocate one of those homes. In addition, when folks own their home, they're also losing the value of that investment if they're not able to relocate elsewhere. Homes currently listed at one of our parks in Olympia sell for around $200,000 So it's really a significant investment if folks are not able to move move their homes elsewhere and retain that investment. Additionally, owners of park models, which is kind of the formal name for RVs or travel trailers, are not eligible for the state's relocation assistance. Next slide.

So why is this an important issue? First of all, this is an issue that's been brought to the city by residents who shared concerns. So staff were first contacted by residents of manufactured home communities in 2024. And that happened after a slate of tenant protections were passed by council in April. And they were curious about, you know, whether those protections applied to them as manufactured homeowners.

And then May 2024, staff were invited to attend a meeting held by one of our communities on the West Side. And they had invited some of our state representatives to provide policy updates, and then, information from the city about what we were working on. So at that time, I provided some clarification about how our code protects residential tenants, but that we were curious about, you know, what challenges or concerns that they wanted to share. So staff then held community meetings in September 2024 and February 2025. And some of our current, our former, sorry, and I think Robert, you were there as well.

Yes, I was.

At some of those community meetings that were held for our land use and environment committee. And residents shared input about some of their housing concerns and what the city could do to support their housing stability. About 25 to 35 residents attended each of those community meetings. So then at the February meeting, staff presented some policy ideas and options that might address some of the concerns that were shared and also were in alignment with some of our current rental housing code. We heard from residents that the proposal that they found would be most supportive to them would be zoning protections so that their community wouldn't be redeveloped to another use.

And they also had a great amount of interest and support for rent stabilization, which we had explained, you know, the city was not able to enact on their behalf. But the state did later that year pass those protections. And so just on your slide here, there's a couple of emails that I had received from some of those residents after the community meetings who wish to share their input. I also want to note that the outreach that happened was with the residents specifically and not to the park owners. And so, you know, this information is really specific to the folks that we've heard from who reside in those parks.

So this work also aligns with some of our city plans, such as the comprehensive plan and the housing action plan to preserve manufactured home communities as an important source of affordable housing. Manufactured housing provides a really vital source of affordable housing, particularly to some of the seniors in our community. So some national statistics, households in mobile homes are over twice as likely to live in poverty as the general population and may be unable to afford other housing options if they're displaced. So manufactured homes are one of very few affordable homeownership options in our community. So it not only represents a loss of affordable housing, but a loss of an investment for someone who has maybe used all of their savings that they had available to purchase a home.

I've heard from some advocates that a lot of homeowners use a one time windfall to pay for their home, such as if they have a back payment for receiving disability benefits and they get a lump sum for those benefits. So it's really a loss for them, you know, not only of their immediate shelter and their housing, but their investment in their home. Go ahead. So I'll go over some recent policy changes at the state level to address some of the challenges we heard and these are really recent. So they've addressed some of the concerns that were shared in those community meetings.

So in 2023, the state adopted amendments that require park owners to provide a notice to residents when the park goes up for sale. And then that provides an opportunity for residents to compete to purchase the community as a cooperative. Some state funding and technical assistance dollars were also allocated to help facilitate those purchases. And then in 2025, Washington passed a rent stabilization bill. And for manufactured home communities that limited their lot rent increases to 5% annually.

The bill also capped moving fees and security deposits to one month's worth of rent and kept late fees. There is current litigation that's been filed by manufactured housing community owners to challenge the rent stabilization law. So I will track the outcomes of that and report back if there's any changes. All right. And then at the regional level, there's been some work that's been done as well.

So a few months after that law passed providing opportunity to compete to purchase, There was a park in Thurston County that was put up for sale. And so the residents began working with resident owned communities Northwest or Rock Northwest to try to determine whether or not they would be able to purchase the park as a cooperative. And so residents were working with Rock Northwest staff member, Victoria O'Banion, who contacted us at the city. And then we connected her with the regional housing council and the staff technical team. And at that time, there was no funding available locally for those kinds of emergent purposes.

We have an annual RFP process where those funds are awarded competitively. But if something comes to the regional housing council outside of those time frames, there wasn't additional money set aside. So a group of staff from the RHC technical team formed a work group to identify ways to support residents in the future who might be interested in cooperatively purchasing their community. And so that work group put together kind of an inventory of all of the communities in Thurston County, and then identified some risk displacement factors. And that work group then worked with Victoria at Rock Northwest to discuss ways that regionally we might be able to fill financing gaps with what limited resources we have available, which includes things like buying down the interest rates, providing low interest loans, and grants for acquisition.

So as a result of all this work, the opportunity fund at the RHC was created for that purpose, which sets aside a small amount of funding every year for emergent funding needs such as this. So these funds can be used as a lump sum or to pay fees or soft costs or to pay down annual debt service because the communities, while they do get some grant funding and lower interest loans, they still often do have to take out kind of a mortgage on the property, which may which then increases their monthly rates.

May I may I the the the as the upfront, how do you start to do the required documentation and all that, given that there's a clock ticking? The the opportunity to purchase gives you a certain window of time to try to put together a proposal, but these homeowners didn't have the upfront money to put the proposal together. Even though there might be subsidized funding to actually, put the mortgage together, they didn't have the money to put together a a real estate proposal. So that's that was part of the urgency that we felt in in having flexibility like this, to be able to do those soft sorts of initial costs. Yeah.

Yeah. That's a great addition. And, Rock Northwest provides that support to residents, so they help, you know, put together a financing strategy and really put together a pro form a to determine, you know, are these monthly costs doable? What funding sources are available? And then help residents convey an offer.

Thank you for that. All right. So the city is preempted by state law from addressing lot rent increases and enacting ordinances that would provide, like, a tenant opportunity to purchase or right of first refusal for residents. So staff is putting forward some other options that you could consider pursuing, including education, funding, or policy options. So at our September 2024 community meeting, residents were interested in learning more and having more education about their legal rights and more community resources.

So that led staff to organize a training in February 2025. And we offered that training in partnership with some of our local legal aid attorneys who could provide some information about the state's Manufactured Landlord Tenant Act. And then staff also developed a resource list that was distributed at that community meeting with some governmental and community resources. So some other options, staff could do some additional outreach and education, such as more regular workshops of that kind of variety, an annual mailing with resource information or other actions. One example is the state's attorney general's office provides training on rent stabilization protections.

And so the city could help promote those kind of training opportunities or share information about those trainings. Staff is currently working on creating some homeownership resources for our city website. And so that will also include some resources specific to manufactured home community residents. And then funding, there are some different options that the city could consider, such as a displacement mitigation or preservation fund that would be used for emergent purposes. Kind of similar to the opportunity fund, but maybe just used to supplement if there was a gap that was needed, some extra support to fulfill.

So that could be structured as either a revolving loan fund or a grant fund if the city wanted to use funds for that purpose. The city could also provide relocation assistance in the event of a closure to help residents locate new housing opportunities. So as I noted earlier, the state does have some limited funds available for that purpose, but some residents may not be eligible if they have an RV or travel trailer. And also, as I noted, the gap between the amount of funding and the actual cost to relocate is pretty significant still. Staff has heard about two communities in the Olympia area that may be interested in redevelopment, and so we are in touch with some of those communities as well.

I'm sorry.

I I don't understand what you mean by redevelopment.

Yeah. There there are two communities that we have heard are potentially interested in redeveloping, and so those residents may be at risk for being displaced if they don't

The land would be redeveloped into a different use.

Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Mhmm.

And at the communities, it is very low income households who reside there who may need assistance in locating new housing options. Staff could also explore financing options for capital improvements such as septic or sewer upgrades that would contain covenants to ensure the community is maintained as a manufactured home community or that lot rents remain affordable or residents are provided an opportunity to purchase the park. Mhmm.

I usually I usually wait till the end, but I actually haven't thought about that. So is it is it is it possible to do an improvement covenant, but that covenant be required to that it turns into a co op in the future or something along that lines? Because that's one of the barriers is transitioning ownership.

Yeah. I think that it would definitely it would definitely always have to be a negotiation, but I think, like, there is an opportunity to negotiate, like, a right of first refusal for the residents in exchange for some financial assistance.

Okay.

Yeah. So you're making a point. Like, if we offered some assistance to do capital or do or help them acquire, then we put a covenant on it. Right? That would say it has

to stay where as it

is in perpetuity. I think that's what

you're right.

Yeah. Because

because I I I'm more okay with a covenant that provides the framework for that rather than down zoning it. Yeah. Mhmm.

And and, Christus, I think you suggested a slightly different model, which, like, when we've used community development block grant Mhmm. To fund sewer system or septic to sewer conversion, we might also negotiate with the landlord to make sure that there's a tenant opportunity to purchase or a first right of refusal as as part of offering that infrastructure money that keeps the park operating.

Okay. Did you recall in the Friendly Village? How much they they bought that that that property for?

I could I could find out. Yeah. I don't have that Yeah. Accessible.

I I just I've been told that number. It was a big number, but I can't remember. I I don't know what it was. I mean, one other thing is, theoretically, we could purchase the development. Right? It's kind of like a farmland preservation model that you could pay the the land owner or the landlord to preserve that in perpetuity for

Like, a land trust type of situation? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Like, a ninety nine year lease.

Yeah. Or I mean, that that would be another way of preserving that. I'm not sure it would solve our rental increase problem on face value, but that is something I've I've thought about. But it would be interesting to know on some of these smaller ones, how much an acquisition would how much an acquisition would cost.

Mhmm.

Because I I don't the city could theoretically would it be possible to find the purchase of this land for for city purposes and then, oh, lease it to a nonprofit housing agency to manage over over time Mhmm. Or something. I mean, I think that's that's viable. Could we again, I I I wanna don't wanna show how naive I am about a lot of things, but could we float bonds to do a a a purchase of of of property that could be handled, do a hundred year lease to the regional housing authority to manage the a hundred year, you know, low low income Mhmm. Lease for a hundred years.

So we would have the property come back to us in a hundred years, yet it would be preserved for Mhmm.

A certain

amount of time.

A certain amount of time.

Yeah.

But I I I'm I'm not sure if that'd be a proper use of bonding authority. That's true. And I and so and and so I'm I could you look into that whether that's possible or maybe it's maybe we know on fixed value or not? I know you I know you can't use a public entity's credit for business purposes, but this would be a a land acquisition.

Yeah. I think if if we're buying it, then it's possible. Yeah. Right? I think I think we could we could get there. Casey, look at 32,000,000 is what it sold for a lot.

Yeah. I I was gonna say

I was saying 100,000 a lot. Yeah. It would be 25,000,000, but Yeah. That doesn't surprise me. Yeah. I I I was up there last year and heard a lot of very sad stories

and

spent spent some time in there. Mhmm. Mhmm. And and I've also seen the the beneficial side of all of this. These are these are sweet places for people in their senior years. My my brother-in-law bought a place in Colonial Village, and he died before he was able to to really utilize it. But but it was I I got to know a lot of people in there, and I really would love to see these places preserved.

Mhmm.

But it's a real challenge, and I don't outside of acquisition you you listed four things I just just for discussion purposes. I'm more in favor of a new partner acquisitions to relocation assistance for capital improvements personally, you know, just because those are easier things in some ways. And there is a a state relocation assistance program, but but where would they relocate to? We're we're gonna help people relocate outside of our city. You know? It's just I don't think that makes a lot of sense.

I I would I would I still wanna see what the covenant with the capital improvements looks like to a certain extent, get an idea of what of what we're talking about there. Mhmm. I'm also I'm not so interested in exactly what a rotating fund would look like. Right? Because how much money we're putting in something like that? What you know, how many yeah. I don't I don't want us to yeah. It's a it

It'll be significant. I mean, it oh, it just depends. I mean, if you're doing capital improvements, it's a lot different than trying to find a way to build a new park, right, and make that happen. Right? I mean, scale of things, you know, just like you've done with your emergency housing declaration, we've set aside some capital money to help, you know, low income housing, affordable housing projects get built. You could do something similar here for capital. I just think the acquisition and the new park are the big dollars. Mhmm.

Those are tens of millions. The capital improvements are tens of thousands if it's septic to sewer kind of work for Tom. So there's there's different zeros. Yeah.

Yeah. Well, some of these some of these parks are in really bad shape. They

are. Yep.

I mean, the the off of Phones Road, not on the other side of it's a pretty tough place. Yeah. You know? Yes.

I thought it was lazy.

And it's just that because

Oh, yeah.

Just kidding. It's Yeah.

Oh, sorry.

No. It's okay. Please. I do wanna note that there is some capital improvement financing available through the state housing finance commission. So again, like the city would not be the lone source of funding for some of these some of these ideas, but just, you know, maybe there are ways that we can combine efforts and fill in gaps where there where there's an option for us to do so.

Because as you as you mentioned, I mean, have it in the, you know, '17 1100 November to 17000. It doesn't cover all of it significantly. Yeah. And

then the new park, so the city could explore an a partnership with Rock Northwest to identify a site for a new manufactured housing community. And in some of our work with Rock Northwest in the past, they did kind of provide some information about how that might look when we applied for a previous grant opportunity. But a portion of those lot spaces could be retained in the event that there was a closure of a park, and then some residents might able to relocate their existing home to that site. And so over all of these things, I want to just note that we would need to identify a source of funding if land use wanted to pursue any of these options. And that grant funding would likely be necessary in order to fund some of these options that I've described.

All right.

Okay. So we could also explore some additional policy options. So currently under state law, park owners have to provide two years of notice to residents if they plan to close a park. Other jurisdictions in Washington, like Kent and Seattle, have created some specific guidelines around closure of manufactured home parks and being in communication with the city about the residents and keeping in contact with their relocation efforts and providing resource lists to make sure that residents are aware of resources available to them. The city could also explore protective zoning measures to prevent redevelopment to a different use.

The city has currently two parks that are zoned under our manufactured home park zoning designation. And then most of the rest of them are in general commercial or high density. So staff has had some preliminary conversations about that internally, and there's concerns about the staffing capacity in order to undertake those kind of rezoning efforts. And around down zoning some of those areas in our more high density areas. There could also be some substandard infrastructure issues with some of our current parks and legal risk involved with zoning them as only restricted to manufactured home community.

There are certain attributes that the council could consider in looking at zoning protections. I'm I'm just Yeah.

Just that last thing you said.

Yeah.

There are restrictions to restricting them to just manufactured home in own communities. Like, we couldn't prevent someone from building a house in there. I mean, what what do you what do you mean by that? I just

Yeah. It's restricted to, like, certain types of development. So I think in our current manufactured home park and planning staff could feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but you can have like manufactured homes, ADUs, or possibly, you know, other small building types. It just wouldn't be like multifamily residential or commercial. So there's a limited number of uses that would be part of that kind of protected zoning.

Well, you you see these they're kind of a step above tiny homes. They're just tiny houses Mhmm. That are on wheels, frankly.

Mhmm.

Mhmm. So but something like that could go in in there, you know, but but it wouldn't necessarily be

They have their whole complicated book worth of regulations in a few cities starting to work on the tiny houses on wheels. But generally, yes. But it's we we haven't quite embraced that yet.

So we we have to

have a manufactured home park zone in a few places in the city. It's restrictive, but not entirely it it allows other uses. You can do duplexes. You can do some other types of residential. There's some other use on the list. Now if you compare it to Tumwater where twenty years ago, they did a very restrictive manufactured home park zone. Very contentious, very opposed by the property owners that went clear up to the Federal Court of Appeals. They supported the city after a long process only because the city happened to have just enough uses not to have it be taken to property Yeah. For that to process. And so it'd be a huge workload, and it would be contentious to do that. This is something we need

to think about if you

wanna move forward with that.

It also doesn't it you correct me wrong here, but it also doesn't stop it from getting sold. Because if if it's zoned That's true. Manufacturing, it doesn't stop it from being sold.

Right. It's also not in perpetuity. It's typically a future council could change the zone back.

Yeah. Correct. So Absolutely correct. And the state could too Yeah. As missing middle updates and stuff.

But you would never wanna put a semi permanent structure on something that that you have to pay for the rent and and a permanent structure on under something. I mean, the whole idea of the mobile home is that it's mobile even though it's not. I I understand. Yeah. I understand that. But

Mhmm. But but you wouldn't I it'd

be as it'd be another leap of faith to put a permanent structure on on on it that that was designed as a permanent structure. Alright.

I

I I think your your caution you had at the bottom of that last page was about retroactively down zoning property, which is really different from trying to protect a newly created park.

Yes.

And that's what the Tumwater long adventure in court was was to retroactively down zone in order to protect Mhmm. Existing mobile home parks.

Yeah. If if I bought a park in a restrictive zone, I know what I'm buying into, and I can't make the case that I didn't know. But if I bought it more open knowing that I bought it as an investment, and maybe later on in life, I wanna get out of a mobile home park and do something different, then you down zoned it. Right? That's where the issues come in, unfortunately.

So one thing that staff have heard from Rock Northwest is that the zoning overlay does help make resale and purchase of manufactured home communities a little bit easier for cooperatives because it is more attractive for lenders because it provides them some assurance that the community is going to remain a manufactured home park in the long term. So that can be an assistance when residents are looking to purchase as a cooperative. Okay, and then next steps. So staff would just like to know if there's any of these options or any other ideas that you would like us to pursue going forward. And we can put together a plan for next steps that takes into account all of our staff resources and timelines because it impacts, you know, CP and D in a lot of different ways with some of these measures.

So, happy to take questions or let me know if there's anything you specifically want me to bring back when I'll be back on this topic again in June. So

You can help me out.

Well, I I don't know where to begin because it's I know it's a difficult issue to really be effective at doing something that people would really feel good about. But I just feel it's absolutely necessary to do something. You know? And so I I don't think we need to take giant steps, but if we could take a couple of meaningful steps, I would love to see you proceed with that personally. The understanding I I mean, it's not realistic that we'd be spending $32,000,000 to buy a friendly village as wonderful as that would

be. Yeah.

You know? But it might not be unrealistic to think that we might spend $5,000,000 on a on a much smaller property, whether it was for a new acquisition or or an existing one that that could create a revolving fund of some kind. But I I I realized that's even a pretty aggressive step, probably. You know? I I'm not naive about that, but it would be interesting to know if that is even a plausible option to to head down that direction.

I you know, there would certainly need to be public buy in for Mhmm. A step for for a step like that.

Yeah. Mhmm.

But so those are just some of my some of my initial thoughts. One other question I had was regarding the land transfer issue at Friendly Village. You you touched upon that that if if that property is sold, is they'd be eligible to double the rent or or whatever at that point. I think that you said that. You know?

With that, does that does that law pertain to all transfers? You know, I was thinking about inherited an inherited transfer, for instance. The the example of the

fellow who testified Mhmm.

It'd be interesting to know if if that could be kept in that family. Now most of these places that that you really wanna live in require owner occupancy. They're not you know, Colonial Village, I thought it was very difficult to rent in there, for instance. You know?

But

I I don't know. Maybe that wouldn't be much of a benefit, but that that's something I'd like to know about is just whether those transfers could continue. But, you know, again, would would would there be any way of using our bonding authority in a creative way to come up with a fund that could be used as a revolving fund that could help purchase purchase a property that that that we wouldn't take that that would essentially be repaid over time because because there they would there'd be a revenue stream, but I don't know. Is this a foolish idea?

No. I don't think so. Yeah. I'm I I think a large scale version of that is the affordable housing concept in Seattle where they take out bonds, they build, and then the rents pay off bonds. Right? But this is a smaller scale version of that. Right? Making sure that we don't get ahead of ourselves, but in a way that we can actually manage it.

Yeah. I think you're you're you're singing a good song here, Paul. So there's, like, a couple things I heard. One is this sort of social housing notion of how can, as a local government, can we be involved in in in successful acquisition. But I I also wanna differentiate between, like, the King County and Seattle efforts are about creating rental housing, and this is about creating homeownership.

Yes. And so there's just it's a it's a different bucket Mhmm. When when you're going to hand it over to a coop to manage the property and individuals to maintain their homes. Mhmm. But I I still think that there's something something like the regional housing council's fund that they put together that the city might be engaged in in having some of that initial funding that's hard to get if if you're trying to trying to bundle the the money.

And I I'm also intrigued with this notion kinda like transfer of development rights, where you were saying, is there a way if we were to do a down zone to pay for that lost economic opportunity on the on the property, is that is that something that we might have a fund to be intentional on

I I I do also believe that all of the people who own these trailer parks are not evil people. They a lot of them I I I shouldn't use that terminology, but a lot of them really are concerned about their tenants. But they want to retire. They wanna get out of the business. They they wanna solve this. So understanding that there's a a transfer interest there that that is legitimate, I think, is that that might it just might be something where that you could purchase the development right, that that they would experience some windfall of profit.

And I I I I share you're you're putting a deep value on on this housing as the most affordable homeownership model and of providing 800 informal parks and a handful more that are outside of formal parks, very affordable housing for seniors. So it's it's to me, it's it's really high value. And I the other thing I so tell me whether or not we can talk about a particular West Side Park that has a third of our total units. And, I mean, we're we're often reluctant to speak about specific property. But several years ago, we were having conversations about redeveloping the parcels near Hagens and assuming that that that mobile home community was gonna be redeveloped and that that would be the roads in into that that area.

And so I also want as as we're doing this, I want us to be really clear that the left and right hands are talking to each other, and we don't have one team meeting with the current property owner to talk about redevelopment and, you know, sort of having those blue sky discussions while the other hand is talking about ways to preserve the park. And that's for for whatever that's worth, that's just me talking out loud because we've we've had both kinds of conversations over the last several years. So

And I can just say to that, you know, our conversation around our adjacent parcel will only be about our adjacent parcel. Right? So not, I think, if developers come to us about the possibility of acquiring parcels to combine, we're gonna kinda say that's not something we're gonna get involved in that our we're engaged in the property we own, not in letting them conversations. And then I think we can also say at that point in time, Tima, that's asking those questions. And, oh, by the way, our council has an interest in preserving these types of projects. So it's not something that's gonna be easy to do. So I'm also

really impressed with the the education and convening people that that you did. And I I would value if there's some some level of that continuing because I think the chances of Northwest Cooperative Development and Rock Northwest having a group to work with is much higher if we've educated people and they've had a chance to start communicating with each other. Think I we make them more likely clients that way. Mhmm.

Oh, yeah. Back to me.

I I have a couple thoughts here about so I know that Northwest Rock Northwest talked a little bit about zoning towards the end there, but I'm curious their thoughts on, like, the covenant model rather than the zoning model. What were their thoughts on that? How it does that does that still have the same level of guarantee that the zoning may have? Because you mentioned how the down zoning created somewhat of a guarantee to help with cooperative transition. And I'm I'm curious about their thoughts around that.

I'm also curious about as you're doing the research of this, we're also we were talking about property and future property, but I we do land banking. I know a school district does land banking. There's a lot of land that that that we have available for various reasons. I'm I'm curious about that aspect of it. And then I wrote this down when Paul was talking about the transfer, you know, transferring in sales.

I'm curious about how much of that is preemption limited by the state. Is that I mean, what what how much how what what what regulations can we actually do specifically, and what can we not do Yeah. From the state? Because that is a real that's a deep question about around around this because you have a two year timeline. Right? But I'm curious about, you know, transferring from family members just as Paul was saying, but, like, how much can we implement before it feels like we're conflicting with the state law, for example.

And I think what I understood from the public commenter was referring to, like, when an individual home is sold, not when the park is sold. Okay. Right. So

Just like in an apartment complex that they keep you at some modest rent increase, but a new renter comes into that same apartment, and they're hit with whatever they

Yeah.

Yeah. And there is no, like

But what would constitute a sale is it was kind of the question I

Yeah.

Yeah. I'm I'm hearing that the what how far can we go where we get we're we're not preempted by what the state does. Is there some creative way we could get Yeah. I I mean,

it does.

It's kinda like I'm glad the apartments got brought up because I think, you know, how do how do we you know, if they're gonna raise the rent, could we put requirements for improvements, for example, rather than just say, hey. This has to be improved. Right? And could that be something that would help with the transfer to it being cooperative through a covenant? Because I I see a rent go up from 800 to 1,400, and I'm just like but other than the fact that property has been sold, what does that do for the people there

Mhmm.

Effectively? And then I'm curious about resources for this revolving fund that isn't a bond. Because when we did the affordability, we had that conversation, Jay, about, like, where do we where are we getting the funding consistently from? We end up using a little bit of utility tax for some of that. Mhmm. But I I I'm wondering because of how many other things that we are thinking about bonding in the few near future, I'm just very nervous about doing a ton of bonding.

Yeah. I would just a couple things on bonding. One is, yes, you have you have capacity limits, and we'd have to, like, kinda look at what your thinking is around that versus other things that you might want to be interested in bonding for. Two is bondings work really well for for things that people can see, touch, and feel. They're not as great for things like creating a revolving fund. And the reason is it's hard to sell those. Right? Because if I'm an investor, I gotta figure out how I'm gonna get my money back. And if I'm if I'm investing in a fund that and I and I don't know how the city's necessarily gonna get paid back, then I don't have any guarantee over a time. So it makes it more difficult to to do that.

That's why I said, you know, buying property or buying things make it easier to figure out how we could bond for, doing capital improvements or things we could bond for because they're more concrete and there's an a set time frame to get paid back. So Right. That's thing one. But, yeah, I think that's the the the two really the two things to think about in this equation. And then how how else do we come up with it? It's just getting creative because we you know, our only sources outside of that are the utilities or our general fund. Mhmm. You know? Or some sort of a voter initiative. I don't know what that would look like, but some sort of something we take to the voters and say, would you be willing to do this?

Would you be willing to raise your property taxes to establish this? And I don't know what that this is, but that's something else that you could we could look at, Chris, I suppose, is what are those kinds of things that is there a city that's done something like that before? And can if I can interject real

quick about that. I the other thing I wrote down here is is the evolution of these into co ops into the future. And if we're going to the public asking for a tax increase on something, if it goes towards the funding towards helping not just we were talking about an opportunity to purchase other things too. It seems along the same line to me to allow more co ownership with folks in the community, not just manufactured housing. And so I I wonder about

I I I agree. I I don't I don't think you can go to the voters for just a manufactured housing.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But but but you could include it

in a package.

Mhmm. Yeah. As I saying, this is fun. This is a fun to help

something like cooperative housing. A 100 units of cooperative housing and and purchase of

Mhmm.

Of the colonial village Mhmm. Permanent senior housing since, you know, essentially.

Because I I think even though these are mostly senior housing, I think that, you know, you can evolve them into co op villages eventually because we're talking about different housing within there that fits fits with manufactured housing. So

It'd be it'd be it'd be an easier sell at senior housing, I think, in some ways. I I know there are a lot of young people that need housing.

Mhmm.

I I get that. But but anyway

Yeah. Gotcha. Can I answer one more of your questions I think you had? Yeah. This question of, if I heard it right Mhmm. Covenants versus zoning. Mhmm. And to to Tim's point, zoning can always be changed by future councils. If we can get if you can get a covenant on a piece of property for fifty to a hundred years, right, it it stays with the sale Mhmm. At that point in time. So it gives you a longer term guarantee that what you want to see happen there stays that way. Because the the word I worry about zoning is you could down zone today, and then fifteen, twenty years from now, a whole different council's in place and developer comes forward, buys a property, put a rezone in place and makes this case. Yeah. And then that council changes zoning. Mhmm.

Right? If you have a covenant on the property, it's more you really can't do that. Mhmm. So I want to since I was you asked that question and Tim had mentioned about the zoning before,

I thought it'd be good to

just talk about that. Famously, Houston doesn't have doesn't have very much zoning. It's all covenants. It manage its own system. That's right. Yeah.

I I wanna ask. In in the workshops that you did in the consulting with Rock Northwest, did they talk about in the in today's prices to set up a new park. The the land acquisition and the development costs are quite a bit higher than they were when these parks were developed. So part of it is just like the most modest apartments in town. It's because they've been there a while, and they bought their infrastructure at a lot lower rate. Did we get sort of an estimated price per unit for new parks that have been developed? I

can Or

you could look into that that because I think I think that's a good reality checking of of the the possibility of developing a new park Mhmm. Is my hunch is that it's gonna come out kinda close to the cost of an apartment unit and that we'll we'll be surprised at the cost per unit to have a pad with utilities to it Mhmm. And roads and curbs, gutters. Stormwater. Stormwater swale. You know? The whole

Colonial States is looking at expanding, you know, towards the on the lakeside of Yeah. The project and the the costs are just

a lot to develop the site where the uses has been too much. Right. They haven't pursued it. So I suspect because of their efforts statewide that we could get some sense, and then we we know generally what applies on our development checklist that's not about constructing the structure. Yeah. Google says Mhmm.

Between 30 and $50,000 per pad per unit to develop a mobile home park rising to as high as a $100,000 per unit in high cost areas that have specialized development needs, high storm water.

Those are pretty low numbers in Iowa and a cornfield, but you don't have to put in roads or something.

Right? Like, with Colonial, have tons of flood improvements, you know, wetlands. Yeah. There's there's all sorts of parameters.

So that's that's why they say it can't exceed a $100

Oh, yeah. Easily.

I I'm

I'm really confident that our number would be well north of a 100,000 a a unit. So and then because even the the property acquisitions for a several acre parcel, and we know that there's only a handful of those and that they're mostly not on sewer right now, the large parcels that are left. So I just I just wanted and and it doesn't have to be a deep dive, but if we had some sort of high level summary of, are there sewered parcels available? And and then maybe that colonial case study and a little bit of information from Northwest Rock. Yeah.

Because it's it's a really cool idea, but if it costs more than stick built multifamily, it's gonna be a a tough decision. Yeah.

Yeah. No. The city didn't take action a few years ago to reduce the road standards for the interior part of the park. Mhmm. That helped them get a little closer, but it's not too much. Yeah.

I have a I guess, one this conversation continues because we keep thinking of ideas Mhmm. Back and forth about it. But when I was thinking about the the fact that this was an owners that these a lot of these properties were bought a long time ago when the value was much lower. Right? And that's why you have an owner that's either local or or in the region.

Right? And that and as they retire out and then you have the concern is the only people who can afford to buy these are bigger companies. So that's why because the value has skyrocketed over time. And so, I guess, I'm wondering another thought I have is, has there ever been attempts to, through the covenant process or through some sort of process, put caps, like how Habitat puts caps on on the equity of the proper of properties when they do their coveting through. But I'm curious is it is if there's a value cap or an equity cap to keep the keep it from skyrocketing over time. Mhmm.

If the homes themselves Yeah. Fail? Mhmm. I believe that Rock does put that in place when they help a community cooperatize because they make sure that households are eligible as low income. I I think that's a condition of some of their state funding, but I'll just I'll double check on that and make sure.

And that's homes, not the property itself?

Yeah. Okay. Okay. So the but we're gonna

on property, there's all excuse me.

Oh, go ahead.

Just in Burlington, where there's a famous US senator. Yeah. He's from Burlington, Vermont. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Some of their extensive land trust that they developed in that region were manufactured home communities that they so they they limited appreciation by by creating some set of incentives to put property that you already own into a trust. Just to figure out how how do you what incentives can you bundle together that match getting millions of dollars in cash?

Right. You know?

Name a park after them? A street? What can we do? Detroit Avenue.

Oh, dear.

They've already got a parking attachment. Yeah.

It's not the same. Yeah. Cool. Do you have any questions for us or any other gave you a ton of stuff.

Yeah. Yeah. So it sounds like I mean, there's some interest in pursuing educational avenues and then exploring if there's any creative funding and transfer of development rights, covenants. Yeah. I think Okay.

That's all. And the question about bonding just what Yep.

K. But what

would what would real options be?

Yeah. And and I

I don't wanna do anything outrageous with bonding, but I I just wanna understand what that is.

Okay.

Because I have some catch up to do here with everyone else on this. But but, I mean, if just just thinking outside the box, if if if if if we did a you know, I don't know how the community would look at this after Housing First, for instance. You know, we have had we passed that not that long ago. Mhmm. But if we did a a fund for

A home fund?

Like a home fund for Mhmm. For cooperative housing for young people and manufactured housing for seniors. Mhmm. You know? And we wanted to do $15,000,000 or, you know, whatever the number is. You know? I you know, it wouldn't be as small

as That's what they put home fund v two. Yep. That there there could be such a thing. And

That's right. Yeah. And because Yeah. I do think that there is an appetite in the public. The public is you know, they're they're concerned about affordability, but there is also an empathy builder for housing challenges in the community. Mhmm.

There is. And and I think that I think you're getting to the point that I hear from seniors and I also hear from renters that are younger people is I'd like to stay where I am at. I don't wanna leave the community. Yeah. That's a consistent narrative.

But before we leave this, we we didn't really go back to the the capital improvements, the short term fixes. And so did in in the last round, do you know of the 12 parks, how many are at risk because of utilities or street access?

Not not for those reasons. Okay. You mean for redevelopment risk? No. Or

No. I mean, like, when we use community development block grant money several years ago, it was because it was that or they were gonna be condemned.

Okay. Gotcha. I can look into that.

Yeah. So I I would wanna leave that open because if if it's a way to retain 20 units of affordable housing, then I I don't wanna take that off

the table. I I was kind of prematurely negative about that. So I that that's good.

Sure. So it's just it's just it's because it's on such a different order of magnitude from trying to assist with a cooperative buyout or something is to do $30,000 of utilities improvement that that we either match or pay for or whatever we I think we ended up doing matches on those ones that we did. Yep. They were the urban growth area, as I recall. And and we we did half and half with the property owner using community development block grant. Yep. But the other choice was they were gonna kick the people out and close the park. So yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

I just I think having some sense of who else is vulnerable to

to that.

Krista, the one other thing is back in DC, I learned a lot about the twenty first century housing act and then the senate version, which is the roads fund. Mhmm. And it's all about and it's bipartisan support around new housing dollars and new opportunities for communities to to deal with affordable housing. So it might be good to really do a deep dive into those two bills and see if there's anything in there that directly relates to this.

Okay.

Right?

Yeah.

Like, I know one of the things it does is it's allows CDBG funds to be used for development of housing. Right? Now we don't get a lot we don't get a lot there, but but that's just an example of I know something is changing, and I'd love to be able to know, and I haven't done the deep dive myself, what else is in there Yeah. That might, if it passed, would change the rules for us Yeah.

Here. So

And and and understand where where those avenues, those dollars are gonna come through. Yeah. Commerce, or is it gonna come through what we already have?

Yeah. Yeah. K.

Great.

I mean, the Joyce just reminded me of is that through middle housing, if you wanna set a new manufactured home park, it used to have to be five acres, and we reduced it

down to one. Oh. So it

is from that standpoint, it's easier to get something done in a smaller area.

Mhmm. Okay.

And so, of course, this issue has been back to Landy's on in June, I think. Right? Yes. Okay.

I don't know. Do you have

any thoughts on this that we haven't any any any ideas that you you think should be promoted on on this that we haven't really

I think you pretty you pretty much better do it pretty well. We have concerns about zoning, obviously, just because of the process and the long term nature of it. I was that can be long term, but I think the direction is when it's good. Yeah. JJ,

do you have any thoughts about this?

It's it's interesting. Well, you're gonna struggle to find new mobile home parks statewide. They just don't exist. It's very difficult. All of our parks are really old for a reason, and so you're probably gonna have to venture outside of Washington State to find a new bubble home park that has been, especially on the larger side of things. So yeah.

Alright. Anything you need from us?

I think so. Cool. Thank you.

Coming to hang out?

Yeah. Mhmm. Have fun.

Thank you, Christian.

We're gonna talk about

Alright. So next item is at Palm Palm Beach Street sub area planning scoping discussion.

Alright. So my name is Casey Shockler, associate planner with Canadian playing and development. I'll be here to begin discussion with you on the Plum Street, South Area Plano. So as mentioned, see my screen. So I'm here to talk to you about the future of the Plum Street corridor.

Plum Street is identified in our comprehensive plan, municipal code under several designations, which we'll discuss further in a moment, that all emphasize it as a main entry point into our downtown. It's a critical entry from Interstate 5 that should welcome visitors to our downtown and city capital. Much of the discussion here today was started about three years ago when the city received a code amendment application requesting consideration for a an additional drive through for additional drive through allowances along Plum Street. That application wasn't ultimately adopted, but it raised questions about the number of zoning districts, design standards, and whether Plum Street was a civic boulevard as envisioned in the comprehensive plan. We're also considering this with an eye towards two major upcoming changes in this area.

The former Lee Creighton Justice Center that is now owned by the Squaxin Island tribe, and then the offices formerly occupied by several state agencies that are being planned as a future site for the Thurston County Public Services and Regional Justice Center. With all of this in mind, city council adopted language in the 2045 comprehensive plan to further evaluate the Plum Street corridor. So for reference on what we're talking about and where, I've highlighted Plum Street here on the left. This is North Of Union Avenue. So the image on the left is North Of Union, and the highlighted portion is extending essentially up to, I believe, Olympia Avenue there.

Uh-huh. This in particular was the primary source of discussion with the drive thru amendment back back in 2023. The image on the right is Plum Street South Of Union Avenue, which includes a commercial plaza, the City Of Olympia's Quincy Street village, as well as Washington state offices towards east side there. Also note on the south side is that both Henderson Boulevard and Interstate 5 connect and merge into Palm Street there so that, basically, that street intersection at the bottom right is towards east side and and the I 5 Corridor. And then as you move over towards the left and I'm sorry.

I can actually try to highlight some of this if you would like. And then this portion here, that is where Henderson merges into Plum. So you've got I 5 coming from the East, and the Southwest has Henderson Boulevard before it actually turns into Plum Street. Alright. So as mentioned a moment ago, a part of the discussion from the 2023 code amendment application and through the comprehensive plan update was the number of zoning districts within a relatively confined area.

In addition to those zoning districts, the area is also influenced by the future land use map, the transportation and land use chapters of the comprehensive plan, the transportation master plan, the downtown design review chapter with multiple design subdistrict sections. It has five to seven zoning districts depending on where you set that boundary, and it is also enforced by engineering and development standards and the downtown planning area of the downtown strategy. A major part of the discussion around all of this was the level of detail that had to be navigated when planning for development in this area and whether any of this could be streamlined or consolidated to make it more approachable. Alright. So looking more specifically at, Pump Street as a transportation corridor, it's identified as the following in many of the previously listed documents and plans.

A downtown entry street, a designated civic boulevard, a city gateway, a street arterial, a bicycle corridor where it intersects at 7th Avenue, a host to a majority of the city's high visibility street corners, a designated freight route critical to the Port Of Olympia operations in particular, and connections to oh, I am sorry. I jumped way ahead. My apologies there, folks. And the connection to Interstate 5, kind of as already discussed. So I can elaborate on any of those designations as needed, but

I'll move on for now.

So planning ahead, as mentioned, are a few major changes on either side of Plum Street. First is Thurston County's plans to redevelop several former state agency buildings as part of a new public services and regional justice center located on the West Side of Plum Street and north just north of Union Avenue. Based on information pulled directly from the Thurston County project web page for this, this will include five separate buildings. This complex is immediately across from the former Lee Brayton Justice Center, which is now owned by the Squaxin Island Drive. For reference, I'm highlighting the entire parcel, which spans from Plum Street nearly to Eastside Street.

Mhmm.

I'm not necessarily here to discuss specifics on either of those projects. It's necessary to highlight that each are potentially major changes to this area that will rely on the Pump Street corridor.

Yes, chair.

Oh, I'll wait.

So what is subarea planning, and why are we talking? So the 2045 comprehensive plan update includes a specific directive to evaluate the Plum Street corridor for future planning efforts. Subarea planning, as outlined in the comprehensive plan, is planning that is is a collaborative effort by community members and the city to help shape how neighborhoods grow and develop. Included in this collaboration is identifying assets, challenges, and priorities, providing information to increase a neighborhood's understanding of land use planning and decision making processes, and encouraging wide participation in developing and carrying out those subarea plans. We anticipate that any sub area planning at the Plum Street Corridor will include major stakeholder outreach with people and businesses in and adjacent to the planning area, as well as partners, our partners with the Squaxin Island Tribe, Thurston County, the Port Of Olympia, and Washington state agencies.

So if we're looking at this as a sub area plan, we're proposing that the following be the the area boundaries. State Avenue to the North, Plum Street to the West, East side on the East, and the inner excuse me, the I 5 Interchange approximately where it intersects at intersects at the origin of Plum Street. So looking at this whole map, you can see where that that kind of corner at the south end intersects with the I 5 on ramp.

What was the south southern boundary again? I I can't quite make it out. It oh, there it's I 5. I'm sorry. I 5. Yeah. And then east side upon

Basically, you've got east side right here.

With adjacent This is east side. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I I I see it.

And, yeah, and I'll I can try to zoom in on that a little bit better.

And, Casey, just so I can clarify, the the west boundary is Plum Street including all of the parcels on the that above Plum Street on the west side of the street.

I'll get to that in a moment. Okay. It is technically we are proposing the the street boundaries as the formal boundary, but I will address the fact that there are parcels along that here in

a Thank you. Yeah.

Alright. Actually, it'll be right now. Okay. Great. So this map includes the boundaries listed, those three boundaries. And this is a this is what should have been included with your staff report, and and it is a little difficult to to read. But the yellow hash or the yellow is

a

250

foot

buffer on on either side or on the outside of those street boundaries. So with that in mind, within the proposed boundaries, so basically on the inside of this proposed boundary line. I don't know if I can. So in a moment, I can I can pull up this map separately? I wanted to give you a little bit info about what is within this boundary.

So we have approximately a 160 unique persons within that boundary that are owned by a 130 individuals or entities, and we have a 110 residential addresses within that boundary. Within the buffer area, that includes an additional of a 130 parcels with 90 owners individual owner or entity owners. The 250 foot buffer includes an additional 200 residential addresses. So all all told, we're looking at 290 parcels, 220 owners with 310 approximately 310 residential addresses within the planning and the 250 foot buffer. The buffer is basically taking into account that while it's not necessarily in the direct sub area planning portion, we fully expect that those adjacent, that buffer area and beyond, to garner a lot of strong interest from folks because that is still part of their neighborhood and would impact that.

Now I'm super happy.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Alright.

So proposed scope of work. If the land use environment committee and ultimately city council opt to move forward with a full sub area planning effort, staff is recommending the following scope of work. Visioning with stakeholders and the public on what the Plum Street corridor should ultimately look like and provide the community in the future. Estimation and assumptions about future traffic needs for this area with the possibility of a traffic study to accommodate those needs. Streamlining and consolidation where possible of the multiple planning and transportation documents to make future development more approachable.

Evaluation of the future land use designations and zoning districts, again, with an eye towards reducing the sheer number of designations. While acknowledging that Plum Street is a vehicle heavy transportation road, identifying ways to preserve, protect, and transition commercial uses adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods. We'd also propose to include renderings to better envision what a civic boulevard and downtown gate could look like in the future, along with estimates of infrastructure necessary to accomplish the community's vision for this area. So that said, the previous work scope of work is comparable to something along the lines of the Capital Mall Triangle Sub Area Plan, which envisioned something not necessarily analogous to what we have here in terms of of the geographic area and what is there. Additionally, for reference, the Capital Model triangle sub area plan was initiated back in 2020 and 2021 and is currently in the process of still updating municipal code to implement that sub area plan.

That process, the triangles sub area planning process included over 30 public meetings, over a dozen briefings to council and city committees, and an intensive communications outreach. That project was also supported financially through a transit oriented development implementation grant of $250,000. So primary question before you today is step one, refining the scope of work. At the top end is the previously outlined, as it were, the full meal deal of a capital mall level triangle sub area plan. Are a wide array of wide array, excuse me, of options going forward, including a less robust, but not necessarily less complicated evaluation of zoning districts and possibly rezoning with some varying degree of municipal code amendments.

Depending on that scope of work, the city will need to determine and secure funding sources going forward. If applicable, conduct a request for qualifications and request for proposal with outside consulting groups to help facilitate this work going forward. Conduct an existing conditions analysis of Plum Street and the identified planning area adjacent to Plum Street, conduct public outreach likely to include targeted stakeholder meetings along with public feedback workshops, sub area comprehensive plan and code amendment drafting along with any necessary environmental reviews, and then actual implementation support of development work within that area. So with that, my primary question to you is what what is that scope of work starting at the very top, something comparable to the the Triangle Capital Mall, Triangle sub area plan, and all the way down to really just looking at either phased rezones, municipal code updates, possible comprehensive plan updates. So there's really a wide range of things that we could do.

Mhmm. The the most recent thing that we can look to in terms of sub area plan, saying it is that capital bond triangle. It's in our very recent memory, and we're still working on it. And I think that level of work has been exemplary, but it's a it's a heavy lift. So Yeah. With that in mind, I think we're really looking for guidance from this committee and council at large on what do you envision for for this work going forward.

So thank you. So

I I was I'm I'm both pretty invested in this and was pretty heavily engaged in the the conversation that that prompted this three years ago. And the the biggest contention it was a proposal to redevelop a property on Plum Street and add a Starbucks drive through. And one contention of the project proponent was this is a highway full of port trucks. It always is going to be kind of a a highway aisle through the city that divides that cuts the city. And so drive through type development is appropriate in that sort of a road, and it it prompted us to do some reflection that, one, we have seven different zonings that sort of created as different people converted residential areas to different professional offices and things like that.

So we didn't have one consistent message of what we imagined this was. And then we have this work about road diets and reimagining other arterials in town. So would we be willing to say this is more like a a a highway with fast food and drive throughs, or is it possible that it would eventually bleed and blur the same as we're hoping that Martin Way and Capital Way, Harrison Hill, that they'll they'll become city streets as the city densifies around them. So that that was that was the tension. And and, frankly, it's I I think that it's worth the work to consolidate the zoning, but mostly I was cranky that there was seven different sets of rules plus three or four other plans as overlays when we had somebody saying, well, could you make a special zoning around my block?

Mhmm. Because look what you did for everybody else. I was like, oh, for Pete's sake, this is a good reason and a good moment, especially with the tribe and the county coming in now, to say we should have a consistent vision for this area that that is in alignment with our other hopes for other other parts of the city. So, anyhow, that that's where I started. So I my my hope besides the sort of the operational sub area plan is that we, through some public process, come to kind of a shared vision of what might this look like a generation from now.

And, you know, that because that I think that shapes the the specifics of the of the zoning changes or infrastructure changes is what what is what is the vision for this corridor as we did with Martin Way recently also? That's I'm gonna step back down off the big tide box now.

Yeah. And I did pull this up. So this is look at the zoning district. So down here, you have an urban residential. That's geographically, it it's got a hillside and and some roads that really kind of keep it separate from the rest of this. We're talking about some of the the zoning. I think we're really looking at this this pale yellow, which is downtown business. And then you have a handful of of commercial slash transitional commercial to residential districts. So we've got professional office, residential mixed use. This is what is it? Commercial high density. I'll have to double check. Oh, I've got it in my notes, actually.

It's okay. Just that there's many of them.

We RMU, GC, and then up here, you have an additional PRM, and that was very deliberate to be a a transitional zoning district up before the Bigelow Historic District. So within that, the other thing I would just point out is that this hash line, that is the downtown planning boundary. So as part of the the downtown strategy. So within that area, you've got a couple of zoning districts that aren't necessarily downtown planning oriented. They're kind of transitional zoning districts. And that was, I think, some of the source of frustration. I think former council member Cooper shared a lot of those frustrations.

Yes. Yeah.

You wanna help stop that fire, honestly. You're talking about complexities of zoning.

Yeah. We had we had this this guy coming in who had done his masters at Evergreen, and he was, like, coming during this time to speak every week at public comment and then find a buttonhole council members after council.

Yeah. Something like that. I did I did I did do some of that. Now I'm here. Right. We we got one.

You're we're right where you want us.

She was on

the left. Close.

But I I would I'm I know I I guess my initial thought is there's a lot that we have learned from the Capital Mall area that I hope we can transition over with that I happen to start over, right, about the future. I think about the transportation system a lot through there. And I I you know, one of the thoughts that I had written down was how do other cities that are doing this so do they set you know, when they when they redesign a street to make it more of a boulevard rather than a highway exit, I guess. Right? I wonder, do they set hours for the utility vehicles coming in?

Or because that because you have all of that all of those logging trucks coming into the port, and they're gonna continue to come in for many years, I believe, even though it has slowed down over time. I just I I'm aware of that.

And and and that you have many, many, many big trucks going out of the port that are not logging trucks.

True.

They're they are warehouse trucks.

Mhmm.

And if you go down there in the morning and you stand there, you'll find there are far more of those than there are logging trucks. The the logging trucks kinda get pointed at, but, actually, it's big semi trucks coming out of the port in the morning that are far more impactful than the logging trucks. And I I I I don't know. I I personally believe we cannot die at every street in the city. You know, we have to have some means of getting into the city.

That means I'm

not saying we eliminate the roads.

No. No. No. I I understand that. But I but I didn't wanna just put that out on the table that, you know, there's been it's been pretty aggressive narrowing of a lot of our streets, and I just think that this is a this is a a an Internet this is a interstate highway exit point.

I'm I I think this is a great process we're going through to to replan this area or or take another look at planning. I'm very interested in what the thinkers are of the county are of all of that property because I assume when we talk about that side of the the road, we're talking about everything to the railroad tracks. And, you know, it's not just those those buildings that are in existence. Is that what that is what we're talking about. Correct?

And I think that's in the buffer most

of that. Put that back into.

So I I couldn't quite help by looking here. Yeah.

Essentially, the commerce building and the new ones for the county

and the McDonald's. But but there's property behind that.

There's property behind the west side

of Yeah. How far did

the 250 foot buffer go?

Oh. Just go past the tracks and go over the post offices.

Does it take against the post office or not

as as the post office hit?

Probably does. What was the

intent of the buffer? The buffer for public engagement, or is it

actually Just to show who would be impacted in terms of close proximity. So it's it's not necessarily that that would be the planning area. It would it would it really would the planning area would be in the confines of the road itself with with an acknowledgment that, you know, even though it's not in the planning area, parcels immediately adjacent to are obviously gonna be impacted by the planning that goes on within that.

It was what Tim said for engagement. Well, but this

is no, this is important too. From a planning point of view, there's a robust conversation about opening up Moxley Creek as an open air, which is not a lot of people have in mind. Mhmm. But I believe that goes right through the back of that property. It does. And We've So

next right next to Plum Street. Just go right just to the Is it West Of Plum Street.

And so it's not behind those buildings. It's in front of them.

Yeah. It goes under some of those buildings.

Yeah. Mhmm. You can kinda track it. It yeah.

Veers off by the little the substation thing by McDonald's that starts heading towards City Hall. Yeah.

You know, just I I I don't know if it's inappropriate, but I I I'm assuming we'll go down this path. These are issues we'll be looking at.

Yeah. I mean, I wasn't aware that daylight into the creek was an ongoing issue, but, I mean, for something we would take into consideration. But

yet, I mean, I think to your point, of course, someone's gonna bring it up in this process. I mean, think that's what you're saying. I mean, you can't you if if you include that area, someone's gonna say, hey. What if we did this?

What would

that look like?

Mhmm. Yeah. Because that even came up with the West Mill project that went into Walker John did. It was appealed because of they thought it should be considered a critical area because of future daylighting. Mhmm. And so, yeah, it's on people's minds.

Yeah. It's just not it's

just not super feasible. Yeah. I see. Right.

That's county property.

Yeah. That's anyway.

I'm sorry. Well, the the I mean, the county from you know, I've I've been talking to just some of the staff, but they're very aware of this project, and they're excited to engage in it.

So That's great. That's good. Yeah. No. No. That's great. And but having having an understanding of what the county is interested in in this process, I think, is very critical too because I I can't quite envision other than they bought all of these buildings and they they're gonna convert them into into in into use. I can't I can't quite get the full vision of what this is gonna look like.

Yeah. They're they're gonna

use all the space and potentially build a parking garage. Mhmm. It's one of the things they're talking with with the tribe about, a joint parking garage somewhere on that site. But I think they fully intend to occupy all five of those buildings and try to get out of both the one on Pacific and the ones up on the hill,

which is what they're thinking. Which to me also feeds into the foot traffic running from across back and forth all day.

Yep. So

this this makes me think that and to your question about would it be a level of effort similar to Capital Mall, I think the difference is you had individuals coming in to do public participation. And in this case,

you have

stakeholders because DES, the tribe, and the county are not going to wanna send one person to be considered like a neighbor. Right? They're they're they're gonna want a a bigger seat at the table.

Yep.

And then and then you have 90 property owners in addition to that.

So That's the thing. With Capapoli, have literally one property

over Yeah.

With the surrounding property owners. Right here, you have hundreds of engaged property owners. So it we could easily use the same template. It's just it'll be probably magnified because of all the different stakeholders in this one.

So I'm I I just wanted to to flag that that that I I think it's more of a stakeholder kind of a model than a neighborhood forum kind of model. I mean, we'll we'll see, but I'm I'm guessing those people want a real seat that they wanna sit right next to you in your cubicle. I mean,

it'll work if I'm

there. And think it's also no. I think it's also important to to highlight that, you when we looked at Capital Mall, that was very much looking at future redevelopment for for Mhmm. Increasing mixed use Yeah. High rise multifamily where possible.

I wanna be very clear that this isn't necessarily a redevelopment of particularly of of the neighborhoods. There's there's no intent to to come in and redevelop existing neighborhoods. This is very much focused on how do we make this this transportation arterial that's so important to the entry of the city. How do we make that more functional? And and, you know, all those destination, we're talking about, like, the Civic Boulevard.

That's talking about pedestrian design, making it a welcoming approach into the city. Mhmm. So I think a lot of it has to do with the interaction of of ingress and egress from I 5, but also trying to acknowledge that this is it also has the bike corridor. So it's pedestrian and bicycle traffic. So it's it's it's development of two very large future sites by by entities outside of the city and making sure that this this arterial is supporting those efforts while also improving the bicycle and pedestrian foot traffic.

So it's different in that sense, but I wanna be very clear, especially for anyone that's listening or is a resident in that area. This isn't a redevelopment effort of that existing housing stock. Yeah. This is making sure that the transportation is supportive of those neighborhoods and doesn't have undue impact on those neighborhoods.

And and I that's where the land use meets it a little bit is if we're gonna if you're gonna redo it as boulevard and you put raised bike lanes, for example, or something along the side there, having the the egress of the parking lots matter a lot, right, where where it gets redeveloped because that is a a planning struggle in transportation is is if you wanna just over here where we put the the the bike the protected bike lane in right across the street over Plum, you have we had to there were some negotiations about the alleyway, certain other things. And so the more exits you have along that, the harder it is to redesign the street. Mhmm. And so I I'll be carry I'm I'm gonna get back around to your question, though, particularly the scope of work. I'm curious about the the timeline for doing the traffic study work because that it is it is different in a lot of ways than capital, but there's a lot that can be transitioned because that is also a big highway exit, and then you have an area that's due for change in the future.

But this is a little bit smaller and a little closer. I'm if we go forward with that, how how much how much we don't have a grant for this.

Mhmm.

Right? How much time does that take for us to do in this with the two developments happening? Are you talking about the whole summary plan? Or Well, just the trans I'm thinking about the the traffic study step two.

If we did the because there's kinda two two parts of that. There's kind of a basic analysis and then a traffic impact study is something that it's own beast. Mhmm. So I I think we could work with transport I'm sorry, transportation colleagues, but I think we could certainly work with some of our transportation folks. I I fairly certainly have a lot of data on this area already. Mhmm. But I I I think that I guess it sounds like you're kinda asking for the traffic study first before we start scoping some of the other work. Is that kinda what I'm curious? So Joyce popped up as well, and Jay looks like he's got something to say.

But but, Joyce, you can go first. Does the land

or the vehicles go first?

One thank you. One of the things I think that is is in our favor is that with the comp plan update that we just finished last year, we do have updated traffic forecasting and modeling. So that's fantastic. And then I'm assuming I don't know the timeline of when projects from the county or the tribe would come in, but I would imagine they would have, specific traffic impact analysis work as well. So those would both be very helpful.

Right. And it would be for each project. They would they would have probably have to do independent studies for each of them.

Mhmm. And that will help us a lot.

But then for us to take a bigger view that includes there do we have a timeline for when those two redevelopments are likely to have traffic impact analysis to us?

I don't think we even have applications or Right. Any I'm not I'm gonna refer to Jay and Tim. I'm not as fine with those two projects.

Squaxin Drive, 2028 Ish, 2029 Ish is likely. County, I don't know. I mean, they're gonna they're I know they're they're moving pretty quick. They wanna they wanna be in those buildings quick. It could all be similar timelines.

Well, and I'll just clarify the county, if they're gonna be moving into those office buildings and not doing, like, additional development, there won't be a traffic study. Is it simply 10 improvements and move in? Mhmm. Is there a land use review which is because it's basically office to office? Yeah. Because if they do new development, that's what could trigger potentially a traffic study.

But to answer your question, I think you're asking, and, Casey, you kinda said it. In my view, before you get to a transportation study, this you know, doing the visioning work and and trying to understand what you want the corridor to become is really important to do before you do the transportation work. Right? Because if your community says we want this kind of experience in the corridor versus this kind of experience, it's a different transportation study. Right? And then because with that comes what are the infrastructure needs and changes that would be needed to make that happen. Mhmm. Right? To make that happen. So, you know, as I heard you guys talking about this, I think there's there's this community work to do to develop a vision for what you want the quarter to become.

And then you can use that to then figure out how you simplify the zoning, and then how you would how that would impact what their view of the the transportation system, what the infrastructure needs are to make that happen. And then you also have to layer in there the environmental considerations that will certainly come up through

all this.

Absolutely. I mean, that's your real simple I think what differentiates this from the Capital Mall Triangle in my view is is we're not talking about, to Casey's point, redeveloping a bunch of residential area. We're talking about a very specific quarter. We're not talking about taking out all the houses and doing something different in the residential side. Right? I think that's a much different so I think this is simpler than Capital Mall Triangle from that view. And if you scoped it like those things I just talked about, I think it's a much simpler scope of work. But what's missing from that will be the question.

Yeah. And I I I'll be curious because with the two redevelopments or potentially one redevelopment, another one maybe in a little further along is what type of pressure does that create to all the other parcels around Yeah. To change into other things. Well,

whenever you book when wherever you have a courthouse, you have lawyers and offices nearby. Great.

That one, the state built a lot of those.

Well Yeah.

And but those are high income people Yeah. Close to our restaurants, and that's that's a good thing. And, you know, I suspect there will be a lot of law offices that move off of the hill Mhmm. Into downtown, which will be good for downtown. Yeah. Mhmm. Yeah. Mhmm.

Yeah. And I I do suspect that there'll be a maybe a difference of opinion when you go more towards East Side Street and towards residential Yes. Versus the business side on the other side of that. And so the needs trying to match those needs is gonna be interesting. Mhmm.

But yeah.

I also I this probably sounds like a country bumpkin, but it's still true that I can cross mid block just about any time of day at any point along Plum, and I can turn left on the Harrison at any even at 5PM out of any of those businesses. So we we wanna be diligent and and intentional about this and also realize that even if there's 500 participants at a conference and there's the courthouse flow, it's it's still not gonna be a congested Highway 99 and Linwood kind of situation on this quarter. We wanna, I think, you know, protect the the uses and and this blurring with the residential neighborhood, but I just also, that's why I would be satisfied with something sort of on the level that Jay just outlined, a a broader look, because I I don't think we're trying to reengineer to accommodate six lanes of traffic and two turn lanes and and, you know, I just I just don't I don't don't see that kind of increase even with these two new redevelopments.

Yeah. I don't either.

I mean, I'll be curious to see how much of the any study says about even the connection between Southeast Olympia and going up through there because there's it's all car traffic through there for the most part. You don't I don't see people riding a bike down Harrison up through Plum. So the connection, there's also that aspect of it too is connecting it to the rest of the city. It just doesn't exist.

You mean Henderson? Henderson. Sorry. I'm okay.

Yeah. The Henderson connection just doesn't really exist for multimodal either.

Mm-mm. It does not. No. In fact, I mean, I I always see him that turn to Henderson is really the start of the highway to me. I mean, as as soon as you turn Mhmm. It feels if yep. Everyone picks up speed. It feels like high it feels like highway to me. Mhmm. I mean, you would have to we it'd be a pretty substantial change there to get to a multimodal experience there. Not that it can't happen, but think that is is an important consideration here. Because you can come. It's not just a highway access. It's all the way around to Henderson. Right? So to the

high school and others. And so

It's a connection there. Yep. Mhmm.

Yeah. Anything else that you would need from us? Any questions, comments, concerns? I think I've got enough to work with and start scoping out, come back to in the near future.

Yeah. I I I agree with what I'm hearing that it doesn't have to be we're not looking for something that is super complicated. Mhmm. I I think there will be tough conversations with the public about hot building heights and other things like that like we did with the mall. But I think I'll be curious to see where we go from here, and I have more notes once we get there.

And so and I I think in terms of those kinds of debates, like, building heights, that my my assumption was that we could consolidate some of these zoning designations without dramatically changing what sorts of uses are allowed. But they're they're similar Mhmm. Use designations on that transition between the single family and the commercial buildings. So I'm not imagining that we're we're paving the way for a different sort of building forms in there, but maybe that would come up. But I I think the more we can focus on the the transportation corridor Mhmm. And and less on a a vision of what happens in fifty years of densifying, I I I don't know.

I think the community is gonna be focusing more on that than the transportation.

Right. That's that would that's what'll get the attention if we I mean, they'll

they'll focus on this. So literally, what what's the county it's it's a question I asked about the county. What's the county gonna a second to really look like? And the tribal property now.

Mhmm.

And and so I I actually think there is going to be kind of a pressure point on well, all of those properties adjacent to the tribal property. You know, I I'm a neighbor of the guy who owns Flat 40. Well, what are they gonna do there? Mhmm. What are they gonna do there? I mean, he's looking for other he's looking for an option because he's afraid he's gonna be kicked out of there already. You know? And I think he's a smart businessman. You know? And so, actually, these issues of what kind of zoning can you have for building, I I assume that's what we would be doing, actually.

Mhmm. I'm not I'm not trying to and and I'm I'm open to any ideas, but I just assume that's what we would be doing in a in a redevelopment. We wouldn't just be talking about the the traffic.

No. And and I think if you're you know, I kinda share where we had those different zoning areas, and I highlighted the hash mark that is the downtown planning area. I mean, if you wanted a a really straightforward evaluation, it's looking at the zoning types on those different zoning districts, seeing whether they were possibly compatible with downtown business zoning. Mhmm. I've started that work for the most part.

Majority of those uses that are existing in the general commercial CSH, PRM are compatible with downtown business. So there I I think that's generally straightforward, but you're still talking about rezone, which gets people nervous in particular. Mhmm. I think the other thing is the RMU has a a designation in our future land use map as a residential. RMU.

That's the residential mixed use. So in the comp plan, that shows it a future land use of residential use. If we were to change the RMU to downtown business, which I think, again, the houses in, and that's predominantly where some of the residential units are, they would be compatible with the downtown business zoning type, but it would require a comprehensive plan amendment in our future landings map. So it's it's not necessarily complicated, but it does still include a a a fairly large public engagement process. So I I hesitate to call that kind of a easy path forward.

But if we're concerned about the number of zoning districts, I would say that as as a planner and some of my colleague planners would say, it's in the downtown planning area. Downtown business zoning, if we wanna simplify for the sake of zoning districts, there's there a lot of sense in pursuing the possibility of of downtown business. So that's a a thought that's kind of outside of the the corridor transportation concerns.

And if I may clarify about the consolidating my my interest and Cooper's interest in consolidating these was that we had a request to rezone another small place. Basically, it's

not a zone.

And we're trying not to do anything that's close to spot zoning because it'll put us forever in negotiating the use of each parcel. And so that was the interest in in making it more consistent is then, a property owner or a project applicant would know what the ground rules are coming in, and and we wouldn't be in the position of sitting as a quasi judicial body

Yeah.

Trying to decide, you know, the the use of each each parcel along the the Plum Street. So that was that that was really the motivation, not just that it looks cluttered on the map, but that it it prompts people to also ask for individual spot zones for their parcel.

And and going back very specifically to that that drive through amendment, literally, you went across the street, you had different development standards and uses. So it was it was across the street.

You had a

totally different zoning district that had possibly more allowances than if they if if otherwise. So that was that was some of the consternation at

that as

part of that conversation as

well. And

part of it was also that it was not that it was a mixed use development, but it was right next to the the bike crossing.

Like, it was Which is at 7th Avenue.

Right there. And that that is that is the was conflicting.

Which does actually go right across an existing drive through restaurant, which was also part of the conversation. Yes. Yes. It was. Yeah.

Can I ask you a question?

Yeah. Because I gonna ask you some more.

Because well, because Robert asked a question.

I think where you're getting at

earlier was about just timeline for a project like this. I mean, it's I don't think this is a three or four year thing like Capital Mill Triangle, but it's it's probably at least a year plus to get through public engagement to then start doing transportation work around it. Like, I I'm just trying to get a gauge for, like, how long a process this is.

Yeah. And so the sequence, Jay, that you run out was to have, you know, vision work for the corridor, then you had zoning, then you had infrastructure. But what another thing we can consider is flipping the first two around, do comp plan in the zoning first if that's if we wanna simplify the zoning, that's something we could do in house. You know, get ready for a comp plan change next week and do analysis and then take that forward to the council. Get that done, then focus on visioning for the corridor, which we will need some consultant help for that. That takes renderings. That takes, you know, effort. So that that takes some some type of funding either either through Jay and the Budget. Or or a grant. Jay.

And then it comes after that. So it could be kind of phased that way. So it gives you the zoning part and come back and do the vision for the corridor next.

Everyone's looking at me. Yeah. What do you think? I think that I think if we could do the zoning

Mhmm.

In the next year, that makes a lot of sense. Okay. Obviously, there'll probably some level of public feedback and Mhmm. On that even though we're pulling a lot of stuff from what's already in the comp plan Mhmm. For future land use map changes. Yeah. And then, of course, transportation's gonna cost a lot of money regardless.

Yeah. But, I mean, I think that's I mean, to to Tim's point, you can get a quicker win to at least have a direction and and show the county where you're heading. And then it it'll it might help them hone in their engagement with you later about how you fill in from there. Yeah.

No. It does include as Casey noted a comp plan change also for at least a a a portion of it. So it'd probably be a package we bring forward for

Mhmm.

The process queuing up next year. It would go through, basically twenty twenty seven comp plan amendment process.

Sounds good.

And yeah. And so yeah. And this is by the way, this is my Joyce had a really robust discussion today. So this is it's not like I'm thinking of this on my team. We thought this through a little bit as an option. So is is this a phased approach where, you know, initially, we do something where we don't app need money from consultants, but then

That's great.

Positions us to then pursue that next. Yep. And we can work Thanks, Joyce.

We can work

that into the budgets.

And just just because I'm somewhat new to this and this is to you is so you you showed us that map with those eight different colored zones.

Mhmm.

And are we thinking that we will have two different colored zones, or are we thinking one full zone of one color?

I I think the intent there there's a lot of different ways you could approach that. I think if you wanted to go for something really simplified or relatively simple, as I mentioned, this hash mark is the downtown planning boundary. This is downtown business zone. EORM, CSH, RMU, general commercial. So those are kind of transitional, commercial, residential until you get over into this area, R 612.

Mhmm. That is, lack of a better term, kind of a single family residential zone. These were kind of in place not kind of. They were put there as that zone type to be transitioned zones to that. One of the things I would highlight in the 2045 comp plan update is that we did kind of change our residential use type to urban residential.

So we don't necessarily have the low, medium, high density categories that we had prior. So I think in that sense, urban residential and downtown business are probably more compatible and have less necessity for that kind of transitional use types. Furthermore, it's already a a a pretty built out area. Like I said, we're not looking at this as complete redevelopment. But if you do have those businesses off of East Side or off of between East Side Of Plum that wanted to have the more downtown business oriented uses, doing a rezone from for these areas to downtown business, from my perspective, makes a fair amount of sense.

As I've said, and I I I hate to put some of my colleagues out there, but there's some agreement amongst the planners that have looked at this that's a downtown business kind of makes sense if you want a single downtown. So and maybe what we could do

is when we come back is kinda talk about what are the components of of that that that zoning and what would it what would

it allow, what would it not allow. And then

you can that you can make that decision about what do you think moving in that direction makes sense.

Yeah. I

think I think the options around that. Yeah.

Yeah. I've started that crosswalk. I haven't found much that would make anything incompatible. And if there was anything that made it an existing nonconformance through that rezone, there there are other code and options that we could could possibly update to to alleviate any concern that way. But at at a at a very high level look at this, I'm not finding much that any of those zones, those kind of red, green zones that you see up there, there's not much that would be incompatible with the downtown business zoning.

Mhmm. On the flip side, particularly if you look at the RMU, which is a residential zoning district, it would allow further commercial within that that portion in particular. So there would be an increase in allowance of commercial opportunities there. So depending on on whether you see that as a a good thing or a bad thing could influence whether you want for that. So but as the existing uses, they probably all are are are conforming with downtown business at a high level look so far.

We could also go to development standards too. The the height differences. Right. Right. Yeah.

Because downtown doesn't have the same height limit limits as those other areas.

And they all also have downtown design review subdistricts, which also have influence over that, and then also influences Yes. Yeah. So that's another slide. If you look at your packet, there is an annex. I highlighted those subdistricts. Those have really precise criteria on what at the street level, sidewalk level those can be as well as, you know, building design standards. So that wouldn't necessarily change in most of those. Mhmm. They're not downtown business. I believe within that area, they are still part of the downtown design review subdistricts. So they're already applicable there.

So so this is a naive question, but if you're a property owner in the red, pink, yellow, brown court, what would what would you think?

If I was there? Yeah. My concern if I was a residential owner would be kind of why I'm trying to alleviate concerns now is that if we're saying we're gonna come in and redevelop, I would be concerned what impact that had on my residential property.

Mhmm.

Property values, uses, and what's moving in next door.

Yep. You

know? Yep. Yeah. And so but I assume that that would probably be more positive for most prop most of those property owners, but I I don't I just am trying to understand.

I mean, if you want a downtown mix of uses like we want to envision in downtown in this area, yes. You you have commercial services for the residences. It's just more of a downtown feel in the future if they were to redevelop over time. Mhmm. If I'm a property owner, I may like it too because my value's gonna go up if I can do more things. So

Yeah. Perspective. Yeah. Thank you. I I just need a little education

on this. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah.

I see David's got his hand up.

I saw Joyce had her hand up too at once.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

I did it.

I I didn't know if you wanted Joyce to go first because I thought she had her hand up. No. Okay. I did just wanna let you know even though this meeting's going on probably longer than than you'd like and you don't want any last minute interjections, the transportation master plan has an entire page on Plum Street about future planning efforts for some of the problems they've identified. It's page one seventy seven. And it talks about how those those issues should be looked at in the update for transportation master plan, which I believe is starting very soon if it hasn't already had some.

I didn't necessarily wanna put our public works folks up on on the spot, but, yes, the TMP is up for review starting this year. So that is a very valid point.

I I just wanted to let you know about that. You're talking about quarter planning. That that may be, something you should be aware of that is coming up. So that's all I had for you.

Thank you.

I think I actually included that. Yeah. The TMP master plan section is in the appendix of this presentation. So I can share that if you would like, but it is in your packet.

You got it.

Is ready there also. Go ahead, Joyce.

Oh, I just you guys already kinda touched on the the building height, provisions. One of the things, Casey's probably already on top of it, but the I believe with the changes we made in the middle housing ordinance and the building height in our six to 12 going up to 40 feet, that some of the transitional zoning standards that apply to those transitional zones limit height to 35 feet. So that's something that we should clean up in in the code. I didn't make that I did not make that connection until just now. Casey was probably already on top of it.

Joyce, can I ask you a question about this?

Sure.

About height. Would it be be running into any state limits if we consider doing something a little, like, I don't call it radical, but something a little different about heights of buildings. So we've never done this before in the city of Olympia, but there's a trend of thinking about the height of the height of building limit to the width of the street.

I've heard of I've heard of that.

Yeah. Yeah. Is that is that something that could potentially run into any barriers with our missing middle? Would that require any major changes to do something like that?

That's that's a very interesting question. I've I'm not aware of any potential barriers off of the other than, you know, public concern or public perception, but I'd I'd be happy to look into that more. It's an interesting question.

Joyce, do you mean you'd be happy to ask

David? Yes.

Do you guys

do you know how hard it is to sit here knowing I don't get to work on this project? It's killing me. It sounds so much fun.

We can make things happen, Joyce. Oh,

it's so hard. I almost got teary eyed a little earlier.

Yeah.

Because I would love you guys, I'm just saying right now, I would love for Plum Street to be just a gorgeous entrance into our downtown. And I know everybody would, but how fun to make that come to life.

Mhmm. Can we start

with the welcome sign?

Jay, you weren't the last mention. You weren't the last name, but I did mention

that. I appreciate you.

Can also similar visioning for Capitol Boulevard back in 2014. Mhmm. And a lot of those changes you're seeing with the the whole transfer interchange there with Capitol was through that visioning process, and so they were able to get Capital Funding to do those that work. And so the rest of the corridor over time, I mean, it's gonna transition to more of a multi corridor.

They've they've recently got some grants from WSHTOPS to do some of those roundabouts I saw. Mhmm. Yep. Yep. Mhmm. Yep. Which should be great if we could get a roundabout there on the union.

Well, I'm just plugging it now that someone could give that the former the current former welcome sign to Jay for retirement gift.

Oh, yeah. You're you're not the first person to propose that, Joyce. You could have just go

up in your driveway. Yeah.

I Joyce, I thought we were tight. Oh.

It could go in the in the museum, like, on one of the spots outside of the city hall elevators as a remembrance. But you made a difference today sign.

Yeah. Alright. Okay. So do you have everything you need from us, please? Yes and more. So Okay. Alright. I look forward to hearing more in the future.

Yeah.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Nice day. We are at reports and updates.

Any reports? I have a couple of things I wanted to just sort of throw out there. The first one is I tested out the new parking ticket system.

By getting a ticket?

Yeah. By getting a ticket. Yeah. And at at least at this point, our people are hand gathering their copies of the of the tickets, bringing them, to actually be delivered to Thurston County, and then a clerk at Thurston County is doing data entry to enter the tickets. And and so they said there's a few days delay from when you get the ticket to when they're ready with the number to have you pay it.

And in addition to that, they said it doesn't look like it's gonna work to do the online paying portal. So you'll either have to phone them, mail it, or come in to pay. So it's just it's just it's a little bit bumpy in this initial transition over to the the county. So I I just I just wanted to flag that to make sure that there's awareness.

Yes. There's awareness, and we're working on a fix Mhmm. To that. So we're working with the county to see if we can put a fix in place to get to a place we wanna get to with online payments center. So, yeah.

That's that's great. So I just I just and I was also just frustrated that there was Yep. Data entry and hand carrying paper copies up there, which I know that will eventually get that worked out. And then I had, constituents reach out who live, near LVA Park on the in the subdivision near the Habitat project, the 3500 Mhmm. Boulevard. And they were trying to understand they they they've heard through the grapevine that there have been some plot plan changes that will change where pedestrian access to the park is from that the old water tower side there.

Based on the Habitat project?