Tumwater — City staff on May 27 briefed the City Council on the next steps for redevelopment of contaminated brewery properties and related brownfield sites, including underway environmental sampling and plans to prepare a planned‑action environmental impact statement (EIS) under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).

City Administrator (Parks) and Kelly (economic development lead) told the council that sampling has advanced from Phase 1 to Phase 2 at the Knoll portion of the former Olympia Brewery site and that Phase 2 fieldwork has begun this week at the former WSDOT Olympic Region headquarters site. Kelly said the city is using two main grant tracks: an integrated planning grant (IPG) from the Washington Department of Ecology focused on the WSDOT site and a community‑wide assessment grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency covering multiple opportunity sites, with deliverables that include 15 Phase 1 assessments and 10 Phase 2 assessments.

Why it matters: City staff said the planned‑action EIS — a non‑project, subarea SEPA review — will allow Tumwater to evaluate alternative redevelopment scenarios across a defined study area, identify infrastructure and mitigation needs, and adopt mitigation measures in a planned‑action ordinance so qualifying future projects can proceed without separate, project‑by‑project SEPA reviews. City staff said the approach can improve predictability for developers and support regional collaboration to reuse the sites.

What’s been done: Kelly reported that Phase 2 drilling and sampling at the Knoll site “happened last week” and that the city should have laboratory results by late summer. The Valley portion of the former brewery has a completed Phase 1 and a scheduling plan for Phase 2. The former WSDOT Olympic Region headquarters began subsurface testing this week; staff said they are coordinating with WSDOT environmental engineers on the scope and data sharing.

Grants and funding: Kelly and Parks said the city has applied for a $250,000 Thriving Communities grant and is pursuing EPA and Ecology brownfields grants. The city included budget authority in the 2025–26 biennial budget to support early planning and the EIS scope but noted that the budget will not cover the entire planned‑action EIS process; staff said additional funding sources will be sought.

Planned‑action EIS scope and timeline: Parks explained that a planned‑action EIS evaluates a defined geographic subarea, analyzes development scenarios and identifies mitigation measures that are then adopted into a planned‑action ordinance. He said the city has a draft scope of work from a consultant, plans for a regional working group, and expects community engagement to continue; the work is projected through calendar year 2026. Parks said the EIS will analyze built‑environment impacts (water, sewer, transportation, floodplain and public services) and natural‑environment impacts (river and water quality) and produce mitigation strategies and funding approaches.

Council questions and next steps: Council members asked whether older planned‑action EIS documents expire and how to coordinate with nearby neighborhoods. Parks said prior planned‑action EISs typically expire and that staff will review whether a prior area should be incorporated into the present study area. Kelly said she has not yet done neighborhood‑level outreach for the WSDOT site and invited council members to identify neighbors or groups for targeted briefings. Staff said they will return with a detailed scope of work, study‑area boundaries, outreach plan, and preliminary cost estimates once the consultant work progresses.

Quotations: Kelly opened, “I am so excited to have my first conversation with you tonight in this role.” Parks summarized the planned‑action benefit: “Once this planned action EIS process is complete, any future projects that happen within that area that are consistent with the development scenarios and the types and intensities that were evaluated and that incorporate the mitigation measures that are identified in the planned action ordinance, they don't have an additional separate, individual SEPA review process.”

Discussion vs. decision: Council received the informational update; no regulatory action, ordinance adoption or funding appropriation for the EIS was approved at the meeting. Staff said the council can expect follow-up briefings as sampling results come in and the planned‑action scope is finalized.

Background: Kelly described the brownfields process (Phase 1 historical research, Phase 2 soil and groundwater testing, remediation planning), and highlighted that federal and state cleanup funding sources are available to public entities to reduce risk and foster redevelopment. Parks said the city has discussed the project with regional partners and the lieutenant governor and intends to include regional stakeholders in the planned‑action process.

What’s next: Staff will gather Phase 2 results, refine the planned‑action EIS scope with the consultant, pursue additional funding sources, and return to council with a timeline, study‑area map and preliminary mitigation and cost estimates.