Olympia committee recommends terminating Briggs development agreement to allow more housing

The Olympia Land Use & Environment Committee on Dec. 18 voted to recommend termination of the Briggs Urban Village development agreement, a 2003 contract that staff said caps residential units at 810 and limits future housing options in the neighborhood.

Senior planner Jackson Ewing, presenting the item, said the Briggs area is "approximately 137 acres with 75 acres of open space" and that most elements of the original agreement are no longer operative except the strict unit cap. "Termination of this development agreement is really necessary for the applicant to increase those residential units in the village," he said.

Supporters who testified during the committees public comment period urged the city to both remove the unit cap and protect neighborhood-facing commercial commitments. Brian Fowler, a neighborhood advocate, urged a code change to prevent open space and critical areas from being excluded when calculating required commercial acreage, saying the simplest fix was to "add the word 'entire' before the word 'village.'"

Residents also pressed the committee to hold to minimum grocery-store sizing that had been recommended by the planning commission. Longtime neighborhood resident Jim Lazar urged the council to "hold to the 12,000-square-foot minimum standard for the grocery store," saying a walkable grocery was part of what prompted many people to move there.

Ewing and staff said that terminating the development agreement would not eliminate the master plan or public review requirements. He said code and master-plan changes would still require public notice, SEPA review where appropriate, and a hearing-examiner process. Jackson also told committee members that public comments would be summarized in the staff packet for the full council meeting.

After questions about sequencing and whether council would hold a formal hearing, a member moved to "approve [the] recommendation to terminate the Briggs Urban Village Development Agreement and forward to the full city council for consideration." The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote.

The committee discussion also noted a code amendment under consideration that would set minimum and maximum commercial space based on acreage rather than rigid ties to unit counts. Staff said the proposed code changes and the development-agreement termination would be two separate items before council and that neither would be a formal council public hearing; both would allow oral and written public comment.

The recommendation now goes to the full City Council for consideration; staff said they would include a slide summarizing public comments and have the city economic-development staff available to explain market-study issues when the items appear at council.