Committee backs dozens of proposed amendments to Olympia Municipal Code

Dozens of amendments to the Olympia Municipal Code have been recommended by a committee in order to clarify development regulations and meet new state requirements.

The Olympia Land Use & Environment Committee unanimously approved the recommendations of more than 40 amendments to the Olympia Municipal Code at a meeting on May 28.

The amendments target multiple sections of the OMC, including Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic), Title 16 (Buildings and Construction), Title 17 (Subdivisions) and Title 18 (Unified Development Code).

Planning Manager Joyce Phillips presented 47 proposals for the OMC. The amendments, which are a result of a multi-year backlog that accumulated while the city completed its comprehensive plan update.

“During the comprehensive plan periodic update process that took three years, we did not run any unnecessary code amendments,” Phillips explained. “We focused on the comprehensive plan update and those related code amendments.”

The amendments contain proposals from city planners, Olympia Fire Department, historic preservation staff and new legislative requirements.

Several amendments are intended to comply with state laws requiring local governments to update development regulations within six months of adopting comprehensive plans.

According to a staff report, some of those deadlines require Olympia to complete the amendments by the end of June.

The proposals are set into three main groups:

• State-mandated updates and housing-related changes: Several amendments implement new state requirements and support housing production, including allowing child day care facilities in residential zones, creating a two-lot subdivision (“lot split”) process, addressing residential parking requirements, and modifying standards to facilitate the conversion of existing buildings into housing.
• Public safety and historic preservation. The fire department proposed updates to definitions, fire access standards and alarm requirements, while historic preservation staff recommended clarifications to Olympia Heritage Commission roles and consultation procedures.
• Code cleanup and operational clarification. Many amendments streamline and standardize the code by removing outdated references, clarifying terminology, such as “shall” and “must,” aligning residential parking enforcement language, improving landscaping plan requirements to include underground utilities, and refining rules for bicycle parking, signage and design review applicability.

“The primary purpose of these amendments is to address issues that come up over time, provide clarity or better language, correct code citations,” said Phillips to committee members. “We did try to flag language that the public identified as being confusing.”

The Olympia Planning Commission reviewed the amendments in March, held a public hearing on April 6, and then recommended approval of the amendments.

While supporting the package, commissioners raised concerns about restrictions on residential uses in ground-floor commercial spaces along designated pedestrian streets in downtown.

In a letter to the Olympia City Council, the planning commission noted removing the restriction could create opportunities for additional housing at a time when commercial vacancy rates suggest sufficient retail space may already exist.

The letter, signed by Planning Commission Chair Greg Quetin, concluded the issue warrants further analysis because it intersects with other city goals related to pedestrian activity.

The commission recommended revisiting the issue during Olympia’s implementation of Senate Bill 6026, which ties into residential development in commercial and mixed-use zones, and other upcoming state requirements affecting local authority over ground-floor commercial space.

Commissioners also suggested using the findings from a recent commercial vacancy study to inform the discussion.

The topic also drew discussion from committee members about downtown design standards, and whether the city should continue requiring retail uses on the ground floors of certain buildings in pedestrian-oriented areas.

Council member Clark Gilman said he has been thinking about whether the city should continue requiring ground-floor retail in some downtown areas or allow more flexibility in how those spaces are used.

“I think moving to eliminate the retail commercial requirement, and then have demand drive how they use the first floor of the building,” Gilman said.

He added the priority should be keeping ground-floor spaces active, regardless of use.

“It is more important to me that those first floors are occupied somehow, and that really is what makes the pedestrian scape work," Gilman said.

Phillips noted the city has already significantly reduced the areas where ground-floor commercial space is required compared with a decade ago.

She also said the city currently allows certain residential-related uses, such as building lobbies, on the ground floor and offers additional building height incentives in some locations when residential units are included.

Community Planning and Economic Development Director Tim Smith cautioned against removing commercial requirements, citing research showing active ground-floor uses contribute to a vibrant downtown streetscape.

He suggested a more strategic approach that considers alternatives, such as live-work units, while preserving opportunities for future commercial occupancy.

“We are seeing some projects … where spaces are being filled,” Smith said. “Over time, that space being filled can help activate that section of the street.

The package of amendments will advance to the city council for consideration. Committee members also requested that staff bring future information on the ground-floor housing issue.