History, politics, people of Oly WA

Category: Olympia future

Restore Olympia’s East Capitol Campus Neighborhood

The Washington State Department of Transportation headquarters on Olympia’s East Capitol Campus feels like a relic of a rapidly vanishing era of government buildings. It was built in 1970 to house hundreds of state employees. Its daily occupancy has dropped to a small fraction of its pre-pandemic numbers. On any given day, fewer than fifty workers type away in its vast corridors.

And remote work isn’t the only reason the building feels like a ghost town. In late 2025, employees started reporting visible cracking in the structural concrete. Fearing a potential collapse during a major earthquake, state administrators restricted access and moved most of the remaining staff out. Today, the Transportation Building sits mostly empty, sidelined by serious structural safety concerns.

That evacuation forces a much bigger question about how we use space in the city. The entire East Capitol Campus stands as a mistake in scale. It’s a sterile expanse of empty lawns and cavernous parking garages, built half a century ago by wiping out a thriving, walkable neighborhood. We have a rare chance to undo a poor design decision from the 1950s and stitch the surrounding community back together.

The Erasure of the East Campus

To understand how Olympia ended up with this empty concrete and grass wilderness, you have to look back to the years right after World War II. As state government expanded, the Washington State Supreme Court decided that executive offices for state agencies had to stay right here at the seat of government in Olympia.

Planners faced a choice on where to put everyone. Instead of folding that growth into the existing neighborhood street grid, they took a different path. Guided by a 1957 traffic study, they proposed a massive expansion to the east, designed primarily to clear vehicle congestion around the historic West Campus.

What followed was the systematic clearance of an eighteen-block residential neighborhood. Bounded by Capitol Way to the west, Jefferson Street to the east, 11th Avenue to the north, and Maple Park to the south, this area was once one of Olympia’s densest and most walkable communities.

The neighborhood featured William Winlock Miller High School, convenience stores, duplexes, and at least six different apartment buildings.

The state took over seventy-five private properties through a campaign that dragged on for decades. The story of Roy H. Bergh, who was 77 at the time, and his wife Leila, 72, always stands out to me. For thirteen years, the Berghs resisted every attempt by the state to condemn their property. The struggle ended in 1973 when authorities evicted and jailed the couple for refusing to leave the home they felt was stolen from them. Today, the northern flank of the Natural Resources Building sits on the exact spot at Franklin Street and 12th Avenue where the Berghs used to live.

By the mid-1960s, the city closed off the historic cross streets, wiping the original grid off the map to make room for the new development. In place of a lived-in neighborhood, the state built a sprawling executive district designed entirely around cars.

What remains today feels hollow. The east side of Capitol Way lacks basic sidewalks, bordered instead by massive, empty lawns that almost nobody uses. Workers and residents lost a real community, replaced by acres of commuter parking garages and bulky 1970s office blocks.

What We Can Do

Other cities have run into this exact same problem, watching a single-use institutional dead zone drain the life out of their downtowns, and chosen to undo the damage. Here are four examples, running roughly from cautionary tales to truly instructive models.

In Minneapolis, a former expanse of surface parking lots and light industrial buildings turned into a mixed-use neighborhood remarkably fast. A new stadium, the Green Line light rail, and a central park called The Commons drove the transformation, drawing in retirees, empty-nesters, and younger professionals.

Downtown East offers a clear warning alongside its rapid growth. For years, the area lacked public schools and full-service grocery stores, making it tough to build a real community for families. Wide, car-dominated thoroughfares still hamper the kind of small-scale street life that makes a neighborhood feel like home.

Bellevue’s Spring District represents a fifteen-year effort to turn thirty-six acres of suburban light industrial warehouses into a dense, transit-oriented village. Anchored by a Sound Transit light rail station, planners designed the area to pair housing for thousands of residents with retail and tech offices.

In practice, the development feels like an isolated island. Wide, car-choked arterials turn leaving the district on foot into a hostile trek. City leaders also allowed the developer to pay into an affordable housing fund rather than building low-income units directly on site. The end result feels like an expensive, isolated bubble, cut off from the rest of the city.

In San Francisco, the old UCSF Laurel Heights campus is being converted from a massive, single-tenant institutional complex into a multi-building neighborhood. By adding 744 new homes, the development injects high-density housing right into an established, transit-rich neighborhood.

Breaking up that massive, single-user office site made room for public plazas, local shops, and a real mix of housing options. Despite some pushback from neighbors concerned about traffic, the project shows how a sprawling institutional footprint can fit right back into an existing city grid.

Then there’s Sacramento, where state and city leaders are actively turning obsolete state offices into housing. Backed by a $50 million grant from Meta, California is clearing out and knocking down three vacant, high-rise government buildings along Capitol Mall. In their place, Sacramento State University is building a downtown campus complete with student housing, a hotel, and spaces for performing arts.

The project relies on an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District, using projected increases in property tax to fund the necessary site upgrades. Sacramento shows what happens when state government steps aside and turns over seismic, outdated real estate instead of just patching it. Housing follows. So does a university campus, along with actual reasons to stick around downtown after 5 p.m.

There are a lot of complicated factors that would play into a transformation of the East Campus. Without schools, groceries, and genuine reasons to spend time outside, you end up with another Downtown East. High density alone falls short, too, especially when surrounding wide roads cut people off or when developers pay into housing funds instead of building actual affordable units, creating the kind of isolated island seen in the Spring District.

The projects at Laurel Heights and Capitol Mall prove that breaking up a massive, single-owner institutional block is entirely doable. Sacramento shows who has to make the first move: the state, by stepping back and giving up ground it no longer needs.

The Adaptive Reuse of the WSDOT Building

Applying these lessons to Olympia starts right at the abandoned DOT headquarters. The physical structure and actual layout might be the best argument for saving it. We can probably turn the DOT building into housing.

Most modern office buildings feature deep, vast floor plates, which usually make converting them to residential space a total nonstarter. The center of the building stays pitch black no matter how many windows you cut into the exterior walls.

The DOT building was built in a distinct, elongated H-shape, creating thin, narrow office wings. The distance from the outer windows to the central hallway is surprisingly shallow, letting natural sunlight reach almost every square foot of the interior.

The H-shape also creates two large courtyards flanking the central passage, maximizing exterior wall space. That design allows developers to add windows along almost the entire perimeter, easily satisfying residential fire codes for natural light and emergency exits.

I’ll admit that I’m not a structural engineer, so my opinion on technical details should be taken with a grain of salt. Still, the underlying geometry is hard to ignore.

The timing works out remarkably well to take this path now. The building already needs a massive seismic retrofit just to stay standing, meaning crews will strip the interior down to its raw concrete frame no matter what.

If the state brings in a private developer, workers can install the plumbing stacks, utility meters, and interior apartment walls right alongside the structural column upgrades. Since the building has to be gutted for safety reasons anyway, we’re looking at the most cost-effective window in its history to convert the space into housing.

The State Has to Let Go First

All of this discussion about East Campus is built on an underlying need for housing diversity and an opportunity to re-establish a walkable neighborhood in Olympia.

But the most glaring need would be addressing the ongoing, bitter dispute in the South Capitol neighborhood, highlighting a critical, unresolved pressure valve on the Olympia Campus.

South Capitol neighbors are currently fighting a pitched battle against lobbying firms and legislative-centric businesses that buy up historic residential homes, converting them into offices that sit empty for most of the year.

This commercial pressure is an artificial crisis. Historically, campus planners wanted to raze 20 acres of South Capitol for government expansion; instead, they went east. Today, we have the opportunity to create naturally occurring commercial spaces east of campus rather than forcing lobbyists to covertly commercialize historic residential streets. It makes market sense for lobbyists to want to be near the legislative building and offices. But there are very few commercial buildings within walking distance.

The state should allow private, mixed-use development on the underutilized East Campus. By diversifying the East Campus and integrating private offices, street-level retail, and high-density housing, Olympia can naturally draw the lobbying corridor out of historic neighborhoods and onto the campus itself.

We should first stop protecting the failed status quo.

We shouldn’t pretend the East Campus’s original vision is still working. The empty lawns, asphalt lots, and empty office buildings don’t add up to a living city. The era of the single-use commuter campus has run its course.

A reimagined East Campus won’t look like an Olympia neighborhood overnight. It’ll probably feel more like Portland’s South Waterfront: dense, modern, and waiting for the trees to grow in while community takes root. Still, the state of Washington and the City of Olympia have to start somewhere. It’s hard to think of a better place to begin than with the building that’s currently falling apart from the inside out.

Olympia ’57 and the Arts Walk we always needed

Walking through downtown Olympia during Arts Walk this spring, I was struck by a realization:

Arts Walk has become what Lakefair was originally intended to be: a human-centered festival that brings people downtown and supports local businesses. What began in 1957 as a strategic effort by downtown retailers to draw shoppers back from the emerging suburban fringe has evolved, ironically, into something that now seems to conflict with its original purpose. Meanwhile, Arts Walk (especially the spring edition) has stepped into that role and done it better.

The first Lakefair took place just seven years after the Deschutes River was dammed to create Capitol Lake. Back then, Tumwater as a town stopped short of the Trosper and I-5 cloverleaf, Lacey barely extended beyond a few blocks around the St. Martin’s College campus, and Olympia’s downtown was the regional commercial hub. An aerial photo from 1957 shows a very different city. There’s no westside sprawl, no South Sound Center, no Capital Mall. Interstate 5 is only beginning to cut its path through the city. The southeast side is still a patchwork of empty fields. Downtown was everything.

Lakefair was born into that moment. The lake was new, a kind of novelty. We hadn’t built any parks around it, and people could still remember the squalor of the Depression era shanty town, Little Hollywood, the lake was meant to replace. Downtown retailers felt threatened by the spread of car-centric shopping centers to the south and west, and Lakefair was their answer: a family-friendly summer celebration rooted in Olympia’s historic center.

But the tide couldn’t be held back. By the 1980s, the construction of Capital Mall and South Sound Center pulled national retailers out of downtown. As rents dropped, local and niche businesses moved in. Downtown shrank in economic dominance, but it found something more interesting: being an actual human-scaled neighborhood. By going down, downtown Olympia grew up.

Lakefair, however, didn’t adapt. It stayed focused on big crowds and spectacle. It became a regional summer draw, people come in from Tumwater, Lacey, and the westside not to experience downtown but to experience the event. Today, the foot traffic is enormous, but not helpful. If you talk to people who live and work near downtown, many will say they avoid Lakefair. Ironically, the further someone lives from downtown, the more likely they are to enjoy it, because for some, it’s the only time they come. For those who frequent downtown, Lakefair is an interruption.

Compare that to Arts Walk. It’s right-sized. Embedded in the streets. Both the Friday night Luminary Procession and the Saturday Procession of the Species invite people not just to gather, but to stroll, to explore, and to be downtown. These events don’t shut down the regular rhythm of the neighborhood; they highlight it. Arts Walk brings people face-to-face with small businesses, galleries, performers, and each other. It’s not a performance to be watched from the sidelines; it’s an experience shared from within.

The seasonal timing is meaningful. Lakefair is scheduled for the height of Cascadian summer, long days, hot sun, and school-free weeks. But Arts Walk arrives at the beginning and end of the softer season. Spring Arts Walk, in particular, feels like a true civic ritual: the reawakening of our community after a long winter and a downtown that’s still very much alive.

Lakefair has also changed in ways that move it further from its roots. Food booths once reserved for nonprofits are now open to commercial vendors. Local nonprofits increasingly struggle to justify the effort and expense of participating. And though the Twilight Parade still winds its way through the city, it mirrors the spirit of Arts Walk’s two processions, just with a different energy: one is lighthearted and grassroots; the other, more grand and nostalgic.

There’s a larger parallel here, too. Just as Lakefair took its name and identity from the artificial lake at the city’s core, it may now face a similar fate. Capitol Lake, long celebrated as a civic centerpiece, has been revealed as ecologically harmful—shallow, warm, and lifeless. The planned restoration of the Deschutes Estuary will undo that mid-century engineering mistake, trading a static reservoir for a living tidal system. Something more natural. More fitting.

In the same way, Arts Walk fits Olympia. It flows through the streets, not around them. It thrives not in designated festival zones but in the storefronts, sidewalks, and alleys that make downtown what it is. If Lakefair is to survive in a post-lake Olympia, it can return to its roots. Maybe even borrow a few pages from Arts Walk. Move into the streets. Shrink the footprint. Reconnect with the businesses and people downtown.

I’m not a Lakefair hater. I have fond memories, and I go down there for at least two nights a year for rides, food and fireworks. I know many in our community still love Lakefair, too. But festivals should serve the places they’re held. Arts Walk has become Olympia’s true local celebration, reflecting how we live now, not how we used to.

We are struggling as a city to recover from years of car-dependent development. Most of the square miles of today’s Olympia have no actual places to walk to, we need to get into our cars for everything. The single-family zoning that dominates the landscape removed the housing capacity that used to, more or less, assure everyone had something to call a home. We’re working now to create more density, more actual businesses in our neighborhoods. More sidewalks and more reasons to use them. Call it creating more “people-oriented places” or just human-scale, but looking at what Lakefair was born to fight is actually where our future should be taking us.

Renters are nice people and other thoughts on the demagoguery of the Missing Middle

Missing Middle from AIA Austin

Right now the Olympia planning commission is considering a list of recommendations about the so-called Missing Middle. These recommendations would hopefully increase density in Olympia’s least dense neighborhoods by allowing duplexes, townhomes, courtyard apartments and ADUs in the mostly the upper elevation swaths of single-family homes neighborhoods.

As you would expect, there are a bunch of people who are not fans of this idea. And as you might expect, they belong to existing neighborhood organizations in well established (but I would argue not traditional) residential neighborhoods. As Whitney Bowerman argued in this excellent email she sent to the planning commission, these organizations represent mostly older homeowners who want to preserve the low-density character of their neighborhoods.

This testimony to the planning commission I think almost perfectly encompasses this attitude.

First off, she makes a point that we shouldn’t follow the example of Seattle. Implying that by increasing density you don’t do much to decrease housing costs. The fact is that rents and housing costs have started to decline in Seattle, mostly because of all those cranes on the skyline are starting to make a dent in demand.


Renters are not bad, I’m a renter

About two minutes into her testimony, she starts to get into a caricature of homeownership. “For generations, working people have dreamed of owning a house,” she said. Specifically a house, and in her mind, a detached single family home. Which is also a specific type of home that hasn’t been historically accessible to many people or even now.

“It is not just a financial investment, it is an emotional investment and a social investment as well,” she said. Apparently, when you own a home, your emotions should matter more and your memories are deeper and richer.

“Outside those walls and over the fences, they (homeowners) create social networks,” she said. “Perhaps not in the days of old when someone was home and could build social capital in the neighborhood, but people do participate in Nextdoor, attend annual meetings… they are literally invested in their neighborhoods.”

This is all a slam on the nature of renting a home. Personally, I’ve done both. I’ve rented in almost every quadrant of Olympia and owned two homes in East Olympia. Currently, I rent an apartment in Southeast Olympia and hope one day to own again, but not a single family detached home. My goal is a townhouse with as little yard as possible.

But this belies the philosophy behind this anti-density testimony. The neighbor I had that called me a piece of shit while I was outside with my toddler owned his home. He still owned it when the police arrested him for waving a gun at his wife. I’m sure he had memories in my neighborhood, but they weren’t more meaningful because he paid a mortgage.

I’ve also had a series of neighbors that have quickly moved in from out of state, bought a home and relatively quickly moved out without making a dent in my community. They were not literally invested in anything and their presence, while pleasant, did not have a deeper impact on the neighborhood.


It isn’t about renters vs. homeowners, it’s about density and affordability

I agree the research indicates that homeownership by-in-large means better things for a community.

The testimony is also moving the ball from a debate on increasing density in Olympia’s low-density neighborhoods to a debate over the value of homeowners vs. renters. At least in the examples of townhomes and possibly courtyard apartments, the Missing Middle will be the only actual path to homeownership that some people can ever use. And, the option of duplexes and ADUs will possibly allow some folks, who would like to set down permanent roots in a neighborhood, stay in a neighborhood.

Imagine for a moment a single mother who got a late start on retirement. She has an addition in her small home that she can easily transition into an ADU if it was allowed by the city. That would keep her in her home past retirement.

Currently, a lot of neighborhoods in Olympia fail the test of liveability in two major ways. They are too low density to really be considered walkable. Even if a small neighborhood center like Wildwood did want to located inside some of these neighborhoods, it wouldn’t survive because single-family neighborhoods simply aren’t dense enough.

Also, we fail in terms of variety of housing types, especially in the car-dependent SE neighborhoods. A good neighborhood ensures that multiple generations of the same family can live in the area, that people from a variety of backgrounds can come together. Large swaths of single-family homes, while protecting the nature of a neighborhood, does not promote diversity.

Beautiful Olympia sea level rise design

Sea level rise has been a doing discussion in Olympia for the last few years, and to this point, we seem pretty clear on the implications. At some point, the last century of working towards reaching towards the deep water will be reversed in Olympia. Much of Olympia’s history has been defined by expanding our shorelines, slowly replacing 4,000 foot long wharf with dry land.

A map of map of sea level rise implications in Olympia…

Looks a lot like a historic map of our shorelines:



The most facinating thing I’ve read about the future/past of Olympia’s shorelines has been a master’s thesis from a student in California. It really is a beautiful thing.

The thesis by Brenda Lorene Snyder in urban design at University of California, Berkeley is fascinating.

Snyder does a great job laying out the natural and built history of Olympia and Puget Sound. But, the meat of the thesis, the picture of Olympia after a century of sea-level rise starts here.

Off the top, she assumes the restoration of the Deschutes River estuary. Despite some city maps that imply saving the lake, her vision simply allows for an open estuary with little if any discussion.

Here is Snyder’s map of post sea level rise Olympia:

I’d suggest reading the entire thing, there are more than a few beautiful nuances to appreciate. Here are a two of my favorites though:

  • Aqua blocks. Snynder proposes creeks running through several current alley ways to deal with stormwater runnoff.
  • Replacing the historic long warf with an extended Capitol Way with artisan structures over water.
She also gives a walking tour of the new Olympia downtown:

After perusing Creek Street we turn right onto Legion Way SE, headed towards Olympia’s historic town square, Sylvester Park. Significant growth has occurred within the downtown neighborhood over the past decades and Olympia has been able to manage this growth to its own benefi t. Strategic infill has strengthened the continuity of its human scale walk-able blocks. Through thoughtful design and attentiveness to the scale and style of historic structures Olympia has been able to maintain and strengthen the character of livability it’s become known for – a cozy yet lively village tucked away along the shores of the Puget Sound.

Despite the birds eye view seeming like this is a proposal to walk back from the impacts of nature, the closer in look shows a much more balances approach. She does propose a long berm (hidden as a new urban street) to protect downtown blocks. But, at the same time, she proposes using urban design techniques to provide clean water. She also protects our deepwater port.
But, this certainly isn’t slapping up bare earth berms and hard walls to protect the blocks we have now.
This may not be exactly what we end up doing, but this is the kind of beautiful urban design we need to approach the hard questions we’ll have to answer in the next century. We have to be able to see the solutions before we make them happen.

© 2026 Olympia Time

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑