It was nothing out of the ordinary for Olympia. As I sat inside the Clubside Café with Peter Stroble — a young, thirtysomething with a scarf and a down-filled, Patagonia vest — discussing the future of Washington’s quirky and eclectic capital city, a circle of bundled-up gutter-punks sat outside butchering guitar chords and bumming cigarettes. The sky was gray, and the wind was cold, but at least it wasn’t raining. The waitress, when not serving the four or five of us who’d come to the Clubside for lunch, leaned against the counter and carried on a conversation with an equal number of people who seemed to be there just to hang out. I assumed she knew all of them.



That’s the kind of place Olympia is.



I was there because Stroble had invited me. Along with being an obviously well-educated dude, a father, husband, and the director of sales and marketing for his family’s small national manufacturing company located in Shelton, Stroble is also a member of Oly 2012. Depending on whom you ask in Olympia, this last fact either makes him responsible and civically engaged or a dickhead tool in bed with developers.



That’s the kind of place Olympia is.



The issue that so splits Olympians over the Oly 2012 organization — and thus the worth of Stroble and the group’s other six members — is very simple. Near the Fourth Ave Bridge, across from the Bayview Thriftway and between Capital Lake and Budd Inlet, there’s an area of land known as “the isthmus.” The fact that it’s not technically an isthmus doesn’t matter. What does matter is people’s vision for what the land should be now and into the future. In Olympia, it’s an issue worth fighting over. The land and the view that surrounds it are enough to stoke the passionate and often fierce emotions of many in this left-tilted college town.



The vocal majority wants a park. People such as Stroble and Oly 2012 want high-density housing. Triway Enterprises, a development company that owns the land, wants condos — 141 condos to be exact, that, at least at the time of the company’s original proposal, were to go for one million dollars a hit. Since Triway asked the city of Olympia to rezone the area of land in question to allow 65- to 90-foot buildings over a year ago, the debate has raged, often degenerating into shouting, name-calling and vandalism.



That’s the kind of place Olympia is.



Perhaps the actions of the Olympia City Council help demonstrate the divided nature of the city when it comes to this isthmus issue. In December, by a 4-3 vote, the City Council did, in fact, decide to raise the height limits on the isthmus to 65 to 90 feet (65 in some places, 90 in others, but a big jump from the original 35-foot limit any way you look at it). But they also added a number of stipulations — including mandating that whatever gets built there must include housing and if the developer wants to reach for the sky it also must adhere to restrictions such as constructing a viewing platform, adding parking and providing a public park.



However, thanks to an initiative driven by opponents of the condos and signed by thousands of Olympians, the city also is in the process of studying “the feasibility” of a park on the land. The study isn’t scheduled to conclude until March.



How studying the feasibility of a park while simultaneously increasing height limits at the request of a large development company with a penchant for condos jives, I’m not quite sure. What I do know is by the look of things the argument won’t be petering out anytime soon. Contention and division run deep.



Especially in a place like Olympia.

Oly 2012

Stroble wasn’t exactly what I was expecting. Like many, I’d followed the isthmus debate from afar. And also like many, I’d thought of the decision about what to do with the isthmus as one between million dollar condos and a park. When you think of it in those terms — picturing either a strip of green trees and unobstructed views or towering palaces — I think most prefer the vision of a park. Unless, of course, you have enough money to afford a palace.



So when Oly 2012, a body that Stroble describes as a policy analysis group and regular citizens who care about Olympia, came out in favor of raising height limits on the isthmus — a decision that would at least seem to favor Triway’s condos — it made me instantly suspicious. It made many in Olympia furious. When those who despise the idea of condos on the isthmus accused Oly 2012 of being a shill for developers, I allowed myself to wonder the same thing.



Stroble is definitely not a shill for developers. His hair was not slicked back. He didn’t have a cell phone holster. He walked to our meeting. And he looked more like your average Evergreen student than me — and I graduated a Geoduck. With his third child due, literally at any moment, Stroble took the time to sit with me for lunch and offer some clarity to the 2012 stance. First of all, the genesis of Oly 2012 had nothing to do with the isthmus issue. In fact, Stroble admitted that prior to the current fight, he’d never even heard of the isthmus. According to him, Oly 2012 was made up of citizens engaged in the city government who’d helped many on the current City Council get elected and who wanted to form a body to help them accomplish their goals.



“The momentum for our group came from the momentum that got them elected,” says Stroble of the beginnings of Oly 2012. “Olympia has a long history of saying no. (Oly 2012) was formed to provide proactive support for change.



“We didn’t want such a polarizing issue. Unfortunately, the isthmus issue came up right away,” says Stroble. “It basically hit us before anyone even knew.”



Initially split down the middle, after weighing all the options carefully and looking to Olympia’s Comprehensive Plan (a document that lays out Olympia’s goals for growth management) as a sort of bible — Oly 2012 decided to back the building height increase.

Referencing Jane Jacobs and James Howard Kuntsler, Stroble said Oly 2012’s decision — while difficult and by no means without sacrifice — came down to striving for sustainability, achieving the comprehensive plan, battling suburban sprawl, and creating the means for the city of Olympia to improve social services. Stroble envisions an Olympia with a bustling downtown core, where cars are optional, open spaces aren’t an invitation for crime and a deterrent for population density growth, and the needs of Olympia’s homeless population are met.



“This is not about Triway or million dollar condos. I’m talking about mixed-use housing,” says Stroble.



In Oly 2012’s final position paper (yes, they write papers too) endorsing the rezone, the group had this to say:



“We remain committed to the redevelopment of downtown Olympia, including the building of market-rate housing for all income levels, and adequate parking to meet the needs of residents, business owners, and visitors. We want a diverse, walkable, inviting and economically thriving downtown we can all be proud of! Furthermore, we want to save as much of the farmland and forestland of Thurston County as possible from the everyday threat of suburban sprawl by developing denser, more diverse housing options for Olympia’s citizens.”



Simply put, Stroble says, “(the rezone) meets the Comprehensive Plan goals. You’re not going to get a better use for that land.”

But what about the view?

Just as Oly 2012’s support of the rezone has no relation to Triway’s proposed condos, the fight against the rezone has nothing to do with objecting to high-density housing in downtown Olympia.



It has everything to do with the view.



From the capitol campus, looking out to the northwest, it’s quite a sight. Your eyes carry you across Capital Lake, past the Fourth Ave Bridge and onto the waters of Budd Inlet without interruption. As far as picturesque capital cities go, Olympia has a lot going for it. To supporters, not giving into the condo henchmen and instead building a park will only enhance Olympia’s beauty, and it will fend off the dollar worshipping gentrification that’s happened in so many other places.



“It’s one of the magnificent sights in America,” says Jerry Reilly, chairman of the Olympia Isthmus Park Association and a former Olympia planning commissioner. “Its value to the community and state is enormous.



“There is plenty of space for market rate housing (downtown),” continues Reilly. “I have no disagreement that we need dense housing. That doesn’t logically follow that you build (on the isthmus).



“A park is the highest and best use for this land. There’s a broad community consensus.”

To capitalize on that broad community support, but more importantly to stop the city from moving forward after it has already voted to raise height limits on the isthmus — despite the fact the citizens of Olympia have requested a park feasibility study — Reilly and others who favor a park have sued Olympia. They are seeking an injunction to nullify the city’s decision to raise building heights until the park feasibility study is finished and all appeals and other remedies are exhausted.



“(By raising the height limits Olympia has) compromised the feasibility study,” says Reilly. “They have made the park option more difficult by increasing the value of the land dramatically.



“Due diligence required us to take that step,” says Reilly of the lawsuit.

Along with claiming the city ignored the people of Olympia’s demands for a park feasibility study by raising the height limit before the study was completed, he — and many others — claim the plans for 65- to 90-foot buildings on the isthmus violate the state’s Shoreline Management Act, a stance Reilly and the attorneys on his side are also pushing.



“Our attorneys are as confident as I’ve ever seen attorneys be,” says Reilly.

Don’t forget Triway

Most important in all of this arguing is Triway Development — the company that actually owns much of the land in question. Though Triway initially asked for the rezone when economic times were far different and the idea of building $141 million condos anywhere — especially downtown Olympia — sounds a little loopy at the moment, through Jeanette Hawkins, who was on Olympia’s City Council from 1994-2003 and now works for Triway Enterprises, the development company offered its perspective on what the future of Olympia’s waterfront should look like.



“We will commence with our project (a two- to three-year timeline),” writes Hawkins. “This location really demands a first-class building.



“Raising the building heights supports the city’s vision for a strong, vibrant downtown community, supporting more jobs, shops, restaurants and housing. This amendment and rezone supports the city and state growth management goals by creating greater density in urban areas,” Hawkins continues. “This rezone is the right thing for the environment. It keeps development in the city where it belongs, prevents sprawl and loss of forest land and rural open space, and improves public transit opportunities.”

The future?

As much as many in Olympia seem to hate it, things in our capital city cannot remain the same forever. Things change. They always do. As populations continue to rise, the downtown core of Olympia faces a decision. Should it allow this growth to happen in the strip mall-heavy suburbs, increasing the toll on the environment and ignoring the Comprehensive Plan? Or should it do something proactive — likely changing Olympia’s downtown forever and maybe even opening the door for hated developers in a town built on saying no?



For what it’s worth, all sides of the argument seem confident that they’ll prevail.

“Eventually, there will be high-density housing on the isthmus,” says Stroble. “I love Olympia. I love the funk factor. I’ve seen what happened to Belltown. It doesn’t have to be like that. They can only Kirklandize Olympia if we let them.”



“They believe (building condos) would be a catalyst. It’s not going to do anything for downtown,” says Reilly. “My optimistic scenario is the feasibility study will come out and show the park to be a reasonably achievable target. In all likelihood, the other project will have failed (by then). At that point, city leaders will begin to pivot and reconcile themselves with the people.”



“This is really spectacular property, and I think it has every chance of being successful — whether it’s Triway that builds it or someone else,” says Hawkins. “I have faith in our future and have every intention of following through.”