buildable lands report 2014 - thurston county

Buildable Lands Report 2014 For Thurston County

Grand Mound Area (2006 and 2012 Aerial Photo)

FINAL

Thurston Regional Planning Council

March 2014

THURSTON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL (TRPC) is a 22-member intergovernmental board made up of local governmental jurisdictions within Thurston County, plus the Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation and the Nisqually Indian Tribe. The Council was established in 1967 under RCW 36.70.060, which authorized creation of regional planning councils. TRPC’s mission is to “Provide Visionary Leadership on Regional Plans, Policies, and Issues.” To Support this Mission:

A. Support regional transportation planning consistent with state and federal funding requirements.

B. Address growth management, environmental quality, and other topics determined by the Council.

C. Assemble and analyze data that support local and regional decision making D. Act as a “convener”, build regional consensus on issues through information and citizen

involvement. E. Build intergovernmental consensus on regional plans, policies, and issues, and advocate local

implementation.

This report was prepared as part of the Thurston Regional Planning Council’s 2013-14 regional work program.

2014 MEMBERSHIP

THURSTON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

Governmental Jurisdiction Name of 2014 Representative

City of Lacey Virgil Clarkson, Mayor

City of Olympia Nathaniel Jones, Councilmember

City of Rainier Dennis McVey, Councilmember

City of Tenino Bret Brodersen, Councilmember

City of Tumwater Tom Oliva, Councilmember

City of Yelm Robert Isom, Councilmember

Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation Amy Loudermilk, Staff

Nisqually Indian Tribe Willie Frank, Tribal Councilmember

James Slape, Jr., Tribal Councilmember

Town of Bucoda Alan Vanell, Councilmember

Thurston County Sandra Romero, County Commissioner

North Thurston Public Schools Chuck Namit, School Board Member

Olympia School District Allen Miller, School Board Member

Intercity Transit Karen Valenzuela, Authority Member

LOTT Clean Water Alliance Cynthia Pratt, Board Member

Port of Olympia Bill McGregor, Port Commissioner

PUD No. 1 of Thurston County Chris Stearns, PUD Commissioner

Associate Members

Economic Development Council of Thurston County Michael Cade, Executive Director

Lacey Fire District #3 Gene Dobry, Commissioner

Puget Sound Regional Council vacant

TCOMM9-1-1 Ed Hildreth, Board member

Timberland Regional Library Cheryl Heywood, Library Director

The Evergreen State College Jeanne Rynne, Director of Facilities Services

Chair Vice Chair Secretary

Sandra Romero Virgil Clarkson Tom Oliva

Thurston County City of Lacey City of Tumwater

Lon D. Wyrick, Executive Director

Advisory Committee

2014

Adam Frank Olympia Master Builders

Andy Ryder City of Lacey, Transportation Policy Board

Bret Brodersen City of Tenino, Transportation Policy Board

Dave Burns Principal Planner, City of Lacey

David Ginther Senior Planner, City of Tumwater

David Schaffert President/CEO, Thurston County Chamber

Dennis Bloom Planning Manager, Intercity Transit

Dennis Mahar Executive Director, Area Agency on Aging

Doug DeForest Business Representative, Transportation Policy Board

Ed Hildreth Intercity Transit, Transportation Policy Board

Fred Evander City Planner, City of Tenino, City of Rainier

Grant Beck Director of Community Development, City of Yelm

Jeremy Davis Senior Planner, Thurston County

Jerry Parker Citizen Representative

(also on Olympia Planning Commission)

Jim Longley Transportation Planner, Nisqually Indian Tribe

Mark Kitabayashi Thurston County Realtors

Michael Cade Executive Director, Economic Development Council

Mike Beehler Lacey Planning Commission

Clarita Mattox Real Estate Operations Manager, Port of Olympia

Pete Kmet City of Tumwater, Transportation Policy Board

Riley Moore St. Martin’s University

Pete Swensson Citizen Representative

Tim Smith Planning Manager, City of Tumwater (Alternate)

Todd Stamm Planning Manager, City of Olympia

Tyle Zuchowski Capital Planning Manager, LOTT

Thurston Regional Planning Council Staff

Veena Tabbutt Senior Planner

Holly Gilbert Senior Planner

Thera Black Senior Planner

Scott Carte GIS Manager

Jeff Holcomb GIS Analyst

Michael Ambrogi GIS Analyst

Nathan Nadenicek Intern

Rosalie Bostwick Office Manager

Burlina Montgomery Office Specialist III

Lon D. Wyrick Executive Director

Jared Burbidge Assistant Director

This page intentionally left blank

Thurston Regional Planning Council Page i Buildable Lands Report 2014

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................... 1

SOURCES OF DATA ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

Annual Data Collection ........................................................................................................................................ 4

Other Sources of Data .......................................................................................................................................... 4

Population and Employment Forecast .................................................................................................................. 4

20 YEAR PLANNING HORIZON ................................................................................................................................... 4

RELATED GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT (GMA) GOALS............................................................................................ 5

RELATED COUNTY-WIDE PLANNING POLICIES .......................................................................................................... 5

THURSTON COUNTY LAND USE ................................................................................................................................. 6

CHAPTER 2: ACHIEVED RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES ........................................................................... 7

DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................................. 9

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT TO MEASURE? .................................................................................................................... 9

HOW IS DENSITY MEASURED? ................................................................................................................................... 9

FINDINGS - ARE URBAN DENSITIES BEING ACHIEVED IN URBAN GROWTH AREAS? ................................................ 10

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? ......................................................................................................................................... 11

DENSITY BY TYPE OF UNIT ...................................................................................................................................... 12

DENSITY BY TYPE OF AREA ..................................................................................................................................... 13

EXAMPLES OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY ...................................................................................................................... 14

WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD? ............................................................................................................................. 24

CHAPTER 3: RESIDENTIAL LAND SUPPLY ....................................................................................... 33

DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 35

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT TO MEASURE? .................................................................................................................. 35

HOW IS LAND SUPPLY MEASURED? ......................................................................................................................... 35

WHAT ABOUT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS? ........................................................................................... 36

WHAT ABOUT PARKS AND SCHOOLS? ...................................................................................................................... 36

WHAT ABOUT LAND AVAILABILITY? ....................................................................................................................... 36

HOW IS THE LAND CAPACITY MODEL CALIBRATED? ............................................................................................... 36

WANT MORE INFORMATION? ................................................................................................................................... 36

WHAT IS LAND SUPPLY COMPARED TO? ................................................................................................................. 37

FINDINGS – IS THERE ENOUGH LAND IN THE URBAN GROWTH AREAS? .................................................................. 38

IS THERE TOO MUCH LAND IN THE URBAN GROWTH AREAS? ................................................................................. 39

DEMAND – PROJECTED NEED FOR HOUSING ............................................................................................................ 40

SUPPLY – RESIDENTIAL LAND SUPPLY AND POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS ............................................................. 45

TYPES OF POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ............................................................................... 46

THURSTON COUNTY’S URBAN GROWTH AREAS ...................................................................................................... 56

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE FACTORS INCLUDED IN THE URBAN GROWTH AREA REVIEW? ......................................... 56

CHANGES TO THE URBAN GROWTH AREA ............................................................................................................... 58

Environmentally Sensitive Areas ........................................................................................................................ 58

Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................................................... 59

Public Services .................................................................................................................................................... 59

Demographic Needs ............................................................................................................................................ 60

Thurston Regional Planning Council Page i Buildable Lands Report 2014

CHAPTER 4: COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL LAND CAPACITY .................................................... 61

DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 63

WHY IS COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND SUPPLY IMPORTANT TO MEASURE? ................................................ 63

WHERE WILL NEW JOBS LOCATE? .......................................................................................................................... 63

HOW MUCH LAND WILL THESE NEW JOBS NEED? .................................................................................................. 64

Employees per Building Square Feet .................................................................................................................. 64

Average Building Square Foot Floor to Area Ratio (FAR) ................................................................................ 64

WHAT ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE? ........................................................................................................................... 65

FINDINGS – IS THERE ENOUGH LAND? ..................................................................................................................... 65

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND SUPPLY ...................................................... 73

CHAPTER 5: RURAL LANDS ................................................................................................................. 75

DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 77

WHY ARE THESE IMPORTANT TO MEASURE? ............................................................................................................ 77

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ................................................................................................................. 77

RURAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS ............................................................................................................................... 78

RESIDENTIAL RURAL LOTS ...................................................................................................................................... 79

Thurston Regional Planning Council Page 1 Buildable Lands Report 2014

CHAPTER 1:

OVERVIEW


Overview

Since the late 1970s the Thurston Regional Planning Council has provided estimates of the buildable land

supply in Thurston County. During this time, Thurston County was one of the fastest growing counties in

Washington State. Understanding the land supply gives indications on where projected growth can and is

likely to locate, and how much land is set aside for other uses such as environmental protection, parks and

recreation, agriculture, and forestry.

In 1990 the State Growth Management Act (GMA) was passed requiring local cities, towns, and the

county to develop detailed plans on how they planned to accommodate growth. These are called

comprehensive plans. At the same time the seven cities and towns and Thurston County developed

county-wide planning policies that laid out how Thurston County was to grow as a region. Under these

policies, Thurston Regional Planning Council was asked to review land supply and planned densities to

ensure that the urban areas were large enough to accommodate 20 years of projected growth.

The State legislature added a monitoring and evaluation provision to the GMA in 1997. This provision is

often referred to as the “Buildable Lands Program.” It affects six western Washington counties (Clark,

King, Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish, and Thurston) and the cities and towns within them. Thurston Regional

Planning Council was asked to develop the Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County, based on its

long history of monitoring land supply. Two reports have been previously issued in 2002 and 2007. This

third report is due no later than June 30, 2015. It is being issued in 2014 to inform local comprehensive

plan updates, and to build on data developed in the update of the 2012-13 Population and Employment

Forecast. This abbreviated approach is a response to lack of state funding for a robust update.

The Buildable Lands Program in Thurston County must answer three key growth-related questions. The

first is whether residential development in the urban growth areas is occurring at the densities envisioned

in local comprehensive plans. The second is whether there is an adequate land supply in the urban growth

areas for anticipated future growth in population, and the third is whether there is an adequate land supply

in the urban growth areas for anticipated future growth in employment.


Sources of Data

Annual Data Collection

Residential and commercial building permits from Bucoda, Lacey, Olympia, Rainier, Tenino,

Thurston County, the Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation and the Nisqually Indian

Tribe

Approved subdivisions (long plats) from the Thurston County Auditor’s office

Residential projects in the development pipeline (application stages) from Bucoda, Lacey,

Olympia, Rainier, Tenino, Thurston County, the Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation

and the Nisqually Indian Tribe

Thurston County Assessor’s office – building and land valuations

Parcel GIS data layer from the Thurston Geodata Center

Annexations

Other Sources of Data

Covered Employment from the Washington State Office of Employment Securities

Census 2010

Aerial photography

Zoning, jurisdictional boundaries, planning areas from local jurisdictions

Population and Employment Forecast

Thurston Regional Planning Council

20 Year Planning Horizon

The 20 year planning horizon established for this report is 2015 to 2035 to correspond with a 20 year

period for the comprehensive plan updates (due in 2016). Base data from the population and employment

forecast is 2010.


Related Growth Management Act (GMA) Goals

GMA Goal (1) Urban growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public

facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.

GMA Goal (2) Reduce sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into

sprawling, low-density development.

Related County-Wide Planning Policies

Urban growth within Thurston County will occur only in designated urban growth areas. The urban

growth areas will be periodically reviewed.

Thurston County and each city and town will concentrate development in growth areas by: encouraging

infill, phasing urban development outward from core areas, establishing mechanisms to ensure average

residential densities are sufficient to accommodate the 20-year population projections, designate rural

areas for low intensity, non-urban uses, requiring development to be configured so urban growth areas

may eventually infill and become urban.

The State Office of Financial Management (OFM) growth management planning population projections

will be used as the range of population to be accommodated for the coming 20 years.

Within the overall framework of the OFM population projections, Thurston Regional Planning Council

will develop county-wide and smaller area population projections based on current adopted plans, zoning

and environmental regulations and buildout trends.

A review and evaluation program pursuant to RCW 36.70A.215 (“Buildable Lands Program”), will be

established, subject to availability of state funding.


Thurston County Land Use

Thurston County is approximately 735 square miles (including lakes and other land-locked water bodies.)

Of this area, 6.6 percent has been identified as vacant land. A further 23 percent is in residential uses –

some of which can intensify over time (see Chapter 3 for examples of partially-utilized land). Another

almost 15 percent is in forest or agriculture uses today, but in zoning designations that will allow for

residential development in the future (see categories highlighted in red in the figure below).

Figure 1-1

Thurston County Land Use

Urban and Rural Lands


CHAPTER 2: ACHIEVED

RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES


Achieved Residential Densities

Are urban densities being achieved in urban growth areas?

Description

Achieved residential density is the measure of how much land each new home, condo, or apartment

complex requires. As a rule of thumb, if development is occurring at four or more dwellings per net acre,

it is considered urban and consistent with the Growth Management Act.

Why is this Important to Measure?

The South Sound is one of the fastest growing areas in the state. In 1985, twenty-five years ago,

approximately 140,000 people were living in Thurston County. By 2010, this number had risen to over

250,000. This is a gain of around 110,000 people. We’re expecting another 120,000 people by 2035, or

within the next 25 years. Our growth rate is high because of our stable economy, high quality of life, and

lower cost of living compared to the Central Puget Sound region.

We have around 130,000 thousand jobs in Thurston County, and expect another 60,000 by 2035, or

within the next 25 years. These jobs will attract workers and their families. We’re also expecting an

increasing number of people to move to the Thurston County to commute to jobs in the Central Puget

Sound region, and to large job centers such as Joint Base Lewis-McChord. We also attract retirees and out

of the area students to our university and colleges.

This means that one-third of the jobs and housing that will exist in 2035 will have been created between

now and then, having a tremendous impact on our built environment.

Monitoring achieved density tells us how compact growth is as our communities grow, and if we are

using land, as a resource, wisely. This will help achieve our community visions of concentrating growth

in the urban areas, and providing more opportunities for areas where people can live, work, shop, learn,

and play in close proximity. It will also help achieve our goals of preserving natural resources and a rural

atmosphere in the remainder of the county.

How is Density Measured?

Achieved residential density is measured by comparing new construction of residential homes and

apartments against lot size. Public roads, open space, and critical areas and buffers are removed from the

land area calculations.


Findings - Are Urban Densities being Achieved in Urban Growth Areas?

Overall, Thurston County urban jurisdictions are achieving urban densities greater than the rule of

thumb threshold of four dwelling units per acre.

Individually, all Thurston County urban areas with sewer service are achieving urban densities.

(For health code reasons, densities must be lower than four units per acre when sewer service is

not available.)

Achieved densities are higher within city limits (incorporated areas) than the unincorporated

growth area.

The achieved density in Yelm, Tenino, and Rainier’s unincorporated urban growth areas were not

measured, as these areas are not zoned for urban growth. The assumption is that once these areas are

annexed they will be rezoned for urban densities. Until that time, 1 unit per 5 acre rural zoning acts as a

holding area.

Figure 2-1

Achieved Density in Thurston County's Urban Areas

Figure 2-2

Achieved Density in Thurston County's Urban Areas

City limits and Adjacent Growth Areas*

Note: * Does not include Yelm, Tenino, and Rainier unincorporated growth areas as they are zoned for 1 unit per

five acre until annexation into adjacent city.


What does this Mean?

The Growth Management Act comprehensive plans and zoning were passed in the early 1990s in all of

Thurston County’s jurisdictions. Since that time, all urban jurisdictions with sewer infrastructure have

seen an increase in achieved residential density, meaning that they are using land supply more efficiently.

Not only is less land consumed for the same number of homes, but less public infrastructure is needed to

support a more compact form of growth. This means that fewer miles of roads, stormwater, water, and

sewer pipes need to be built and maintained. Compact growth also leaves more land for parks, open

space and rural uses.

Table 2-1

Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units Acres

Approved

DU/Acre

Approved

Dwelling

Units Acres

Approved

DU/Acre

Bucoda Total 4 2 1.89 8 1 6.30

Lacey City 1,127 126 8.93 3,814 384 9.94

UGA 1,488 288 5.16 624 111 5.62

Total 2,615 415 6.31 4,438 494 8.97

Olympia City 800 124 6.45 835 97 8.58

UGA 802 136 5.90 511 66 7.79

Total 1,602 260 6.16 1,346 163 8.26

Rainier City 40 15 2.60 106 48 2.22

Tenino City 59 16 3.70 23 4 5.40

Tumwater City 585 83 7.06 801 89 9.00

UGA 275 73 3.79 175 25 7.06

Total 860 156 5.53 976 114 8.57

Yelm City 552 74 7.42 746 98 7.65

Grand Mound UGA Total 5 5 0.99 130 20 6.52

Total Cities 3,167 441 7.18 6,333 721 8.79

Total UGAs 2,570 502 5.12 1,440 221 6.51

Total Urban Areas 5,737 943 6.08 7,773 942 8.25

Sources: TRPC; Thurston County Assessor's Office; Local Jurisdiction Planning Departments.

2001-2005 2006-2010

Note: Does not include single-family homes on lots over 2 acres in size as it is assumed these parcels will be

further subdivided when sewer service is available.

Average Number of Approved Dwelling Units per Acre in Urban Areas

Thurston County, 2001-2010


Density by Type of Unit

Achieved residential density varies by type of dwelling unit. In the last planning period, single-family

homes in the urban areas had an achieved density of around 7 units per acre – up from 5 units per acre

during the earlier part of the decade. Densities for duplexes, fourplexes, townhomes, condominiums

(which are an ownership category, not a building form) and apartments typically are higher.

With changing demographics, we are expecting an increase in demand for multifamily homes compared

to single-family homes. This change in demand is driven by the aging of the baby boom, some of whom

will trade in large homes and suburban lots for the convenience of city living as they retire. In addition,

an increasing proportion of their children, the millennial generation, are delaying marriage and children,

and seeking walkable urban neighborhoods with smaller homes. All of this is likely to lead to an increase

in achieved residential densities over time.

Table 2-2

Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units Acres

Approved

DU/Acre

Approved

Dwelling

Units Acres

Approved

DU/Acre

Single-family 4,428 856 5.17 5,990 845 7.09

Duplexes to fourplexes 184 19 9.45 94 11 8.58

Townhomes 116 10 11.26 431 28 15.16

Condominiums 74 7 10.96 226 11 21.28

Apartments 935 50 18.52 1,032 47 22.05

Total 5,737 943 6.08 7,773 942 8.25


Average Number of Approved Dwelling Units per Acre by Type of Building


2001-2005 2006-2010

Note: Does not include single-family homes on lots over 2 acres in size as it is assumed these

parcels will be further subdivided when sewer service is available.


Density by Type of Area

Achieved residential density tends to be slightly higher in infill areas. Infill areas are defined as those

areas within the cities or urban growth area that were urban in nature by the 1970s, for both north and

south county cities and towns. Greater differences in achieved density are found between the north

county center and corridors (corridors defined as a quarter mile from the major street in either direction)

and the remainder of the north county urban area.

Changing demographics are also likely to lead to an increase in demand for housing in infill areas and in

areas with access to convenient and frequent (15 minutes or greater) transit service. These areas are

found in the urban corridors of Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater – areas with the highest achieved

residential density.

Table 2-3

Type of Area

Approved

Dwelling

Units Percent Acres

Approved

DU/Acre

Approved

Dwelling

Units Acres

Approved

DU/Acre

Infill 423 7% 65 6.51 391 5% 46 8.51

Other 5,314 93% 878 6.05 7,382 95% 896 8.24

Total 5,737 100% 943 6.08 7,773 100% 942 8.25

North County Center or Corridor 345 6% 26 13.06 546 7% 35 15.43

Remaining North County 4,732 82% 804 5.89 6,214 80% 736 8.44

South County Urban Areas 660 12% 113 5.84 1,013 13% 171 5.93

Total 5,737 100% 943 6.08 7,773 100% 942 8.25


Average Number of Approved Dwelling Units per Acre in Urban Areas


2001-2005 2006-2010

Note: Does not include single-family homes on lots over 2 acres in size as it is assumed these parcels will be further subdivided

when sewer service is available.


Examples of Residential Density

The first set of examples are single-family subdivisions. Examples range from lower density rural

subdivisions, to moderate density subdivision. The scales on each photo are comparable.

Net Density measures the number of homes divided by the area in residential lots. The

subdivision area given to open space and roads is not included. Critical areas such as wetlands,

subdivision parks, and stormwater ponds are usually included in the open space. The density

reported in the “achieved density” tables is a net density.

Gross Density measures the number of homes within a subdivision divided by the total area,

including local roads and open space.

The second set of examples are representative of infill density – or buildings on individual lots in existing

neighborhoods. The term planners are currently using for this is “middle” density. “Middle-density”

already exists in many of our older neighborhoods, in many shapes and forms, and can help provide

additional housing in urban neighborhoods to support transit ridership and increase the number of

customers within walking distance for neighborhood commercial areas, reducing the need for parking.

This set of examples shows what various densities look like.

Residential Subdivisions

2012 Aerial Photos

Subdivision Information

TRPC database

Rural subdivision approved in

1974.

Net density 0.86 du / acre.

Gross density 0.68 du / acre.



2012 Aerial Photos


TRPC database

Subdivision approved in 1987.



Subdivision approved in 1997

(vested under pre-GMA

zoning)





2012 Aerial Photos


TRPC database









2012 Aerial Photos


TRPC database




Subdivision approved in 2001-

2003.





2012 Aerial Photos


TRPC database







Mix of housing types

including attached townhomes.



2012 Aerial Photos


TRPC database





Net density 14 du / acre.


Mix of housing types

including attached townhomes

and multifamily.


Building View Neighborhood View

(red dot indicates building)

These two townhomes in Olympia sit on a standard 3,000 sq ft (each) city lots and have a density of 15 units

per acre.

This three-unit apartment, located in a residential neighborhood near downtown Olympia takes up the same

space as the neighboring single-family homes, but has a density of 26 units per acre. Ensuring that multi-unit

buildings feature a similar building height, width and roof shape as adjacent single-family homes can help

new structures fit into existing neighborhoods.




This historic mansion in the historic South Capitol neighborhood of Olympia contains 8 living units. With a

density of 41 units per acre, this structure shows how higher density can be attained without changing the

perceived density of the neighborhood.

This fourplex, situated near the Capitol in the South Capitol neighborhood of Olympia, has a density of 25

units per acre. This building type, which features two residences on the top of the structure and two on the

bottom, was common prior to the Great Depression and World War II. In the early 1920's, the Sears catalog

even sold blueprints for the housing type.




These historic homes in Tenino, each situated on a 0.12 acre lot, have a density of 8 units per acre.

This building in the historic Stadium District of Tacoma has 12 units on a 14,625 square foot lot, for a

density of 35 units per acre. The courtyard design offers outdoor space for the residents as well as an inviting

entrance.


What does the Future Hold?

Since the Growth Management Act comprehensive plans, zoning, and development regulations were

adopted in the early 1990s, there has been a steady increase in achieved density in the urban areas. This is

mainly a result of increased density in single-family subdivisions. Single-family housing starts have

comprised around 75-85 percent of the new housing starts in the county in the last decade and a half.

While Figures 2-1 and 2-2 show achieved density based on housing starts, and cover the full range of

housing types – single-family, multifamily and manufactured homes, Figure 2-3 shows residential

subdivision density – or residential lots platted through the long plat subdivision process. The dates

indicate the date on which the subdivision was approved. Typically, once a subdivision plat is approved

it takes up to three or four years for the homes to be built.

The data in Figure 2-3 show an interesting trend. Both gross and net subdivision densities began to

increase after the Growth Management Act was passed and zoning was changed throughout much of the

urban area. Net density (think of net density as individual lots) increased at a greater pace than gross

density (think of gross density as the number of homes divided by the entire neighborhood area, including

streets and open space). This is for two reasons:

As lot sizes got smaller, a greater proportion of the land was set aside for streets and open space.

Over time – a greater proportion of the land that was developed had critical areas such as stream

corridors and wetlands. These were included in the subdivision open space.

The 2010 plus data allow a glimpse into the future. Reversing trends, gross density is expected to

decrease in the future. This is because many of the planned projects are on lands that contain large

amounts of critical areas. This highlights how important it is to focus on infill and redevelopment, as the

opportunities for increasing density in the remainder of the urban growth area may be shrinking. This data

set is developed from identifying recently approved projects, as well as development projects that are

proposed and have preliminary approval.

Figure 2-3

Residential Subdivision Density in Urban Areas


Table 2-4

Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

DU/Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

DU/Total

Acres

Platted

Bucoda Total 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Lacey City 1,422 423 3.36 843 215 3.93

UGA 2,807 1,012 2.77 2,040 904 2.26

Total 4,229 1,435 2.95 2,883 1,119 2.58

Olympia City 1,203 424 2.84 855 264 3.23

UGA 966 394 2.45 348 168 2.07

Total 2,169 817 2.65 1,203 432 2.78

Rainier City 26 11 2.30 10 6 1.65

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 26 11 2.30 10 6 1.65

Tenino City 19 5 3.66 0 0 0.00

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 19 5 3.66 0 0 0.00

Tumwater City 281 95 2.95 584 239 2.45

UGA 319 137 2.32 210 150 1.40

Total 600 233 2.58 794 389 2.04

Yelm City 107 38 2.84 29 12 2.44

UGA 36 15 2.44 91 77 1.18

Total 143 52 2.73 120 89 1.35


Total Cities 3,058 996 3.07 2,321 736 3.16

Total UGAs 4,128 1,558 2.65 2,689 1,299 2.07

Total Urban Areas 7,186 2,554 2.81 5,010 2,035 2.46

Sources: TRPC; Thurston County Assessor's Office; Thurston County Auditor's Office.

Gross Density - Average Number of Approved Dwelling Units per Total Acres

Platted in Residential Subdivisions, Thurston County, 1970-2009

Explanation: UGA is unincorporated Urban Growth Area. This table does not include residential lots created

in mobile home parks; represents scenario if subdivision were completely built out.

1970-1979 1980-1989


Table 2-4 (continued)

Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

DU/Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

DU/Total

Acres

Platted

Bucoda Total 0 0 0.00 19 16 1.16

Lacey City 2,195 605 3.63 1,046 274 3.82

UGA 439 237 1.86 527 230 2.30

Total 2,634 842 3.13 1,573 503 3.13

Olympia City 864 261 3.31 578 149 3.89

UGA 375 215 1.74 403 155 2.61

Total 1,239 477 2.60 981 303 3.24

Rainier City 117 79 1.48 53 32 1.68

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 117 79 1.48 53 32 1.68

Tenino City 69 16 4.27 7 3 2.10

UGA 12 12 1.01 0 0 0.00

Total 81 28 2.89 7 3 2.10

Tumwater City 143 43 3.36 264 84 3.13

UGA 364 338 1.08 165 94 1.76

Total 507 381 1.33 429 178 2.41

Yelm City 254 65 3.89 259 65 4.01

UGA 6 6 0.94 0 0 0.00

Total 260 72 3.63 259 65 4.01


Total Cities 3,642 1,070 3.40 2,226 623 3.58

Total UGAs 1,196 809 1.48 1,095 478 2.29







1990-1994 1995-1999



Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

DU/Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Total

Acres

Platted

Approved

DU/Total

Acres

Platted

Bucoda Total 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Lacey City 682 127 5.38 3,622 693 5.23

UGA 904 315 2.87 628 203 3.09

Total 1,586 442 3.59 4,250 896 4.74

Olympia City 388 107 3.63 618 160 3.86

UGA 578 184 3.14 309 89 3.47

Total 966 291 3.32 927 249 3.72

Rainier City 22 11 2.04 172 90 1.91

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 22 11 2.04 172 90 1.91

Tenino City 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Tumwater City 164 45 3.69 1,140 266 4.29

UGA 447 86 5.21 277 87 3.18

Total 611 130 4.69 1,417 353 4.01

Yelm City 415 96 4.34 1,239 268 4.61

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 415 96 4.34 1,239 268 4.61


Total Cities 1,671 385 4.34 6,791 1,477 4.60

Total UGAs 1,929 584 3.30 1,394 424 3.29

Total Urban Areas 3,600 969 3.71 8,185 1,901 4.31






2000-2004 2005-2009


Table 2-5

Jurisdiction

Proposed

Dwelling

Units

Total

Acres

Proposed

DU/Acre

Bucoda Total 0 0 0.00

Lacey City 1,331 403 3.30

UGA 1,487 312 4.77

Total 2,818 715 3.94

Olympia City 598 199 3.00

UGA 467 80 5.85

Total 1,065 279 3.82

Rainier City 27 14 1.98

UGA 0 0 0.00

Total 27 14 1.98

Tenino City 10 3 0.00

UGA 0 0 0.00

Total 10 3 0.00

Tumwater City 523 188 2.79

UGA 1,568 516 3.04

Total 2,091 704 2.97

Yelm City 612 135 4.54

UGA 0 0 0.00

Total 612 135 4.54

Grand Mound UGA Total 48 12 0.00

Total Cities 3,101 942 3.29

Total UGAs 3,570 920 3.88

Total Urban Areas 6,671 1,862 3.58

per Total Acres Residential Subdivisions - 2010 plus

Gross Density - Average Number of Proposed Dwelling Units

Explanation: UGA is unincorporated Urban Growth Area. This table does not include residential lots

created in mobile home parks; represents scenario if subdivision were completely built out.

Sources: TRPC; Thurston County Auditor's Office; Planning Departments.

2010 Plus


Table 2-6

Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Acres in

Res.

Lots

Approved

DU/ Res.

Acre

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Acres in

Res.

Lots

Approved

DU/ Res.

Acre

Bucoda Total 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Lacey City 1,419 306 4.64 841 143 5.90

UGA 2,807 737 3.81 2,040 649 3.14

Total 4,226 1,042 4.05 2,881 792 3.64

Olympia City 1,203 306 3.93 855 190 4.50

UGA 966 264 3.65 348 111 3.13

Total 2,169 570 3.80 1,203 301 3.99

Rainier City 26 7 3.52 10 4 2.37

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 26 7 3.52 10 4 2.37

Tenino City 19 4 5.31 0 0 0.00

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 19 4 5.31 0 0 0.00

Tumwater City 281 68 4.15 584 146 3.99

UGA 319 98 3.26 210 101 2.08

Total 600 166 3.62 794 248 3.21

Yelm City 107 30 3.60 29 11 2.70

UGA 36 14 2.61 91 74 1.23

Total 143 44 3.28 120 85 1.42


Total Cities 3,055 720 4.24 2,319 494 4.69

Total UGAs 4,128 1,113 3.71 2,689 936 2.87



Net Density - Average Number of Approved Dwelling Units per Residential Acre

in Residential Subdivisions, Thurston County, 1970-2009



1970-1979 1980-1989



Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Acres in

Res.

Lots

Approved

DU/ Res.

Acre

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Acres in

Res.

Lots

Approved

DU/ Res.

Acre

Bucoda Total 0 0 0.00 19 15 1.23

Lacey City 2,195 369 5.95 1,046 137 7.65

UGA 439 161 2.73 527 162 3.26

Total 2,634 530 4.97 1,573 298 5.27

Olympia City 864 175 4.92 578 90 6.42

UGA 375 115 3.25 403 92 4.40

Total 1,239 291 4.26 981 182 5.40

Rainier City 117 66 1.78 53 27 2.00

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 117 66 1.78 53 27 2.00

Tenino City 69 13 5.21 7 3 0.00

UGA 12 4 3.32 0 0 0.00

Total 81 17 4.80 7 3 0.00

Tumwater City 143 29 4.87 264 46 5.74

UGA 364 206 1.77 165 47 3.52

Total 507 235 2.15 429 93 4.62

Yelm City 254 46 5.53 259 42 6.16

UGA 6 6 1.05 0 0 0.00

Total 260 52 5.04 259 42 6.16


Total Cities 3,642 699 5.21 2,226 360 6.18

Total UGAs 1,196 492 2.43 1,095 300 3.65

Total Urban Areas 4,838 1,191 4.06 3,321 660 5.03






1990-1994 1995-1999



Jurisdiction

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Acres in

Res.

Lots

Approved

DU/ Res.

Acre

Approved

Dwelling

Units

Acres in

Res.

Lots

Approved

DU/ Res.

Acre

Bucoda Total 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Lacey City 682 78 8.77 3,622 386 9.39

UGA 904 186 4.85 628 91 6.87

Total 1,586 264 6.00 4,250 477 8.91

Olympia City 388 46 8.47 618 63 9.85

UGA 578 85 6.78 309 45 6.88

Total 966 131 7.37 927 108 8.61

Rainier City 22 8 2.77 172 68 2.52

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 22 8 2.77 172 68 2.52

Tenino City 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Tumwater City 164 27 6.15 1,140 131 8.70

UGA 447 52 8.55 277 32 8.76

Total 611 79 7.74 1,417 163 8.71

Yelm City 415 61 6.77 1,239 161 7.70

UGA 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00

Total 415 61 6.77 1,239 161 7.70


Total Cities 1,671 219 7.61 6,791 809 8.40

Total UGAs 1,929 324 5.95 1,394 199 7.01

Total Urban Areas 3,600 543 6.62 8,185 1,008 8.12






2000-2004 2005-2009


CHAPTER 3:

RESIDENTIAL LAND

SUPPLY


Residential Land Supply in Urban Areas

Is Thurston County’s urban residential land supply sufficient to accommodate

projected housing and population growth to the year 2035?

Description

Residential land supply is the

amount of vacant, partially-used,

and redevelopable (under-

utilized) land that under current

land use rules and regulations can

be developed for homes,

apartments, condominium, and

other types of living arrangements including dormitories, and senior living facilities.

Why is this Important to Measure?

Residential land supply is one determinant of where future growth will locate. Thurston County has been

one of the fastest growing counties in Washington for the last thirty years. Thurston County and each city

and town have developed visions on how they plan to grow over the next twenty years. These visions are

laid out in their comprehensive plans. The forecast provides an opportunity to evaluate if the rules and

regulations each jurisdiction has in place will result in the amount, type and placement of growth they

expect and hope to receive.

How is Land Supply Measured?

Residential land supply is measured by first taking an inventory of all the land, buildings, and other types

of uses that are on the ground in 2010. This creates a land use inventory categorizing land into the

following categories.

1 Water Bodies

2 Parks, Preserves, & Open Space

3 Natural Resources (Public and Private)

4 Roads, Railroads, & Rights of Way

5 Government/Institutional

6 Utilities

7 Residential

8 Commercial/Industrial

9 Mixed Use

10 Undeveloped land


After that, a series of assumptions are applied to the residential, commercial/industrial, mixed-use, and

undeveloped land to determine how and if the land can be developed in the future. These assumptions

range from things such as how many homes per acre can be placed on a piece of land, when a piece of

land can be considered fully developed or partially-used, how much of the land is likely to be developed

for commercial or industrial uses, and how much to take out of the land supply for environmentally

sensitive areas.

These assumptions are based on the policies and regulations adopted by local cities and towns and

Thurston County.

What about Environmentally Sensitive Areas?

Environmentally sensitive areas and their associated buffers are not included in the available land supply.

What about Parks and Schools?

Parks, schools, and churches are often located in residential areas. An assumption is made on how much

land will be needed for these uses.

What about Land Availability?

A factor is applied to the land supply to take into account what amount of land is not expected to be

available for development over the planning period. This is commonly referred to as a market factor, and

takes into account that not all property owners will be willing to sell or develop their land.

How is the Land Capacity model Calibrated?

The land capacity model is calibrated to a database of planned projects (over 130 projects and almost

6,000 residential units). Calibration is by jurisdiction and zoning category. The calibration reports are

part of the Population and Employment Forecast documentation, and can be found in the supporting

documents on this web page: http://www.trpc.org/236/Population-Employment-Forecasting

Want More Information?

More information on how land supply is calculated, along with a series of land supply maps, can be found

on TRPC’s website under the Population Forecast section. http://www.trpc.org/236/Population-

Employment-Forecasting

The full assumptions report can be found here:

http://www.trpc.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/588

http://www.trpc.org/236/Population-Employment-Forecasting



http://www.trpc.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/588


What is Land Supply Compared To?

Land supply is compared to the projected need for housing. The housing projections come from TRPC’s

Population and Employment Forecast, which sets forecasts or targets for each city and town and the

growth areas. By state law, these forecasts must be within the range of the State Office of Financial

Management’s (OFM) population projections.

Figure 3.1

TRPC’s Population Forecast

Note: TRPC’s forecast compared to the range provided by the State’s Office of Financial Management.


Findings – Is There Enough Land in the Urban Growth Areas?

Based on adopted policies in place in Thurston County as of mid-year 2012, the evaluation shows that:

1) There is sufficient land supply to accommodate projected population growth (to year 2035) in

Thurston County’s urban areas (cities plus unincorporated growth areas or UGAs), and

2) Each urban jurisdiction in Thurston County has designated sufficient land supply to accommodate

projected population growth (to year 2035).

Note: 2035 represents a 20-year planning horizon from when most local comprehensive plans will be

updated in 2015/2016.

Questions remain as to how much of the residential land supply will be available for development due to

the pending federal endangered species listings.

Table 3-1

Residential Supply versus Demand

Note: Supply should exceed demand (percent excess) by a reasonable market factor in order to account for land that

is not available for development during the planning horizon. The rule of thumb is a county-wide market factor

between 10% and 25% is considered reasonable. Smaller jurisdictions tend to have higher market factors due to the

statistical difficulties in estimating supply versus demand for small areas.

SUPPLY

Jurisdiction

Capacity for

Additional

Dwellings

Total 2010-2035 2010 Plus 2035

Bucoda & UGA 240 460 220 350 37%

Lacey & UGA 31,740 45,560 13,820 17,560 21%

Olympia & UGA 26,950 40,410 13,460 16,880 20%

Rainier & UGA 770 1,300 530 750 29%

Tenino & UGA 750 1,550 800 1,200 33%

Tumwater & UGA 10,570 19,170 8,600 11,010 22%

Yelm & UGA 3,050 10,250 7,200 10,310 30%

Grand Mound UGA 380 690 310 430 28%

Total Urban Areas 74,450 119,390 44,940 58,490 23%

2010

Dwelling

Units

DEMAND

Percent

Excess

Units required to

Accommodate 2035

Population


Figure 3-2

Supply vs. Demand for Dwelling Units in Thurston County Urban Areas

Is there Too Much Land in the Urban Growth Areas?

This question is not part of the “buildable lands” review requirement, and will be fully addressed during

the Urban Growth Area review undertaken by counties every ten years under the State’s Growth

Management Act. However, the data in the supply versus demand table shows that the excess capacity

within the urban growth areas is sufficient to accommodate projected growth, but also that the growth

areas are not too large based on the criteria established by Thurston County. It falls within the range of

the established reasonable market factor of between 10 to 25 percent.

Excess Capacity

A reasonable amount of excess capacity is both necessary and desirable when sizing growth areas, as not all land suitable for development will be available for development in the 20-year planning horizon. Some land owners will choose not to put their vacant or partially-used land on the market, or choose not to redevelop developed properties.

How is Excess Capacity calculated? Excess capacity is the

amount of total capacity (supply) in a given area, minus the amount of units expected to be used or built (demand) within the planning horizon.

If, for instance, a planning area had the capacity for 1,000 dwellings, and 700 units are expected to be built within the planning period of say, 20 years, then the excess capacity is 300 units.

What is Percent Excess Capacity? Instead of expressing

excess capacity in terms of dwelling units or acres, it is shown relative to how much is expected to be used in the planning horizon.

Using the example above, the excess capacity (300 units) divided by how many units are expected (700 units) is the percent excess – or 43 percent. This means that

there is enough capacity to accommodate demand, plus 43 percent extra.

How much is Excess Capacity is Reasonable to account for Market Conditions?

The market factor established by the Board of County Commissioners for Thurston County’s previous urban growth area evaluation (2007/2008) was a range between 10 and 25 percent.

Demand

700 units

Excess Capacity

300 units

Total Capacity 1,000 units

Example


Demand – Projected Need for Housing

Housing projections for each city and town and the growth area are developed through TRPC’s

Population and Employment Forecast program. By state law, these forecasts must be within the range of

State Office of Financial Management’s population projections. Detailed documentation on the forecast

can be found on TRPC’s website: http://www.trpc.org/236/Population-Employment-Forecasting



Table 3-2

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Bucoda Total 560 570 575 675 890 1,065

Lacey City 42,400 45,370 49,360 50,850 52,160 53,090

UGA 33,140 34,280 39,250 44,150 49,350 54,630

Total 75,540 79,660 88,610 94,990 101,510 107,720

Olympia City 46,510 49,550 54,610 60,130 64,980 67,730

UGA 11,800 12,270 13,240 13,900 14,960 16,670

Total 58,310 61,820 67,850 74,030 79,940 84,400

Rainier City 1,795 1,920 2,035 2,175 2,480 2,660

UGA 110 110 110 135 360 485

Total 1,905 2,030 2,145 2,310 2,840 3,150

Tenino City 1,695 1,710 1,745 2,010 2,670 3,095

UGA 15 15 15 25 80 90

Total 1,710 1,725 1,760 2,030 2,750 3,190

Tumwater City 17,330 19,290 22,930 25,800 28,440 30,090

UGA 6,020 6,540 7,920 9,830 11,720 12,790

Total 23,350 25,830 30,840 35,620 40,160 42,880

Yelm City 6,775 8,260 12,570 16,985 19,910 21,975

UGA 1,425 1,425 1,480 1,610 2,545 4,305

Total 8,200 9,685 14,050 18,595 22,455 26,285

Grand Mound UGA Total 1,345 1,275 1,465 1,630 1,775 1,885

Chehalis Reservation2

Total 70 75 90 105 125 160

Nisqually Reservation2Total 595 750 985 1,035 1,070 1,120

Total Cities 117,070 126,680 143,820 158,620 171,530 179,710

Total UGAs1 53,850 55,920 63,480 71,270 80,790 90,860

Total Reservations2 665 825 1,070 1,145 1,200 1,280

Rural Unincorporated County3 80,680 83,030 87,500 91,130 95,030 98,740

Thurston County Total 252,300 266,500 295,900 322,200 348,600 370,600

Explanations: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 1UGA - Urban Growth Area. Unincorporated area designated to

be annexed into city limits over 20 years time to accommodate urban growth. 2Data is for Thurston County portion of

reservation only. 3Rural unincorporated county is the portion of the unincorporated county that lies outside UGA and

Reservation boundaries.

Population Forecast

Thurston County Cities and UGAs

Jurisdiction

Population Forecast

Source: Thurston Regional Planning Council Population and Employment Forecast 2012.


Table 3-3

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Bucoda Total 240 250 250 290 390 460

Lacey City 18,500 19,800 21,480 22,290 23,000 23,470

UGA 13,240 13,700 15,540 17,660 19,910 22,090

Total 31,740 33,490 37,020 39,950 42,910 45,560

Olympia City 22,100 23,730 26,400 29,260 31,820 33,350

UGA 4,850 5,060 5,500 5,810 6,310 7,060

Total 26,950 28,800 31,900 35,070 38,130 40,410

Rainier City 720 770 810 870 1,000 1,080

UGA 50 50 50 60 160 220

Total 770 820 860 930 1,170 1,300

Tenino City 740 750 760 900 1,270 1,520

UGA 10 10 10 10 30 30

Total 750 750 770 910 1,300 1,550

Tumwater City 8,050 8,900 10,470 11,790 13,050 13,830

UGA 2,520 2,720 3,240 4,060 4,870 5,330

Total 10,570 11,620 13,710 15,850 17,920 19,170

Yelm City 2,500 3,050 4,670 6,440 7,660 8,540

UGA 550 550 570 620 1,000 1,710

Total 3,050 3,610 5,240 7,060 8,660 10,250

Grand Mound UGA Total 380 420 490 560 630 690

Chehalis Reservation2Total 20 20 30 40 40 50

Nisqually Reservation2Total 200 200 240 260 280 300

Total Cities 52,840 57,240 64,850 71,850 78,200 82,260

Total UGAs1 21,600 22,510 25,390 28,780 32,910 37,130

Total Reservations2 220 230 270 300 325 360

Rural Unincorporated County3 33,520 34,460 36,070 37,640 39,200 40,480

Thurston County Total 108,200 114,500 126,600 138,600 150,600 160,200

Explanations: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 1UGA - Urban Growth Area. Unincorporated area designated to

be annexed into city limits over 20 years time to accommodate urban growth. 2Data is for Thurston County portion of

reservation only. 3Rural unincorporated county is the portion of the unincorporated county that lies outside UGA and

Reservation boundaries.

Dwelling Unit Forecast

Thurston County Cities and UGAs

Jurisdiction

Dwelling Unit Forecast



Table 3-4

Thurston County Population Projections by Housing Type and Group Quarters

Type of Housing 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Single-family detached 178,810 189,960 212,240 231,990 251,460 268,980

Multifamily 41,190 44,170 50,020 55,570 61,300 66,360

Manufactured Home 28,060 27,980 28,660 28,980 28,800 27,820

Group Quarters 4,220 4,340 4,950 5,620 6,410 6,810

Total 252,290 266,450 295,860 322,170 347,970 369,970

Thurston County Occupied Housing Projections by Type

Type of Housing 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035


Multifamily 21,650 23,910 27,660 31,310 35,260 38,640


Total 100,650 107,560 120,400 131,810 143,300 152,450

Thurston County Vacant and Occupied Housing Projections by Type

Type of Housing 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035


Multifamily 23,690 25,470 29,040 32,870 37,030 40,570


Total 108,180 114,450 126,580 138,570 150,630 160,230

Vacant Units 7,530 6,890 6,180 6,760 7,330 7,780

Vacancy Rate Assumption 7.0% 6.0% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9%

Estimated Household Size for Housing Demand

Type of Housing 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Single-family detached 2.68 2.66 2.64 2.63 2.62 2.62

Multifamily 1.90 1.85 1.81 1.78 1.74 1.72

Manufactured Home 2.29 2.27 2.33 2.36 2.39 2.47

Total 2.46 2.44 2.42 2.40 2.38 2.38

Housing Projections, by Type of Unit



Figure 3-3

Thurston County Forecast of Market Demand for New Housing

2010 - 2035

Figure 3-4

Change in Household Size, Thurston County


Supply – Residential Land Supply and Potential Dwelling Units

Residential land supply is measured by first taking an inventory of all the land, buildings, and other types

of uses that are on the ground today. After that, a series of assumptions are applied to determine how or if

the land can develop in the future. Details on these assumptions can be found on TRPC’s website:

http://www.trpc.org/236/Population-Employment-Forecasting in the document “Population and

Employment Land Supply Assumptions for Thurston County.”

Also on the website are a series of maps to support the land supply analysis.

1990-2011 Building Permits

2010 Current Land Use

2010 Residential Development Potential

2010 Commercial, Industrial, Mixed Use Development Potential

A series of calibration reports, comparing model outputs to proposed development projects, is also

available. Methodology, maps, and calibration reports underwent full stakeholder review in 2012 as part

of the Population and Employment Forecast update.



Types of Potential Residential Development Capacity

Potential residential development capacity comes in many shapes and forms in Thurston County.

Examples are shown on the following pages. Potential capacity is the number of residential units (single-

family homes, apartments, condominiums, duplexes, manufactured homes, etc.) that could potentially be

developed on any given piece of land in Thurston County under current adopted land use regulations,

after accounting for land set aside for critical areas. It is an estimate under “average” conditions.

There are many pieces of land in Thurston County that are already developed, or are not suitable for

residential development. These lands are not considered to have potential residential development

capacity.

In addition, there are some types of residential development capacity that are estimated on an area-wide

basis based on past trends such as accessory dwelling units and family member units.

Some of the types of potential residential capacity used in this report are described below.

Please note that estimates of potential residential development capacity are used for general

planning purposes only based on regional data sets. Actual development capacity is

determined through the regulatory processes at local jurisdictions and is conducted at a site-

specific level.

Estimates of capacity for additional dwelling units in Thurston County’s urban areas is estimated from

land supply, and is shown in the graphs and tables following.

Figure 3-5

Estimates of Capacity for Dwellings, by Type

Thurston County Urban Areas


Type of Potential Residential Capacity Example

Recently Permitted: This category

accounts for lots under construction at the

time the land use inventory was developed.

The homes in the center of the aerial photo to the

right were under construction in 2009. (Bella

Housa Village, Yelm)

Subdivision Lots: Empty lots in

subdivisions approved since 1970.

This subdivision contained numerous vacant lots

when this aerial photograph was taken in 2009.

(The Highlands at Somerset Hill in Tumwater)



Planned Projects: There are many

residential development applications

submitted to local jurisdictions that are in the

process of being reviewed. A recent

residential housing market study for

Thurston County by NewHomeTrends

estimated that 75 percent of the proposed

residential units would be permitted within

the next 10 years.

This proposed subdivision in Lacey – Aspen

Ridge – is an example of a planned project.

Plans call for 57 single-family homes on this

almost 20 acre lot in Lacey’s moderate density

zoning district.

Master Planned Communities: On many

of the larger pieces of urban buildable land in

Thurston County, the cities and developers

work together to develop a master plan, to

combine opportunities for employment,

parks, and housing, and in many cases

schools.

Briggs Urban Village is an example of a master

planned community that includes a city park,

YMCA, mix of single-family, multifamily, and

senior housing, and commercial/office space.

Conceptual diagram from Parametrix. www.parametrix.com/projects/pdf/Briggs%20Village.pdf



Vacant Single Lots: There is an inventory

of vacant lots that were not platted through

the subdivision process, or were platted prior

to 1970. Many of these are in the rural

county.

The two five acre lots in the bottom left portion of

the image to the right are examples of vacant

single lots. In the future it is likely that one home

will be placed on each lot.

Subdividable land is land that has the capacity for more than one dwelling or housing unit. It can be

either vacant or partially-used.

Vacant Subdividable Lands:

Vacant land has no

commercial, industrial, or

residential structures on it at

the present time.

The small development on

Tumwater Hill (circled) is an

example of subdividable land in

an existing urban neighborhood.


More examples of subdividable land …

Type of Potential Residential

Capacity

Example

Partially-used Subdividable

lands: Partially-used land has

an existing structure. And

under current zoning could

potentially be subdivided and

support additional dwelling

units.

Example of a large urban lot that

was subdivided – with a duplex

built on the vacant piece.

Olympia.

Example below is a comparison of two larger subdivisions on partially-used land. On the left is Tumwater

Countyside Place, which is platted for 89 lots. The original home remains, while the barn and out-buildings were

demolished. On the right is Mirasett, which is platted for 73 lots. To make way for this subdivision the original

home and out-buildings were demolished. Both subdivisions were approved in Tumwater’s urban growth area –

70th Avenue southwest vicinity – and later annexed into the city.

2000

2009

2003



Redevelopable Capacity: Redevelopment refers to

when an existing use is removed to make way for a

more intensive use in a commercial or mixed use

zoning district. In general, this occurs where

buildings have a low value compared to the land

value. The new use does not have to be similar to the

original use of the property.

An example of residential redevelopment is the Boardwalk

Senior Apartments in downtown Olympia, built on the site

of a former department store – see photo on right.

Accessory Dwellings: An

accessory dwelling unit is a

small second residence

permitted on a lot with an

existing home.

Right - Accessory dwelling unit

added to an existing lot in

Lacey.

Family Member Units:

Family member units are a

second residence permitted

on a lot with an existing

home, with the caveat that

the second residence must be

used by a family member.

Family member units are

permissible in rural Thurston

County,

Right – Manufactured home

family member unit added in

2008 on a rural County lot.


Table 3-5

Residential Capacity by Type and Jurisdiction

Existing

Dwellings

(2010)

Recently

Permitted

(2011 - 2012)

Subdivision

Lots

Planned

Projects

Master

Planned

Communities

Vacant

Single

Lots

Vacant

Subdividable

Lands

Partially-

Used

Subdividable

Lands

Redevelop-

able &

Accessory

Dwellings

Units

Total

Estimated

Additional

Residential

Capacity

Bucoda Total 240 0 0 0 0 60 250 40 0 350

Lacey City 18,500 470 910 1,420 780 50 1,300 750 380 6,060

UGA 13,240 220 270 1,610 1,660 120 3,510 3,880 230 11,500

Total 31,740 690 1,180 3,030 2,440 170 4,810 4,630 610 17,560

Olympia City 22,100 840 710 1,550 2,110 420 4,620 2,670 1,190 14,110

UGA 4,850 90 140 470 0 70 740 1,260 0 2,770

Total 26,950 930 850 2,020 2,110 490 5,360 3,930 1,190 16,880

Rainier City 720 30 0 30 0 70 110 240 0 480

UGA 50 0 0 0 0 0 80 190 0 270

Total 770 30 0 30 0 70 190 430 0 750

Tenino City 740 0 0 10 800 20 150 140 20 1,140

UGA 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 50 0 60

Total 750 0 0 10 800 20 160 190 20 1,200

Tumwater City 8,050 310 590 1,520 800 80 1,880 1,960 310 7,450

UGA 2,520 60 180 540 0 10 1,250 1,520 0 3,560

Total 10,570 370 770 2,060 800 90 3,130 3,480 310 11,010

Yelm City 2,500 100 590 600 5,880 20 610 790 30 8,620

UGA 550 0 0 0 0 10 390 1,290 0 1,690

Total 3,050 100 590 600 5,880 30 1,000 2,080 30 10,310

Grand Mound UGA Total 380 20 40 50 0 0 200 110 10 430

Total Cities 52,850 1,750 2,800 5,130 10,370 720 8,920 6,590 1,930 38,210

Total UGAs1 21,600 390 630 2,670 1,660 210 6,180 8,300 240 20,280

Urban Areas Total 74,450 2,140 3,430 7,800 12,030 930 15,100 14,890 2,170 58,490

SUPPLY: Capacity for Additional Dwellings 2010 Plus

Jurisdiction


Explanations: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 1UGA - Urban Growth Area. Unincorporated area designated to be annexed into city limits over 20 years

time to accommodate urban growth. Includes a reduction for parks, schools, churches, etc. in residential zoning districts for subdividable lands.


Table 3-6

Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units (2010 Plus) by Type of Dwelling by Planning Area

Area Planning Area Total

Single-

family

Multi-

family

Lacey & UGA Central Lacey City 1,050 225 825

Hawks Prairie City 2,745 2,140 605

Hawks Prairie UGA 350 280 70

Horizons City 1,040 675 365

Horizons UGA 5 5 -

Lakes City 595 395 200

Lakes UGA 1,065 945 120

Meadows City 165 5 160

Meadows UGA 1,765 1,250 515

Pleasant Glade City 435 190 245

Pleasant Glade UGA 1,980 1,600 380

Seasons UGA 4,630 4,135 495

Tanglewilde-Thompson City 35 20 15

Tanglewilde-Thompson UGA 1,700 555 1,145

Total Lacey & UGA 17,560 12,420 5,140

Olympia & UGA Downtown City 1,310 - 1,310

High Density Corridor - Eastside City 530 10 520

High Density Corridor - Westside City 200 - 200

Northside City 1,770 825 945

Northside UGA 605 545 60

Southside City 5,650 2,630 3,020

Southside UGA 1,545 1,055 490

Westside City 3,740 1,665 2,075

Northwest UGA 510 440 70

Southwest City 905 300 605

Southwest UGA 115 100 15

Total Olympia & UGA 16,880 7,570 9,310


Explanations: Numbers may not add due to rounding. UGA - Urban Growth Area. Unincorporated area

designated to be annexed into city limits over 20 years time to accommodate urban growth. Includes a

reduction for parks, schools, churches, etc. in residential zoning districts for subdividable lands.





Single-

family

Multi-

family

Tumwater & UGA Airport City 1,020 805 215

Brewery City 330 15 315

Deschutes City 190 130 60

Deschutes UGA - - -

Littlerock City 2,745 1,935 810

Littlerock UGA 110 90 20

Mottman-Black Lake City 185 160 25

Southeast Capitol Blvd. City 660 325 335

Southeast Capitol Blvd. UGA - - -

Trosper City 1,250 870 380

Trosper UGA 5 5 -

Tumwater Hill City 985 765 220

Tumwater Hill UGA 40 40 -

New Market City 85 20 65

Eastside UGA 965 805 160

Southside UGA 1,485 1,100 385

Westside UGA 955 850 105

Total Tumwater & UGA 11,010 7,915 3,095









Single-

family

Multi-

family

Bucoda & UGA Bucoda 350 295 55

Rainier & UGA Rainier 480 350 130

Rainier UGA 270 235 35

Total Rainier & UGA 750 585 165

Tenino & UGA Tenino 1,145 1,095 50

Tenino UGA 55 50 5

Total Tenino & UGA 1,200 1,145 55

Yelm & UGA City Center 2,720 1,775 945

Master Planned Community 5,900 3,890 2,010

Yelm UGA 1,690 1,460 230

Total Yelm & UGA 10,310 7,125 3,185

Grand Mound UGA 430 225 205

Total Thurston County Urban Areas 58,490 37,280 21,210






Thurston County’s Urban Growth Areas

Thurston County’s first urban growth boundary agreement was established in 1983 for the north county

areas, and later revised in 1988. In the early 1990s growth boundaries were established county-wide.

Since that time the urban growth boundaries have been adjusted slightly. Overall, the area designated for

urban growth has been reduced by over 1,000 acres, or around 1.7

percent in the last 20 years. The most significant reductions

occurred in Tenino and Tumwater’s urban growth areas in the mid-

2000s.

Even with the reduction in land area, the urban growth areas

established over 20 years ago are still large enough to

accommodate 20 more years of growth. This indicates that they too

large when originally established.

There are several reasons this occurred:

1. Residential densities have increased over time, meaning

land has been used more efficiently than originally

anticipated (see Achieved Residential Density chapter.)

2. There was already an urban land use pattern outside of city

limits at the time the growth boundaries were designated,

and in order to allow for those areas to be annexed into

adjacent cities over time, the growth boundaries were drawn to include them.

What are some of the Factors included in the Urban Growth Area Review?

A requirement of the State’s Growth Management Act is that the urban growth areas be reviewed every

10 years.

The following is some of the criteria for the review, as

established in the Growth Management Act:

“(d) Based upon the growth management planning population

projection selected by the county from within the range

provided by the office of financial management, and based on

a county-wide employment forecast developed by the county

at its discretion, the urban growth areas shall include areas

and densities sufficient to permit the urban growth that is

projected to occur in the county for the succeeding twenty-

year period.

(e) The urban growth area may not exceed the areas

necessary to accommodate the growth management planning

projections, plus a reasonable land market supply factor, or market factor. In determining this

market factor, counties and cities may consider local circumstances. Cities and counties have

discretion in their comprehensive plans to make many choices about accommodating growth.

Thurston County’s urban

growth areas include the

incorporated areas (cities and

towns), the unincorporated

urban growth areas within and

around the cities and towns,

and the unincorporated Grand

Mound area. Each city and

town has its own growth area,

although in the case of

Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater

they can share common

boundaries.

From: Issues in designating urban growth areas, State of Washington Department of Community Development (1992).


Each urban growth area shall permit urban densities and shall include greenbelt and open space

areas.”

Source: WAC 365-196-310 – Urban Growth Areas

What this means is that the county is not only directed to review the growth area to ensure that there is

adequate land supply to accommodate projected growth (the Buildable Lands Program), but must also

ensure that the land supply does not exceed the area necessary to accommodate projected growth.

Designing urban growth areas involves a delicate balance. Too much land supply equals sprawl, and too

little land supply equals inflated land costs.

This area in Lacey’s unincorporated growth area (City of Lacey is shaded yellow) was developed in the

1970s, well before an urban growth boundary was established around the cities.


Changes to the Urban Growth Area

During the urban growth area review, Thurston County will likely look at a variety of factors to determine

if the urban growth boundary warrants adjustment.

Environmentally Sensitive Areas

Recent adjustments to the urban growth boundary (Salmon Creek Basin) or zoning within the urban

growth area (Butler Cove) addressed environmental concerns such as high groundwater flooding. These

adjustments were made independent of land supply considerations. It is likely that environmental issues

will continue to be identified an addressed.

Much of the area in the photo to

the left was removed from

Tumwater’s urban growth area in

the late 2000s due to concerns

over high ground water flooding.

There was very litle new

residential capacity in the area

based on exising land use,

ownership, and environmental

constraints – therefore the

adjustment made little impact on

the buildable lands supply within

the growth areas as a whole.

This area within Olympia’s urban

growth area was rezoned from

urban densities to one unit per five

acres due to environmental

concerns over steep slopes.

The financial feasibility of

providing urban infrastructure

such as sewer in the

topographically challenging area

was also a concern.


Infrastructure

Building and maintaining public infrastructure, such as roads, sewer, and stormwater facilities, is a large

part of city and county budgets. Research and modeling has shown that a more compact form of urban

development will help cities and the county save money over the long term. In addition, there are areas

within the growth area that are very challenging to serve with public infrastructure due to physical

barriers (such as crossing rivers, wetlands, or railroad tracks) or topographic constraints.

This area in Olympia’s urban growth area is

currently under study.

Topography, stream corridor, and wetlands

make it challenging to provide urban

services to the area.

Concerns have also been raised about water

quality, both in Woodard Creek and

Henderson Inlet.

Public Services

In Thurston County, transit service is provided by Intercity Transit within the Public Transportation

Benefit Area (PTBA) serving Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater, Yelm, and the area approximating the growth

areas of these cities. There are many areas of the PTBA where fixed-route service is not yet provided –

either because the areas are essentially rural in nature today, or for other reasons transit service cannot be

provided efficiently. When re-examining the urban growth area boundaries, the question of whether or

not the future land use pattern will result in the density and diversity of activities needed to support a

viable and efficient transit system should be asked.

Other public services such as fire, police, and other emergency services can be provided more efficiently

to a compact development pattern.


Demographic Needs

When evaluating the urban growth areas, it will be essential to ensure there is not only sufficient capacity

to accommodate future growth, but that zoning allows for the range of housing choices to meet the needs

of changing demographics.

Two strong demographic trends are influencing housing choices nationwide. One is the aging of the baby

boom generation. Today in Thurston County 12 percent of our population is aged 65 and older. By 2035

this number will rise to 19 percent. The result is the projected need for an increased number of smaller,

accessible housing choices. Seniors generally prefer to age in place, which means either within their

existing home or their current neighborhood where the stores and services are familiar. This means that

existing neighborhoods would benefit from diversifying their housing choices to meet a range of housing

choices, preferable within a short drive, easy walk or transit trip to goods and services.

There will still be a market for single-family suburban homes with yards, but the market share is expected

to decrease. People finishing school and entering the work force are increasingly delaying marriage,

having children, and home ownership. A growing number are delaying getting a driver’s license, and are

seeking communities and housing choices in walkable urban areas with easy access to jobs, education,

goods, services, and recreational opportunities.


CHAPTER 4: COMMERCIAL &

INDUSTRIAL LAND CAPACITY


Commercial & Industrial Urban Land Supply

Is Thurston County’s urban commercial and industrial land supply sufficient

to accommodate projected job growth to the year 2035?

Description

It is projected that around 60,000 new jobs will be created in Thurston County between 2010 and 2035.

This means that almost one-third of the jobs that will exist in 2035 will have been created between now

and then. Where these jobs locate, the sorts of building they are in, and the surrounding infrastructure

that is built to support them, will help shape the community of our future.

Why is Commercial and Industrial Land Supply Important to Measure?

This analysis takes a broad look at the inventory of commercial and industrial land to support

employment. Adequate land supply has been identified as one of the core components of commercial and

industrial economic development. For more on this issue, please see the Sustainable Economy White

Paper produced through the Sustainable Thurston project: http://www.trpc.org/260/Sustainable-Thurston-

Plan

Where Will New Jobs Locate?

New jobs will locate in all parts of the county, but around 95 percent of new jobs will locate in the urban

areas. Rural jobs tend to be home-based employment or resource-based.

Within the urban areas, 72 percent of new jobs are expected to locate in areas zoned for commercial uses

(including mixed-use zoning districts). These include most jobs in state and local government, the

exception being some schools and The Evergreen State College. It also includes jobs in shopping areas,

professional offices, including doctor and dentist offices, and other types of services. Some light-

industrial types of jobs locate in these areas, including mini-storage facilities.

Eight percent of new jobs are expected in areas zoned for predominately industrial uses. The majority of

these jobs are in manufacturing and warehousing, but there are also many other types of business such as

recreation (batting cages, dance and gymnastics studies) that locate in warehouse-style building.

The remaining 20 percent will locate in areas zoned for residential uses. In residential areas, many of

these jobs are for self-employed people and those working in home-based businesses. Other employment

sites near residential neighborhoods include schools, churches, nursing homes, and apartment complex

managers.

http://www.trpc.org/260/Sustainable-Thurston-Plan

http://www.trpc.org/260/Sustainable-Thurston-Plan


Figure 4-1

Location of Jobs Compared to Zoning, 2010-2035


How Much Land Will These New Jobs Need?

In order to decide the minimum amount of land these new jobs will need, two factors need to be

estimated:

Employees per Building Square Feet

In Thurston County’s urban areas there is an average of 3.3 employees per 1,000 square feet of

commercial building space (including vacancies). (Note – the vacancy rate is high at the current

time). For industrial or warehouse spaces, there is an average of 1.5 employees per square feet. These

figures do not include schools, churches, and other buildings used for community gathering spaces.

They also do not include warehouse distribution centers, which tend to have much lower employee

per square foot ratios.

Average Building Square Foot Floor to Area Ratio (FAR)

This factor looks at how much total land area commercial and industrial building require. In addition

to the building footprint, space is needed for parking, stormwater ponds, and landscaping.

Commercial buildings tend to have a higher floor to area ratio – often more than double that of

industrial buildings. In Thurston County it averages around 11,000 square feet per acre. Compare

this to industrial buildings, where it averages around 6,000 square feet per acre.

These factors vary by area. Where land prices are higher and vacant land is harder to find, land is used

more efficiently. For comparison, downtown Tacoma has approximately 300 employees per acre, while

Olympia has 46 employees per acre in commercial areas (city and urban growth area).


What About Infrastructure?

The analysis assumes that infrastructure (roads and utilities) will be built or extended as necessary as land

is developed.

Findings – Is There Enough Land?

The evaluation shows that there is enough vacant, partially-used and redevelopable land to support the

employment growth forecast to the year 2035 for urban areas in Thurston County.

The supply varies by jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction has a vision for how they plan to grow, which is laid

out in their comprehensive plans. Olympia, for instance, has very little vacant industrial land compared to

Tumwater and Lacey. Taking the three cities together, there is ample space for attracting manufacturing

or warehousing jobs. All three cities have sufficient space for jobs in the commercial sector, however

redevelopment is likely to occur more often in Olympia as there is less vacant land. Reuse of empty

buildings and redevelopment of underutilized parcels is considered in the land supply analysis, especially

in the core urban areas and along major transit corridors where redevelopment is more likely to occur.

Yelm has seen steady job growth over the last few decades, and has designated adequate land supply to

accommodate future growth.

Rainier’s long range plans include annexing parts of their unincorporated growth area and rezoning it to

commercial or industrial uses.

Questions remain as to how much of the commercial and industrial land supply will be available for

development due to the pending federal endangered species listings.

Forecasting future need for industrial and commercial land is much more complex than residential

forecasts. A robust land supply requires a full range of options for potential businesses – from

unimproved land, to land with infrastructure already available, to existing and vacant buildings.

Figure 4-2

Commercial and Industrial Land Supply Compared to Minimum Land Demand


Note: These are “average” conditions. Jurisdictions may use land more or less efficiently depending on market

factors and type of commercial / industrial growth.

Thurston Regional Planning Council Page 66 Buildable Lands Report

Table 4-1

Employment Forecast Allocations by Jurisdiction, Thurston County

2010-2035

Jurisdiction 2010 2035 2010 2035 2010 2035 2010 2035 2010 2035

Bucoda City 3 3 8 30 119 221 8 12 138 266

Lacey City 74 74 2,468 4,753 16,127 26,125 4,956 6,761 23,626 37,713

Lacey UGA 245 219 1,106 1,997 3,259 5,971 705 1,220 5,314 9,407

Olympia City 91 91 2,761 4,751 32,239 45,832 16,256 18,977 51,346 69,651

Olympia UGA 13 13 407 588 1,210 1,669 112 294 1,741 2,564

Rainier City 3 3 53 89 216 343 170 215 441 650

Rainier UGA - - 3 39 9 42 - - 12 80

Tenino City 36 36 82 187 519 928 249 298 887 1,449

Tenino UGA - - 0 2 1 5 - - 1 8

Tumwater City 41 41 3,143 4,547 8,436 13,674 9,469 11,387 21,089 29,649

Tumwater UGA 53 53 1,063 1,430 1,014 1,590 276 544 2,406 3,616

Yelm City 12 12 345 1,322 2,919 8,250 717 1,154 3,993 10,739

Yelm UGA 72 72 23 124 105 325 71 71 271 592

Grand Mound UGA 20 20 143 215 680 1,024 276 208 1,120 1,467

Chehalis* Reservation 19 19 5 36 599 1,219 - - 623 1,273

Nisqually* Reservation 5 5 7 49 667 1,290 200 313 879 1,657

County Rural 2,203 2,203 2,839 3,535 7,507 8,868 2,041 3,032 14,590 17,638

Total 2,889 2,863 14,458 23,692 75,624 117,376 35,506 44,486 128,477 188,417

Note: * Tribal enterprises such as hotels and casino are included in commercial. Industrial includes construction which is distributed

to anticipated construction sites.

Resources Industrial Commercial TotalGovernment


Table 4-2

Development Trends in Commercial Growth

Thurston County Urban Areas, 1900-2009

Table 4-3

Development Trends in Industrial Growth

Thurston County Urban Areas, 1900-2009

Note: Inventory of buildings permitted up to the end of 2009. Excludes schools, churches, colleges, jails, libraries,

the airport, large distribution centers, hospitals, city halls, Port of Olympia property, golf courses, recreation parcels, horse arenas, reservoirs, and tanks. Does include the Capitol Campus. Each time period represent commercial or industrial buildings built during that time period that are still on the ground today.

Time Interval

Total Building

Floor Area

(square feet)

Ground Floor

Area

(square feet)

Average

Number of

Stories

Developed

Land

(acres)

1,000 Square

Feet Total Floor

Area per

Developed Acre

Not identified 566,800 554,700 1.02 120 5

1900-1909 353,500 199,800 1.77 20 18

1910-1919 268,600 196,500 1.37 10 27

1920-1929 757,100 568,600 1.33 30 25

1930-1939 279,900 270,800 1.03 30 9

1940-1949 520,200 492,800 1.06 50 10

1950-1959 648,200 607,700 1.07 90 7

1960-1969 1,574,200 1,363,800 1.15 140 11

1970-1979 3,275,300 2,911,700 1.12 310 11

1980-1989 5,062,400 4,157,900 1.22 450 11

1990-1999 6,121,800 5,257,000 1.16 600 10

2000-2009 7,920,900 6,943,600 1.14 710 11

Total/Average 27,348,900 23,524,900 1.16 2,560 11

Time Interval

Total Building

Floor Area

(square feet)

Ground Floor

Area

(square feet)

Average

Number of

Stories

Developed

Land

(acres)

1,000 Square

Feet Total Floor

Area per

Developed Acre

Not identified 858,400 858,400 1.00 40 21

1900-1909 12,700 12,700 1.00 0 *

1910-1919 10,700 10,700 1.00 1 *

1920-1929 42,900 42,900 1.00 1 *

1930-1939 13,400 13,400 1.00 3 *

1940-1949 131,800 121,500 1.08 5 *

1950-1959 35,100 31,100 1.13 10 4

1960-1969 436,500 429,300 1.02 60 7

1970-1979 1,102,500 1,100,700 1.00 140 8

1980-1989 1,113,600 1,112,200 1.00 170 7

1990-1999 2,689,800 2,604,300 1.03 240 11

2000-2009 2,148,900 2,039,900 1.05 220 10

Total/Average 8,596,300 8,377,100 1.03 890 10


Table 4-4

Generalized Employment per Square Foot Ratios

Thurston County 2010

Note: Excludes resource lands, warehouse distribution centers, schools, churches, other local government buildings

and higher education buildings.

Total Site-based

Home-

based

Commercial 99,300 87,700 11,600 26,700 3.3

Industrial 13,900 12,000 1,900 8,100 1.5

Total/Average 113,200 99,700 13,500 34,800 2.9

Generalized

Employment

Category

Employment (2010) Building

Square Feet

(1,000)

Generalized

Employee per

1,000 SF


Table 4-5

Development Trends in Commercial and Industrial Growth by Jurisdiction

Full Inventory of Buildings – Current to 2009



the airport, large distribution centers, hospitals, city halls, Port of Olympia property, golf courses, recreation parcels, horse arenas, reservoirs, and tanks. Does include the Capitol Campus.

Jurisdiction

Total Building

Floor Area

(square feet)

Developed

Land

(acres)

1,000 Square

Feet Gross

Floor Area per

Gross Acre

Generalized

Employee

per 1,000 SF

Generalized

Employee per

Gross

Developed Acre

Bucoda & UGA 19,400 1 24 3.3 79

Grand Mound UGA 604,000 70 9 3.3 28

Lacey & UGA 7,532,000 810 9 3.3 31

Olympia & UGA 13,082,200 940 14 3.3 46

Rainier & UGA 72,800 20 4 3.3 12

Tenino & UGA 178,800 10 13 3.3 59

Tumwater & UGA 4,574,000 550 8 3.3 27

Yelm & UGA 1,285,700 150 8 3.3 28

Total/Average 27,348,900 2,550 11 3.3 35

Jurisdiction

Total Building

Floor Area

(square feet)

Developed

Land

(acres)

1,000 Square

Feet Gross

Floor Area per

Gross Acre

Generalized

Employee

per 1,000 SF

Generalized

Employee per

Gross

Developed Acre

Bucoda & UGA 1,200 0 3 1.5 5

Grand Mound UGA 141,900 20 6 1.5 11

Lacey & UGA 2,870,600 380 8 1.5 11

Olympia & UGA 1,193,400 80 16 1.5 22

Rainier & UGA 8,000 3 3 1.5 4

Tenino & UGA 37,900 10 7 1.5 6

Tumwater & UGA 4,105,600 360 11 1.5 17

Yelm & UGA 237,900 50 5 1.5 7

Total/Average 8,596,500 900 10 1.5 14

Overall - Commercial

and Industrial 35,945,400 3,450 10 2.3 24

Commercial Buildings

Industrial Buildings


Table 4-6

Development Trends in Commercial and Industrial Growth by Jurisdiction

Recent Construction - 2000 to 2009



the airport, large distribution centers, hospitals, city halls, Port of Olympia property, golf courses, recreation parcels, horse arenas, reservoirs, and tanks. Does include the Capitol Campus.

Jurisdiction

Total Building

Floor Area

(square feet)

Developed

Land

(acres)

1,000 Square

Feet Gross

Floor Area per

Gross Acre

Generalized

Employee

per 1,000 SF

Generalized

Employee per

Gross

Developed Acre

Bucoda & UGA 0 0 0 3.3 0

Grand Mound UGA 463,200 34 14 3.3 45

Lacey & UGA 2,987,800 311 10 3.3 32

Olympia & UGA 1,900,800 118 16 3.3 53

Rainier & UGA 0 0 0 3.3 0

Tenino & UGA 3,500 0 8 3.3 26

Tumwater & UGA 1,975,100 194 10 3.3 34

Yelm & UGA 590,400 55 11 3.3 36

Total/Average 7,920,800 710 11 3.3 37

Jurisdiction

Total Building

Floor Area

(square feet)

Developed

Land

(acres)

1,000 Square

Feet Gross

Floor Area per

Gross Acre

Generalized

Employee

per 1,000 SF

Generalized

Employee per

Gross

Developed Acre

Bucoda & UGA 1,000 0 3 1.5 5

Grand Mound UGA 51,900 7 8 1.5 11

Lacey & UGA 1,343,100 148 9 1.5 14

Olympia & UGA 42,700 2 22 1.5 33

Rainier & UGA 8,000 3 3 1.5 4

Tenino & UGA 0 0 0 1.5 0

Tumwater & UGA 702,100 59 12 1.5 18

Yelm & UGA 0 0 0 1.5 0

Total/Average 2,148,800 220 10 1.5 15

Overall - Commercial

and Industrial 10,069,600 930 11 2.3 25

Commercial Buildings

Industrial Buildings


Table 4-7

Estimated Employment (Job) Growth in Urban Areas in Thurston County by Zoning Type

(2010 to 2035)

Source: Thurston Regional Planning Council Employment Forecast.

Table 4-8

Commercial and Industrial Land Needs

Thurston County Urban Areas 2010-2035

Note: This is the minimum need for available commercial/industrial land supply to accommodate future growth, and

does not take into account the need for special uses that may arise over the planning horizon.

Jurisdiction

Commercial or

Mixed Use Industrial

Public &

Institutional Residential Total

Bucoda & UGA 64 0 4 60 128

Grand Mound UGA 342 0 0 5 347

Lacey & UGA 11,170 2,953 998 3,059 18,180

Olympia & UGA 15,985 124 0 3,017 19,127

Rainier & UGA 72 0 47 157 277

Tenino & UGA 442 0 51 76 569

Tumwater & UGA 6,092 884 30 2,763 9,769

Yelm & UGA 5,938 175 75 880 7,067

Total/Average 40,105 4,136 1,205 10,017 55,464

Generalized Zoning Category

Jurisdiction

Commercial or

Mixed Use Industrial Total

Bucoda & UGA 2 0 2

Grand Mound UGA 10 0 10

Lacey & UGA 316 206 522

Olympia & UGA 452 9 460

Rainier & UGA 2 0 2

Tenino & UGA 12 0 12

Tumwater & UGA 172 62 234

Yelm & UGA 168 12 180

Total 1,133 289 1,422

Minimum Acres of Land Needed to

Accommodate 20 years of Job Growth

Minimum acres needed is calculated by taking employee growth and dividing

it by average number of employees per acre (from preceeding tables)


Table 4-9

Commercial and Industrial Land Supply


Notes: Excluding properties owned by schools, churches, colleges, and universities and other local

government.

1 Land with moderate to high likelihood of intensifying uses. 2 Estimates range from 650,000 to 1,500,000 sf of commercial space for Yelm in the master planned communities. 3 After annexation and rezone by the city.

4 Unknown development potential for Port of Olympia's Tumwater properties and West Tenino due to the pending federal endangered species listings.

Jurisdiction

Vacant or

Partially-used Redevelopable1 Other

Bucoda & UGA 3 4 N/A

Grand Mound UGA 86 24 N/A

Lacey & UGA 752 253 N/A

Olympia & UGA 240 276 100 2

Rainier & UGA 47 12 3 3

Tenino & UGA 7 15 Unknown 4

Tumwater & UGA 303 104 Unknown 4

Yelm & UGA 214 77 100 2

Total/Average 1,653 765

Jurisdiction

Vacant or

Partially-used Redevelopable1 Other

Bucoda & UGA 1 0 N/A

Grand Mound UGA 150 21 N/A

Lacey & UGA 436 76 N/A

Olympia & UGA 4 27 0

Rainier & UGA 0 1 32 3

Tenino & UGA 5 2 Unknown 4

Tumwater & UGA 999 163 Unknown 4

Yelm & UGA 174 10 N/A

Total/Average 1,769 300

Acres of Land Available in Commercial or Mixed

Use Zoning Districts to Accommodate Job Growth

Acres of Land Available in Industrial Zoning

Districts to Accommodate Job Growth


Additional Information on Commercial and Industrial Land Supply

Commercial and industrial land supply is identified by comparing existing land use and zoning. Vacant

or partially-used lands in commercial and industrial zoning districts, and a portion of the land in mixed-

use zoning districts, is included in the estimate of commercial/industrial land supply.

Redevelopable land is a small but growing part of our developable land base. Most of the redevelopment

potential in Thurston County’s urban areas is for commercial and industrial uses. Sometimes parking lots

are removed to make way for additional commercial buildings, or other times old-outdated buildings are

removed, and new ones built in their place.

Redevelopment usually takes place when land prices rise at a greater rate than building values, especially

as vacant land becomes increasingly scarce.

Before and after photos of commercial redevelopment along the Harrison Avenue Corridor.

Just as commercial buildings can be redeveloped into residential buildings, the opposite can occur. Single

homes in commercial areas are often converted to businesses, or torn down and redeveloped into

commercial uses.

2004 2000


CHAPTER 5: RURAL LANDS


Rural Lands

What are the development trends in Thurston County’s rural lands?

Description

Rural lands are those lands outside of the designated urban growth areas and tribal reservations. Of the

735 square miles that comprise Thurston County, 87% are designated as rural lands.

Why are these important to measure?

Measuring development capacity and trends in development on rural lands is not a requirement of the

buildable lands program, but it does inform the urban analysis and provides useful information to local

decision makers.

Residential Development Capacity

Twelve percent of the capacity for dwelling units in rural lands is found in vacant lots or planned projects.

Figure 5-1

Estimates of Capacity for Dwellings, by Type

Thurston County Rural Areas

Existing Dwellings (2012) 71%

Partially-Used Subdividable Lands

3%

Vacant Subdividable Lands 14%

Vacant Lots 9%

Planned Projects 2%

Subdivision Lots 1%

Other 12%


Rural Development Trends

Just over 31 percent of Thurston County’s households live in the rural areas. In the last decade, the

percent of new housing units locating in rural areas ranged from 47 percent in the earlier part of the 2000s

to 14 percent by 2011. One trend of note was a slow and steady decrease in the percent of new housing

units locating in the rural areas. Some of the reasons for this include:

A moratorium on new rural subdivisions and subsequent rezone (completed in 2006)

Growing desirability of urban neighborhoods, in particular master planned communities in many

of the major cities

Rising gas prices, making rural commutes less affordable

Based on recent trends and changes in demographics that will likely lead to a greater increase in the

number of people seeking to locate in urban neighborhoods close to jobs and services, TRPC’s forecast is

for 13 percent of future dwelling units to locate in rural areas between 2010 and 2035.

Figure 5-2

Urban and Rural Development Trends (2001 to 2011)

New Housing Units

Note: Does not include accessory dwelling units or family member units.


Residential Rural Lots

In the last ten years, almost six thousand rural lots were developed. Most of the development activity

(more than 50 percent) has been on small lots, or lots less than two acres in size. These lots are generally

found areas designated as “Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development”. For the most part, the

smaller lots that exist in Thurston County were subdivided prior to the Growth Management Act being

adopted, or near areas with existing small lots.

There has also been slightly more than 20 percent of development activity on lots that are around five

acres in size.

Figure 5-3

Lot Development in Thurston County by Lot Size

2000-2010

Table 5-1

Lot Development in Thurston County by Lot Size

2000-2010

Note: 1 Inventory of lots for single units.

Lot Size

Lots Developed

(2000-2009)

Inventory of

Vacant Lots1

Estimated

Supply

0-4 acres 3,865 2,652 7 years

4-8 acres 1,624 1,898 12 years


For More Information

Contact Veena Tabbutt, Senior Planner, (360) 956-7575, or email at [email protected].

buildable lands report 2014 - thurston county

Documents