Not Ken Lake: Housing Proposed on Black Lake Blvd
- friendsofkenlake
- Jan 11
- 5 min read
This weekend, JOLT reported a proposed multifamily housing development at the corner of Black Lake Boulevard and 21st Avenue SW. We’re paying attention, and here’s what we know and what comes next.
This post is meant to clarify — using the project’s own submission materials and the City’s review process — what is being proposed, what has not been approved, and where residents still have meaningful opportunities to participate.
What Is Being Proposed — and Where
The project discussed by the City of Olympia’s Site Plan Review Committee is a 70–72 unit multifamily development located outside the Ken Lake community, on a corner parcel along Black Lake Boulevard and 21st Avenue SW.
The site is currently a previously disturbed and contaminated property associated with a neighboring gas station. According to the City and the project architect, the site has already undergone remediation and received clearance from the Washington State Department of Ecology.
This matters because the proposal is not converting open space, forest, or shoreline land into housing. It is a redevelopment of an already impacted parcel. The proposal acknowledges that existing sidewalks and planting strips will need to be updated to align with current standards.
The project architect describes it this way:
“There are 72 residential units proposed in two, 3-story buildings… a leasing office, fitness center and lounge are appropriate for this size project, which will take two units away from the total count.” — Project Narrative, Dec. 10, 2025
Location Matters — and the Map Is Clear
The project’s vicinity map shows the site’s location relative to Ken Lake and surrounding roads. The parcel sits along Black Lake Boulevard, an arterial, and is not within the Ken Lake HOA or shoreline itself.
The location reflects existing city planning priorities that concentrate higher-density housing along arterials and near services. The proposal also includes pedestrian and bicycle access improvements along Black Lake Boulevard and 21st Avenue — infrastructure that, if completed, would connect to routes used by Ken Lake residents as well.
What Stage This Project Is Actually In
This proposal was discussed as part of a presubmission conference with Olympia’s Site Plan Review Committee.
That matters.
A presubmission conference is not an approval. It is an early checkpoint where City staff identify required studies, constraints, and code issues that must be addressed before a formal application can move forward.
The City’s own agenda labels this item as:
“Presubmission Conference” — City of Olympia Site Plan Review Committee Agenda, Jan. 7, 2026
At this stage, the City is not deciding whether the project will be built. It is identifying what the applicant must still prove.
Why This Is Not a Zoning Surprise
At a recent planning meeting, the board emphasized that there is no zoning crisis — and this proposal does not contradict that statement.
The zoning that allows multifamily housing on this parcel has existed for some time. What is new is not the zoning, but a specific proposal moving into early review.
That distinction is important. Zoning establishes what could be built. A proposal still has to demonstrate how — and whether — it can meet current standards.
This is exactly the difference we discussed in earlier posts.
Height, Scale, and Why Shoreline Review Matters
One detail that has understandably caught attention is building height.
In the presubmission materials, the project lists a total building height of 35 feet:
“Building Height – Total (ft.): 35” — Presubmission Conference Details
This number is significant because 35 feet is the maximum height allowed for buildings within shoreline jurisdiction. Outside shoreline areas, the zoning would otherwise allow greater height.
City staff made clear during the meeting that this issue is unresolved. As City Planner Casey Mauck explained, a professional shoreline delineation is required to determine whether any part of the site falls under shoreline regulations. If it does, additional permits and restrictions apply.
In other words, shoreline review is not optional, and it has real consequences for building design.
Stormwater, Runoff, and Environmental Constraints
Concerns about runoff and water quality are appropriate — and they are explicitly part of the review process for this site.
According to the project narrative:
“The storm water design will consist of impervious asphalt driveways and pervious asphalt for the parking stalls.” — Project Narrative
The presubmission details also quantify the scale of impervious surface:
“Total Impervious Area – To Be Added (sq. ft.): 49,468” — Presubmission Conference Details
This level of impervious surface is precisely why shoreline, wetland, and groundwater protections are triggered.
City staff noted several environmental constraints that must be evaluated:
The nearby ditch may be connected to wetlands or habitat areas, requiring wetland and biological assessments.
The site lies within the Allison Springs 10-year wellhead protection area, which places restrictions on landscaping materials and potential soil contaminants.
If shoreline jurisdiction applies, a shoreline substantial development permit would be required.
These are regulatory gates, not procedural formalities.
The Steps This Project Still Must Clear
This proposal is at an early review stage. Several substantive approvals and studies are still required before anything can move forward.
The most consequential issues for Ken Lake residents remain unresolved, including shoreline jurisdiction and environmental impacts.
The City has explicitly stated that:
A professional shoreline delineation is required to determine whether any portion of the site falls under shoreline regulations.
If shoreline jurisdiction applies, building height limits drop to 35 feet, and a shoreline substantial development permit would be required.
The nearby ditch may be connected to wetlands or habitat areas for Black Lake, triggering additional wetland and biological assessments.
The site lies within the Allison Springs 10-year wellhead protection area, which restricts landscaping materials and limits allowable soil contaminants.
None of these reviews are automatic approvals. They are regulatory checkpoints designed to prevent negative impacts to surrounding areas.
Where Residents Still Have Agency
One of the most important takeaways is this: shoreline and environmental review processes are not symbolic. They are enforceable, technical, and public.
If you are concerned about runoff, drainage, lake health, or downstream impacts, the shoreline process is where those concerns belong — supported by data, testimony, and environmental standards.
Attending shoreline meetings, submitting comments, and asking specific questions about stormwater management and hydrology is far more effective than treating the proposal as already decided.
This is an area where community participation genuinely matters.
A Relevant Piece of Community History Ken Lake has navigated environmental risk before. Years ago, concerns arose about groundwater contamination from a nearby gas station affecting the lake. Residents became involved through formal channels, raising questions about runoff, groundwater flow, and long-term mitigation. The outcome was not escalation or blame, but a land-use decision: the site was ultimately selected for a government facility, in part because the use allowed for controlled surfaces and reduced the risk of further groundwater migration. That history matters here not because the situations are identical — they are not — but because it shows how environmental concerns near the lake have been addressed constructively in the past: through documentation, public process, and regulatory decision-making. |
Taking Concerns Seriously Without Escalation
We will continue to track this proposal, link to relevant meetings, and share what residents need to know to participate constructively. If new information changes the analysis, we will say so clearly.
For now, the facts support a calm conclusion:
A proposal exists. Review is ongoing. Environmental safeguards are not optional. And residents still have a seat at the table.
Find primary documents here, in the planning meeting agenda: Link
Comments