OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Olympia, Washington/City Council & Commissions
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Olympia Hearing Examiner Decisions on West Bay Marina and Springwood Gardens (Sept 29, 2026)

City Council & Commissions — Tuesday, September 29, 2026
BodyOlympia, Washington
SessionCity Council & Commissions
DateTuesday, September 29, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:03:19

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:00

Uh just one minute to pull people in from the attendee list.

0:06

Okay, it looks like they're joining.

Speaker 2

0:11

I

Speaker 1

0:11

think we're good to go.

0:13

Go ahead.

Speaker 2

0:14

I was just going to say, do you see a Haley Stevens or Neil Falkenberg?

0:19

They would be from the applicant side for the West Bay Marina project.

0:26

I don't see them here on the webinar.

Speaker 1

0:28

I do not see them as well.

Speaker 2

0:30

Okay.

0:38

Oh, I I see Haley.

0:40

Okay.

0:40

Haley's here.

Speaker 3

0:42

Okay.

0:42

So let's get us underway.

0:45

And so I'm sorry, Mr.

0:46

Handard.

0:46

Did you say we were being recorded?

Speaker 1

0:48

Yes, we are, Mr.

0:49

Hearing Examiner.

Speaker 3

0:50

Okay, thank you.

0:51

So good evening, Mark Scheipmeyer, the city hearing examiner.

0:54

I've been asked to convene two hearings this evening.

0:58

The first being uh an application uh regarding West Bay Marina uh to replace a number of facilities currently located at the marina.

1:07

Located at 2100 West Bay Drive.

1:10

This bears the city's hearing number 25-1692.

1:15

In advance of tonight's hearing, I have received the staff report uh from uh Olympia planning staff authored by Paula Smith, who is present tonight, associate planner.

1:25

I reviewed that staff report and all of the reports associated with that staff report in advance of tonight's hearing.

1:33

Again, um, or the purpose of tonight's hearing is to consider two required permits uh for the project.

1:39

One is a shoreline substantial development permit, and the other is a shoreline conditional use permit.

1:47

Uh and so all testimony tonight will be relative to those two uh requested permits.

1:53

Uh I'm uncertain as to who will be appearing uh for the applicant.

1:57

Uh the staff report that indicates that the applicant's representative is Marine Floats.

2:03

We'll find out who from Marine Floats uh will be uh speaking on its behalf a little bit later.

2:08

So the purpose of tonight's hearing is threefold.

2:11

It's to hear from city staff, Ms.

2:13

Smith, and perhaps other members of the city staff explaining this application and the city's response to the application and its recommendations, followed then by an opportunity for the applicant uh to add to or subtract from uh what the city staff has explained, followed then by an opportunity for members of the public uh to be heard.

2:34

The record should reflect that there has been relatively little public comment on this project to date.

2:40

There have been a few comments, but not many, and it's possible that there may not be much public comment tonight.

2:46

We'll find out as we go along.

2:48

When we get to public comment, uh we'll uh determine a best method uh for establishing uh a list of those who want to be heard.

2:57

Everyone who does want to be heard will be sworn and then uh turn loose uh to give your testimony.

3:04

I don't anticipate a large crowd uh wanting to give testimony, and therefore I'm not going to impose any significant time limit.

3:12

I'll ask that all testimony uh I'll I'll put a five-minute limit on testimony, which is somewhat generous.

3:20

Um, I'm not sure that it will be reached by anyone, um, any member of the public wanting to speak tonight.

3:25

We'll find out.

3:26

And if someone for whatever reason feels that five minutes is insufficient, we can discuss that further and determine what additional time might be appropriate.

3:36

This hearing is taking place uh in a hybrid format uh with the opportunity to appear both at city hall as well as remotely.

3:44

Uh record should reflect that nearly everyone uh will be appearing remotely rather than in person uh for this hearing.

Unassigned speaker

3:52

So

Speaker 3

3:52

let's get us underway again.

3:54

All those who do testify tonight will do so under oath.

3:56

That includes city staff.

3:58

So Ms.

3:58

Smith, let's have you sworn, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Speaker 2

4:04

I do.

Speaker 3

4:05

And before I uh go ahead, I just want to apologize in advance.

4:08

I uh came home from

Unassigned speaker

4:10

a

Speaker 3

4:10

European vacation only to find myself with a nasty cold and and so I'm a little hard to understand tonight.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Stormwater Management█████████████████████21%
Environmental Protection███████████████15%
Public Engagement███████████████15%
Permitting████████████12%
Land Use Planning███████████11%
Procedural██████6%
Public Comment██████6%
Sidewalk Maintenance████4%
Wetland Management████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Olympia Hearing Examiner Decisions on West Bay Marina and Springwood Gardens (Sept 29, 2026)

The Olympia Hearing Examiner, Mark Scheipmeyer, convened a hybrid public hearing on September 29, 2026, at 1:30 PM to consider two separate land-use applications: a shoreline permit request for the West Bay Marina replacement project and the continued preliminary plat hearing for the Springwood Gardens subdivision. The hearing included sworn testimony from city staff, applicants, and public commenters. The Examiner orally approved both applications with conditions, subject to written findings.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • West Bay Marina Hearing: Melissa Johnson, a boathouse owner at the marina, expressed support for the replacement project but voiced concern about the potential loss of her investment in the boathouse, noting that no other marinas in Puget Sound accept boathouses due to environmental rules. She sought clarity on restitution or demolition responsibility.
  • Springwood Gardens Hearing: Multiple residents testified, focusing on two issues: pedestrian connectivity and stormwater management. Alexander Prescott argued that the stormwater dispersion trench constitutes an indirect discharge to the wetland, triggering core requirement #8, and questioned the justification for a 25% wetland buffer reduction. David Mackey and Sandra Herndon highlighted safety hazards from the lack of a sidewalk on Springwood Avenue, noting children and pedestrians must walk in the road. Zach LeClair echoed concerns about wetland buffer reduction and stormwater discharge interpretations.

Discussion Items

West Bay Marina (Case 25-1692): City planner Paula Smith presented the proposal to replace aging marina infrastructure at 2100 West Bay Drive, including removal of 405 creosote-treated piles, reduction of boat slips from 364 to 221, and removal of 45,136 sq ft of covered moorage. Staff recommended approval of a shoreline substantial development permit and shoreline conditional use permit, finding that the project produces no net loss of ecological function through improved materials and reduced environmental impact. Applicant representative Tabitha Simonetti (former Marine Floats employee) affirmed the project's environmental benefits and noted that a water quality monitoring plan would be developed with the Department of Ecology. The Examiner discussed the removal of pilings near contaminated sediments and the adequacy of conditions to avoid disturbance.

Springwood Gardens Subdivision (Case 26-0980): This was a continuation from an April 2026 hearing. Senior planner Jackson Ewing explained that after further review, the wetland buffer habitat score increased from 6 to 7, raising the standard buffer from 180 ft to 220 ft. The applicant seeks a 25% reduction to 165 ft. City stormwater engineer James Patton testified that the stormwater pond redesign, which uses a dispersion trench to spread water over the buffer, does not trigger core requirement #8 (direct/indirect discharge to a wetland) because the water is dispersed, not channeled. Applicant engineer Matt Weber confirmed the pond was deepened to maintain detention volume within a smaller footprint, and that infiltration systems also manage runoff. Wetland specialist Natalie Denson concurred with the revised report and reduction request. On pedestrian connectivity, the applicant Matt Lewis stated they secured a 10-ft easement and are willing to construct a pedestrian pathway if conditioned. The Examiner also discussed the original proposal to open Central Street to vehicle traffic.

Key Outcomes

  • West Bay Marina: The Hearing Examiner orally approved both the shoreline substantial development permit and shoreline conditional use permit, finding the project consistent with the shoreline master program and management act. The written decision will be issued in 10–14 business days; the shoreline conditional permit will require final Department of Ecology approval.
  • Springwood Gardens: The Hearing Examiner orally approved the preliminary subdivision plat with two additional conditions beyond the staff-recommended conditions: 1) The applicant shall construct a five-foot pedestrian sidewalk across the easement to the west to improve connectivity to Bethel Street, and 2) Central Street shall be designated pedestrian-only (except for emergencies) instead of open to vehicular traffic. The applicant's request to allow bonding for wetland mitigation prior to final plat approval was accepted, pending formal language. The written decision is expected within 10–14 working days.

Meeting Transcript

Uh just one minute to pull people in from the attendee list. Okay, it looks like they're joining. I think we're good to go. Go ahead. I was just going to say, do you see a Haley Stevens or Neil Falkenberg? They would be from the applicant side for the West Bay Marina project. I don't see them here on the webinar. I do not see them as well. Okay. Oh, I I see Haley. Okay. Haley's here. Okay. So let's get us underway. And so I'm sorry, Mr. Handard. Did you say we were being recorded? Yes, we are, Mr. Hearing Examiner. Okay, thank you. So good evening, Mark Scheipmeyer, the city hearing examiner. I've been asked to convene two hearings this evening. The first being uh an application uh regarding West Bay Marina uh to replace a number of facilities currently located at the marina. Located at 2100 West Bay Drive. This bears the city's hearing number 25-1692. In advance of tonight's hearing, I have received the staff report uh from uh Olympia planning staff authored by Paula Smith, who is present tonight, associate planner. I reviewed that staff report and all of the reports associated with that staff report in advance of tonight's hearing. Again, um, or the purpose of tonight's hearing is to consider two required permits uh for the project. One is a shoreline substantial development permit, and the other is a shoreline conditional use permit. Uh and so all testimony tonight will be relative to those two uh requested permits. Uh I'm uncertain as to who will be appearing uh for the applicant. Uh the staff report that indicates that the applicant's representative is Marine Floats. We'll find out who from Marine Floats uh will be uh speaking on its behalf a little bit later. So the purpose of tonight's hearing is threefold. It's to hear from city staff, Ms. Smith, and perhaps other members of the city staff explaining this application and the city's response to the application and its recommendations, followed then by an opportunity for the applicant uh to add to or subtract from uh what the city staff has explained, followed then by an opportunity for members of the public uh to be heard. The record should reflect that there has been relatively little public comment on this project to date. There have been a few comments, but not many, and it's possible that there may not be much public comment tonight. We'll find out as we go along. When we get to public comment, uh we'll uh determine a best method uh for establishing uh a list of those who want to be heard. Everyone who does want to be heard will be sworn and then uh turn loose uh to give your testimony. I don't anticipate a large crowd uh wanting to give testimony, and therefore I'm not going to impose any significant time limit. I'll ask that all testimony uh I'll I'll put a five-minute limit on testimony, which is somewhat generous. Um, I'm not sure that it will be reached by anyone, um, any member of the public wanting to speak tonight. We'll find out. And if someone for whatever reason feels that five minutes is insufficient, we can discuss that further and determine what additional time might be appropriate. This hearing is taking place uh in a hybrid format uh with the opportunity to appear both at city hall as well as remotely. Uh record should reflect that nearly everyone uh will be appearing remotely rather than in person uh for this hearing. So

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com