Yesterday I had the pleasure of interviewing Fred King, a retired architect who is the Chair of the Capitol Campus Design Advisory Committee regarding the proposed rezone of the Fourth Avenue isthmus, for the upcoming issue of Works In Progress. Here is a sneak preview:

Works In Progress: I understand that there were two presentations regarding the rezone proposal made by City of Olympia staff to the Capitol Campus Design Advisory Committee (CCDAC)?

Fred King: The first time we were just told there was a rezone proposal, and CCDAC members said we don’t know what the effect of this will be, give us some graphic illustrations of how this will affect views. The second time, the city staff came back with some building block type illustrations that purported to show how it would affect views from several locations on campus, although it wasn’t entirely clear at which locations. At that meeting, CCDAC expressed some concerns. We still felt that we didn’t have adequate evidence that the views on campus wouldn’t be adversely affected, especially by the taller buildings. From the beginning we have been opposed to any buildings in the fountain block. The reason for that is that during the several years when we were planning Heritage Park, there were discussions between the city and state about the overall park grouping, with Heritage Park on state land and the city park on city land, and there were agreements about how this would proceed, which included that block being entirely park.

WIP: Do you feel the presentations were objective, or biased in favor of the rezone?

FK: I don’t think they were particularly biased. I felt they were objective. But they weren’t terribly clear.

WIP: I read in the Olympian that people seeing the presentation, with the graphics with large buildings on the isthmus, gasped in horror [Ed. note: the Olympian article actually reads that members of the committee “groaned”]. What was the reaction to the presentation?

FK: I don’t recall people gasping in horror, but it was certainly a negative reaction.

WIP: Who are the legislators on the Design Committee?

FK: There are four legislators, two from each house, and each house has a representative from each caucus. Senator Karen Fraser, Representative Sam Hunt, Representative Debolt, and Senator Dale Brandland. The Secretary of State is also on CCDAC. He attends periodically, but normally sends one of his deputies. Most frequently it has been Patrick McDonald. There are also four design professionals appointed by the governor.

WIP: Were any of the legislators particularly adamant, or vehement, in their opposition to the rezone proposal?

FK: I don’t feel that any one of the legislators present at the meetings was uniquely adamant. There was discomfort on the part of all of them. In fact, I don’t recall that anyone on CCDAC expressed any support for the concept. But we did agree on a couple of things. One was until we have better visual presentations of the impact of the rezone, we shouldn’t be making a hard statement. And we agreed strongly about preserving the fountain block as a park, as I already told you. I do want to emphasize that the members of the Committee do understand the City of Olympia’s need and desire for better housing. We’re not in opposition to housing downtown. We’re in opposition to buildings that block the view to and from the campus.

WIP: Some people have said that building large buildings that block the view from the Capitol Campus would damage relationships between the state and the city, between legislators and city government. From your vantage point, do you see a danger of this happening?

FK: I am speaking on behalf of the CCDAC, and in that, it would be inappropriate for any particular member of the committee to speculate on what the impact on relationships might be, and I certainly can’t speak from a legislative perspective. What I can say is that for literally decades, the campus planning for the capitol campus was made to a large extent in collaboration and cooperation with the City of Olympia. There were certain principles of the campus master plan that we felt the city fully endorsed. One was that these view corridors were to be protected from the campus to Budd Inlet, and beyond. We have developed even our most current master plan in such a way that view corridors were not blocked by new campus buildings. This had been up until now a cooperative understanding that the legislative building was the gem of the campus and, for that matter, the gem of the town, and that the ability to see it from many places in Olympia was very important to the character of the community. Similarly, from the campus perspective, the view out across the Fourth Avenue isthmus to Budd Bay and the mountains beyond was very important to the character of the campus. The Police Associations of the state just completed a very significant monument on the campus and positioned it in a way to take advantage of the wonderful views across the isthmus and Budd Bay and across to the mountains. Lower buildings would not impair that view, but certainly several buildings of the size of the Capitol Center Building would do that. The point is the views from campus, particularly from the Temple of Justice and some of the plazas that will be part of the new Heritage Center which is currently being designed at the location of the current GA building, will be impacted. The Heritage Center will have several plazas and each one of them has its own view to the north. It’s a building that we expect will be visited every day by school children from all around the state, admiring the campus and learning about the history of the state and its development and seeing its position in the Olympia environment.

WIP: Some of Triway’s representatives and boosters have said that the original Wilder & White plan did not presume that there would be no tall buildings on the isthmus, only that there would be a small “view corridor” in the fountain area. What do you believe the Campus designers had in mind for the isthmus?

FK: I think that Triway’s folks are incorrect. I believe that the views north and beyond were integral to the way the capitol campus was originally planned.

WIP: When you testified at the Planning Commission hearing on June 24, what you said about the “pedestrian character” of the isthmus particularly resonated with me, as I walk around Capital Lake frequently. How do you feel a rezone would change that character? What kind of character would evolve instead if there were tall buildings in that area?

FK: It depends a lot on how those tall buildings develop, but it is reasonable to assume that if they have several hundred people living on the isthmus, there will be a lot more cars, the streets will be much more crowded, and it will be an urban experience rather than the pastoral experience that the park now presents.

WIP: At the June 24 Planning Commission hearing, a lot of people were upset about not being able to speak. I heard you arrived very early to sign in. Is that true?

FK: No. I am representing a state agency. Another representative of the state agency came very early to sign me in. The representative of GA who came and signed me in was there early, and stood in line for quite a while.