MUKILTEO—At the end of Harbour Heights Parkway in Mukilteo lies the Harbour Pointe Tech Center, where the property may soon be rezoned for a proposed 275-unit Multifamily Residential housing project. However, in keeping with the Mukilteo tradition of opposing high-density, some residents have concerns.
The Harbour Pointe Tech Center property is currently zoned as a Business Park and designated as “Industrial” on the City of Mukilteo’s current Comprehensive Plan. The surrounding land is currently zoned as MR22 which allows for up to 22 homes per acre.
It is owned by HPTC Property, LLC which is owned by Tom Prenzlow, the former owner of Systima Technologies, Inc., a current tenant in the business center. Prenzlow purchased Harbour Pointe Tech Center and property, for $46.75 million in September of 2020—adjusting for inflation this would equate to $56.8 million in 2024. A year later, Karman Space & Defense acquired Systima where Prenzlow remained as an equity holder.
Karman, headquartered in Los Angeles, was created in January of 2021 with financial backing from Trive Capital, a Dallas-based private equity firm, which still lists the company in its asset portfolio.
According to the Prescott Group, former asset managing firm of the site, “Harbour Pointe Tech Center is a 335,000 square-foot, four-story office and research facility in North Seattle (Mukilteo). Formerly a torpedo testing facility for Raytheon, the building was purchased by Prescott in 2000 due to its substantial floor loading, extensive power and its unique design for $72 per square foot. An additional 20 acres of land was also acquired adjacent to the building for future development or sale.”
Nevada-based Tri Pointe Homes applied to rezone the Harbour Pointe Tech Center from Business Park to Multifamily Residential-High Density/Multiple Residential (MR) on April 4, 2024, which would amend the City of Mukilteo’s current Comprehensive Plan.
Tri Pointe Homes has been subject to a number of lawsuits over the years—Arrianto v. Tri Pointe in 2021, Burgos v. Tri Pointe in 2020, to name a couple—in addition to eliciting several complaints by customers.
On Better Business Bureau, customers have complained about Tri Pointe allowing their builders to drink on the job, constantly postponing closing dates and delaying construction times, incorrectly installing drainage that resulted in flooding damage, and drainage systems overflowing during rainy weather.
Tri Pointe customers have even voiced their concerns on a subreddit where a user said the builder incorrectly installed the wrong kitchen countertops, and delayed completion due to a “communication error” regarding the installation of cabinets. Other users, on the other hand, applauded Tri Pointe’s work as a “solid build” and commended their swift purchasing process.
The Lynnwood Times reached out to Tri Pointe Homes for comment on these criticisms but did not receive a response as of the publication of this article.
As it stands, at least two Mukilteo Council members are in favor of the decision—Council President Louis Harris and Councilman Richard Emery—in addition to Mukilteo Mayor Joe Marine who some residents have criticized for his current stance, as one priority of his 2021 mayoral campaign platform was against high density. Both Harris and Emery voted in favor of the controversial Housing Action Plan (HAP) on July 19, 2021.
Though Mayor Marine won’t get a vote Monday, he informed the Lynnwood Times that his support for the rezoning is consistent with his stance against density in the long term.
“It makes sense to do something sooner rather than later. If you look at the legislature, they’re getting into more of our local control in regard to housing. They won’t even allow land now to be zoned single family residential,” Mayor Marine told the Lynnwood Times. “My concern is that if we delay this by five to ten years what more changes would there be? Would it be even more density than what’s allowed now? And we have a developer who’s willing to come in and do a much lower density than they could do considering the zoning. I think this is one of the best deals we can get.”
Mukilteo City Councilman Mike Dixon, who typically supports density in Mukilteo, informed the Lynnwood Times that he will be voting in opposition to the rezoning proposal adding that it’s simply the wrong location for a multifamily complex.
“We should have density along traffic arteries,” Mukilteo Councilman Mike Dixon, told the Lynnwood Times. “I don’t think it makes any sense putting it down there, it doesn’t match the neighborhood, it’s not the type of density we need, and people don’t want it.”
Mukilteo Councilman Steve Schmalz also informed the Lynnwood Times he stands against the rezone proposal simply because “the residents are opposed to it.”
“There was an advisory vote by the public in 2021 and 81% voted that they didn’t want high density housing in the city anymore, and that’s exactly what this is calling for” Schmalz told the Lynnwood Times.
To get a different perspective, the Lynnwood Times reached out to Mukilteo City Council President Harris and Councilman Emery, who have both voiced their support for the rezone during recent City Council meetings, but Council President Harris declined to comment, and Councilman Emery did not respond before the publication of this article.
Legal concerns
A letter was sent by Telegin Law to the Mukilteo City Council members and the City Clerk on Friday, September 13, urging the council to postpone its September 16 meeting until the City has “complied with all applicable procedural rules for comprehensive plan map amendment and rezones.”
Telegin Law, representing the Sundance at Harbour Pointe Condominium Owners Association, alleged that the City has not followed the applicable rules for public hearings on proposed comprehensive plan map amendments and rezones, pursuant of the Mukilteo Municipal Code (MMC) 17.72, specifically as it relates to requiring a review of all proposed comprehensive plan map amendments with the City’s Planning Commission during a Public Hearing prior to a vote.
Based on that required review, the Planning Commission is to present its findings of fact and recommendations, per the MMC, the Mayor is to acknowledge as receipt of these findings, and the City Council is then required to consider the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment at a public meeting. It is during this meeting where the Council can then vote to adopt the comprehensive plan map changes, approve with changes, defer the proposal back to the Planning Commission, or disapprove of the proposal all together.
The City did, in fact, review the proposal with the Planning Commission on April 18, 2024. There were four docket items reviewed during that meeting, three of which were city-started projects, and the fourth was the application submitted by Tri Pointe. All four of those docket items were compiled into a single comprehensive plan update discussion. The Planning Commissions’ recommendations for the proposal was to approve the rezone to Multifamily Residential but with a cap of 180 units.
Still, Telegin Law argued that the City has not made public any written evidence of the Planning Commission’s findings and recommendations as no such written findings and recommendations have been posted on the City’s website nor transmitted to parties of record.
Attorney Bryan Telegin, Council for Sundance at Harbour Pointe Condominium Homeowners Association, raised concerns that the lack of written findings and recommendations by the Planning Commission could result in Tri Pointe raising the unit cap.
Lastly, Telegin argued that there was simply not enough notice issued concerning the public hearing date.
On September 10 the city issued notice of the September 16 public hearing, sent by email to parties of record, and posted its agenda publicly on September 11, just five days before the scheduled meeting on the City’s website—despite the email sent on September 10 stating “information about this meeting can be found on the City’s website.”
According to the Mukilteo Municipal Code, 17.72.030.C.2.b, the City is required to issue a notice of public hearing ten days before the hearing’s date.
However, Mukilteo City Clerk Asea Sandine informed the Lynnwood Times that the city sent notice of the September 16 meeting to a local newspaper on August 30 with a September 3 publication date in mind—well within the 10 days required by law.
Telegin Law concluded its letter recommending the unit cap be set at 136 units, which is consistent with the Planning Commissions’ recommendations – a calculation based on the average gross density of the surrounding area being 4.44 units per acre.
Traffic congestion concerns
Mukilteo residents have historically been vocal about their opposition to what they call “high density” to preserve the “small town feel” of Mukilteo that attracted many to move there in the first place. Perhaps the best example of this is the staunch opposition to the city’s proposed Housing Action Plan in 2021 which stirred protests and brought a record-breaking turnout to City Council meetings, the majority of which voicing their concerns.
But separate to risking that small town feel, both residents and some Mukilteo City Council members have raised concerns about “density”, specifically how this project would effect traffic congestion, given the Harbour Heights project utilizes a single road— Harbour Heights Parkway— for demolition, construction, and residential usage. Additional concerns surround the strain on sewage, and access for emergency services.
“It’s going to strain everything because that’s a huge amount of households for that area,” said Julia Shemesh, Mukilteo resident. “What the residents want is a single-family housing development that is in character of Waterton.”
Waterton is a gated nearby upper-middle class to affluent suburb with houses ranging from $1 million to nearly $2 million according to Upgrade Realty.
“Mukilteo only has so much room. We don’t have room to build more roads. We don’t have room to build more schools. We don’t have room for it. What happens in Mukilteo if one of those houses catches fire out there or there’s an earthquake? How are you going to get masses amounts of people out on one road – you won’t,” said a Mukilteo resident who lives nearby but preferred to remain anonymous.
When Tri Pointe homes applied for a comprehensive plan change and rezone with the city on behalf of the property owner, they provided an initial traffic analysis in support of that application which was reviewed by the city. This analysis was conducted under the assumption that the proposed development would have 275 housing units, which has since been reduced to 222.
Though Tri Pointe agreed to reduce the unit cap of 222 housing units, some residents shared that they still have concerns that the developer could back out and transfer the project to another developer in the future that is more set on building more units on the property, echoing a concern raised by Teligan Law.
In the traffic analysis by Transportation Engineering Northwest (TENW) and paid for by Tri Pointe Homes, it states that rezoning the current business park to multifamily residential in Mukilteo would reduce traffic on Harbour Heights Parkway from 3,376 weekday trips to 2,248, while also reducing a.m. peak hours from 481 to 155 and p.m. peak hours from 460 to 192. The analysis based its calculation on the Institute of Traffic Engineers’ Land Use Code (LUC) 710 General Office Building standard.
However, the traffic analysis in the study is highly misleading or incomplete at best.
According to ITE Land Use Code (LUC) 710 General Office Building, the calculated weekday trip estimated value (not a value from physical traffic on the road) is based on a fully occupied property of 341,299 square feet (sq-ft). The current property is 334,090 square feet, not 341,299 used in the analysis, and has 169,838 square feet of available (unused) office space; meaning the traffic analysis should have assessed a scenario with a weekday traffic value based on 164,252 square feet of currently utilized office space and not only the total 341,299 square feet (sq-ft). Ever since Boeing pulled out years ago, Systima is now the only tenant in Harbour Pointe Tech Center.
Using the calculation formula provided in TENW’s analysis, the estimate for weekday trips for a scenario of current occupancy would be 1,787 far from the 3,376 used in TENW’s analysis. On Thursday, September 12, around 1 p.m., the Lynnwood Times counted 163 parking spots with a parked vehicle, which would equate to 1,630 weekday trips (arriving and leaving work) assuming no vehicles leave for lunch and return, and no customers visit the site.
In other words, the traffic analysis provided by TENW should have included a scenario comparing the estimated weekday trips of current occupancy which equates to an estimate of 1,787 to the proposed 275 residential units of 2,248 estimated weekday trips.
Based on a 222-unit development (22 single-family detached housing units and 200 attached single-family dwellings) the estimated weekday trips equates to 1,725, similar to the estimated current traffic volume based on building occupancy.
The TENW analysis also showed that the area had a high level of transportation infrastructure, but this was a high-level review without a detailed development plan. According to Andy Galuska, Community Development Director with the City of Mukilteo, if a development application is received, the city would review the proposal to ensure the traffic impacts would comply with its adopted standards.
Local fire and police departments also reviewed the proposal, Galuska said, and believe they could adequately serve the subject property if it were rezoned and redeveloped with the current road system; however, a more detailed review would be conducted in conjunction with an official development application.
Disrupting Bald Eagle nests
Some Mukilteo residents who live near the proposed Harbour Heights project have raised concerns that the future site would also disrupt a Bald Eagle nest known to exist there.
“The residents who live here see the Bald Eagles all the time. Bald Eagles are a national symbol. They are no longer an endangered species, but they are protected by federal and state law,” Julia Shemesh, Mukilteo resident, told the Lynnwood Times. “We want them to observe the law and adjust what they’re doing, or would like to do, to reflect this issue because if they’re not going to be honest and law abiding about something like this how can anyone trust whatever they say about anything else – particularly the density and protected green spaces?”
Shemesh continued that she suggests the City take into consideration the photographs she, and some of her neighbors, have submitted of the eagles and interview the residents in the area about their frequent sightings.
Wetland Resources Environmental Consulting sent out a notice to Tri Pointe on August 7, 2024, notifying the developer that, during a SEPA review of the project property, a Bald Eagle nest was spotted within the vicinity. Wetland Resources Inc. (WRI) conducted an investigation of the site, and nearby areas, on August 7, and a Bald Eagle nest was found during that investigation, but it was reported to be adjacent to the property on St. Andrews Place to the north – about 520 feet from the proposed development.
Per the United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) guidelines regarding developing within the vicinity of a known bald eagle nest, if a development occurs outside of Bald Eagle breeding season (January to August), and are located 330 to 660 feet from a nest the issuance of an Eagle Disturbance Take is typically not required. Within those same guidelines an Eagle Disturbance Take may also not be required if the development takes place during Bald Eagle breeding season, is located 330 to 660 feet from the nest, but the Bald Eagles seem tolerant of past disturbances.
However, per the Mukilteo Municipal Code, 17B.52C.130, if activities are proposed within 800 feet within a Bald Eagle site a habitat management plan may be required.
“We have received comments about Bald Eagles nesting in the area. Wildlife are an element of SEPA review and under SEPA review of a development application we would take a closer look at the potential impacts to wildlife as well as proposed or required mitigation,” said Andy Galuska, Community Development Director for the City of Mukilteo. “Any development activity would require compliance with the federal and state laws that apply to eagle habitat which may include limiting some development activities near the nesting site.”
The vote to rezone the Harbour Heights property is scheduled to take place at Mukilteo City Council’s Regular Meeting on Monday, September 16.
EDITOR’S NOTE: [CORRECTION 10:43 a.m., September 17, 2024] The Planning Commissions’ cap of 130 units, was corrected to 180 units.
Author: Kienan Briscoe
9 Responses
This article is one-sided, and claims that there is public uproar when the city only requested input from the current residents, and not younger residents or prospective residents. Mukilteo is a community for all: this includes our service workers, teachers, and medical staff at the Everett clinic, and mechanics at Boeing. Our nation and our state are dealing with an unprecedented housing crisis, and we must increase the supply of homes for people in our community. Are we a community only for 47 year olds with a $120,00 household income? Or we do want to be a community where our children can one day afford a home?
If our nation had a “housing crisis” they wouldn’t have let in 30 million people.
Citizens do not want density! They’ve said it again and again. Mukilteo has already grown way past what people expected. Mukilteo is being destroyed by greed! They would never allow this on Nantucket, Martha’s Vineyard , etc. and we shouldn’t either.
It’s good people are being heard. We’ve had enough.
Yes, greed. Always a motive for more when you think it’s enough, greed says it is not enough. Greed drives
Man’s ideas of profits. Is there a point when a home is enough and you are content? Or, bigger is better? It’s called priming the greed pump.
Nice try Diddy.
As a younger resident I’m sure the rest of us agree that the jobs to actually afford the housing come first. We are foremost in job market crisis. Making the people who sign paychecks out to be expandable by rezoning their businesses is not the option. Especially when the houses crisis isn’t created by American bodies but corporations owning residential homes and the wild influx of people they are allowing when it’s statistically obvious the birth rates to citizens are actually going backwards. Or are we going to pretend that 12 million people who snuck in don’t live somewhere?
At NO PLACE do those who have invested in the real estate they purchased, and paid taxes on – AND daily take care of attempt to lower their value for people who do NOT live in the community.
EVER.
Try taking that proposal to Martha’s Vineyard, The Hamptons – or Carmel.
Nobody ever seems to ask WHY we have a ‘housing crisis’. The census for 2010-2020 showed one of the slowest population increases since the census started. Who is buying all these houses? Maybe corporations using them as rentals?
Also, what’s going to happen if the Kroger deal goes through? The QFC (Mukilteo’s ONLY grocery store), will be slated to close. Where in the heck are we supposed to buy our groceries? Seems we will have to drive further and further to buy the essentials, contributing even more to traffic congestion.
They are building plenty of multi family buildings along the light rail. I really don’t think we need them deep in the heart of mukilteo. Personally, I moved to Mukilteo for its serenity. As mentioned this would make for a traffic nightmare ….roads were not built with this in mind.
The city of Mukilteo has gone thru enough changes in the past few years. It’s time to slow it down. The schools are crowded, the traffic in the surrounding areas is already on overload. We are losing our green spaces at an alarming rate. Ferry lines go on forever. We DO NOT need to add more people in a “high density” situation. I wish one could believe developers as to where the building will end but I have not seen that before and this developer does not seem to have a good reputation to begin with. One or two houses I can see, but more high density living spaces and what that could mean? No , I do not agree. Absolutely not to be perfectly clear. I am a 25 year + resident and have lived with in 10 miles of Mukilteo my whole life. What beauty Mukilteo had cannot be returned. We can stop it from becoming so crowded it is no longer Mukilteo at all, but another overcrowded city that blends with Lynnwood and Everett with apartments on every corner and no room to breathe. Please say no to yet another development.
The ongoing push to destroy Mukilteo must stop!!
This wouldn’t even be a thought in Martha’s Vineyard!
These proposals are merely veiled calls to destroy the community you have invested in.
It must be stopped and council members continuing to push for it must be replaced.