Residents clash over what constitutes 'park' as waterfront rezoning debate intensifies

Multiple residents urged the council to preserve open parkland and grass on Lot 5 rather than approving zoning that could enable commercial buildings. "Why do we have to muck it up in Mukilteo every time and crap up this beautiful waterfront?" said Kate Forrester, a 28‑year resident who opposed increased waterfront development and warned that once parkland is replaced with buildings "it's gone." (Kate Forrester).

Opposing views were represented by public commenters who said Lot 5 is currently a largely unused gravel area and that well‑designed mixed use with concentrated parking and cafes could increase daily visitation. Ashvin Sanghvi, who supported activating the waterfront, said the public survey showed restaurants and dining among top preferences and argued that concentrated parking could "actually increase...green spaces and more enjoyment out of it." (Ashvin Sanghvi). The council heard both practical concerns about access and promises of enhanced promenade design during the course of testimony.

Speakers also raised process and transparency concerns. Kevin Stoltz, a former council member, urged the council to ensure documents and transfer restrictions are reviewed before proceeding and suggested referrals to the Parks and Arts Commission for park matters.