By
Anton K. Alexander | Real Estate Broker, Elev8 Realty Group at Compass
Preetkanwal Bains PhD | Project Engineer, Washington State Ferries (WSDOT)
Photo by MP Lowell Photography
May 2026
The Penny Creek Natural Area (PCNA), a 60-acre wetland preserve at the corner of Mill Creek, is currently at a crossroads. The city’s decision about this area is not really about maintenance costs. It is about whether a community gets to keep what it has already paid for and whether we continue to offer future homebuyers the same quality of life that drew so many here in the first place.
As a real estate broker who has spent 17 years helping families buy and sell homes across the greater Seattle area, and a resident and an engineering professional holding a PhD, we have seen one pattern hold true time and again: neighborhoods that protect their accessible green space protect their long-term property values and desirability. Those that let them slip away often spend years trying to recreate what they lost.
That’s what’s on the line with the Penny Creek Natural Area. The City Council recently voted 4-2-1 to move ahead with studying whether to take ownership, and we understand the fiscal caution behind the no votes. But the question in front of the council is both narrower and more important than a line-item maintenance argument.
The Question Before the Council Is Not What People Think
The PCNA is a legally designated wetland mitigation area. No one can build homes or commercial space on it, regardless of who holds the deed. This was never a tradeoff between “parks vs. taxable land.”
It is this: Does the City of Mill Creek take ownership and guarantee this 60-acre preserve stays permanently open to the public, or does the developer retain control and potentially exercise their contractual right to close the gate, permanently, to the very community that has built its identity around it?
What the Local Sales Data is Telling Us
We pulled MLS data on 152 closed residential sales in the past 12 months across four areas centered on the PCNA. No models or adjustments, just what buyers have paid in the past year.
What you find is homes within a half mile of the PCNA are selling at roughly 4 percent more per square foot than comparable homes in the surrounding area. On a 2,000 square foot home in the $900,000 to $950,000 range typical for this neighborhood, that premium is approximately $36,000 to $40,000 in equity. That is the real, measurable value the PCNA is contributing to the properties around it.
National research backs this trend. An analysis of multiple peer-reviewed studies found that passive natural parks generate measurable premiums in over 90 percent of cases, typically in the 3 to 8 percent range for suburban settings. The Trust for Public Land’s analysis of Seattle’s own park system found a 4.84 percent proximity premium translating into $14.77 million annually in property tax, generated by the increased values of the homes around them.
That last point is the one some are missing. If even a modest 2 to 3 percent value decrease follows closure of the PCNA, not deterioration, simply a locked gate and an uncertain future, the resulting erosion in surrounding assessed values would produce an estimated $38,000 to $57,000 in annual property tax losses across just the neighboring homes. In other words, the revenue the city is trying to protect by walking away is in the same ballpark as the revenue it would quietly put at risk.
Value and Benefits Would Only Continue to Increase
Here is something missing from the maintenance-cost debate entirely. Mill Creek has grown 82 percent in population since 2000. Snohomish County projects another 308,000 residents by 2044, meaning more people competing for the same footprint. The research is pretty consistent on what happens next; As density goes up, the premium people will pay to live near accessible green space goes up with it, because it gets scarcer.
The 60 acres aren’t getting any bigger. The neighborhood around them is. The premium documented today is a floor, not a ceiling. The homeowners adjacent to the PCNA are sitting on a compounding community asset worth a little more with each passing year as the surrounding area sees continued development and there’s less open space like it left to go around. “I have seen firsthand how infrastructure planning and community spaces like the PCNA shape long term value,” said nearby resident Amandeep Singh.
The Maintenance Worries Has Real Answers
The PCNA is a passive wetland not a ball field, or a playground with liability inspections. The real work is fairly contained: maintaining trails, controlling invasive species, and monitoring conditions. That falls within what Public Works already does, and the police department’s existing community presence model covers the security side. On top of that, the Friends of the Penny Creek Natural Area, a volunteer group that’s already shown a lot of energy and support from the local community, is ready to take on a real share of the stewardship.
The funding picture is also a good deal better than the debate has let on. The Snohomish County Conservation Futures Program has distributed over $80 million since 1988 for exactly this type of property and has indicated a 2026 grant round is forthcoming. The Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program allocated $120 million statewide in the 2025 biennium for natural areas. EPA Wetland Program grants fund the specific monitoring obligations that come with the PCNA’s mitigation designation.
In other words, Mill Creek is not facing this alone. The city has access to well‑established, well‑funded programs designed specifically to support the preservation of places like the PCNA. The resources exist and Mill Creek can and should be pursuing them.
What Happens If the City Says No
The developer would have the option to close public trail access and maintain the wetland at the minimum standards required by their mitigation agreement, not the community standard the neighborhood has enjoyed over recent years. The ecological buffer would still be there. But the trails, the wildlife walks, and the community gatherings that turned the PCNA into a neighborhood fixture would not be.
A land trust transfer is possible but would take years to negotiate and offers no guarantee of maintained public access. The community would spend that interim period in uncertainty causing measurable effects on buyer perception in a premium market like Mill Creek.
Once this community gives up access to the PCNA, it does not get it back. The land cost alone to recreate 60 acres of functional, publicly accessible wetland would be extraordinary. Right now the stars are unusually aligned. The acquisition is free, the developer is willing to transfer, and a community that clearly cares about this place is showing up to say so. That window won’t stay open forever.
Mill Creek has a rare opportunity here. We hope the council chooses to take it.
About the Authors
Anton K. Alexander is a Real Estate Broker with Elev8 Realty Group at Compass, serving the greater Seattle, King and Snohomish County residential market for over 17 years.
elev8realty.com | 425.777.7747 | anton@elev8realty.com
Preetkanwal Bains is an Engineering Professional and a NorthPointe resident serving with Washington State Ferries, a division of Department of Transportation in Seattle.
pksbains@gmail.com | 425.476.4664
