June 4, 2009 at 7:29 pm #81726
I did a “training” hike up to the top of Tenerife via the Kamikaze Falls boot trail (which, BTW, is in the process of being replaced by the DNR with a true trail), and returned via the road from the saddle above Rachor Lake that heads over toward Mt Si before going down the mountian.
I’ve done this hike many times as a spring trainer, so I was shocked to see a new road that connects to the existing road at the Rachor saddle and heads about 1/3 of the way (going easterly) toward Tenerife. The new road seems to be cut as close to the ridge line as possible without actually touching the ridge line which makes me think that ridge line is some property boundary. I couldn’t see some details because that ridge and most of the upper roads were covered in snow.
Does anyone know the story behind this new and ugly road?
June 7, 2009 at 10:11 pm #87080
I thought I had heard it was for logging access, but that could be a fig newton of my imagination. But also – I had been told just recently there was trail maintenance with blasting on the Kamikaze trail, and that the trail was closed by the workers. So I did Mailbox instead last week.
Still have all your fingers and toes, Sandy? 🙂
June 7, 2009 at 10:13 pm #87081allisonParticipant
Any new road or trail construction on the south side of 90 does not surprise me. The MBS is looking at that as one of the areas needing some development.
June 9, 2009 at 1:00 am #87082
I had been told just recently there was trail maintenance with blasting on the Kamikaze trail, and that the trail was closed by the workers.
Yes, there is trail work going (construction I’d say rather than maintenance) on the lower part of the trial, and they’ve closed the Kamikaze trail for safety reasons I presume. But no work was going on that day so we just joined the Kamikaze trail above the heavy construction area. Kathy, I suspect you are right about logging prep since there is already an old clear cut nearby. I guess I was still surprised to see a new road up there since the DNR has recently declared much of that area protected (at least for some areas that are VERY nearby). I guess that means that there are some significant portions of the south side of Tenerife that are in private hands.
Any new road or trail construction on the south side of 90 does not surprise me.
I’m talking to the NORTH of I-90.
June 11, 2009 at 3:16 pm #87083
June 11, 2009 at 3:39 pm #87084
June 11, 2009 at 5:45 pm #87085
Actually I was wondering why Sandy waited until spring………..
……because I am an old fart. My blood is too thick in the winter to pump!
P.S. You must have had an interesting ski up the Kamakazi trail. 🙂
June 11, 2009 at 5:51 pm #87086
That’s not an excuse 😉 And I think I’ll leave skinning up Kamikaze to the Jason Hummel types!
June 11, 2009 at 7:31 pm #87087
There are 2 parcels of private property op there. One is for sale http://www.baldhornet.com/1Property.html. Winter of 2007 or 08 (I don’t remember which) the owners plowed the road to show perspective timber buyers the property.
Thanks for the info Kent. Looking at the website you provided, it is clear that it is this Bald Hornet group that cut this new road (supposedly to provide access for cutting timber on the land).
This Bald Hornet parcel is smack dab in the middle of the newly extended Mt Si preservation area. I am highly suspicious that this is another one of those “blackmail” deals where the owners know the state government would like to remove private land in the middle of a public land area. So the land owner pretends to put it up for sale as prime development property in order to force a sale to the state at inflated prices.
This website actually presents this land as if the attraction is logging it (apparently selectively due to existing regulkations), and then building your “dream house”, or perhaps a resort community. Can you imagine……with access via the existing road!! I can’t imagine buying for such a use. My guess is that the property is being offered that way so that when the state makes an offer, the owners will say it is worth far more than the timber on it and will attempt to value it as if it is prime resort development land. (I’m just guessing of course.)
June 11, 2009 at 9:10 pm #87088Kent NelsonParticipant
Blackmail deal – Sotra. I talked with somebody who knows the owners, so this is really 3rd hand info. Apparently the owners have tried for years to get the DNR to purchase the property, but DNR had no interest. Now they are marketing it to the public. Keep in mind the current owners have owned the land for decades, so this isn’t some get rich quick scam.
June 12, 2009 at 12:37 am #87089
I’m not sure what “Sotra” means (unless you mean “sorta”), but in any case, it does sound like this situation is not quite the same kind of deal that went down in 2004 (I think it was) when DNR purchased the nearby “Crown Lakes”. That deal was definitely a “blackmail” deal.
I find it hard to believe that DNR is “not interested” in purchasing a parcel of land smack dab in the middle of its NRCA. I would guess it is more likely DNR isn’t interested at the asking price. These lands are usually purchased for their timber value long ago, but are now being sold as land for development……at a far higher price per acre rate.
As you indicate, this doesn’t sound like a quick and dirty “get rich quick” scheme, but I suspect it is a “sell for inflated price” proposition. The owners indicate on their website that logging can be done (“thinning” they say, so I suspect there are some limits on logging), but go on to say that the land can be used for:
“Perhaps, the ultimate location for a private lodge. Or, maybe, the most breathtaking building site in all of King County.”
This is similar to what happened with the “Crown Lakes”. The owner in that case attempted to value the land based not on timber (especially since it was already logged :)), but as if the land could be developed into a number of exclusive lake side estates. DNR did finally buy that land for inclusion into the NRCA at a highish price ($5 million I think), but not at the outrageous original asking price.
I’ve got to think this situation hinges on price, not interest. (But again I am only speculating.)
June 12, 2009 at 11:22 am #87090
There doesn’t appear to be much interest in an “estate” up there for whatever reason, as this property has been for sale for quite a while (well before the economic downturn as I recall).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.