Have plans for a massive resort near Mount Rainier reached the end of the line?
A long-planned resort not far from the Nisqually entrance of Mount Rainier National Park faces renewed scrutiny after a Pierce County department called for the project’s overall development permit to be revoked.
A group of local residents and activists also is seeking a review of decisions that has kept the conditional use permit alive up to this point.
Meantime, one of the project’s main proponents contends that long-term grievances against the plans have unfairly portrayed him, his family and others involved as “greedy developers.”
Overall, distrust runs deep after decades of legal sparring between the opposition and the project’s backers.
“I think there’s more to this story than meets the eye,” said developer Rick Adams, whose family has been working on the project for decades, in a recent interview with The News Tribune.
Park Junction LLC seeks to develop a 400-acre destination resort between Elbe and Ashford that would include a golf course, a conference center and a 270-room hotel, retail and other amenities.
The conditional use permit for the estimated $200 million project was first approved in the early 2000s and has faced periodic status reviews in public hearings.
A lack of progress on the project while still retaining its conditional use permit has come under fire from its main opponent, the Tahoma Audubon Society, which contends the project will bring sprawling developmental blight, ruining lands now populated with elk and other habitat.
Following a contentious hearing in July 2019, with those testifying against the project for environmental issues outnumbering the proponents, a Pierce County hearing examiner decided specific milestones had to be met before the conditional use permit would be reissued.
Those milestones now bring the biggest test for the project to date and have led the county to declare it might be time to pull the plug on the endeavor.
But the fight continues.
Milestones and appeal
The first of the milestones required by hearing examiner Stephen Causseaux was to create two “test wetlands” to see which mitigation plan worked better. To the county’s knowledge, the developer did not create two “wetland demonstrations.”
In a letter dated Dec. 2, Melanie Halsan, assistant director for Planning and Public Works, wrote to Causseaux to say the department was now seeking revocation on the Park Junction conditional use permit.
The county noted: “On December 1, 2020, this Department visited the site to see if the two demonstration wetlands were constructed as required. Our review indicates they have not. Test Wetland MA-1 appears to have been rough graded but no liner was observed, and no planting has occurred. Heavy equipment was working on-site in the vicinity of Test Wetland MA-3, but at this point only rough grading appears to have occurred. No clay lining was observed, and no vegetation planted.”
Rick Adams remains confident the project is moving forward as required.
“At this point we are gathering information,” Rick Adams and his father, Gayle, wrote in an email to The News Tribune in response to questions in early December. “But we do believe we have met the intent of the Hearings Examiner in that the construction of the ‘test’ wetland mitigation areas requirement that ‘some or all of the mitigation wetlands shall be physically constructed.’
“We will be planting this month, ahead of the spring schedule that PALS (Pierce County’s permitting process) had originally suggested. The viability/success of the mitigation work in question will not be determined until the end of the growing season 2021.”
In a Dec. 10 interview, Rick Adams added, “The wetlands issues have been a real challenge because we can meet all the regulatory requirements, but we can never satisfy the wetland individual in Pierce County.
“And now, it’s never going to be good enough,” he said, with what he viewed as county forces actively aligned against the project.
Park Junction filed an appeal Nov. 18, arguing, “The Examiner recently provided clarification as to the mitigation wetlands that are subject to the deadline of Required Milestone ...; however, the clarification was provided with so little time before the deadline that the Applicant may not meet the required milestone.”
It described the time frame as “unreasonable and impracticable” and called on the hearing examiner to “remove or amend Required Milestone.”
GROUP SEEKS NEW EXAMINER, REVIEW OF PROCESS
Tahoma Audubon Society fears the next hearing in February to consider revocation of the permit still won’t bring an end to the project.
The group contends some county officials and the hearing examiner have in some way worked in tandem to keep the project afloat, an accusation county representatives dismiss outright.
TAS points to documents and emails it obtained in a records request as proof that the county was moving toward seeking revocation much earlier, but later changed course after a September 2018 meeting between Park Junction owners and the county executive.
“Any objective review of the records provided by the Office of County Executive, the County Council, and the Department of Planning and Public Works, results in the conclusion that the planning staff had been pressured by the Office of County Executive and the County Council, to the detriment of a fair handling of the (conditional use permit),” wrote Matt Megga, executive director of Tahoma Audubon Society, and Kirk Kirkland, conservation chair of the group, in a memorandum to Dennis Hanberg, director of Planning and Public Works for Pierce County, in late November.
TAS shared a copy of the memo with The News Tribune.
Another issue stems from wording TAS found contradictory in the final decision issued by Causseaux in October.
The decision directs that “the project owners must process their project in strict compliance with agreed upon milestones.”
It also states: “These Milestones may be modified by the Examiner if the present decision is appealed so that the Applicant has a realistic opportunity to meet the targets.”
That modification angle, Kirkland wrote in an email to Halson and Hanberg in early December, means “it is quite clear that he will not revoke a permit if appealed for missing a milestone.”
The appeal has been stayed until after the administrative revocation hearing is held, according to a Dec. 16 court order. In the filing, legal representatives for Park Junction and Pierce County noted that “The outcome of the administrative proceeding may resolve or moot the issues raised in Petitioner’s LUPA appeal.”
The News Tribune sent questions to the county about TAS’ allegations of the county executive and hearing examiner working to keep the project afloat and about TAS’ quest to have a new hearing examiner oversee the next hearing.
Libby Catalinich, communications director for the county, responded via email, saying the executive was unavailable for an interview and adding the following statement:
“Pierce County is going to continue following the law. The Hearing Examiner is an independent judge. He ruled against the Tahoma Audubon Society, and we’re not going to improperly attempt to influence him, no matter what political pressure this interest group tries to apply.”
Asked whether elected officials, including the county executive, involved themselves in the hearing examiner process, Halsan told The News Tribune in an interview Dec. 3: “It’s not uncommon that (Planning and Public Works) will engage with the executive on these issues that impact the department. I think what’s important to note here is that the referring body or the decision making body is the hearing examiner. So we as a department, we as a county provided that recommendation to the examiner and the examiner as the authority made his decision.
“We do take direction from the executive. And there are cases depending upon their impact on the county where we do work with our bosses, the executive’s office, and how the department is moving forward.”
The hearing examiner did not respond to a request from The News Tribune for comment.
Halsan, in her letter to the hearing examiner, made clear that missing the milestones is the ultimate determining factor as to whether the project lives or dies.
She wrote that the Dec. 2 staff recommendation was the result of milestones not met in the project.
“We know that there has been much discussion in your decisions about whether the overall Park Junction project has been proceeding in a timely manner or if revocation of the conditional use permit (which approved this project) should be pursued,” Halsan wrote.
“Your most recent decision included required milestones which would allow all to better measure if reasonable progress is being made. Unfortunately, since the very first milestone (regarding the demonstration wetlands) has not been met, nor is substantially complete, this Department has formerly submitted an application seeking that the Conditional Use Permit be revoked.”
Rick Adams maintains the county has decidedly not acted in his favor, as evidenced by the recent call for revocation.
Adams says the only county support for the project came years ago from Doug Sutherland, who was county executive at the time of the project’s inception.
Sutherland in 1994 said the project met several needs, including becoming a destination for small international groups, according to News Tribune archives.
“Since Doug left office, we’ve never had anybody try to help us,” Adams told The News Tribune.
Pierce County isn’t taking a side in the outcome of this project, Halsan told The News Tribune.
“The department is interested in assisting everyone through the permitting process, but you do need to show progress, and the examiner gave us those milestones for production,” she said.
THE PROJECT AT THE CENTER OF THE FIGHT
Caught in the middle is the project itself, which Rick Adams said now is very much in jeopardy with the next hearing.
If the project prevails, he said, he envisions a grand destination resort and a championship-level golf course with spectacular views of the mountain and surrounding valley.
Rick Adams’ parents, Gayle and Cora Adams of Elbe, in the early 1990s partnered with Sylvia Cleaver Shepherd of Portland, Oregon, who brought in Selwyn Bingham, one of her partners at BCB Group, a development firm in Portland.
Bingham died in 2013; Cora Adams died in 2018.
Rick Adams told The News Tribune that among the project’s main assets is it would bring jobs and assist in helping the park manage the current parade of vehicles now lining up to get into the park by offering shuttle services.
Ultimately, he noted, the project was supposed to tie the community together.
“I’ve looked at other national parks. At one time in the late ‘90s, early 2000s, I was with a group of people that were trying to give some rational and common sense brought forth to what were called gateway communities around the nation,” he said.
“And a lot of the communities have worked cooperatively to put in transit, to put in private sector facilities outside and to stabilize.
“If your community can garner a benefit from the visitors’ arrival, they can then tell their story, their history, their culture, and manage the visitors’ impact on the community by putting in the infrastructure. And then people have a sense of pride about the community, then they have something that’s unique from anywhere else in the world because it’s theirs, and they can share that and it will survive.”
Opponents, Adams told The News Tribune in an interview, are quick to poke holes in the plan but in his view offer no substitute solutions.
“We’ve got a day-trip mentality here that’s killing Paradise,” he said of one of the most popular destinations within the neighboring national park.
Clare Duncan McCahill, a resident near the property, told The News Tribune via email, “We found he and Gayle both to be very dismissive when we went to them to raise our concerns about the project last year. In response to our numerous concerns, they simply said, ‘It’s happening.’ It is impossible to ‘join’ them when there is no negotiation.”
One element that both sides have dug in on is the creation of a golf course on site, which TAS sees as only adding chemical blight where a creek runs through a portion, and runoff which they fear will affect organic farms in the area.
Adams said criticisms over plans for the golf course highlighted a double standard, sharing a Tahoma Audubon Society online link that promoted “Birding at Eagle’s Pride Golf Course on JBLM: Third Thursday of each month. No pass required.”
“The TAS for years has been visiting the golf course on JBLM, and continues to do so to this day. How would we differ?” he asked.
Kirkland, in an emailed response, wrote: “We don’t object to golf courses – we object to convention centers located on prime agricultural land in volcanic hazard areas. This same development will decimate local lodging and restaurants and forever change the gateway to Mount Rainier National Park. Audubon Society is concerned with the golf course at Park Junction because of its effect on the elk herd and the water quality in the creek that drains the property. …”
“Will Park Junction Partners agree to use and maintain the golf course to avoid contamination of the creek and agree to regular chemical testing of creek to determine that runoff from the onsite sewage plant or from golf maintenance does not affect the water quality?”
The group also fears elk in the area would be displaced by the development.
“The golf course pasture has been a place where the (elk) herd frequently grazes and is an important feeding area in the spring. Turns out the hooves of elk can damage putting greens and fairways of the golf course. Will Park Junction Partners welcome the herd on their property as a unique experience for golfers and visitors to encounter wildlife or will the herd not be welcome on their property in the future?” TAS said in an emailed response to The News Tribune.
Rick Adams told The News Tribune that the course would be of high quality and he was in fact focused on the environment with the designs.
“It’s never been our intent to leave a mess downstream,” he said. “We aspire to make the New York State Audubon Society’s golf course credentials, eventually.
“Nobody wants to talk to us about what we’re doing. They all just want to paint us as those horrible developers out there.”
He said the ideas went beyond the golf course, again noting that transportation was top of mind for the project.
“I’ve talked to some electric bus companies to see if they’re capable of running, say from Park Junction to Paradise and back,” Adams said. “They are more than capable. All this stuff needs to be discussed, and there’s no platform to do that. … It shouldn’t be just a couple of people in the community hollering about all the problems. This is a serious issue that the state of Washington has the responsibility (to deal with) but more especially with Pierce County.”
THE FUTURE
Gayle and Rick Adams see the road ahead as a testament to their family’s commitment to the area.
“We are more than doing our part, and invite visionary leadership to join with us and the National Park to address this problem. It won’t be cheap nor simple, but burying our collective heads in the sand has only made matters worse.” the two wrote in an email to The News Tribune.
TAS responded: “A representative of Audubon would welcome an opportunity to sit down with Rick Adams and the staff of the National Park to address problems with the elk herd, increased traffic or water quality. However, we cannot discount the basic fact that a convention center is going to have a significant impact on traffic volumes in a rural corridor… .”
The revocation hearing could well be the final act for the project and the decades the Adams family and partners invested in it.
Rick Adams told The News Tribune that to “kill our project isn’t going to solve anything. It’s just going to make it worse.”
“We want this to be a beautiful project for generations to come.”
The family has no immediate plans for the land if the project’s permit is revoked, Rick Adams said.
“We’re not going to build, you know, a 400-500 house subdivision. We’re just going to quietly go away, sell off the parcels and be done,” he said. “That or ... I will spread my parents ashes on it. We’ll just live there for generations just hanging out. We haven’t quite decided yet.
“But we’re not going to make a mess out of it down there. We’ll leave that up to the urban populations that can’t come to terms with what they’ve done up here.”
The hearing to consider revocation of the conditional use permit is set to take place Feb. 24. A TAS representative told The News Tribune the group plans to formally ask for the previous hearing examiner to recuse himself and file a declaration after Christmas.
This story was originally published December 26, 2020 at 7:05 AM.
