A bridge to Herron Island: The fight, the opposition, and the near-success |
|
by Joseph Pentheroudakis, patron of Washington State Archives
In April 1951, logger Bill Sehmel (pron. ZAY-mel), one of the sons of a German pioneer family in Rosedale outside Gig Harbor, bought Herron Island from its then owners, George and Blanche Murphy, for $100,000. Sehmel had researched island logging, weighing the logistics against the potential profit, and realized the virgin timber on the 286-acre island was worth a lot of money.
Sehmel, his son Charlie, and a logging crew spent the next five years clear-cutting the island. They assembled and filled log rafts along the east and north sides of the island that were then towed to Puget Sound Plywood in Tacoma’s Commencement Bay. Topographic maps of the island from the 1950s, revised as late as 1994, still show the pilings that had been driven into the tidelands to hold the rafts.
Sehmel netted a profit several times his investment. By the fall of 1956, the island was over 90% cleared, with all profitable lumber extracted. What had been an island crowned by a dense stand of fir, madrone, and hemlock was now a barren lump of clay dotted with seemingly sky-high slash piles and enormous stumps.
Once the logging operation was complete, Sehmel decided to sell the island. In May 1957, he sold it to a group of four investors headed by Richard Clifford. The sale was a contract for $85,000 plus interest; as parts of the island were subdivided and platted, starting at the north end, Sehmel would quit-claim them to the investors, a process that took a couple of years.
The developers spent over a year cleaning up the island, burning the slash piles, getting rid of the stumps, and putting in roads and water. Gayle Carson, whose family owned a cabin in neighboring McMicken Island, reported watching in horror as Herron Island was “on fire” (her words) during those summers.
On April 30, 1958, the developers organized Herron Maintenance Company as a nonprofit corporation. The name would be amended to the current “HMC Management” in May 2010 to comply with state law prohibiting the use of the word “company” in the names of nonprofit entities [RCW 23.95.305, (2)(b)].1
On July 13, 1958, The News Tribune (Tacoma) reported that Realty Sales Co., the developers’ company handling lot sales, was offering waterfront tracts on the island, and that free rides were available to interested parties aboard the recently acquired ferry, the 1939 vintage Annabelle S. “Every lot has a view” was the tagline in the ads.
By 1963, there were about 100 member owners, and a board of trustees elected to manage the affairs of the island took over from the initial board appointed by the developers. Copies of early board meeting minutes and other documents from the early years are scant. There was no community building or office, so meetings took place in board members’ homes, almost always off-island. Consequently, many of those documents have been lost or are gathering dust in people’s attics. However, several copies from 1964 to 1966 still exist, and from those we can reconstruct the history of the bridge project.
The first document is an Aug. 4, 1964, letter by Bridge Committee Chair Hans C. Olson addressed to Pierce County.
|
|
Box 97
Eatonville, Washington
August 4, 1964
Board of Pierce County Commissioners
County City Building
Tacoma, Washington
Gentlemen:
I am on the Board of Trustees of the Herron Island Maintenance Company, a non-profit corporation organized to conduct the business for the lot owners on Herron Island. Recently, I was appointed on a committee to determine whether or not it will be possible for us to build a private bridge from the present ferry landing [on the mainland] to the northeast point of Herron Island. We are obtaining the services of a structural engineer, who on the basis of a preliminary survey, thinks that it is practical to build such a structure. Financing could be done through bonds to be repaid by the membership assessments now in effect.
If we are able to proceed, the structure would probably be built within the next few years and we want to have all preliminaries out of the way well in advance.
We have contacted the Corps of Army Engineers [sic], who have informed us that among the first steps, we must obtain permission from the county and or other local agencies for the actual construction and also for permanent access and egress to the bridge. Presently, so I have been told, we have a long term lease from Pierce County for the approach to the ferry terminal. Could we change and extend this lease to permit us to use the same area for a bridge approach?
Please inform me about any permits or regulations which we must meet to make this project a reality insofar as Pierce County is concerned. Should you desire a personal conference or more information, let me know and it can be arranged.
Yours very truly,
/signature/
H. C. Olson
|
|
|
The structural engineer mentioned was Harold V. Sargent (1919-1998), an Olympia-based civil engineer who also designed the bridge to Harstine Island in the mid-1960s.2
The next document, dated October 1964, appears to be a report to the board and is much more informative. It includes the responses to a questionnaire sent to the membership the previous fall regarding a number of capital expenditures. It also includes a description of the proposed bridge. That gives us an approximate date as to when discussions about the bridge had begun.
|
|
Oct. 1964
Ninety three returns were received in answer to the questinnaire [sic] sent to the membership last fall. The following replies indicate, the general trend of the thinking at that time:
a. Only a small majority favor the construction of a community building on the Island (49 yes--44 no)
b. A large majority favor the construction of a bridge if it is possible to do so. (79 yes....10 no)
c. Even though it is estimated that the Ferry has a useful life expectancy of 20 years, a large majority favor discontinuing the ferry operation and substituting a bridge (68 to 15).
d. Should it become necessary to limit ferry services, majorities expressed these ideas:
(1) Strict limit of Guest Passes (51 to 13)
(2) Strict limit of Extra Trips (57 to 7)
(3) Limited service on week days (73 to 3)
In other words, the mandate from the membership is to limit service within available Income whenever it becomes necessary. No one volunteered to maintain present or greater services by increasing membership dues.
-------------------------
THE BRIDGE TO HERRON ISLAND
The Board has been active in pursuing the necessary preliminaries in determining whether or not it would be practical and economically feasible to construct a bridge. Mr. Harold Sargent, a civil and structural engineer from Olympia who has hd [sic] considerable experience both in highway and bridge construction, was engaged to prepare preliminary sketches as well as to determine what required permits, rights of way, etc., were necessary. To date we have his opinion that a bridge is entirely feasible; that it can be protected by electronic devises [sic] to allow only members and their designated guests access to the bridge; that approximately one third of the distance to be covered would be a concrete span with about one third at each end being a fill of rock and earth; that financing would likely be through issuance of thirty year bonds, to be repaid through membership sues [sic]; that present dues probably would not be sufficient to cover the principal and interest payments in addition to other Island maintenance costs; that the structure should be built as soon as possible to avoid further cost through inflation and that the materials used should be concrete and steel to cut maintenance costs. The following factors have not yet been determined:
1. The best location for the bridge.
2. Property acquisition on the mainland to provide access to the bridge.
3. The determination by the Corps of Engineers as to whether or not a bridge is permissible and if so what type i.e. high or low. (If a high bridge should be required the cost would become prohibitive, but it is thought that this will not be demanded since there is large boat navigation possible on the west side of the Island.)
The Corps of Engineers will make no determination until a definite site location is decided upon together with a sketch of the proposed structure and the Corps will give it's [sic] final answer after it has conducted public hearings. However, our engineer cannot comply with their requirements until we have the right of way location assured. To date, then, we are at a standstill until these determinations can be accomplished.
|
|
|
At the Feb. 27, 1965, board meeting, there is a brief progress report on the bridge project.
|
|
Mr. Newcomb has contact [sic] Evelyn Forbes regarding getting an option on 100 feet of her property. She has promised to contact him. Rayfuse moved the board be prepared to finance an option for one year in an amount up to $500 to hold the land until our bridge feasibility study is completed. 2nd Langlois. Carried.3
|
|
|
Another report appears in the minutes of the Aug. 14, 1965, board meeting, where Sargent is formally tasked with conducting a feasibility study.
|
|
Mr. Olson read Mr. Hatton’s letter as attached. [Note: the letter was not among the documents]. Mr. Hatton has indicated he would consider our offer to purchase at a later date. In view of the fact that the lot owners on the Island have at various times, informally and/or formally at annual meetings of the corporation, expressed a desire for a bridge to the island, be it therefore resolved that we instruct our engineer Mr. Harold Sargent, of 715 South Washington Street, Olympia, Washington, to proceed with the necessary plans and specifications for presentation to the Army Engineers [sic] asking that the required procedures be started to determine whether or not permission will be granted for such a structure and/or the type of structure to be authorized. Mr. Osborn moved we approve the above resolution, seconded by Mr. Stein and unanimously carried.3
|
|
|
The bridge design presumably proposed at that time can be found in the appendix (“1972 bridge plan”).
That same month, Olson wrote the following short article about the bridge for the Beachcomber.
|
|
For the Beachcomber Box 97 Eatonville, Washington August 17, 1965
THE BRIDGE
The question has been asked "Why did the Board employ an engineer before contacting the Corps of Engineers to determine whether or not permission for a bridge could be obtained?" The question certainly is logical and the board actually started out on the same assumption but were informed that no action would be taken by the Corps until sketches of the proposed structure by a licensed civil or structural engineer be presented to them together with supporting data by county, state and local authorities concerning restrictions as well as rights-of-way and other related matters. After being informed of these requirements the board invited Mr. Harold Sargent, a civil engineer from Olympia, who presently is working on the proposed Hartstein [sic] bridge, to come to a meeting to discuss the Herron Island proposal. It was then decided to employ Mr. Sargent on a time plus cost basis (not to exceed approximately $300) to prepare the necessary plans etc. required for the application to the Corps of Engineers.
Preliminaries have now been completed and at the regular meeting of the board held on August 14, 1965 a resolution was passed authorizing Mr. Sargent to complete the application. Whenever the Corps has reviewed and passed on the application they will issue a call for and conduct a public hearing at which time all interested citizens may express their approval or disapproval. After this meeting the Corps will determine whether or not permission to build will be granted as well as the type of structure they will approve.
It is hoped that a low bridge will be allowed because a high structure will be too costly for us to undertake. In any event, coming developments relating to the bridge should be interesting and exciting.
|
|
|
The minutes from the Sept. 24, 1965, board meeting contain a brief progress report by Olson mentioning that Sargent had sent the board a letter requesting more information. We do not have a copy of that letter, and the minutes do not go into any more detail.
There was also a discussion led by Olson at the same meeting on how to finance the bridge with McLean and Co., a financing company in Tacoma. Again, there are no details in the minutes.
A more extensive and substantive discussion took place between Sargent and Tom Cross, Pierce County Parks and Recreation department, at the Dec. 11, 1965, meeting. Sargent mentioned a critical item that may have been what eventually scuttled the project: The state would first need to lease the bottom of the bay where the bridge would be built (in bold below):
|
|
Tom Cross reported that the Pierce County Parks Dept. planned. to buy property for future park development somewhere on the Peninsula, probably at one of three sites, Fox Island, Purdy causeway or property at Herron [on the mainland], part of which is presently occupied by Herron Island Maintenance Co. ferry bridge [dock?]. Jim Andersen of the Purdy Realty C. represented the property at Herron on which Pierce County presently holds a 180 day lease. Mr. Cross felt this could be purchased with 50% State and 50% Federal matching money.
Mr. Sargent suggested that the Maintenance Company attempt to trade the present right of way for one at the extreme south end of the prospective park property. He stated that before anything definite can be done about the bridge the State must first give a lease on the bottom of the bay where the bridge would be built. The present laws are vague in this area so it is difficult to get a quick decision on this. Mr. Sargent gave Tom Cross a copy of the bridge planning map presented to the Corpse [sic] of Engineers.
Mr. Olson reported that Harry Sprinker, County Commissioner, had suggested that they would want fill used out to the span and allow public use of this portion. George Newcomb said that public use and boat launching would probably bring the public to the beaches at Herron Island., but Mr. Cross said that any development of the park area was not projected at the present time and perhaps not within the next ten years.
Mr. Cross said we should make our desires known in a letter addressed to Mr. Geiger, County Commissioner and he will present our proposal at a meeting to be hold the following Wednesday. Mr. Olson agreed to write this letter.
Mr. Sargent pointed out that the State has jurisdiction on deep tide lands and there is no longer any 3rd class tide lands. The State can give the County the right of way.
|
|
|
Following up, Olson sent the following letter to Pierce County Commissioner Fritz Geiger on Dec. 13, 1965.
|
|
Attention: Mr. Fritz Geiger
Pierce County Board of Commissioners
Pierce County Board of Commissioners
Tacoma, Washington
Gentlemen:
A large number of the lot owners on Herron Island wish to construct a bridge to Herron Island. Proposed financing would be through long term bonds to be amortized through the existing or increased assessments.
It has come to our attention that Pierce County may acquire the property at Herron where the present mainland ferry slip is located. If this should become a reality we hope that you will allow us to lease a portion of northwest corner of this property for an access to the proposed bridge . Such an arrangement would be of mutual advantage in that the county would have an unbroken shore line on the north and west sides of the property and we would have a shorter distance to the Island.
We have already determined that a low bridge is feasible and practical while a high one would be beyond our capacity to finance. The Corps of Army Engineers [sic] will determine whether or not to allow a bridge and if so what type. However the Corps will not proceed to call a public hearing until a number of preliminary requirements have been completed to their satisfaction. One of these is that the Pierce County Board of Commissioners indicate in writing that they are not opposed to the construction of a bridge and that within their powers to do so, they would be willing to lease or sell the required right of way to the Herron Maintenance Company. Since we are unable to proceed further with our plans until the Corps of Engineers receives such assurance from your board, we respectfully request such a letter at the earliest possible time. The letter should be addressed to Mr. Lauritts Larsen, President, Herron Maintenance Company, 7919 Oakridge Drive, S. W. Tacoma, Washington.
Another factor which has been discussed unofficially is that Pierce County might wish to provide public use of the mainland fill to the point here the bridge begins. We wouId like to suggest that this fill could be developed into a protected boat moorage at little additional expense and a boat launching ramp could be added to its north side into deep water. It might be well to include such a suggestion in a project proposal to the federal government. We wish the bridge proper together with the island entrance fill to remain private.
Members of the Board of Trustees of the Herron Maintenance Company are willing to meet with you at your convenience to discuss and clarify any questions in connection with the bridge proposal. We are convinced that Herron Island has a great potential for recreation and home development and of of [sic] its finest attractions is the seclusion and privacy which we now have and which can be continued with a private bridge.4
|
|
|
More importantly, however, there must have been a letter sent to the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regarding leasing the bottom of the bay under the proposed bridge. The response by DNR’s Supervisor of Civil Engineering Marvin Bowler is mentioned in the minutes of the Jan. 29, 1966, board meeting, and it must have been a serious setback: According to the minutes, the DNR said that the state could not give permission to build a bridge to a private corporation.
We have only one additional document after that board meeting: a letter by the board to a Mr. Forde Hewitt requesting a meeting, with Sargent present. The letter is dated Feb. 25, 1966, and the meeting was to take place March 2. That was perhaps an attempt to acquire an option to Mr. Hewitt’s property for the mainland end of the bridge, should the proposal using the county’s property fail. There had been a movement by mainland owners to oppose the bridge, spearheaded by Alvin Johanson, Hewitt’s next door neighbor, so it’s also possible the proposed meeting may have been an attempt to soften that opposition. A copy of an undated letter forming a group to oppose the bridge can be found below.
The record ends with that February letter; however, the island had yet to abandon the bridge plan. Sargent Engineering, Harold Sargent’s firm, has kindly provided us with additional plans for the bridge dated November 1972. Those plans are also in the Appendix. There have been rumors on the island for decades that there was a vote by the membership on the bridge project, and that it failed by a single vote. We do not have a record of that vote, but clearly the board pursued the project until at least 1972.
The idea of building a bridge still comes up from time to time in the island community, but there is no serious constituency or support for it. Islanders have become accustomed to the rhythm of life with a ferry, and residents and visitors have come to appreciate the restful transition the crossing provides. In spite of some of its obvious benefits, a bridge would do away with all that, and life on the island would no longer be the same.
|
|
- As it turns out, the law did allow the use of the word “company” for nonprofit entities incorporated before Jan. 1, 1969, but if I remember correctly, our attorney advised me to change the name to avoid confusion. I was unable to document that, however.
- We do not have a record of the county’s response to this letter. I have contacted Washington State Archives to see if I can track it down.
- It is not clear if Evelyn Forbes’ property was on the island or the mainland. I am looking into that.
- Once again, I do not have a record of the county’s response. I have contacted Washington State Archives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
