October 5, 2015 · Exit133

County Nixes Second Chambers Bay Golf Course

Following this summer's US Open experience, Pierce County officials are having second thoughts about a project that would have brought a second golf course to the Chambers Bay property.

In early 2014 we heard about a proposal to build a Chambers Bay resort, complete with 250-room hotel; event, dining, and bar spaces; locker rooms and other amenities; and a second golf course, just south of Chambers Creek Park. The project was to be funded and built by a California developer, who would lease the land from the County. About a year ago we heard a few more details of the proposed project, and heard concerns from the county council over preserving public access on the County-owned property.

Now The News Tribune reports that the county is asking the developer to scale down plans for the site.

Apparently the scale of the US Open convinced the County that building a second golf course right up next to the first might not be the best idea. Especially if they want to play host to other large-scale events in the future.

Sonnenblick, the California developer, is working on revised plans. According to the TNT, without the second golf course, those plans would mean a smaller hotel, done in phases, with the first phase about half the size of what was originally envisioned. The smaller-scale plans would fit better with the existing Chambers site master plan (the second golf course and larger development would have required an amended master plan). The smaller-scale plans will also mean fewer concerns over preserving public access on the publicly-owned site. New project renderings are in the works to be shared with the County soon.

So, are you sad to see plans for a second (golf cart-accessible) golf course go? Do these changes open up possibilities for any new elements you'd like to see included on the site?

Filed under: Elsewhere, University Place, Chambers Bay

1 comments

James October 19, 2015

I, for one... am not sad to see this go away! I though it was a horrible looking building to begin with, much more suitable for a school campus or Industrial building- ugly. It had NO charm of our Pacific Northwest, nor did it engage any of our Architecture firms to design it- rather, depending on Architecture firms from Southern California. So, really? What's next? Employ a Miami-based Architecture firm and design a red-tile roofed building with bright pink, blue and white façade? Slap that on our beachfront! I always thought that the developer would choose a firm here in the PNW, and that the building would look similar to the tribal casino hotels, with totem poles/eagle statues, and reflective of our lifestyle HERE... not that of Southern California! Brass/glass, concrete... white... what gives? Yes, scale it down! This is not Disneyland. What would happen if this project bellied-up in 8 years? How long would this behemoth sit idle and become an eyesore like the Asarco plant or the Town Hall or any number of buildings we are now trying to SAVE because of lack of tenancy? "build it and they will come" - B.S! REVITALIZE.. .and they will come... They will come to see that Tacoma has bounced back from the 80s... Don't just keep building... make this city great again!