Re: “Don’t let year-round residents spoil Chambers Bay,” (TNT local viewpoint, 9/10).
During last fall’s open house and town hall meetings on two proposals to develop Chambers Bay, I was not in the area. When I returned, I reviewed the Sept. 8, 2016 presentation, which did not show a “residential villages” proposal, so I was not concerned.
Now that there is a vote to amend what the public agreed to, I have found in reviewing the proposals submitted by the two developer groups that the original plan submitted by the chosen group included an Option Ill for “Residential Villages,” which was not in the other developer’s proposal.
It appears to me that Pierce County and the council are trying to get this amendment passed quickly without much input from the public.
There is no urgency to develop the Chambers Bay property. The county should consider reviewing the proposal that was not chosen or go out to rebid should the amendment to the proposal pass.
The original concept of the area was to be a top golf course and park, and never mentioned placing permanent housing in the area. I believe this should not be allowed on the Chambers Bay property.