Plans for $200 million resort to serve visitors to Mount Rainier National Park are resurfacing decades after initial approval.
The project came back to life with a recent status hearing, and an upcoming decision could put construction in motion 25 years after plans were first announced.
Park Junction Resort at Mount Rainier would be located 11 miles from the park on state Route 706, halfway between Elbe and Ashford.
The resort would bring a 270-room hotel with restaurants, two indoor and four outdoor tennis courts, a heated swimming pool, spa and fitness center, according to the resort's website.
Plans also call for a 22,000-square-foot conference center, an 18-hole golf course, a sewer plant and residences.
The residences, according to project manager Sylvia Cleaver Shepherd, would total 325 units.
Scroll down to continue reading
More news from KIRO 7
In an emailed response to questions from The News Tribune, Shepherd described the units as a mix of duplexes, fourplexes, sixplexes, and detached single residences.
According to her email, employee housing would be built off site.
There's also a 20,000 to 30,000-square-foot shopping center planned for retail and tourist shops.
"Tenants are likely to include a convenience store, sports and apparel shops, bakery, ice cream shop, gift shop and art gallery," according to the website.
The resort, at 420 acres, would bring monumental change to the area and led to legal battles before its initial hearing examiner approval about 19 years ago.
Over the course of its history, the project has been polarizing for residents in the surrounding communities.
Some people worry about a changing landscape and perceived environmental impacts along with the prospects of more traffic on the road to the park entrance that often is congested now.
Others see it as a chance to finally bring local jobs and opportunity to the rural area, fulfilling a goal first set forth by a local family behind the project years ago.
"The goal always has been to provide something for the valley," Shepherd told The News Tribune in a recent phone interview, "a reason for kids growing up there to stay in the place they love, creating jobs. That's what started the whole thing."
IN LIMBO
The first plans for the site were filed July 5, 1994. Those applications were for a rezone, environmental review and wetland review.
In the following years, the project faced many challenges as it went through the county planning and permitting process and the courts.
Its conditional use permit alone included 106 conditions of approval, with one of those being regular status hearings.
The first status hearing was held in 2012, the second one in 2014.
What's happened on the property in the 25-year span has mainly amounted to logging of some of the site and not much else.
In alerting residents of the third status hearing, the county's planning department sent notifications to people on the last mailing list it had on file as parties of record from past hearing examiner decisions on the project.
That meant by 2019, a lot of the notices were returned because those folks had moved on.
According to a county staff report, legal notices were published in The News Tribune and Eatonville Dispatch on July 3.
"As this is not a new conditional use permit application, the county did not send notice to current abutting property owners within 300 feet/2 parcels from the site," according to the staff report.
On Page 4 of the report, it noted that "Should the Hearing Examiner have issues, the hearing shall be held, and notice sent to parties of record."
That might change.
Pierce County Planning and Public Works spokesperson Sheryl Rhinehart told The News Tribune via email Aug. 28: "The problem with just sending notice to only parties of record, and not current abutting property owners, is that over the years people on the party of record list may have moved, passed away, etc."
"In the future for this proposal, staff would recommend that the examiner consider requiring notice be expanded to include, at a minimum, notice being sent to current abutting property owners within 300 feet/two parcels from the site," Rhinehart wrote.
Other factors offer evidence of the length of time passed since the project was first floated.
One of the principal applicants and financial backer, Selwyn Bingham, died in 2013. Concerns remain among the project's opponents over whether there is sufficient financing in place now.
Shepherd would not disclose any details to The News Tribune on who now was offering replacement financing.
In 2018, the state Department of Ecology was close to canceling the site's water right permit.
"The reason being is that the applicant should be in the phase of their permit where they should be close to completing the construction of the water system," according to the county staff report.
The water right permit was extended to July 2021. County planning staff noted in its report that it had to file a public records request with Ecology to find out why.
Staff wrote: "It appeared the applicant primarily asserted permitting challenges with the county," specifically with the site's wetland review, which Shepherd told The News Tribune had been "an unbelievable battle."
In December 2018, the engineering firm contacted the county to start the project moving forward again.
The project was sidelined again when another principal, Cora Adams, and her daughter died after being struck by a tour bus in Washington, D.C. Cora's husband, Gayle, a local business owner, is majority owner and managing partner for the project.
After the two deaths in December, the county delayed the third status hearing for six months.
GETTING BACK ON TRACK
In June, a site development application was submitted for the first phase, mainly focused on clearing and grading a portion of the property. A status hearing application soon followed.
In the meantime, a quarter century has brought changes to the project that were not possible at the start.
The idea of building a virtual driving range instead of dedicating land for one was raised as a possible wetlands mitigation at the July hearing, according to an audio recording of the hearing obtained from the planning department.
One of several arguments put forth at the July hearing touched on another change: the recent long-term ground lease approval of the Chambers Bay Resort and its array of planned amenities as a golf attraction.
Attorney Robert Mack of the Smith Alling Lane firm in Tacoma, who also represented the Tahoma Audobon Society and other parties at earlier hearings, testified at the July hearing that Chambers Bay now could be a potential competitor with its own golfing/villas concept.
"Times have changed. I'm not happy for the applicant that times have changed to their detriment, but they have," Mack testified.
That argument was challenged not only at the hearing but later by Shepherd, who took exception when asked about it by The News Tribune.
"Chambers Bay will not affect it in any way, shape or form," she said.
Mack further testified that the project's developers should update reviews of the project since so much time has passed.
"There are reasons for extensions of time ... but at some point, enough is enough," he said. "We believe that you should as part of your ruling require updates to some of the studies done, primarily dealing with traffic, water supply and waste water, economic feasibility and the open space and habitats."
Shepherd countered in her own testimony: "We have worked diligently to meet time lines and deadlines.
"We're not trying to delay this project, we are trying diligently to get this done."
William Lynn, legal counsel for the project, noted at the July hearing the amount of time it had taken to get plans together to lay the groundwork for the rest of the project's basic infrastructure.
"In terms of progress, I think there's been significant progress. It is established that this infrastructure, the water system, this sewer system are both necessary, a prerequisite in obtaining other permits," he said at the hearing.
"This doesn't happen overnight ... and represents a significant amount of work and significant effort to achieve the infrastructure requirements that are an early step in this process."
As the hearing examiner considers whether the project should ramp up again without additional reviews, supporters point to how the area and the park could benefit.
"I'm personally excited about this resort," James Ball, an Ashford resident and business owner, said in his testimony at the July hearing. "The town of Ashford I don't think currently suffices as something that a world-class tourist destination like Mount Rainier National Park deserves.
"I do respectfully agree with some of the people who are hoping to maintain the rural type of community that Ashford is, but as we've heard testimony, the people are not going to stop coming ... the traffic is there. Hoping that it goes away is not the answer."
Shepherd told The News Tribune she has no plans to abandon ship after working so long on the project.
"It was to be my last project," she said. "I have never given up on a project and don't intend to now."
TO SUBMIT COMMENTS:
Comments to the hearing examiner on any documents submitted up to that point on the project will be accepted until Sept. 3.
▪Email: ty.booth@piercecountywa.gov
▪ Mail: Pierce County Planning and Public Works, Attn. Ty Booth, 2401 S. 35th St., Suite 2, Tacoma, WA 98409
A written decision is expected later in September.
The News Tribune
