I would not hesitate to use a par-3 for the 18th hole if I thought it was the best solution to that part of the property. But, clients don't like it. The 19th hole at Stone Eagle was suggested as the 18th and rejected, that's how it became the 19th ... and possibly the explanation for some of the other "bye holes" which have been built recently, too.
Tom (and others) what about this...lets take, for example stone eagle or Forest Dunes...
What about taking that "bye hole" and making it the 10th hole...then simply call it the front 9 and the back 10?
Nineteen holes "for the price of 18."
I mean after all, really...how do they police the fact that some groups may not need the bye hole...I mean who DOESNT play the bye hole? People in a hurry?
That solves the issue of ending on a par-3
My home course as a kid...Valley View...an RTJ Sr. design, ended on a par-3...NOBODY COULD MAKE UP MUCH GROUND IN MATCHES.
It was short (142W, 163B), so it wasn't a "half-hole."
Shame...seventeen was a great 4.5 (really a par-5, but 495 all downhill...but if you missed the green left or right, you were in the woods...AND the green sloped heavily AWAY from you...it was a "one bounce and on green. If you thought you stubbed it and hit it short, you were pin high...if you thought you were good, you were 20' by...