Just read through this thread on SFGC...
One of the "defining characteristics" of SFGC that keeps getting mentioned is its scale. Having played there a few years back I would agree.
In the clubhouse, they have several pictures of the course on the wall, including a bunch from the early years - presumably soon after it was constructed. There were very few (if any) trees on the course when it was first built.
My question is whether or not the course's feeling of scale (one of its defining characteristics) has been enhanced by the addition / growth of the trees, which create the impressive "corridors" that have been mentioned, and perhaps add some feeling of depth to the course. I felt that that the trees added to the feeling of scale and to the flow of the course without interfering with play (because expect in a couple of cases, the trees are kept a safe distance from the lines of play).
While tree overgrowth had been discussed and criticized at length on this site, is there a middle ground, where the addition of trees to a site (originally designed with no trees) can improve the overall quality / feel of the course?
This topic may have already been hashed out, but I'd be curious to hear people's opinions.
-David Q.