You really have to see it to appreciate what was done to create

[Patrick_Mucci]

Thanks for the notes, Patrick.  I have wanted to hear more about the course for a while.

Were there any holes there that were particularly memorable?

A good number of them, starting with # 1.

Each hole is truely unique, created out of nothing.[/color]

Just a small point - whilst the flagpole is no doubt impressive, the 75 foot depth of the foundations would be more a factor of the local geology than the forces of the pole. 

Having played with the site engineer I can assure you it was the stress factors on the pole, which flys an enormous flag that takes about 10 men to hoist and bring in.  A heavy motor operates the lines.
[/color]

The fill imported onto the site and the presumably weak alluvial mudflats underneath the fill would have limited ability to support structures. 

There were no mud flats beneath the site where the pole sits.

The mud flats are far removed from that location.

In additions to the fill, fly ash and cement were added.
[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Given the small acreage, the routing is masterful.
He separates the holes by elevation as much as by distance. 

Tommy (and Pat)

interesting words.  I will read more about it from Daley's Vol 4.  Can you expand on what you mean by separating the holes by elevation as much as by distance?  Is it that consecutive holes are played at different elevations, almost akin to being on a different floor of a building? 

That element certainly exists, and is employed quite well.[/color]

Are there any other combination of holes that have a simialr feeling? 

I think of Royal Dornoch #17 as being a great example of a hole that links separate landforms, which in conjunction with #16 get the golfer from the coast to the highland for the last hole.  Is this the sort of concept, or soemthing quite different?

I've never played RD, so I can't comment.[/color]

James B

[George Pazin]

I am serious in saying that there is no way that area around Bayonne GC will look the same in twenty years, and if Bergstal has any cash left, I would think he is trying to buy property around the club.

Back when Atlantic GC first opened, the land around it was a bunch of potato fields on the wrong side of the highway. Today the raw land trades at obscene numbers.

So you think you can predict the future 20 years from now? 

My worthless prediction is that things will look a whole lot different than almost everyone expects. 

Jim, while I agree with your overall premise, the one thing you can say about the NYC metro area is that demand outstrips supply for jsut about everything. I think that provides the underpinning for Mike Sweeney's prediction. Not quite as safe as T bills, but not far behind.

-----

Lucky me, one of my good friends just joined Bayonne last year - and another joined Mountain Ridge!

[Patrick_Mucci]

HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE SITE ?[/b][/color]

No
[/color]


That doesn't surprise me.

You don't have any concept of the land form in that area.  You don't have any concept of the terrible waste of money for the bridge to nowhere and you're totally uniformed with respect to the lack of views from that area.

If you'd look at the aerial I provided, you'd see that the path only continues for an extremely short distance beyond the bridge, making the creation of the bridge a total waste of money.[/color]

I will make you a bet double or nothing on that lunch you owe me that I visit the Bayonne GC site before you admit you were wrong on that Pound Ridge thread!

I'll take you to Bayonne on the condition that you post how incredibly wrong you are about your position on the bridge and the waste of money.

The Pound Ridge project was delayed while the costs kept escalating.[/color]

I am serious in saying that there is no way that area around Bayonne GC will look the same in twenty years, and if Bergstal has any cash left, I would think he is trying to buy property around the club.

I hope I'm here to collect on that bet.
A major deep water port with huge cranes is just north of BGC and I don't think that's going to change.[/color]

Back when Atlantic GC first opened, the land around it was a bunch of potato fields on the wrong side of the highway. Today the raw land trades at obscene numbers.

Mike, why not compare the Monterey Pennisula with Gothenberg, NE ?
There is no comparison.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike

I am completely with you.

That makes both of you wrong.

Sean, did it ever occur to you that you don't know what you're talking about because you've never been to the specific site under discussion, or do you just like making a fool of yourself ?[/color]

Some folks just don't get it. 

And you're one of them.

You have ZERO familiarity with the site.
You simply don't know what you're talking about.
It's one thing to remain silent and have people think you're a fool, it's quite another to open your mouth and prove it, which you've done admirably.   Thanks.

But, if I can forgive Mike for his ignorance due to his being 8 miles removed from the site I guess I can forgive your ignorance due to your being removed by 3,000+ miles from the site.[/color]

[Kirk Gill]

I can't help but compare the discussion of this course to the discussion of the new Castle Course. Melvyn Morrow mentioned this on that thread: "If this land can be butchered beyond recognition for golf so can other areas around the world, hence my comment regards Land Fit for Purpose."

And Mark Chaplin said:  "Ruining the land - a links course sits on a specific type of naturally formed land, can a bulldozer and a few 1000 lorry loads of sand create "true" linkland conditions??"

Now needless to say that whatever was there before the building of Bayonne Golf Club, it wasn't an unspoilt natural site like the one where the Castle Course was built (even though that was not a natural "links" site). Few might argue that this part of New Jersey was "destroyed" by building this course. But to get down to the nitty gritty - this course is "fake." To what degree is that an issue for those of you who have played it? Does it increase your respect for the architect because it was so well done, or does it make you in any way yearn for something more authentic? Or is the point moot because the course is so enjoyable?

I haven't played the course, but I would probably love it. The sleight-of-hand needed to create it seems like craft to me, and I admire craft. But for those who would criticize the Castle Course or Kingsbarns because of their inherent, man-made "unnatural-ness," does the same standard apply to Bayonne?

[Sean_A]

Mike

I am completely with you.

That makes both of you wrong.

Sean, did it ever occur to you that you don't know what you're talking about because you've never been to the specific site under discussion, or do you just like making a fool of yourself ?[/color]

Some folks just don't get it. 

And you're one of them.

You have ZERO familiarity with the site.
You simply don't know what you're talking about.
It's one thing to remain silent and have people think you're a fool, it's quite another to open your mouth and prove it, which you've done admirably.   Thanks.

But, if I can forgive Mike for his ignorance due to his being 8 miles removed from the site I guess I can forgive your ignorance due to your being removed by 3,000+ miles from the site.[/color]

Pat

My father taught me to dismiss those who make assumptions about one's knowledge.  I reckon in dealing with you, its very sound advice.

Ciao

[Voytek Wilczak]

The bridge that Bayonne GC was "forced" to build is a fragment of the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway.

The Walkway was supposed to continue past the 16th green and past the driving range; going pretty much all around the south-east perimeter of the golf course all the way to the industrial area.

But Homeland Security recommended against completing the walkway, because the public would be able to wander around the Most Dangerous Mile in America (the Chemical Mile) - Bayonne's industrial/chemical  area adjacent to BGC, where tanker cars of deadly chlorine gas are processed daily.

So the walkway ends where it ends.

BTW - there is no reason for Mucci to get his knickers in a twist over the bridge. It is a practice as old as modern civilization that municipalities get developers do extra stuff in exchange for permits.

Here are a few points:

1. The Bayonne public uses it on a daily basis for walks - it's a terrific walk - makes for good neighborly relations between BGC and Bayonne
2. BGC uses it daily for maintenance - I see all kinds of golf course vehicles with golf course workers using the bridge all the time
3. I believe Bayonne was initially promised a public golf course by Cherokee - the site development economics forced Bergstol's hand into making it private, so Bayonne countered with some tee-times for residents and the walkway for the public (although, as indicated below, the walkway - including the bridge - could have been required by law)
4. Liberty National was also "forced" to make a beautiful walkway for the public as part of Hudson River Waterfront Walkway - that walkway also looks to have cost about a mil.

Sorry, Pat, as a Hudson County resident I am THRILLED that both BGC and LNGC were "shaken down" by big, bad municipal governments to give something to the public besides fenced-off private properties in the midst of the most densely populated county in the nation.

And maybe, just maybe, when all the chemical industry leaves Bayonne and Jersey City, the Bridge at the Bayonne Golf Course won't lead to nowhere anymore, but will be a part of a continuous green belt called Hudson river Waterfront Walkway, which is being developed by people with vision.

PS - I just found this article.

Bayonne might have been just enforcing the law, not strong-arming Bergstol.


Judge Upholds Law on Waterfront Access
August 19, 1999

Turning aside complaints from developers, a Federal judge has upheld a state rule guaranteeing public access to an 18-mile walkway along the Hudson River.

A lawsuit by the builders marked the first time in the nation that an entire set of regulations on waterfront access was challenged on constitutional grounds, said Ann Alexander, a staff lawyer at the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic, which joined other environmental groups and the state in defending the rules.

''There has been a disturbing trend of late toward privatization of the waterfront, but this decision sends a clear signal to developers that there are limits to that,'' Ms. Alexander said today.

A lawyer for the New Jersey Builders Association and the National Association of Homebuilders did not return a call seeking comment.

Judge Garrett E. Brown Jr. of Federal District Court filed his ruling last Thursday and lawyers learned of it on Tuesday, Ms. Alexander said.

The builders challenged a 1988 regulation in which the State Department of Environmental Protection requires developers along the Hudson to build and maintain a 30-foot-wide walkway that is open to the public. Their suit cited the Fifth Amendment's clause against government's taking property or diminishing its value without compensation.

The Hudson River Waterfront Walkway runs between the Bayonne and George Washington Bridges through nine towns. Fifteen miles are completed, and the remaining three miles are being designed.

The Shelter Bay Club complex in Edgewater used gates to close off its walkway because of vandalism. The state is trying to force its reopening.

[David_Tepper]

Voytek -

Thanks for the facts! A little knowledge goes a long way.

DT

[John Moore II]

Pat--Not to take the thread off topic, but we still haven't seen your promised groundbreaking survery results, or whatever you had in mind, from our lingering "best 18 par X holes" threads.  Results of said survery were promised last weekend. I was hopeful this was your results.

[Larry_Keltto]

I'd be interested in comments of folks that have now played at Bayonne and Whistling.   They would seem to have the same faux links construction origins.  Also, a two tiered parallel hole corridor theme seems to be similar.

I'm curious about the Bayonne/Whistling Straits question, too. Has anyone played both?

[SPDB]

J. Kenneth:
I wouldn't hold your breath. Those threads were heading to the same destination as the bridge in question.

[John Moore II]

SPDB-I'm certainly not holding my breath, but it has been long promised that we would see some type of results from those surveys, seeming something really groundbreaking. I am simply reminding him we have yet to see anything. I would like to see whatever the results are to be, I went through minutes of headache to generate my lists of best holes.

[Tommy Williamsen]

It is very difficult to compare WS and Bayonne.  Whistling Straights is built on much more land.  The land surrounding WS looks like unkempt dunes, just like Ireland.  Bayonne does not have the land to pull that off.  It makes a climb up to about 100 feet in elevation where WS stays closer to the elevation of the lake.  The grass and vegetation at Bayonne is closer to what you would find in Ireland.  They planted different plants etc than they have in Ireland, but the look is very similar.  The grass at WS especially in front of the greens is pretty American. 

Which do I like better?  It is a toss up.  I could player either as a steady diet.

[David_Elvins]

Having played with the site engineer I can assure you it was the stress factors on the pole, which flys an enormous flag that takes about 10 men to hoist and bring in.  A heavy motor operates the lines.

Patrick,
Sorry, hadn't relised you had played with the site engineer.  I design foundations for flag poles for a living, but I will defer to your greater expertise on this one.  Sounds like an impressive structure, I look forward to seeing it one day.

Back to architecture:

You mention the course had a few blind shots.  Are these mainly on tee shots or second shots? 

You mention that the course needs a bit of fine tuning.  What specifically do you think needs to be improved?

How would you describe the green complexes? Was there much variety in them? Big? Small? Undulating?  many bunkers around them?  short grass or rough surrounds?

[Patrick_Mucci]

The bridge that Bayonne GC was "forced" to build is a fragment of the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway.

That's what makes it even more absurd.
The fragment is a measely extension of 200 yards from the bridge's eastern end.
Why force someone to spend $ 1,200,000 to get 200 more yards of path, especially when the view is of a huge building and cranes.
If it was your money you wouldn't be so quick to support the project and spend the funds for 200 yards.[/color]

The Walkway was supposed to continue past the 16th green and past the driving range; going pretty much all around the south-east perimeter of the golf course all the way to the industrial area.

But Homeland Security recommended against completing the walkway, because the public would be able to wander around the Most Dangerous Mile in America (the Chemical Mile) - Bayonne's industrial/chemical  area adjacent to BGC, where tanker cars of deadly chlorine gas are processed daily.

I believe the tank farm was the problem for failure to complete GAP Bay 8.
The railroad tracks are offset from the intended route of the path along the shoreline.[/color]

So the walkway ends where it ends.

Which gets to the point.
The walkway ends only a short distance from where the 800' bridge makes landfall on the eastern end.

Which means that BGC was forced to spend over $ 1,200,000 on a bridge just to extend a path for two hundred yards.  It's pure insanity.[/color]

BTW - there is no reason for Mucci to get his knickers in a twist over the bridge. It is a practice as old as modern civilization that municipalities get developers do extra stuff in exchange for permits.

Evidently the New Jersey Supreme Court recently got their knickers in a twist when they ruled that municipalities can no longer "shake down" (extort) payments in cash or kind from developers.  Fire Engines were a popular method of exchange, but fortunately the State Supreme Court recognized the onerous implications of this long standing practice, and ruled against it.[/color]

Here are a few points:

1. The Bayonne public uses it on a daily basis for walks - it's a terrific walk - makes for good neighborly relations between BGC and Bayonne

More nonsense.  The path ends two hundred yards from the end of the bridge.  On a beautiful day I only saw three people use the bridge, and two were fishing near the end.  Not to mention the aroma from the mud flats which the bridge traverses.  It's hardly an idyllic setting[/color]

2. BGC uses it daily for maintenance - I see all kinds of golf course vehicles with golf course workers using the bridge all the time

Given the choice of spending over $ 1,200,000 or having the maintainance vehicles ride down the 8th hole to service a small section of the site, I'll guarantee you that they'd choose the 8th hole over $ 1,200,000.[/color]

3. I believe Bayonne was initially promised a public golf course by Cherokee - the site development economics forced Bergstol's hand into making it private, so Bayonne countered with some tee-times for residents and the walkway for the public (although, as indicated below, the walkway - including the bridge - could have been required by law)
Are you sure you're not confusing this project with the Meadowlands golf course project ?

If Bayonne forced BGC to grant tee times to the public, then the golf club isn't a strictly private facility, and thus subject the State's anti-discrimination statutes.  Are you positive about this ?
Who decides who plays and when ?[/color]

4. Liberty National was also "forced" to make a beautiful walkway for the public as part of Hudson River Waterfront Walkway - that walkway also looks to have cost about a mil.
Liberty National is an entirely different site and issue.
Liberty National is a real estate development with a golf course.[/color]

Sorry, Pat, as a Hudson County resident I am THRILLED that both BGC and LNGC were "shaken down" by big, bad municipal governments to give something to the public besides fenced-off private properties in the midst of the most densely populated county in the nation.

The New Jersey Supreme Court agrees with you on "shake downs" and recently ruled against them.

You can't look at the issue at arm's length or as a disinterested party because you have a vested interest.
If Hudson County indicated that they were going to tax you $ 500 to build the bridge, I'm pretty sure you would have opposed it.
But, since somebody else was "shaken down" to pay for it, you're all in favor of a free lunch.  If the funds had to come out of your pocket I don't think you'd be so supportive.

Unlike you, I have no vested interest in this issue, hence, I think my understanding and vision of the more global implications are clearer.[/color]

And maybe, just maybe, when all the chemical industry leaves Bayonne and Jersey City, the Bridge at the Bayonne Golf Course won't lead to nowhere anymore, but will be a part of a continuous green belt called Hudson river Waterfront Walkway, which is being developed by people with vision.

Right, when all the businesses and commerce leaves, and there are no jobs in Bayonne, you and all of the other environmental advocates will be happy.  What you and others don't understand is that companies have a choice of where they'll conduct business.   And when government creates a hostile and/or burdensome taxing environment, they'll move elsewhere and unemployment will skyrocket, home values will plummet and only then will bureaucrats scratch their heads and say, "what happened, what went wrong ?"  Then, the residents that still remain will have plenty of time to contemplate why they're unemployed as they enjoy their thrice daily walks.[/color]

PS - I just found this article.

Why don't you post the article, not what you've chosen to type ?
Please identify the case so I can researach it for myself.[/color]

Bayonne might have been just enforcing the law, not strong-arming Bergstol.

Baloney.
Once it was determined that the GAP BAY 8 route couldn't extend beyond the designated point, there was no need to force the club to build an 800 foot bridge to nowhere, one that would only extend the path by 200 yards.
[/color]

Judge Upholds Law on Waterfront Access
August 19, 1999

Turning aside complaints from developers, a Federal judge has upheld a state rule guaranteeing public access to an 18-mile walkway along the Hudson River.

A lawsuit by the builders marked the first time in the nation that an entire set of regulations on waterfront access was challenged on constitutional grounds, said Ann Alexander, a staff lawyer at the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic, which joined other environmental groups and the state in defending the rules.

''There has been a disturbing trend of late toward privatization of the waterfront, but this decision sends a clear signal to developers that there are limits to that,'' Ms. Alexander said today.

A lawyer for the New Jersey Builders Association and the National Association of Homebuilders did not return a call seeking comment.

Judge Garrett E. Brown Jr. of Federal District Court filed his ruling last Thursday and lawyers learned of it on Tuesday, Ms. Alexander said.

The builders challenged a 1988 regulation in which the State Department of Environmental Protection requires developers along the Hudson to build and maintain a 30-foot-wide walkway that is open to the public. Their suit cited the Fifth Amendment's clause against government's taking property or diminishing its value without compensation.

To force a developer to spend over $ 1,200,000 for a bridge that only extends the path by 200 yards is insane.  If the money to build the bridge came out of your pocket you'd scream bloody murder and you know it.
This was sheer folly.

Why did you fail to mention that if the path had been allowed to continue to Constable Point that golfers would have to tee off on # 17 with people (the public) walking directly in their flight path.

If they were hit, would the club be liable ?
If they were hit, would governmental agencies seek to shut down the hole ?
The golf course ?
Make the golf course spend more money to reroute # 17 ?[/color]

The Hudson River Waterfront Walkway runs between the Bayonne and George Washington Bridges through nine towns. Fifteen miles are completed, and the remaining three miles are being designed.

Have you walked it from one end to the other ?[/color]

The Shelter Bay Club complex in Edgewater used gates to close off its walkway because of vandalism. The state is trying to force its reopening.

David Tepper,

In what context do you determine whether or not Voytek has presented the facts ?

He is biased, he has a dog in the fight.  I have none.

Who's the independent party, Voytek or myself ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat--Not to take the thread off topic,

Baloney, you intended to take the thread off topic, that's why you posted what you did.[/color]

but we still haven't seen your promised groundbreaking survery results, or whatever you had in mind, from our lingering "best 18 par X holes" threads. 

Are you sure ?

Didn't I start a thread re: assessing the talent/merits of an architect based on his design of par 5's ?[/color]

Results of said survery were promised last weekend.

I had better things to do last weekend.
I spent it playing NGLA and Westhampton

And, I never promised any results of any survey.
Please have someone read my posts to you as you don't seem to be able to comprehend the typed word.[/color]

I was hopeful this was your results.

It's not.
And, the thread you reference was never intended to post the results of any survey.

As to another thread, I'll get around to it when I feel like it.
In the meantime, feel free to create any threads you deem worthy.[/color]

Do PAR 5's define the architect's inate talent ?
« on: June 30, 2008, 08:02:17 pm »   

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Par 3's seem simple to design and build.
Par 4's a little more complicated.

It seems that par 5's are the most difficult to design.

Could that be the reason why many courses only have two or three of them ?

Are PAR 5's one of the key indicators, along with routing, by which we should judge the quality of an architect's work ?

Can an architect whose par 5's are mediocre to lacking, ever be considered great ? 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sorry, hadn't relised you had played with the site engineer. 
I design foundations for flag poles for a living, but I will defer to your greater expertise on this one. 

As a PH.D, P.E. and the site engineer intimately familiar with every aspect of the project, I believe this fellow knows more than you, myself and the entire GCA.com crew regarding the flag pole and everything else at BGC.
So, I have to take him at his word.

Sounds like an impressive structure, I look forward to seeing it one day.

It's truely impressive and majestic

Back to architecture:

You mention the course had a few blind shots.  Are these mainly on tee shots or second shots? 

Mainly on second shots.[/color]

You mention that the course needs a bit of fine tuning.  What specifically do you think needs to be improved?

Because they wanted the course ready for play, to have that mature look on opening day, I believe that the Fescue rough is too thick.  I think it needs to be thinned out a bit.  It's magnificent to look at, serves a purpose, but, it's too penal.

I know a number of clubs that have embarked upon projects to thin out their Fescue roughs.  I think BGC would benefit from such a project.[/color]

How would you describe the green complexes?

Fabulous, with plenty of pitch and contour and variety in shape.
They tend to be large with a pinch of the "greens within greens" concept.
[/color]

Was there much variety in them? Big? Small? Undulating? 

Yes.

Please take the tours on their website and you can see for yourself.[/color]

many bunkers around them?  short grass or rough surrounds?

All of the above.
They had great variety.
Each one is different and each one plays differently, from the approach shot to recoveries.

It was a terrific golf experience.
I enjoyed the course.
Again, I'm sure that they'll fine tune the course over time, to make it better and better, but, it's off to a very good start.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

J. Kenneth:
I wouldn't hold your breath. Those threads were heading to the same destination as the bridge in question.

SPDB

That's only because some chose to fixate on that element of the thread.

They had ample opportunity to discuss the golf course and the architecture, but chose not to.

Some even chose to divert the discussion on BGC by referencing other threads.

[Mike_Cirba]

I'm hoping to play Bayonne later this summer.

I'm certainly hoping it's better than Whistling Straits, based on the hype I've heard.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'm hoping to play Bayonne later this summer.

I'm certainly hoping it's better than Whistling Straits, based on the hype I've heard.

Mike,

I think you'll enjoy it immensely.

I don't want to overhype it, but, when you consider what existed on that land, flat land at 10' ASL, you have to be impressed by what Eric accomplished.

Let us know your thoughts after your round.

[RJ_Daley]

In reading the "in the news" button on the Bayonne website, I have changed my question slightly.  I was asking for a comparison to Whistling Straits.  But, it seems the construction required mixing Portland cement with the soupy dredged up sludge that was the base of the property is something more akin to Chambers Bay.  While Chambers didn't have sludge to deal with, it had enormous mass sub grading of an old lime kiln Portland Cement production quarry.  Thus both requiring massive capping of topsoil and sand.  So, to that extent, the grading - shaping techniques must have been similar.  If I can only guess the look and feel of the course off the photo tour on Bayonnes part, and having seen Chambers, I have to lean towards suspecting that Chambers was a bigger success in the creating faux links department. 

I also wonder what the prospects for that 'fescue' are in terms of keeping it manageable.  It already looks like more of a mish mash of broadleaf weeds and brush and such than predominantly 'fescue'.  I think the article referred to planting 'scotch broom'.  But, I just suspect that the rough/narrow dunes corridors ares the week point on this property, and wonder how it will be managed to keep the course playable, going forward. 

Also, the requirement for a pedestrian thouroughfare might be more comparable with CB. 

[Mike Sweeney]

If Bayonne forced BGC to grant tee times to the public, then the golf club isn't a strictly private facility, and thus subject the State's anti-discrimination statutes.  Are you positive about this ?
Who decides who plays and when ?[/b][/color]

http://www.golf.com/golf/courses_travel/article/0,28136,1682681-0,00.html


From Sports Illustrated:

The golf club annually sets aside 200 special half-price rounds for Bayonne residents, but a good walk spoiled (there are no carts at this walking-only course) still costs $200 plus another $100 or so for a caddie. Since Bayonne Golf Club opened on Memorial Day weekend in 2006, no more than a half-dozen locals have taken advantage of the offer.

"It's like another world," says Mike Solski, 33, who works at Pompei Pizza (est. 1961) and has little time for golf. "Not that it brings in a lot of revenue for other people in the town."

Sometimes the steam from the pizza can get in a workingman's eyes. Maybe the economic impact doesn't create a giant ripple in the Bayonne economy — 10.1% of residents were below the poverty level in 1999, higher than the state's 8.5% average — but there are at least 25 city residents working at the golf club, a number that figures to double when the $20 million clubhouse opens next year. The club also employs the services of a number of local companies. Bayonne Golf Club pays more than $1 million in property taxes, and it has built a public-access walkway to the edge of New York Bay, an area that once belonged to stray dogs at the dump.

But the hidden benefit to the city provided by this hidden gem of a golf course came to the environment. The old landfills did not have a closure plan to keep contaminants out of the bay. The cost to the city for closure of the landfills, to bring them up to environmental code, was going to run into the millions. Bergstol put it on his tab. O.K., the place still isn't Kiawah Island, but the wetlands mitigation around the course has been a resounding success. In an early environmental study there were 189 fish in the area. A recent study pegged the number at more than 10,000.


.........

Of the 200 members who are considered local — people who reside within 150 miles; only a couple live in Bayonne—there is a healthy Wall Street/Masters of the Universe representation. (There is also a sporting touch: Members include Greg Anthony, Boomer Esiason, Dan Marino and NBC golf anchor Dan Hicks.) For perhaps three quarters of the 250 members, among them four women, Bayonne is a second or even a third club.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Patrick,

If this membership has to kick in $5000 a piece to let the local kids have access to fish the waterway rather than the dogs at the dump, who gets hurt? The club is successful, Bergstal is obviously a smart guy and I doubt he was surprised by any of this.

First I have to teach you about CT/Westchester development, now New Jersey, what next Notre Dame Football???

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

You're missing the point.

For $ 5,000 per member, you only get an additional 200 yards of pathway over the bridge.  It's insanity.  And, it's a remote site, it's not like it's next to a housing development.

I doubt any kids will be venturing there on their leisure time.

And, what will the next demand be ?
That's the danger

If you're going to attempt to teach me about ND football, then I guess it's only fair that I teach you about BC basketball

[Tommy Williamsen]

I'm hoping to play Bayonne later this summer.

I'm certainly hoping it's better than Whistling Straits, based on the hype I've heard.

What was your problem with WS?