[Sam Maryland]

I wonder who is going to provide the financing?

SM

My guess would be a combination of Citicorp and Textron

if Trump really has a commitment from Citi on this deal he'd be smart to pull down the ENTIRE line - NOW...

...I don't know what the planned timeline on this development is but I bet there end up being material delays related to financing (if it gets started at all).  just doesn't seem to have the characteristics of something any bank would want to lend on at this time.

SM

this from the Biz Week article:  To take advantage of these opportunities, you'll need to kick in some of your own cash. "In the conversations we're having with buyers these days, we tell them to expect to put in 30% to 40% cash," says Jerry Hinckley, national sales director for the Golf Finance Division at Textron Financial, one of the largest course financiers in the country.

====================

those who are against this project may want to just relax, step back, and save some energy...

...this project will not be financed anytime soon, if ever.

SM

[Brian_Ewen]

Sam
Really ?

Here was me thinking he must be glad it has been knocked a year , with the way the £ is now .

No ?

[David_Tepper]

What The Economist thinks:

http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12564699

[Jed Peters]

I think the actual amount of money that's to be made here isn't so much the issue as it is to solidify DT's place in Golf--and to increase his brand awareness.

He wants top courses, in top locations, and to be the biggest name in the Game.

[Mark Pearce]

Brian,

Fair enough, not just about golf, but.....

The majority of the folks were in favor of it as indicated, with the notable exception of the council and 1 PO'd land owner.

What makes thier voice any more compelling?  Its the lunatic fringe that rants and cries and eventually gets thier way and rules made for everyone else to follow, even though the vast vast majority never agree with them.

If the majority agree upon it, then what is the problem?  Are citizens supposed to be subject to the govt?  Or should the gov't be accountable to the citizens who put them in power?

So someone goes thru the appeals process,(whether you like him or not), legally...and guess what...they're still ranting and crying.  Surprise, surpise. 

Kalen,

This isn't the States, an enormous expanse of land where building an eyesore isn't a problem because it's a small spot in millions of acres, it's a relatively small bit of beautiful land, of which there isn't much left, in a small and overcrowded island.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Arble,

Jeepers, I bet if polled, most people wouldn't care about the site Trump is about to ruin.

Has Trump chosen an architect yet ?

If not, why do we assume that he'll ruin the site ?

Would the same be said if a modern day developer hired C&C or Doak to design a golf course on the site of TOC, assuming that it was presently farmland ?

Does the Clubhouse at St Andrews, the Hotel and buildings ruin that site ?

[David_Tepper]

Pat M. -

As noted earlier in this thread (and on several other prior ones on this subject), Martin Hawtree will design the 1st course.

DT

[Jon Wiggett]

Patrick,

it is a SSSI of European importance and not farmland. Regardless of how good a golf course could be built on it, it will still ruin the site. There are just some sites hich you don't build on. As to the buildings, have a look at Trumps proposal. It ain't exactly the R&A Clubhaouse

[Jim Nugent]

Jon and Mark Pearce: should the will of the people be ignored?

[Sean_A]

Jon and Mark Pearce: should the will of the people be ignored?

Jim

Do you really think allowing the people to decide all issues such as this is prudent?  The ecosystem surrounding these dunes is rare and many experts believe that altering it could potentially destroy it - of course, we don't know what the knock on effect of this is.  In effect, the Scottish government is rolling the dice for future promises by reneging on past promises to protect this land.  Its not as if the importance of the dunes system is altered, its the merely a change of government.  Its short term thinking which has led to our current financial crisis and its about time governments start to make decisions which make sense beyond their terms of office.

Ciao 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jon and Mark Pearce: should the will of the people be ignored?

Jim

Do you really think allowing the people to decide all issues such as this is prudent? 

So, who gets to decide, who gets to decide each issue ?

Or, is that question best answered based on the decision you prefer to see ?

Come to NJ and try working with the NJDEP and then tell me if the Departments should decide or if the people should decide.

I have more faith in the people than I do in career bureaucrats.

The ecosystem surrounding these dunes is rare and many experts believe that altering it could potentially destroy it - of course, we don't know what the knock on effect of this is. 

Have the ecosystems at TOC, Prestwick, Troon, Western Gailes been destroyed ?

In effect, the Scottish government is rolling the dice for future promises by reneging on past promises to protect this land. 

How does a golf course, with perhaps only 70 acres or less under management not protect the land ?

What's the total acreage of the property ?
What's the total acreage of the coastal shoreline with similar characteristics ?

Its not as if the importance of the dunes system is altered, its the merely a change of government. 

Its short term thinking which has led to our current financial crisis and its about time governments start to make decisions which make sense beyond their terms of office.

How is wanting citizens own and live in their own homes "short term" thinking ?

The phrase, "it's about time governments start to make decisions which make sense beyond their terms in office" is the best argument in the world for term limits.

The phrase that governments make decisions which make sense is mostly contradictory.  That hasn't been happening for centuries and it's doubtful it will start any time soon.

Dan King posted a great quote that went something like this.

I don't trust men to make decisions governing the affairs of their lives so why should I trust them to make decisions governing the lives of others ?

[Sean_A]

Jon and Mark Pearce: should the will of the people be ignored?

Jim

Do you really think allowing the people to decide all issues such as this is prudent? 

So, who gets to decide, who gets to decide each issue ?

Or, is that question best answered based on the decision you prefer to see ?

Come to NJ and try working with the NJDEP and then tell me if the Departments should decide or if the people should decide.

I have more faith in the people than I do in career bureaucrats.

The ecosystem surrounding these dunes is rare and many experts believe that altering it could potentially destroy it - of course, we don't know what the knock on effect of this is. 

Have the ecosystems at TOC, Prestwick, Troon, Western Gailes been destroyed ?

In effect, the Scottish government is rolling the dice for future promises by reneging on past promises to protect this land. 

How does a golf course, with perhaps only 70 acres or less under management not protect the land ?

What's the total acreage of the property ?
What's the total acreage of the coastal shoreline with similar characteristics ?

Its not as if the importance of the dunes system is altered, its the merely a change of government. 

Its short term thinking which has led to our current financial crisis and its about time governments start to make decisions which make sense beyond their terms of office.

How is wanting citizens own and live in their own homes "short term" thinking ?

The phrase, "it's about time governments start to make decisions which make sense beyond their terms in office" is the best argument in the world for term limits.

The phrase that governments make decisions which make sense is mostly contradictory.  That hasn't been happening for centuries and it's doubtful it will start any time soon.

Dan King posted a great quote that went something like this.

I don't trust men to make decisions governing the affairs of their lives so why should I trust them to make decisions governing the lives of others ?

Pat

I won't waste my time explaining things to you as I am fairly certain it will do no good.  Go through the links and decide for yourself - as best you can.  Though I must say, who do you think is making the decisions here?

The length of the area in question is ~5 miles and Trump wants about 2 miles of it - including some 25-30% of the prized Foveran Links.
http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/map_tcm9-177637.pdf

http://www.aberdeenshire.gov.uk/planning/inquiry/SNH%20Precognition%20Summary%20Jim%20Hansom.pdf

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/212607/0067713.pdf

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/212607/0068202.pdf

Ciao

[Robert Thompson]

Having played a value-budgeted Hawtree design in Ontario numerous times (Tarandowah), I'm hopeful he can come up with something interesting. He doesn't seem the type to create a bunch of waterfalls anyway....

But I really wish Trump would shut his bloody mouth. All this "best golf course in the world," hype is so full of hyperbole that it makes me want to vomit.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Arble,

How is the project that much different from what exists at Pebble Beach ?

Spanish Bay ?

[Anthony Gray]

   Is Donald good for golf? Good for Scotland?

        Anthony

[Ally Mcintosh]

Sean Arble,

How is the project that much different from what exists at Pebble Beach ?

Spanish Bay ?

Patrick,

As much as your questions are almost always interesting, I suggest that in this case you are so wildly far away from the angle that Sean, Mark Pearce and Jon Wiggett are coming from that you need to do some research on your own: Firstly in to Sand Dune Ecosystems... and Secondly in to the culture, topography and history of Scotland.

There are two blatant problems here. One is the SSSI aspect of the site for golf. If you choose not to believe in environmental impact, then so be it. Answers on this thread won't change your mind.

The second problem is the outrageous amount of building development and infrastructure.

In short, the project is not sustainable. In my view of course.

[Sean_A]

Sean Arble,

How is the project that much different from what exists at Pebble Beach ?

Spanish Bay ?

Pat

I don't know what Pebble or Spanish Bay were like before they were developed.  I also don't know if these sites were in anyway different or how much of that sort of land exists.  In any case, I think the point of legal protection, which SSS1 is meant to ensure, is to preserve the land and the habitats it provides in as close to a pristine state as we can.  Land can have instrinsic value regardless of its value as a potential development.  The debate obviously centres around how much compromise between conservation and economic development is reasonable.  This clearly depends on the site in question.  A previous government saw fit to accept a designation of SSS1 for the Foveran Links precisely to protect it from the sort of development Trump proposes.  The current government obviously believes the tradeoff is worth the destruction of a unique British site.  Of course, this sort of decision-making smacks of "well how much do you have, because its all for sale for the right price". 

Personally, I think it is short sighted and throwing around the idea of people getting the chance to own their own homes is about a silly reason for this sort of development as you have ever come up with.  We are talking about very few "starter" type homes in this project and many more second/holiday home/sell a home and move to this location.  So lets drop the idea of homes for masses right now.  In effect what is happening is that a protected site is being destroyed so wealthy people can live/holiday in a beautiful spot around a golf course.  Lord knows Scotland doesn't need another golf course and it doesn't need homes or for the wealthy.  So that just leaves the jobs that will be generated.  I would like to see the breakdown of permanent job creation this project will generate.  In fact, I would like to see any numbers on this project other than Trump's.  From the economic PoV, all I have seen are the numbers Trump offered.  At the very least, we should get numbers from an independent third party.  Otherwise, how are we to know what sort of value this project really offers? 


In any case, other than knowing that this wonderful site will be destroyed, I am just as peeved with the government for going back on their promise (SSS1 is a promise) and how they went about this whole deal.  It further goes to show how these mealy mouthed SOBs can't be trusted and how much money is wasted in the pretense of local government decision-making, planning regulation and environmental protection.  One arm doesn't know what the other is doing so it costs me money.  I have no time for these blighters.     

Ciao     

[Anthony Gray]

  Sports Illistrated says it is a $1 billion dollar development.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Arble,

How is the project that much different from what exists at Pebble Beach ?

Spanish Bay ?

Patrick,

As much as your questions are almost always interesting,
I suggest that in this case you are so wildly far away from the angle that Sean, Mark Pearce and Jon Wiggett are coming from that you need to do some research on your own:

Firstly in to Sand Dune Ecosystems... and Secondly in to the culture, topography and history of Scotland.

My questions related to Spanish Bay and Pebble Beach remain unanswered.

As to the Sand Dune Ecosystems, they seem to have fared fairly well at Troon, Prestwick, Turnberry and other courses.  Why is there such a dire forecast for this site ?  Does the Ecosystem differ significantly from that at the sites mentioned above, and others ?

TOC seems to have fared well despite its proximity to the dunes and estuary.  Surely you're aware of the heavily populated area surrounding the golf course, including all of the buildings.

So, I ask again, what's so different about this site than others that have been developed as golf courses/resorts ?

Had another developer/architect chosen to design and build 36 holes, would there have been the same reaction ?  Or, is the name "Trump" the lightening rod of dissent ?

There are two blatant problems here. One is the SSSI aspect of the site for golf. If you choose not to believe in environmental impact, then so be it.

Evidently, the powers that be didn't believe the environmental impact.

Aren't environmental impact studies forward looking projections ?
Are you aware of the caveat or warning that accompanies forward looking financial projections ?

If we applied today's environmental impact studies to the development of New York City, Washington, D.C. and other areas vital to our society/culture, they NEVER would have been built.

You may not believe this, but, I am sensitive to environmental needs, but, not when they're determined by extremists, which seems to be the case all too often.

An intelligent, balanced approach needs to be taken.

Bandon Dunes seems to be an example of a reasonable compromise between commercial and environemental interests.

Answers on this thread won't change your mind.

I don't know that the answers being provided in this thread are unbiased and/or sufficiently researched either. 

Again, I wonder.
If Mike Keiser was the developer, would the process and outcome have been different ?

The second problem is the outrageous amount of building development and infrastructure.

In short, the project is not sustainable. In my view of course.

If that's obvious to the common man, why would prudent companies invest millions, if not billions in this project ?

[Chris Kane]

Would the same be said if a modern day developer hired C&C or Doak to design a golf course on the site of TOC, assuming that it was presently farmland ?

Does the Clubhouse at St Andrews, the Hotel and buildings ruin that site ?

Patrick, that comment makes me wonder if you've even been to St Andrews.  The courses sit on land which could not be ruined - its atrocious. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Would the same be said if a modern day developer hired C&C or Doak to design a golf course on the site of TOC, assuming that it was presently farmland ?

Does the Clubhouse at St Andrews, the Hotel and buildings ruin that site ?

Patrick, that comment makes me wonder if you've even been to St Andrews.  The courses sit on land which could not be ruined - its atrocious. 

I'm fairly certain, that if St Andrews was to be developed today, environmental issues would impede, if not thwart that process.

[Rich Goodale]

Same with Cypress and Pebble, Pat, and probably even NLGA.

[Sean_A]

Sean Arble,

How is the project that much different from what exists at Pebble Beach ?

Spanish Bay ?

Patrick,

As much as your questions are almost always interesting,
I suggest that in this case you are so wildly far away from the angle that Sean, Mark Pearce and Jon Wiggett are coming from that you need to do some research on your own:

Firstly in to Sand Dune Ecosystems... and Secondly in to the culture, topography and history of Scotland.

My questions related to Spanish Bay and Pebble Beach remain unanswered.

As to the Sand Dune Ecosystems, they seem to have fared fairly well at Troon, Prestwick, Turnberry and other courses.  Why is there such a dire forecast for this site ?  Does the Ecosystem differ significantly from that at the sites mentioned above, and others ?

TOC seems to have fared well despite its proximity to the dunes and estuary.  Surely you're aware of the heavily populated area surrounding the golf course, including all of the buildings.

So, I ask again, what's so different about this site than others that have been developed as golf courses/resorts ?

Had another developer/architect chosen to design and build 36 holes, would there have been the same reaction ?  Or, is the name "Trump" the lightening rod of dissent ?

There are two blatant problems here. One is the SSSI aspect of the site for golf. If you choose not to believe in environmental impact, then so be it.

Evidently, the powers that be didn't believe the environmental impact.

Aren't environmental impact studies forward looking projections ?
Are you aware of the caveat or warning that accompanies forward looking financial projections ?

If we applied today's environmental impact studies to the development of New York City, Washington, D.C. and other areas vital to our society/culture, they NEVER would have been built.

You may not believe this, but, I am sensitive to environmental needs, but, not when they're determined by extremists, which seems to be the case all too often.

An intelligent, balanced approach needs to be taken.

Bandon Dunes seems to be an example of a reasonable compromise between commercial and environemental interests.

Answers on this thread won't change your mind.

I don't know that the answers being provided in this thread are unbiased and/or sufficiently researched either. 

Again, I wonder.
If Mike Keiser was the developer, would the process and outcome have been different ?

The second problem is the outrageous amount of building development and infrastructure.

In short, the project is not sustainable. In my view of course.

If that's obvious to the common man, why would prudent companies invest millions, if not billions in this project ?

Patrick

If you want answers concerning Pebble and Spanish Bay do some research.  I already stated that I don't have answers. Asking again won't make me hit the books.

If I had to guess as to what the main difference regarding Foveran Links is that some of the dunes system changes on a daily basis with the tide and winds.  They aren't made permanent with binding grasses - which is exactly what needs to occur for golf to be played.  My impression of sites traditionally used for links is that grass was already well established making the dunes relatively stable and thus usable for grazing or even rearing rabbits - ha!   

If you read the links I provided you wouldn't write things like "Evidently, the powers that be didn't believe the environmental impact."  The government is quite clear in that it understands significant damage to the existing environment will be a consequence of the proposal.  They are making a no bones about trade off. 

I can't say if TOC or other courses would not have been built, but there are courses being built near the sea which didn't require nearly this much hullabaloo.  By many accounts Kingsbarns, the Castle Course, Dundonald and the new Castle Stuart Course are meant to be quite good.  Development and conservation can and must co-exist.  When all sides invest in compromise attractive projects can be pulled off.  Designating sites SSS1 is part of that compromise process.  It is no use in the government going along with this sort of thing until somebody waves a pile of notes.  We all know governments can be bought, but what they are selling belongs to all of us.

Ciao

If you are interested in the subject you should dig into it a bit rather than blindly flailing about. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean Arble,

I'm familiar with shifting dunes.

Oblique Dunes caused much debate at Sandpines.

If you don't know the answers, perhaps you shouldn't adopt such an authoritive position when championing your cause.

[Sean_A]

Sean Arble,

I'm familiar with shifting dunes.

Oblique Dunes caused much debate at Sandpines.

If you don't know the answers, perhaps you shouldn't adopt such an authoritive position when championing your cause.

Patrick

You are quite adept at throwing around useless quips.  I am not championing Pebble, Sand Pines or TOC - that is why I haven't bothered to look into the matter.  Besides, there ain't much we can do about these places even if they do prove to have been significant and rare sites.  Furthermore, I would argue that at least TOC is a significant site now because of golf and should be protected if need be. 


Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()