LuLu CC to be sold?

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I don't know if the township ever considered some limited public access for residents prior to the vote. I do know that Applebrook and Bayonne,for example, provide this in exchange for accepting funding and/or zoning approval. Does anyone know if there are other examples?

[Bob Harris]

Not sure Bob...my comment was more pointed at the nature of the golf course as opposed to the ownership structure.

I seem to recall some wording in the purchase offer about keeping it as a golf course for a couple of years and took that as a sign that the plan would be to turn it to housing when the market turned...maybe I read it wrong and that housing was never intended. Which is it?

From my conversations with the management, it was their intention to keep LuLu as a private golf club.  They were aware of the township offer and were not adverse to making the same deal.   I would be interested to hear from a real estate expert how much the value of the land has diminished.

[Mike Sweeney]

I don't know if the township ever considered some limited public access for residents prior to the vote. I do know that Applebrook and Bayonne,for example, provide this in exchange for accepting funding and/or zoning approval. Does anyone know if there are other examples?

The Vineyard Club on Martha's Vineyard has 160 off season memberships @ $500 per membership that came about as part of a zoning variance.

My friend Jim Kennedy,

I am not buying that one! 200-300 members, some who don't even live in the town get a disproportionate deal here as a member. Deal done behind close doors and then announced? Was there an open meeting to the taxpayers. You are being too much of a golfer on this one.

Again I don't know the area, but you are limiting this to homes. How about a business, hospital, ball fields and a park? All speculation on my part on other uses.

[Dan Boerger]

I seem to recall that Applebrook, a private course located in East Goshen, PA (also a philly burb course) has a concession with the township that residents can play on Tuesdays (clubhouse closed), but must use a caddy. Bottom line, taxpayers do get some benefit -- if somewhat limited.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
I'm more in favor of the idea, in general, than the specific place where it is being used. I've said before that I think easements can be a good way to save some golf courses from the developer's bulldozers. Every situation is different.

What I think isn't clear is if a vote is needed to actually spend the money (I think that's likely), even though the Commissioners have approved it.

I don't think it's unseemly to negotiate for real estate behind closed doors. Our selectmen recently did that in Salisbury to acquire options on land for our new transfer station. We townsfolk then voted to go ahead with a purchase, but negotiating in private for the property saved us quite a bit of money.

[astavrides]

Alex,

I didn't realize private clubs were excluded from the Philadelphia Golf Community. What's the point of that? What then does consist of the Philadephia Golf Community?

I do not and have no intention of buying season tickets to any of the local sports teams, am I allowed to be a fan?

You're mostly right.  I somehow misread your post as 'to the Philadelphia golf community' [which to me implies 'to the entire Philly golf community', instead of 'in the Philadelphia golf community'  Perhaps it was because 'community' has an all-inclusive connotation.  But I'm splitting hairs a bit now.

The analogy with local sports teams is rather farfetched though.  For one thing, you can buy individual tickets to the Phillies games (or watch them on TV for free and arguably derive the same pleasure), but you can't buy a daily green fee (in general) to a private club.

Obviously, there are some Philly public course golfers (as evidenced by the posters of GCA) who care deeply about very good old private courss like Lulu, but IMO a decent, affordable public course like 5 Ponds or Island Green is much more of an asset to the Philly golf community than Lulu.

[Dan Herrmann]

I seem to recall that Applebrook, a private course located in East Goshen, PA (also a philly burb course) has a concession with the township that residents can play on Tuesdays (clubhouse closed), but must use a caddy. Bottom line, taxpayers do get some benefit -- if somewhat limited.

Dan - the township residents can play one or times per year.

[Mike Hendren]

If LuLu is indeed an equity club, doesn't the granting of a conservation easement constitute adequate consideration?  If the property cannot succeed as a golf course, its likely highest and best use is future residential development, which is no longer permitted - i.e., the membership has given up its economic exit strategy.  The public gains green space and the potential added impact on infrastructure from dense residential development is estopped.  If so I can't the say the public is entitled to golf their ball over the club's marvelous golf course.

Mike

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I understand that at the Commisioner's meeting on September 8 there was no public opposition to the easement nor was the limited public access issue ever mentioned by the public or the Commissioners.


Is Manufacturer's next? They are in the same township.

[Bob Harris]

Is Manufacturer's next? They are in the same township.

If they have no plans to sell, why wouldn't they be interested in $2 M for an easement?

[Lou_Duran]

If LuLu is indeed an equity club, doesn't the granting of a conservation easement constitute adequate consideration?  If the property cannot succeed as a golf course, its likely highest and best use is future residential development, which is no longer permitted - i.e., the membership has given up its economic exit strategy.  The public gains green space and the potential added impact on infrastructure from dense residential development is estopped.  If so I can't the say the public is entitled to golf their ball over the club's marvelous golf course.

Mike

For the bargain price of $72 (a buck for each stroke of par at my favorite golf course) I have full access to this institute of highest learning and Professor Hendren's cutting-edge analysis.      For sure, the owners of LuLu should be very gratified.  Getting a couple million to keep open space open is indeed a coup, particularly if they aren't giving up any additional rights.  Depending on where the money is coming from, the taxpayers may wish to see if there are any politicians appearing on the membership rolls with the marking "Emeritus" next to their names.  It would be interesting to know the source of the $2 Million.

Oh to live in a world where highest and best use has some real meaning!  What is the probability that zoning and city council would give LuLu's owners permission to build a bunch of homes on the site?  And other than the 400 to 500 families who might like to live there and perhaps pay annual property taxes in the same ballpark as the "consideration" (for open space), those already in the immediate neighborhood and us lovers of classic courses may very well find this to be a great deal.

For Pete's sake, if the good people of PA can stomach the passengerless $200+ Milliion John Murpha Airport, what's a measly $2 Million to keep LuLu in the hands of the current private owners?  Afterall, many amongst us believe that Dire Straits contributed a profound, new era truth with their lyrics "money for nothing and the chicks for free".  Rock'N Roll!

At least in most cases in the past, the public at large got to use the properties acquired by the government when they took them over from a failed owner.  I suppose that if we have adopted the notions of "systemic risk" and "too large to fail", that the ideolgical leap to "what the hell, this is only chump change" is not a problem.  And if the logic, not to say anything about the propriety, is questioned, it can always be sold on the basis that the government is keeping those evil, greedy developers from our town.  Any good government jobs available near LuLu?  It seems like a lovely place.

[Mike Hendren]

Lou, I must say in all fairness that your analysis trumps mine.  Even I didn't buy what I wrote after reading it a second time!

Hope you're well!

Mike

[Lou_Duran]

Mike,

I hope you know I was just having fun.  Procrastination being among my biggest vices, I am only on the site this morning because I don't want to do some needed tax work so I can file my 2008 return.  Imagine having a very nominal gain on a hedge fund investment (probably unheard of today) and still having thousands of dollars of tax liability.  Of course, I am delighted to just getting my principle out, but where do I get my government bailout to offset the taxes on the phantom income?

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Lou,

This is a case of democracy in action. The voters of Upper Dublin Twp approved a referendum a few years ago authorizing expenditures of up to 30M for "open space" to prevent further development. The Commissioners voted to spend some of that money at LuLu and may spend more at Manufacturers. There may come a time when they may spend more money for "open space" elsewhere in township. This is not a case of eminent domain.  The money that LuLu will get may or may not bail them out. Perhaps they have debt to pay off that was coming due. I don't know. They did spend a lot of money a few years ago for a Ron Forse restoration of their Ross course and renovations to their swimming pool. Maybe the Commissioners will be guests of the club in the future. Maybe the Twp police and fire departments will have a day there. Who knows? The voters approved and the residents didn't request public access in return for the easement at the public hearing.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

The township is 95% developed:

http://www.ronward6.com/2.html

[Mike Sweeney]

From his web page:

So, I would like to know your opinion on this subject.  Should the township use the funds authorized by the referendum to obtain a development/conservation easement as intended in that referendum or should the township walk away and take the chances that a developer will not seek to build up to 200 homes sometime in the future when the economy improves?  Please send me an email on this subject.

Steve,

I find this interesting for a number of reasons. As a lawyer, you know they did everything legally right. The question remains, is it the right thing to do?

In a perfect world, they would have asked the taxpayers before they made a commitment, but at least they are asking.

By the way, how many developers really want to fight a town board to get a zoning variance?

Is it going to kill the 130 current members to compensate the taxpayers who are saving their club with a few tee times during the week or weekend afternoons?

The world is changing and LuLu can be a leader in changing the public/private model.

[Kalen Braley]

From his web page:

So, I would like to know your opinion on this subject.  Should the township use the funds authorized by the referendum to obtain a development/conservation easement as intended in that referendum or should the township walk away and take the chances that a developer will not seek to build up to 200 homes sometime in the future when the economy improves?  Please send me an email on this subject.

Steve,

I find this interesting for a number of reasons. As a lawyer, you know they did everything legally right. The question remains, is it the right thing to do?

In a perfect world, they would have asked the taxpayers before they made a commitment, but at least they are asking.

By the way, how many developers really want to fight a town board to get a zoning variance?

Is it going to kill the 130 current members to compensate the taxpayers who are saving their club with a few tee times during the week or weekend afternoons?

The world is changing and LuLu can be a leader in changing the public/private model.

Mike,

I completely agree with you on this one.  And please correct me if I'm wrong, but when clubs have a tax exempt status and they collect tax payer money on top of that just so they can stay open for a few private members, how much more wrong can this be?  In some ways this is even worse than all the corporate welfare bailouts that have occured in the last year.  At least hypothetically one had a chance to gain employment at one of these firms and benefit from the infusion of money.

I hate to see a classic club like LuLu being in danger of closing its doors as much as the next GCA'er but at what cost?  Moves like this seem to be setting a very dangerous precedent...i'm still baffled at the justification for such a suggestion!!

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Breaking news...

http://www.myphillygolf.com/detail.asp?id=6154

[mike_malone]

 Well at least the Blue Bell members will have one golf course to play

[Mark Provenzano]

We used to live not far from LuLu, and I went there one time as a guest of a member. Most of the roads zig and zag in that area, running NE-SW or NW-SE. Depending on which way I chose to zig or zag, I'd drive by 4 or 5 other clubs on the way--Manufacturers, North Hills, Sandy Run, Flourtown, Philly Cricket, Whitemarsh Valley, Green Valley, Eagle Lodge (now Ace)...that's just in the area south of the Turnpike between the river and 611. Cross the Turnpike or 611 and there were many more private clubs.  I always wondered how they all managed to stay afloat--seemed like the club/population ratio was pretty high throughout most of Montgomery County.

LuLu (as I remember) was a gem, hopefully the new owners will keep it that way.

[Mike Hendren]

This just in, though Holston Hills is in my beloved Volunteer State, I'd play LuLu 6 out of 10 plays split between them.  I can't fathom a more enjoyable golf course for a middle handicapper that appreciates Golden Age architecture.  My hope is that it remains open and thinly capitalized so that so-called "improvements" can't be funded. 

I love LuLu.

Mike

[Robert Emmons]

Would they have to pay back the 2 million infusion??....RHE

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Robert,

No, the 2M open space easement follows the land and the new owner takes subject to it.

It seems that the voting members are lining up their ducks to cash in:
 
1. 2M for open space reduced debt.
 
2. $ from sale of house also reduces debt: http://www.montgomerynews.com/articles/2010/06/15/ambler_gazette/news/doc4c1852c57a41d438643781.txt
 
3. What's next? Selling the swim club which is distant from the club house? That could also reduce debt.
 
All of this will get them $ from Hansen instead of  last years offer which included assumption of the debt.

[TEPaul]

"Would they have to pay back the 2 million infusion??...."


Robert:

That would depend on what the arrangement, agreement, contract or whatever was between the club and Upper Dublin Township. Apparently Upper Dublin Township raised $2 million to infuse into the club. What did Upper Dublin Township get for that monetary infusion? It sounds to me like they got an agreement, contract whatever, that the owners of LuLu's land must always keep the property as "Open Space" (no development potential in perpetuity). This is essentially a open space conservation agreement (easement) and it may be in perpetuity depending on the particulars of the open space agreement and who's behind it all. If the Township or even the club was operated under some kind of Limited Partnership agreement it is possible that the Open Space agreement may be backed by the Federal Governement around which it is possible for limited partners to take federal tax deductions on personal income. This is very rare with a golf course but not unknown. I believe Applebrook in Malvern Pa was actually structured and created under this kind of Federal Government back conservation easment arrangement (with a local conservation easement organization that creates and monitors federal open space contracts) that also involved its townhip----eg East Goshen Township, I believe.

I know this because the local open space easement organization that was involved with Applebrook also controls and monitors the federal open space agreement of my own farm (not far from Applebrook). Matter of fact, my open space agreement with this local organization that creates and monitors open space easements of the Federal Governement was the very first contract (they call them covenants) this local open space easement organization ever did over 35 years ago now.  I remember when it first happened and we were not even sure the US Governement would go for it or for our evaluation and the massive tax deductions it created. But they did and the rest is history for that local open space easement organization which I believe today has just about half of the entire township I live in under federal open state conservation protection---meaning that land (apparently close to 6,000 acres) can never be developed including my own farm.

[TEPaul]

By the way, Robert, after we and some others did that conservation easement way back then the issue of what would happen if some owner or developer decided to just ignore that easement backed by the Federal government and develop anyway.

Well, about ten years later that actually came up in a court case. Some owner decided to develop the property he had bought in contravention of the federal conservation easement agreement.

The owner just built his mansion on the open space in contravention of the open space easement agreement. The Conservation organization took the man to court and the case went to the state Supreme Court and the judge ruled that owner had two options----eg he could move his mansion off that property or tear it down.

The owner tore it down and the federal conservation open space easement program had its first legal precedent. As far as I know no other property owner around here has ever again tried to contravene a federally backed open space conservation easement in perpetuity by building on land that the easement agreement does not allow.