News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


mike_beene

  • Karma: +0/-0
Real estate courses
« on: May 02, 2002, 09:52:25 PM »
From time to time USGA officials will mention they avoid venues that are real estate related?We know a real estate course when we see it or do we?Housing on both sides of a fairway seems obvious,but by that definition is the first at Pebble real estate?Does it seem that people avoid talking about the houses on Harbor Town?What is acceptable to you when it comes to houses on a golf course and does it diminish the quality of a course when they exist?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

John_D._Bernhardt

Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2002, 08:45:39 AM »
this is also a site specific question. I feel the amount of adverse impact is driven by the site, the set backs, single or double barrel and how much if any trees frame the holes and keep the houses and noise out of the golfers mind and his poor shots out of their yards. I am trying to have the residential sit on the ridge line above the course with only 4 holes actually touching the residential and then 10 to 15 feet below and on one side. The golf forms a 200 acres green space around the communty and runs with the rolling features in the land and lets the forest set up site and vista lines and separate part of the course from the community.  the golf course actually raps around the community.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2002, 04:34:33 PM »
I have given up on finding courses that don't have real estate.  If they don't they promote the fact that no houses are located on the course.

Yesterday I played Sahalee in Seattle.  For some crazy reason I thought it had no houses, wrong.  

A few weeks ago I was in Arizona and played Desert Forest.  This is a course built in the 1960's and had no real estate involvement but over the years developers have bought the land directly next to the golf course and now it looks like a real estate development.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Joe_Tucholski

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #3 on: February 21, 2012, 12:21:56 PM »
I didn't want to thread jack the UK housing thread so bringing back a very old topic.

Nothing ground breaking but this thread was the closest I found (in my short search) to asking the question - Why do some houses detract from a course and others do not?

In the UK housing development thread I believe all the acceptable and maybe even enhancing examples the housing is external to the golf course, while the American versions all have housing internal to the golf course. 

Riviera and Pebble, the last two tour stops, both have plenty of houses but are generally acceptable (haven’t heard any grips about the houses around Riviera and only a few people have issues with Pebble).  Generally both these courses have houses on the periphery of the course.

There were a number of topics previously about acceptable (safe) playing corridors, but in my mind if you have housing on both sides of a hole, even if it is safe, it is unacceptable aesthetically.

I’m guessing there are courses where periphery housing is still unacceptable so what is it that makes some housing aesthetically acceptable and some aesthetically unacceptable. 

Is it quantity, size, appearance, lack of uniformity, ability to fit with the landscape, location, distance from course, all of the above???

Please rate what you think are the most important factors for acceptable housing.

For me it is
1) Location (must be on the periphery of the course)
2) Ability to fit with the landscape (I haven't found a course in the desert w/ housing that I find acceptable because housing developments in the desert seems very unnatural)
3) Quantity (the less houses the less negative impact)
4) Distance from the course (the further away the better)
5) Lack of uniformity (cookie cutter housing in the US hurts but many of the UK examples show similar stone structures - maybe in a few hundred years the current suburban American housing will have great architectural beauty)
6) Location (typically the ocean scenery overcomes a lot of negatives for me)

Mark Saltzman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #4 on: February 21, 2012, 01:16:45 PM »
Joe,

The biggest reason, to me, why homes detract from some courses but not from others comes down to one thing:

Was the golf course routed around the homes, or were the homes located around the golf course? It is usually very easy to tell.

J_ Crisham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #5 on: February 21, 2012, 02:30:40 PM »
I like to use Crystal Downs as an example of "good housing" on the perimeter of the course. At no point does a single shot threaten a house or vice versa. On 17 you have a home on the right that a very wayward shot could end up in a backyard but that is it. This is how golf course housing should coexist.

mike_beene

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2012, 12:38:57 AM »
What is freaking me out is that I have been on this site 10 years.Life goes by fast.Back to the topic,when there are houses on both sides the course loses something and I am not sure why.This must be why some courses are willing to have one nine double lined,at least partially,but not both.Examples include Muirfield Village and Oak Tree and Bent Tree.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2012, 06:52:32 AM »
What is freaking me out is that I have been on this site 10 years.Life goes by fast.Back to the topic,when there are houses on both sides the course loses something and I am not sure why.This must be why some courses are willing to have one nine double lined,at least partially,but not both.Examples include Muirfield Village and Oak Tree and Bent Tree.

Well, it depends on the houses and on how far back they are, doesn't it?

St. George's Hill, near London, is a course that was designed in conjunction with a housing development, and the houses don't detract from it at all.  I think there may even be a couple of holes with housing on both sides of the hole ... I've never looked at a land plan or an aerial of it.  But there are big, beautiful homes with plenty of natural landscape between them and the course.

The problem with American development golf are that:

(1)  Most such developments are built on raw, open land with not enough vegetation to hide the houses.  [Tumble Creek in Washington state is a rare exception.]  And,

(2)  Most American developers are greedy and want to get 2x or 3x the number of lots overlooking the course that the older development courses did.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2012, 07:04:31 AM »
You can't help but notice some of the houses on the St Georges Hill estate, they are that huge.  But the houses are generally quite well tucked back - so much so that it freaked me out when cars went whizzing by a few times on the access roads. 

Little Aston too does a good job of keeping the houses well back from the course, but I think the estate was built around the course rather than as a double development. 

In fact, I can only think of a few instances in GB&I where houses detract from the course.  Unfortunately, Burnham happens to be one.  They don't crowd the course physically, but they do visually. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Bruce Katona

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2012, 10:09:09 AM »
Lyford Cay on New Provience Island is a very good example of a "real estate course" as the community surounds the golf facility.  Ist rate club and community also.

Cherry Valley in Montgomery, NJ is another good example of a real estate course.  yes, there is housing involved, but not on every home nor are those involved holes lined on both sides.

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2012, 10:13:55 AM »
In fact, I can only think of a few instances in GB&I where houses detract from the course.  Unfortunately, Burnham happens to be one.  They don't crowd the course physically, but they do visually. 
Really?  I've only played there a couple of times but I have to say that I've never really noticed the houses at Burnham.  I guess I know they're there but they certainly haven't detracted from the course for me. 

In some cases the houses can actually add to the experience of the course.  I think this is particularly true at TOC (obviously) and Elie.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Tim Gavrich

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2012, 11:01:48 AM »
Sedgefield CC in Greensboro, NC is a classic course built among houses which do not intrude, in my opinion, on the experience of playing the golf course.  I often wonder at the low level of concern a development's planners showed for the potential for residential encroachment on the golf course.  I'll bet that a bunch of communities' managers are kicking themselves now for not having spaced out their housing a little better around their cramped, white soldier-lined fairways.
Senior Writer, GolfPass

Anthony_Nysse

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #12 on: February 22, 2012, 11:58:02 AM »
They did a nice job at Long Cove, making sure the golfer feels like the houses do not replace the rough.
Anthony J. Nysse
Director of Golf Courses & Grounds
Apogee Club
Hobe Sound, FL

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #13 on: February 22, 2012, 04:17:23 PM »
I thought Southern Dunes just outside Orlando had a rather tasteful, non-intrusive housing component

Carl Johnson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #14 on: February 22, 2012, 05:36:16 PM »
I was invited to play a real estate course today in the Charlotte (NC, USA) area that I had never played before.  There are about five holes along which houses have not yet been built, and since the site was originally heavily wooded, we played those holes through tree corridors.  Even on the holes bordered by houses, however, the houses were sited back in the woods, so you did not feel like you were right on the yards.  It would be very, very unlikely you'd ever hit a ball into someone's back yard, even if you tried to.  The reason I generally do not like these courses, which held true here, is the discontinuity from hole to hole.  Typically, from one green to the next tee, with one or two exceptions, you must drive your golf cart / buggy (or walk a really long way) through the woods, over a stream, then more woods, and maybe across a street and between houses and then more woods to get to the next tee.  There are 18 holes, but they are separate -- not what I call a "golf course."   Another issue with this course, and many other such courses in my area that I have played, is that the land is not really suited for golf -- way to much up - down - around - sideways contours.  But for the developer (now bankrupt) wanting to have a course as an amenity to sell homes, you'd never build a course on this piece of property.  I know others, including the fellow who invited me to play, who don't mind this kind of a course at all, but it's not my cup of tea.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2012, 07:33:40 PM by Carl Johnson »

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2012, 05:59:41 PM »
House lined fairways are really cool. I am just waiting for the course with terrace houses down both sides right up to the fairway edge. As long as you keep the ball below roof top height your always in play. Some of you guys really don't have a clue ;D ;D ;D

Jon

Greg Tallman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2012, 06:14:36 PM »
House lined fairways are really cool. I am just waiting for the course with terrace houses down both sides right up to the fairway edge. As long as you keep the ball below roof top height your always in play. Some of you guys really don't have a clue ;D ;D ;D

Jon

You have not gotten out much in central and southeast Florida have you? Condos are called rails though the sinking the eight ball is not the objective.

Brad Isaacs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2012, 06:43:43 PM »
I have given up on finding courses that don't have real estate.  If they don't they promote the fact that no houses are located on the course.

Yesterday I played Sahalee in Seattle.  For some crazy reason I thought it had no houses, wrong.  

A few weeks ago I was in Arizona and played Desert Forest.  This is a course built in the 1960's and had no real estate involvement but over the years developers have bought the land directly next to the golf course and now it looks like a real estate development.

While there  are houses around the peremeter of Desert Forrest, it is most definitely not a real estate feel. You can tell the feel is housing as an afterthought of the course. Great track, I wish more courses were like it. Brilliant design.

Brad

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2012, 06:46:29 PM »
Haven't played there, but shouldn't Wade Hampton be in the discussion?   Also Knollwood Club in Lake Forest, IL...
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Real estate courses
« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2012, 03:49:06 AM »
House lined fairways are really cool. I am just waiting for the course with terrace houses down both sides right up to the fairway edge. As long as you keep the ball below roof top height your always in play. Some of you guys really don't have a clue ;D ;D ;D

Jon

You have not gotten out much in central and southeast Florida have you? Condos are called rails though the sinking the eight ball is not the objective.

No Greg, they don't let me out much.

All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy.
All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy.
All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy.
All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy. All work and no play make Jon a very dull boy.
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back