next »

[Scott Weersing]

For the guys in Arizona:

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/golf/articles/2009/09/16/20090916papagoaga0917.html

What does this mean?
Will the city have to find an another operator?
Who is going to pay the loan for the renovations?

[Steve_ Shaffer]

At least the course was renovated.It was in dire need of work. Something will work itself out:

http://russellchrist.wordpress.com/

[Tom Yost]

Oh... my... god.

 

[Garland Bayley]

Shhhhhhhhh! Don't let Forrest know about this.

[Scott Weersing]

What did the renovation cost?

There is mention that there was a "$9 million loan with BBVA Compass".

How much did it cost to renovate Common Ground in Colorado?

[Bill_McBride]

Shhhhhhhhh! Don't let Forrest know about this.

I thought the same thing.  WTF is going on in PHX?

[Rob_Waldron]

It looks like someone did not pay attention in math class!

[Bill_Yates]

Paging Forrest Richardson!!

Paging Forrest Richardson!!

[Forrest Richardson]

I do not know anything beyond what the article reports. Albert Murdock, the golf director, is a friend and it was a blow to him to get a very quick dismissal notice a few weeks ago.

My understanding is that Compass Bank is left holding the debt should no one be able to pay it back, but I am not 100% sure of that. From that perspective, the City seems insulated ... but they would still be left with no management unless someone replaces the AGA or the proposer who put forth the plans, commitments, etc.

Not having a clubhouse is certainly a drawback. I was sad to see the old building razed as it had been designed by David Shoulder, an architect who in 1966 created my father's building (2201 West Desert Cove Road) ... now home to Ping Golf Clubs/Karsten Manufacturing.

------

Wish I could add more. My best thoughts are for the course, which has been through a lot and still seems to have areas that need work.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Having had some interaction with the AGA, I'm not the slightest bit surprised by this. Someday, someone will realize that a little research can save you a lot of money. IMO, this was a cluster from day 1. Why, on God's green earth would you not hire local, (Forrest's group), and why would you ever expect a non profit (AGA) organization to make money?...or even pay a debt? Since when has Gov't been able to do that? 

[Steve_ Shaffer]

The folks at "Save Papago Golf" were right. Here is Bill Huffman's article from November 2007:

http://www.backspinthegolfshow.com/docs/features/110807.htm


Also, take a look again at all the comments to John Davis' article linked above in Scott's original post.

[Scott Weersing]

The folks at "Save Papago Golf" were right. Here is Bill Huffman's article from November 2007:

http://www.backspinthegolfshow.com/docs/features/110807.htm


Also, take a look again at all the comments to John Davis' article linked above in Scott's original post.

It seems that AGA is going to be two for two with golf management.

"According to McLennan, the selection of the AGA by the city to restore/renovate Papago Golf Course falls short in three specific areas for various reasons. Those include:
          *A lack of experience/history of managing a successful golf operation by the AGA.
“Their only experience is the abysmal economic and ecological failure(s) at Villa Monterey in Scottsdale,’’ McLennan said of the former executive course that foreclosed shortly after the AGA donated it to the Junior Golf Association of Arizona."

[Forrest Richardson]

Regarding Villa Monterey, it was originally designed by Jack Snyder. There was a lone par-5 and the rest were mostly par-3s with maybe 2 par-4s. A great 9-hole executive. I tried several tactics to save the course at the end — as it was toward the end of Jack's battle with cancer and I wanted nothing more than to prevent headlines announcing the demise of one of his layouts. Unfortunately the news broke through to him and I did my best to soften the blow. He passed away thinking his nice little 9-hole layout in Scottsdale was, perhaps, no longer wanted. I suppose that was true, but only because of some awful planning and foresight.

Very simply: Those who controlled the course had no idea what to do with it or how to manage it. Among the last-ditch efforts were abandoning a few par-3s and shortening some holes. How awful — a great layout and routing ruined at the hands of novice and misguided managers, each of whom assumed great knowledge but had far less than your average third-grader. Not once did they ever ask an opinion — they just toyed with the course until there was nothing left. It is now a "me-too" public park. Nothing special. No golf.

Like defacing a great painting.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Apparently work on the course is continuing.


http://www.cybergolf.com/golf_news/papago_continues_with_upgrades

[Tom Yost]

A story in Saturday's Arizona Republic indicates the issue remains murky:

"Uncertainty remains over Papago course operators

by Scott Wong - Nov. 14, 2009 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

Less than a year after completing a multimillion-dollar makeover of Phoenix's Papago Golf Course, the non-profit group that manages the storied municipal links is sending mixed signals about whether it will stay on board.

Earlier this year, the Arizona Golf Foundation, the charitable arm of the state's most influential golf association, cast doubt on its 25-year agreement to renovate and manage the course.

A Sept. 14 announcement by the foundation's parent, the Arizona Golf Association, said the group was preparing to withdraw from participation in the Papago Golf Course Project.

"As you know, this is not a good time for any business, especially one that depends upon discretionary dollars," association President Frank Shipman said in a statement two days later. "We recognize that there are too many layers of management. We feel that it is in the best interest of all parties for us to withdraw from day-to-day operations."

Both Shipman and AGA Executive Director Ed Gowan declined to explain the association's announcement. Foundation President Tim Kloenne, also a past president of the golf association, declared this week: "We are the operator, and our plans are to fulfill the 25-year agreement we have with the city." He called back a day later to say he was retracting his statement and would have no further comment.

So far, the course has remained open.

The professionals the foundation hired to manage the course - Marvin French and Michael C. Trimboli, better known as the Golf Guys LLC - have remained in charge of day-to-day operations. And there's talk the duo may step in if the foundation bails.
..."


Rest of the story:
http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2009/11/14/20091114papago1114.html

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Tom,

Thanks for posting this article. I think the readers comments are on target for the most part, particularly the one on page4 from Shrilland Personal who probably was part of the opposition to this project.

My thoughts are:

1. Why was the clubhouse torn down when no financing was in place to replace it? If a new one is ever built, it should be sympathetic to the prior Frank Lloyd Wright faux design.
2. Another muni, Aguila, is mentioned as a much better deal and a very good course. I intend to play there during my winter hiatus in the area.  http://www.phoenix.gov/SPORTS/aguila.html

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Here is the temporary clubhouse trailer:




Here is what is proposed:

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

There are no words to describe what I think of the proposed club house.

Hopefully, if the course survives, that building will never rise from the ground.
The temporary trailer has bettern design features.

[Tom Yost]

That proposal very much echos the original, a funky mid-century modern design.  Wish I could find some photos.

[Scott Weersing]

There are no words to describe what I think of the proposed club house.

Hopefully, if the course survives, that building will never rise from the ground.
The temporary trailer has bettern design features.

How does a clubhouse make a course better? Would you go out of the way to play a course because it has a great clubhouse? Of course not.  A course that can't match the clubhouse is Medinah.

On the other hand, if the course has a great routing, then the clubhouse is additive. The course becomes better because of the clubhourse. For example, Oakmont.

[Clint Squier]

The clubhouse, though kooky looking, doesn't look very big.....so that's a plus.  Face it, a single wide trailer isn't ideal for a large % of golfers who care about the creature comforts associated with golf. 

Hope something works at Papago, I had an absolute blast playing it earlier this year in the shadows of the LPGA scaffolding.  An excellent municipal golf course with plenty of architectural interest. 

CPS

[Bill_McBride]

When Pensacola Country Club was hammered by Hurricane Ivan, we lost our 100 year old clubhouse and had to build a new course.  For two years during the construction and opening, we used a triple wide trailer for our clubhouse.  I was quite happy, and don't think the membership was ever closer.  There was no men's grill, there was a little kitchen that fixed nothing very fancy and was never open for dinner, and the golf shop was a little corner.  It was bliss.

Now we have two stories of poor space utilization, but beautiful views.

[Forrest Richardson]

That is not the clubhouse that I have seen proposed. The design proposed is:

http://www.bcstudiodesign.com/

Not sure where the design came from in the post above....

Regarding the original building: It was not large, but it had some 1960s Phoenix charm. Dave Shoulder was a well-respected regional architect with noted buildings still standing here in Phoenix. One proposal called for a thoughtful restoration/expansion, which I supported. The same designer — Brian Curtis — created that proposed plan.

One of the aspects that has not been discussed is the loss to taxpayers of the old building, trees and other site improvements. While the features were renovated (and some RE-designed) it has never been fully explored what was actually lost when the building was razed and some aspects of the plan were implemented — very hard to say if the current course would appraise MORE than the old course WITH the small (and old) clubhouse.

Again — my thoughts are with the course. I hope it all works out.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Forrest:

Here is where the other club house came from:

http://www.chapc.com/projects.cfm?ProjectCategoryID=7

Perhaps it was done for another bidder on the project.

[Forrest Richardson]

I believe that predates the Curtis design...pretty much a moot point now as I doubt Phoenicians will see a clubhouse there for a looooooong time.

[Forrest Richardson]

Bill — Your point is well taken: Clubhouses can be well-overrated, and costly. However, at Papago the financial pro forma relied heavily on group bookings and group use...that does not happen in a trailer. People will go to nearby Karsten, Arizona Grand or any number of full-built facilities that have reasonable rates. I believe it will also force the (non-member) facility to lessen its rates — and that is the kiss-of-death in these economic times.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill — Your point is well taken: Clubhouses can be well-overrated, and costly. However, at Papago the financial pro forma relied heavily on group bookings and group use...that does not happen in a trailer. People will go to nearby Karsten, Arizona Grand or any number of full-built facilities that have reasonable rates. I believe it will also force the (non-member) facility to lessen its rates — and that is the kiss-of-death in these economic times.

Big difference public vs private.

If anybody could show me how a big clubhouse with catering staff, banquets, etc, lots of under-utilized space, actually makes bottom line money, I'd be grateful.  It's usually an ego deal for the members to have a place for their daughters to get married.

[Tom Yost]

Now the lawyers are getting involved - More news from today's AZ Republic:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2009/12/24/20091224phx-papagofolo1226.html

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Thanks for posting this Tom

As usual, the comments from the public are very revealing.

[Mike Cirba]

Two questions;

1) What, if anything can be learned from this whole process on what worked and what didn't work from soup to nuts in the renovation project at Papago?

2) If a person were looking for a cheap game of golf on an interesting architectural course during a single day in Scottsdale/Phoenix, would Papago still be a good choice?

Thanks for any and all feedback.

[Forrest Richardson]

One of the first things that comes to mind is that the City paid for a system-wide study...then pretty much ignored it. While the study never got into detail on how to restore Papago, it made a good case for finding a qualified group to underwrite the work, build a new clubhouse (or rebuild the old one) and pay a guaranteed lease to the City. Without getting into details, the City opted for variations on all of these recommendations for Papago — and have wound up with a difficult situation that is not really in their control any longer.

You would enjoy Papago, but I keep hearing there are things not up to snuff. I know they need business, so maybe it should be a part of your plans!