[Jason Way]

You guys who favor the project:  you're ok with spending many tens of millions of public dollars, and maybe $150 million or more, to build this course?

I'll take a crack at that question Jim, even though I think your phrasing of it is inherently flawed.  Then I will answer my own previous question about the design, which apparently wasn't that interesting to our golf course architecture discussion community.

There is a fundamental question overarching here which is, from a public works and land stewardship perspective, is it a good idea to invest in revitalizing the lake front on the south side (as opposed to investing in some other area, or not investing anywhere)?  It seems to me that the lakefront has always been a priority, and ought to continue to be for our fair city.  To do any kind of a revitalization is going to be massively expensive, and yes, I am for that even if it is paid for in part out of my Cook County tax dollars.

Assuming that the powers that be have answered that overarching question in the affirmative, and therefore setting it aside, the next question is, what to do with the golf courses?  The options seem to be:
1. Do nothing (my nature doesn't allow me to pick this)
2. Go the Winter Park makeover route (if the course renovation was being publicly funded, I would absolutely think this was the right thing to do)
3. Go the CommonGround route (this is what I was hoping they would do when I first heard about it, and I expressed this opinion to those involved who asked me)
4. Go for the PGA tour venue (given the involvement of Mark Rolfing from the get-go, it doesn't surprise me that they settled on this).

I don't really care about pro golf, so having a tournament course or a tournament in Chicago doesn't matter to me.  There are many people who are pro golf fans, and I assume that they are excited about it. 

For those who feel that it's appropriate to throw shade at the Keisers, I think that that shade is misplaced.  The Keisers care about caddying and the Evans Scholars program, not PGA Tour golf, unless that tour golf helps the WGA/ES, which in this case it does.  If they have made a calculation that being involved with this project ultimately results in sending more caddies to college in the long run, I am not knowledgeable enough to argue otherwise.  Frankly, most of the participants on this DG aren't either.  I am not saying that Mike Keiser does not have an ego.  That would be silly.  But to equate him to other wealthy golf dudes in his motivations in this case is off base. 

At the end of the day, if the private donors decide that hosting a tour event is more important than having a CommonGround-like vibe, I get it and so be it.  My limited experience with things like this would have me agree with the Judge - rich dudes and gals like to donate to big plans, not little ones.

I tend to agree with you about the green fees for locals, and I hope that they come up with some special membership option for their existing regulars that allows their costs per round to remain the same.  If they have to fleece people in Lake County and out-of-towners to achieve that balance, that is fine with me.

Circling back to the design, Tim laid out for me his thoughts on the changes from the last iteration, which sound mostly good to me.  Playing golf with the city skyline in the background is obviously killer.  Setting matters, even if we pretend like we are above its influences around here, and this is a cool setting.  The routing seems to make good use of the setting.

Just looking at the design, there does not appear to be anything funky cool about it, which is predictably disappointing when designing for Tour play.  However, I hold out hope that some quirk and creativity will be added in when they are building it.  Could we get just one centerline hazard perhaps?  I hope that we get more Trinity Forest, and less Torrey Pines.

I have two big safety red flags.  The 3rd hole runs along the left side of the family course.  If that family course is popular, somebody is going to get killed unless they erect a tall net the length of it.  The other thing is that the pro tee on #16 is going to get used by regular players even if you tell them not to.  Drunk dudes who paid $300 to play your course have a tendency to do what they want, and someone is going to get killed on that beach.  If I were running that place, I would leave that tee off the plan.  Build it right before the tournament each year, and then strip it and close it right when the tournament ends.  The PGA Tour can afford that.

Bottom line for me Jim, yes I hope they do something to improve the courses and if this is what the donors want to do, I am for it, especially if it makes the Evans Scholars program richer.

My (more than) 2 cents.

[Tim Gavrich]

Where is the driving range?


I see a number of short-game areas, plus the Family Course, but no dedicated driving range. Is that right? Is there going to be an aqua range? Or is the Family Course going to double as the range, meaning it'll only be used for its purpose as labeled for a handful of hours each week? As it is, the FC looks like it's scarcely 250 yards end-to-end. That means tall nets and narrow practice confines, yes?

[V_Halyard]

I grew up in Wisconsin and started my professional life at IBM Chicago, and then records, film and Media in Chicago prior to moving to LA/NY/LA/Iowa. I Have friends and relatives that have been gentrified out of the South Side as well as been part of Gentrification. Daley SR. was "Less than supportive" of the South Side which was primarily African American. Harold Washington was a transformative Mayor and Daley Jr. was equally progressive in reshaping the city as a collective. It is not perfect, it is a big-assed American city with significant problems and tremendous potential. I have friends and family that LOVE golf in Chicago. I also have friends and family that have been murdered in "Chi" (recently) as part of the oft-quoted statistic.

With all that, I am absolutely for this project. If it delivers a community mission.
I absolutely wish it were not a PGA Ground Grab and more of a Keiser led project.
Given the proximity to so much platinum shoreline real estate, it was likely too high profile for such a thoughtful approach.
it is a Loud Piece of Land. I also acknowledge that the cost overruns are sure to be stunning. My over under is $80Million.
It is, and will always be Chicago. People gotta' get paid.

I would proffer these thoughts for debate:
1: It has the potential to be a phenomenal project.
2: The PGA/TWG/Rolfing/Mayor Rahm/Rahm's Brother Ari (King of Hollywood), a former Golfing President, and the litany locals, sponsors and television revenue hounds should easily be able to raise far more than $60Mil.  If they say they can't they are doing it wrong and being lazy, and flat out lying.
3: Every resident kid in the area should have access to free golf and a Jr. PGA Academy. If they don't, again, the collective is doing it wrong.
4: Maybe Rolfing and TW are Ghosting here on GCA and will peek in now and then for some golf architectural energy.
5: They should get more private money, reduce the impact to the taxpayers, provide perpetual access for locals, support youth golf, save lives, and grow the damn game.

With this project, it's not that hard because a lot of people are going to win and everybody in or from Chicago can see the money so it may be a little harder to hide.
Also, please know that I say this free political malice, at least its not planned to be a ____ Golf Property pockmarked with Fountains and Statues.
Chime in. Dilly Dilly.

[JReese]

The following link provides some nice on the ground images of the proposed site.


http://chicagopatterns.com/south-shore-nature-sanctuary/

[Paul OConnor]

The existing driving range is north of Hayes Drive about 650 yards from the current first tee.  With this newest proposal it will only be around 1,200 yards away from the first tee, if you can fly like a bird.  Otherwise you can drive your golf cart on the shoulder of South Shore Drive the 3/4 mile to the range.  Google maps says it's only a 14 minute walk.  Just another piece of the puzzle that just doesn't quite fit.
 
There are plenty of people who would like to see that driving range disappear altogether.  It only came into existence after the Nike Missile site was decommissioned in the late 70's, but was originally envisioned as part of a vast meadow that occupied nearly all the area east of the lagoons.  As it occupies prime lakefront acreage, there are many who would like to see this area returned to public open space once again.

Since the proposed course has already planned to confiscate three softball fields, one baseball diamond, and nine tennis courts from the existing park, the local community is wondering why golfers should also have exclusive claim on another huge chunk of this public park.

[Kalen Braley]

I've been reading all the comments and I think both sides have some very valid arguments...


But the one that clinches it for me...80-100 million for one golf course?  That just seems stupid insane...isn't this the kind of overpriced nonsense one of the primary things this site has been advocating against all these years?


P.S.  And with that price tag, how many 'kids for free" and resident tee slots are they going to have per day?

[Jeff Schley]

 “Make no little plans” is an old Daniel Burnham slogan invoked when the city had to rebuild. That phrase seems appropriate now, too. Just because things have been sideways lately doesn’t mean we should give up. The Obama library is a good “hook” here.
  🤔

Totally agree here, the soldiers don't quit the army when the war breaks out.  The supporters need to mobilize as needed for the complexities are great and no one could have ever expected it to be easy.  I'm on your side, although I certainly have my opinions on past political decisions as we all do, I want this to work for everyone in the City of Chicago.

A large barrier that is somewhat flying under the radar, is that the Obama Presidential Center is supposedly going to be 100% privately funded at maybe $100 million.  People in Chicago I'm sure have already been approached and if anyone wants to meet Barack Obama you are surely in luck, for there will be numerous fundraising dinners I suspect to raise that kind of money. The same people we need for the golf course are going to be tapped for the Obama PC and I don't like the odds of many people choosing the golf course. 

I see two things to consider to bridge this gap. 

First, lump the $60 million figure into the Obama PC fundraising campaign for critical mass appeal which would reach a larger audience to tap into.  I'm sure they have established itself as a 501(3)(c) by now and are taking in the tax deductible cash donations for it. The Golf Course project I'm not sure if they have an established non profit accepting private donations yet. Now it isn't as easy in 2018 as it would have been in the past for the new tax code is raising the standard deduction and many won't get to itemize, thus losing any tax advantage of the charitable donation.  Certainly people give for different reasons not just to save on taxes, but 2018 tax code doesn't help.  Marketing how to "bunch" your giving from possibly 2 years into 1 in order to get over the threshold of your standard deduction coupled with others so you can itemize, would help as it is going to take thousands to donate.

Second, we need a large donation if not pooled with the Obama PC, an idea is to get a corporate sponsor for a large part of the project's cost. I don't know how the corporations are incentivized to give to charities now in the tax code as they are already getting their base tax rate lowered significantly and getting a further benefit of lower repatriated overseas profits, I haven't looked, but if it is as it has been in the past they all have CSR funds needing to find a cause.  Bring them in now and start reaping the compounding effect of the time value of PR 2 years ahead of the opening.

We need to stand our ground and keep focused on finding a way in, not a way out!

[Peter Pallotta]

I've no stake/skin in the game and have been just reading along.
For me, Vaughn's post somehow cut through the noise and the pretence both. Probably too much ever to ask, I know, for folks with vested interests to simply lay their cards on the table: their hopes -- and agendas -- honestly shared, their (hidden) biases, presumptions and rhetoric/half-truths revealed and debated. It almost never happens: no one ever wants to be the first to blink, and everyone's been around the block too many times, and it's not the smart move or the way the game is played. Too bad; there seems to be great potential here, judging from Vaughn's post, for some lasting good. Hopefully a few of the swells and sophisticates will have the courage, in the words of that song, to 'Try a Little Tenderness'.

[V_Halyard]

Thank you Peter and yes I can pontificate with minimal fear of retribution! I hope that my main points were not buried in the passion of my ramblings.

To streamline,
1: I lived in Chi, and later in life, played these courses. I am absolutely for the project. It is ironically the antithesis (economically, geographically, demographically) of our Iowa project and I am still Hot for it.  It’s a different situation.
GCA needs to keep tabs and not be afraid to weigh in. Architecture matters in something this high profile. This is potentially an urban golf show pony that can and should be configured to benefit a wide demographic of a public golfing community. I’m all for it.

2: It IS ABSOLUTELY a ridiculous amount of money that is sure to balloon past estimates. $100mil will become a target of pride for the trades involved. Vegas will start a board for it. I’m still for it.

3: The collective involved and those sure to bandwagon aboard can easily raise $100million privately and reduce taxpayer burden. To be clear, much of the cost will be infrastructure (roads, tunnels) but I’m not going to deflect. Let’s be real, it will hit $100mil. Golf projects are not to be indicted as this is akin to building along the West Side highway of NY or next to Santa Monica pier in Cali so it is what it is.

4: I so wish The Keiser’s were doing it but it’s too loud and “all PGA’d up” now so I understand why they’re out.

5: There are ZERO reasons that local kids and residents can’t have some priority and affordable golf as part of the formula. If it doesn’t include this, it should be vehemently squashed.

6: There are ZERO reasons it should not have the most spectacular and effective jr golf and after school program in the world giving oft neglected south side Chicago kids meaningful access and exposure to the life benefits of our great game.  If it doesn’t include this, the plans should be burned.

7: A course this prominent MUST be architecturally outstanding, and if it goes forward, GCAers should follow and be involved wherever feasible. That is not an arrogant statement, more of a clarion call to share and infuse the noise with a passion and recognition for excellent golf architecture. Consider the alternatives...

8: This is not pie in the sky. I respect and understand that the level of cash and posturing for this project is probably distasteful to many on the GCA blog. 

9: That said, do understand that this is an outlier.  The access to the geo-political global elite, PGA/Sponsor brand impressions, and hollywood golf money powers the argument that it can/should be funded with a large cache of private funds. With a little arm twisting of people from Ari’s stable and rounds with Tiger and POTUS 44, this gets done.

Note that Ari Emanuel, Mayor Rahm’s Brother, is arguably the most powerful person in Hollywood representing top firms, producers, financiers, VC’s, studios, and actors, many ardent supporters of President Obama and afflicted with golf.
Hollywood Elite?  Yep. the definition.
Deal with it Mike Young! We’re here to help. 

[Steve Lang]

   Very interesting watching the "try" of this project, lots of lessons to be learned by all participating,.. not to try and think big shows no spirit, thinking big's going to run over some folks or something like the nature sanctuary, everyone thinking they're serving the greater good. 


From afar its looking less and less about gca and more and more about the State of Chicago, power, and way too much money involved for a golf course, located anywhere.


Go ahead and build it, I'll go play and get fleeced once if I'm still alive, but will probably be more excited when going to Chicago to get some ritual sauerbraten or schnitzel at The Berghoff!
 

[V_Halyard]

  Very interesting watching the "try"
From afar its looking less and less about gca and more and more about the State of Chicago, power, and way too much money involved for a golf course, located anywhere.

Go ahead and build it, I'll go play and get fleeced once if I'm still alive, but will probably be more excited when going to Chicago to get some ritual sauerbraten or schnitzel at The Berghoff!

All true so it should be architecturally outstanding.
As for you getting fleeced... well yes, probably a bit, as an out of towner. But probably not as much as you would think. 
If it’s executed properly at least you’ll feel good about having played a great course, had a great young caddie, had a classic Chi-Town 19th hole experience, all in support of  some great golf programs.
Tip Well-Dilly Dilly.

[Kalen Braley]

In retrospect,


I'm reminded of the Torrey Pines north redo price tag at 12.5 million....and I recall how preposterous that sounded at the time...

[Jim Nugent]

It astonishes me that the sky-high costs of the project -- $50 million to $150 million of public money -- meet approval of so many of you.  That is vastly more than need to reinforce the shoreline 

100% private funding, including for infrastructure changes the course requires, might be another matter.  At this point that's a pipe dream.  The last I read (a few months ago) they weren't close to raising even $5 million.   

It will also surprise me if they can fulfill their varied promises, which include a) letting locals play as much as they like at $25 a round, b) giving kids under 17 unlimited free play, and c) still having room for all those well-to-doers who will pay $200 a pop to keep the course viable financially.  Seems to me trying to serve too many masters.   

Does anyone know how the golfers who play the courses now feel about the proposal?

[Terry Lavin]

The monetary figures are staggering. But for years, Jackson Park golfers have crossed an arterial street in their carts or walking with their bags in tow. In the middle of the street. When one adds the other course on the other side of South Shore, you have to contemplate a major infrastructure investment. If the Obama library were not planned nearby, these two golf courses would remain in their undeniably desultory condition.


Jackson Park and South Shore are not nearly as popular as Waveland on the North side. The annual rounds aren’t comparable.


I know there’s a cost benefit analysis to be made but being a native South Sider, I’d like to see this come to pass. Other nearby neighborhoods have improved. This wouldn’t hurt.

[Jason Way]

Jackson Park Golf Association statement from yesterday:


https://chicagoparksgolfalliance.org/updates/2018/02/jackson-park-golf-association-reaffirms-support-golf-course-restoration-thanks-tiger-woods-tgr-design/

[Jeff Schley]

Jackson Park Golf Association statement from yesterday:


https://chicagoparksgolfalliance.org/updates/2018/02/jackson-park-golf-association-reaffirms-support-golf-course-restoration-thanks-tiger-woods-tgr-design/

Good press to proceed, however what BATNA (best alternative to non agreement) do the golfers at JPGA have?  Keep playing their course in a much needed state of renovation? Presently they pay about 30 bucks to walk so I can tell they are more concerned with throwing the anchor in this negotiation as a sub $50 round which I would think probably to land at $45 let's say.  So I pay 50% more to get a much needed renovation, in addition to all the benefits of the youth programs as promised.  There is no free lunch in life and while I don't think they have much choice here but to support it, as it will be a once in a lifetime synergy with the Obama library being built, the 50% bump is significant.  Also it does take away one of the 8 courses (south shore 9 hole) to play on, thus they drop to 7 courses (albeit one great course).

In negotiation you look to maximize value for both sides, not screw one side to maximize your own benefits.  In this case the JPGA has spoken and represent the Chicago golfers who utilize the course and are willing to pay 50% more in turn for course renovation and youth programs.  That is one piece of the puzzle so we shall see how the privately funded pot is coming along. Heck they could do it like the Univ. of Notre Dame's Warren Course and sell naming rights to everything from trees to benches.      BTW nice course.

[JReese]

GC interview of TGR design consultant Beau Welling
www.golfchannel.com/video/model-munis-woods-south-shore-jackson-park-golf-course/

[Jeff Schley]

Nothing new other than keeping the PR going, which is needed as I don't know their fundraising strategy, but I sure as hell hope they are taping all available sources for they will be needed.  A corporate sponsor or combining it with the Presidential Center into one could be good synergies.  This is a polarizing topic, but let's keep the project going and evolving.

[MCirba]

When it comes down to it, isn't that city money going to get spent anyway?   Probably on something with no lasting tangible value, with no real improvement in the city infrastructure or assets.

No one signs up for small visions...that's the most important and true statement I've seen on this long-running thread.   

[Paul OConnor]

 Let’s remember who the Jackson Park Golf Association is:  the group was created at THE SAME TIME as the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance, in 2016.  The organization never existed until CPGA created them out of thin air as their designated grass roots group.    The only reason they exist is so that they can provide reliably biased “community support” for the project. 
 
All these JPGA support letters from Harry Gilliam and Ron Norris are nothing more than CPGA writing letters in support of themselves.
 

Jackson Park Golf Association statement from yesterday:


https://chicagoparksgolfalliance.org/updates/2018/02/jackson-park-golf-association-reaffirms-support-golf-course-restoration-thanks-tiger-woods-tgr-design/

[BCowan]

Paul,


  Thanks so much for all your work on this thread  Did you see Maui Mark on the tele this morning? 

[MCirba]

So if nothing happens, what will be saved or gained?

[Terry Lavin]

If nothing happens, these two poorly maintained and underutilized courses will still be available for play by a small group of local residents. Whoopee!  Maybe Paul and Ben can have an outing with two other gca guys, followed by a craft beer tasting ten miles away.

[BCowan]

If nothing happens Mike, Illinois/Chicago might not do anymore moronic things and not have to be bailed out due to insolvency and too big to fail!  Calumet is up for sale, nothing to see here..   Kinda of funny that a guy who has made a career with sub 6800 yard courses wants to build a tour course.  A doak 5 by the looks of the master plan as if the locals care about the doak scale  .  Have to spend 150M to keep up with those insecure ego's in the Windy.  You gotta love how they go about selling it/shouting down those that oppose with valuable points.  "You can't dress trashy unless you spend a lot of money''....

[Jason Way]

Ahhhh, the delightful experience of reasoned American discourse.  Never gets old. 

There is a mechanism for sharing your perspective on the plan for the golf courses in particular, and the South Lakefront in general.  Go to this web page and speak your mind: 

https://southlakefrontplan.com/contact-us

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()