What separates a great “Housing Course” from a bad one?

[ward peyronnin]

Hope Valley is a very good Ross that was one of the first "housing" courses developed in at least the southeast. Would that all such schemes reflected the decorum exhibited on that site

[Anthony Butler]

Plenty of housing bordering on The Country Club in Brookline MA.


Big houses... Paul Fireman built a 25,000 sq ft home and was rejected for membership.


Tom Brady built a 14,000 sq ft home and was admitted as a member once the club figured out he only cheats while playing football... 

[Jason Topp]

Harbor Town is the most pleasant walk of any course I have played that is clearly a Housing Course.  You play through backyards throughout the course but most of the time you do not notice the housing exists.  The walks from green to tee are short and the course reflects the character of its location. 

[Jeff Schley]

Plenty of housing bordering on The Country Club in Brookline MA.


Big houses... Paul Fireman built a 25,000 sq ft home and was rejected for membership.


Tom Brady built a 14,000 sq ft home and was admitted as a member once the club figured out he only cheats while playing football... 

I played TCC back in the summer of 2017, just after he was admitted there our host stated.  He was waiting over 2 years as the membership don't really relish high profile celebrities apparently.  You can see his house off the 4th fairway as I recall.  We looked and the trees blocked quite a bit, but did see Giselle sunbathing topless.
Just checking to see if anyone is actually reading and just said bull---t.

[Jeff_Brauer]

It's a housing course if the developer paid for it and dictated that it somehow was laid out to maximize housing sales.  If a core (or mostly core) course paid for by a city, private club, resort, etc., it is most likely not a housing course, although there are some crossovers, as noted, like PB (think it was paid for by developer) parts of Pinehurst, etc.


As to what makes a good one, most of the answers have been touched on -
- corridor width (hopefully a minimum of single hole corridors, and those 350 foot minimum for one hole, 190-200 feet right/150-160 feet left, 600 feet for two holes, etc. 
- Minimum road crossings (maybe every third hole minimum hopefully less),
- Direct road crossings (i.e., can see next tee from green, not go through a narrow strip between two lots.
- Attractive large, housing, somewhat landscaped (i.e., partially screened, shaded, etc. in back)
- As mentioned, if the developer will leave a bit of land so the houses don't perfectly parallel every hole, but sit at some varying angles (and well sited on their lots, not with every lot bulldozed flat)  Most don't.


After the basics, you still need to have a course with some design interest to make it a great course.  This doesn't always happen, as in when a municipality and developer team up and its known in advance it will be a moderate fee public course, etc. Even that doesn't have to be the case, with (I hope) my Sand Creek Station being a decent example of a good public course within housing.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Plenty of housing bordering on The Country Club in Brookline MA.


Big houses... Paul Fireman built a 25,000 sq ft home and was rejected for membership.


Tom Brady built a 14,000 sq ft home and was admitted as a member once the club figured out he only cheats while playing football... 

I met with PF when he was going to buy that Hurdzan course to develop his own CC after being rejected by TCC for being Jewish.  Had lunch with his family, etc.  A nice few days on a potentially exciting project.


I was part of a team with a Dallas clubhouse architect who was a bit tone deaf.  He kept selling "knockout wet areas, spas, saunas, etc." and Paul politely rejected them a few times, but the architect wasn't listening.  On the architect's 3rd or 4th try, Paul said we just didn't get New Englanders, who won't walk around naked in front of friends and neighbors even if its common in Texas. 


He politely dismissed the team right then and there, and I recommended a few other golf architects who might mesh better with him.

[Simon Barrington]

...
Wentworth was obviously a housing development. So was Colt's Effingham. I can't remember many others off the top of my head but will check.

This is an in depth piece on Effingham in this regard:-


https://elhg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/golfclubcreation.pdf

[Jeff_Brauer]

Lou Duran mentioned most of the critical factors that drive down the image of a housing course

Nature of the housing, (I really don't mind mansions along the fw's, but townhomes with laundry hanging out in back offend the eye)  It's actually hard to believe a developer would build a course for house types that aren't really meant to appreciate in value and that homeowners would ruin their view with laundry.....)

Width/set-backs - Many old courses had property lines 150 feet from the CL.  Now, 175-200 is more typical.

Drainage - Yes, courses usually are located to handle mass drainage, often to their detriment.

Routing flow - specifically the # of street crossings and long drives between houses, etc.

[Jim Sherma]

Not a fan of courses that wend through housing projects, especially if the housing is generally on both sides. The two that I've played and were done well in my opinion are Kingsmill River Course by Pete Dye (Williamsburg, VA) and River Creek Club by Ault/Clark (Leesburg, VA). Both courses had good flow and while they were certainly routed through housing they did not feel repetitive and overly tight.

[Adam Lawrence]

The Berkshire was developed by Crown Estates with a view to selling houses around the course, but none were ever built, I presume because of the Great Depression.

[Tags:]

Tags: