Safety Netting / Fencing / Boundary Fortification

[Matthew Mollica]

I'd like to start a thread where we catalogue the courses we know to have spent money, in the last 30 years on one or more of the following -


i. Safety fencing
ii. Netting to contain errant balls
iii. Course modifications so as to reduce the likelihood / frequency of balls leaving the property


(N.B. These changes may apply to practice facilities as well as the course)


I'll also accept concentrated tree planning along a perimeter line as a measure to increase safety for those outside the course.


I'll start.


1. Royal Melbourne East
2. Commonwealth
3. Northern
4. Burnley
5. Riverside
6. Centenary Park
7. Royal Park
8. Northcote
9. Medway
10. Westgate


I'd appreciate subsequent posters following suit with the format - maintaining the sequence with numbering subsequently listed courses. Many thanks.


Matt

[Ally Mcintosh]

Hi Matthew,


Apologies from varying away from instructions on the first post but this could be a very long list and without a qualitative discussion on each. I’ve worked on two courses myself that I can add. In fact, I’m heading back to Strandhill later today for 2 weeks work, including a slight rework of the 9th to try and keep balls out of the neighbour’s gardens... This despite there being a net already there, one of the reasons we will eventually have to remove this hole, planning forthcoming.

[David_Tepper]

Royal Dornoch moved the fairway of the 3rd hole to the right several years ago for reason iii.

[Matthew Mollica]

Ally - the longer the better. Don't hold back. I want to know as accurately as possible how many courses are having to make changes along these lines. And which courses they are. Good, bad, urban, coastal, private, public, 9 or 18 holes.

If we get to 3000 courses, I'll accept that as a stopping point.

11. Royal Dornoch
12. Strandhill
13. Augusta National

[Ally Mcintosh]

OK Matthew,


The other course I’ve worked on was a redesign of the 1st hole at Dulwich & Sydenham, an old course with Colt connections in the middle of London.


This because balls were hopping over the current 1st green in to the large house behind.


The club have not proceeded with this yet and have for the moment put a net up instead.


14. Dulwich & Sydenham

[Sean_A]

15. Kilspindie 9th, trees on the right to prevent balls exiting property

16. Huntercombe 6th, trees on right to prevent balls exiting property.

Happy Hockey

[James Bennett]

17. Royal Adelaide #9.  Tee moved forward to reduce the (?minimal) risk of balls hitting houses to the right, across a road,perhaps 70 metres or more off-line.

[Luke Eipper]

18. Yarra Yarra
19. Metropolitan


Yarra Yarra had to reconfigure their third hole.


Metropolitan placed safety netting around  its practice fairway.

[Thomas Dai]

Worcester GCC, UK, originally 18-holes by Alister MacKenzie. A complete revision of the course including building 3 new holes.
Atb

[James Reader]

20. Royal Liverpool


The 17th green was moved away from the road; I believe for safety reasons.

[David_Tepper]

21. The Presidio Golf Course (San Francisco) built protective netting over a number of stalls on the driving range to protect people there from stray balls coming off the 9th fairway.

[Jeff Schley]

I recall Stanford first hole has the road beneath the tee box and a netting strung around trees. 

[Pete_Pittock]

22. Reserve Vineyards (North) is in the contemplative stage as housing is being built along the north side of the driving range and the 10th hole, and the right (east) side of the par 5 12th. The back two tee blocks on the 12th are abandoned. We have adopted the alternative stroke and distance option for OB Balls, so at least you don't hit the same house twice.  Worst during outside tournament play when the once a yearers show up.

[John Emerson]

15. Kilspindie 9th, trees on the right to prevent balls exiting property

16. Huntercombe 6th, trees on right to prevent balls exiting property.

Happy Hockey

If I remember correctly those trees planted made the tee ball abismal?

[Tom_Doak]

23.  (iii)  Essex County (MA) had to move the par-3 14th hole, which had been there for a very long time, because a new neighbor objected to how close it was to his property line.


24.  (i / ii / iii)  Mar del Plata GC, Argentina, had to put up fencing AND alter four holes after someone was struck by a golf ball outside the boundary of the course.


25.  (i)  Kilspindie, Scotland, had to put up a screen off the 10th tee after someone built a house on land that was formerly vacant.

[David McIntosh]

I think 15 and 25 refer to the same hole at Kilspindie so will recommence on No.25 with two from Edinburgh.

25. Royal Burgess (15th)
26. Baberton GC (1st)

Both for reason iii.

The Royal Burgess change was to a long dogleg right par 4 where a neighbour had been complaining about too many balls ending up in his garden. Solution was to plant 4 young trees to the right of the tee boxes to block the direct route over the corner of the dogleg, move the fairway before the dogleg to the left and shifted a bunker on the left side of the fairway further up the hole.

At Baberton, similar neighbour complaints led the club to move the green back (I think) and to the left away from the boundary on the short par 4 opener. The fairway was also realigned to the left to tie in with the green.

[Mike Nuzzo]

This thread feels like it is going to wind up in the hands of an attorney that will successfully compel a course to put up more netting. I'd prefer to not boost netting sales and to analyze on a case by case basis. Cheers

[Matthew Mollica]

Mike - I have been thinking about this for some time and was hesitant to start the thread for the reason you describe.


I also chose the figure of 3000 as a cut off given there are approximately 34000 courses on Earth, as I suspect something nearing 10% of courses may have required nets / safety fencing / boundary containment measures, perimeter planting schemes or re-routing for safety reasons. Linked to distance delivered by contemporary balls and clubs.


I chose to proceed with the thread as the weight of numbers might help make authorities take the issue of ball and club reform a little more seriously. I understand however, the reluctance of some to contribute to the thread, on the grounds you cite.


MM

[Mike Nuzzo]

Thank you Matthew
I agree I would much rather the ball change than the courses!
Kind of silly to change 200 acres when you could just change 1.68 inches instead.

[Matthew Mollica]

Ball change does seem like a more sensible approach when we start to catalogue the changes made to courses through the last few decades. Unless of course you operate a safety fencing / net company.

[Matthew Rose]

Most munis I played growing up had fencing guarding certain tee boxes, particularly my home course. Logistically the routing is a nightmare if you look at it from an aerial; there is one tee where you could conceivably hit players teeing off on two other holes AND the adjacent greens from the previous holes. But as long I was there, they never moved anything.

Park Hill in Denver, before it closed, eliminated a par four next to Colorado Blvd and replaced it with a par three pointing away. Another par three had the green moved away from an ongoing light rail project. The ironic thing now is the whole thing ended up being a waste because those holes were in play for probably two years tops, as the entire golf course is probably going to be plowed under as soon as the lawsuits settle.

[Derek_Duncan]

Ball change does seem like a more sensible approach when we start to catalogue the changes made to courses through the last few decades. Unless of course you operate a safety fencing / net company.

Matthew,


I'm curious to see where this goes. It might be more beneficial to the case, however, to limit this thread to courses that have erected netting/fences/etc. in the last 15 years. In other words, as a result of the big jump in ball and driver technology.


There are many courses around the world that have had boundary defenses up for decades because of small or odd property configurations. In other words, issues that predate or have little to do directly with gains in modern equipment.


Just a thought.

[Brad Tufts]

27. TCC Brookline for (ii).  This was fencing over part of the pool area in the middle of their property, as someone blasted a ball into the pool from the 14th tee, requiring a 45+ degree slice to the right, 300y to the pool.  The netting is held up by a large metal arm.


I'm not sure how long the pool has been there, but my guess is that enormous banana balls have not gone 300y until recently.

[jeffwarne]

Thank you Matthew
I agree I would much rather the ball change than the courses!
Kind of silly to change 200 acres when you could just change 1.68 inches instead.

Don't forget to add in nearly every single driving range that hasn't already become a short iron practice facility

[SL_Solow]

At Briarwood. Allison 1921, the original design lacked a practice range.  R.B. Harris redesigned the 18th hole and created space for a practice range which proved to be too short. But it survived in its original form for many years. After going to limited flight balls, we built a net to keep balls from going through the range and across the street where houses are located.