Pictures of Bayside (Axland & Proctor) in Nebraska

[Adam Clayman]

Just so I got this site picture right again...  You say the lots would occupy what is now the higher ground that is basically the length generally of the 9th hole, FW & G, that have views over the poractice green, driving range teeing line and ravine and range, down to the lake, where there will be a new par 5 between the lots (about a quarter mile from the shore) and the shoreline.  So the lots will have a view of the range, and lower across the new par 5 corridor, then the lake?  And, that will bring in premium real estate lot prices?  And, again; will they be multi-unit condos or timeshares, or estate lots?  They'll be surrounded by a remanant of prairie golf, such that it was, already dominated on the western side of #4 and 5 by multi-unit housing?  But, the new par 5, 4th will be somehow better or as good in its extended form as the par 5 #4 as it is; and the extended par 5 will play to the wild par 3 green tht was #5, and the extraordinary designed short par 4 7th will be altered, lengthened and doglegged right across a sahara like bunker to a previously constructed green that was built to take a shot from 90* different then the remodelled, but it will be a foreshadowing of 10?  But, this has little impact on play or visuals? 

What would I do... honestly?  I'd try to answer whether this course, in its location, unchanged in its design will  always be a loosing enterprise, or can it make me a living.  If I see a way to make a living with the current excellent and pretty highly acclaimed design, I'd leave it and go develop the property down by the lake for the housing.  If it is always going to be a looser in profitablilty, I'd try to get out of the golf business and in doing so, I'd ask if the redesign and lot sales are actually a sure fire big profit opportunity.  Then I'd take the profit and run, and I'd still try to sell the course, because it is always going to be a looser in the new remodelled entity as well. 

I guess I"d ask myself what I'm going to do with those lot profits (assuming there are good profits to be made).  You can spend it, and live high off the hog for a while, or you could plow them back into another R.E. development, if that is your thing.  But, I'd get used to the idea that all you will have left is a second tier resortish course, out of the way in the middle of nowhere, where better courses will get more play, and probably eventually be forced to find a way to peddle it or live with the mediocrity.  But, that is just me...

Dick, No! Your characterization of the alterations and housing units is flawed. Perhaps you need to get in the car and see it for your self. The fifth and 8th greens do work (IMO) even though they were designed for different angles.

  I'm sorry if I was unclear. My question was about the 11th hole specifically. The ridge line that occupies the hole currently.

I prefaced my question so the typical housing lined hideousness was not an issue.

[Scott Szabo]

Adam,

I'm trying to visualize what you are reporting, but I have never been along the north side of the range, where I believe you are speaking of.  I would hate to see them alter 4-8 as I think those are some of the best holes on the course.  #7 especially is one of the better ones - I'd hate to see it scrapped.

If I understand you correctly, the new holes 7-9 would flow down to the lake - what kind of distance are we talking about from the new #9 greent to the clubhouse?  That would seem to be quite a distance.

And the proposed changes to #11 - the new green would be more down toward the lake?  Or are we talking about a potentially new hole altogether?  

Scott

[Adam Clayman]

Scott, re 11. it would a whole new hole.

The new ninth, could play as far as 230 yards if the current forward tee on 9 is used. Otherwise, the regular tees would be shorter possibly creating a horseshoe teeing ground playing from multiple distances. Jason has not shot the distances yet, but I would guess the Par 5 8th is approx 550 uphill. #9 looks to be in the 400 yard range. But again, this is all just early ramblings from a couple of golfers, not land planners, archies or self proclaimed experts.