News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Yancey_Beamer

Re: 100m (328 foot) safety corridor. Is it enough?
« Reply #25 on: June 20, 2011, 09:15:00 PM »
The laws vary.I once bought a lot on a course at Kiawah.I received papers stating that under South Carolina law and the agreement I had signed that the golf course was for the playing of the game of golf and that if I built a house on the lot and that any golf ball that strayed onto my lot or through a window was to be returned to it's owner.Furthermore they had the right to insist on the return of their property.I don't know what the law is now but this seemed reasonable to me.If you buy property on a golf course what do you expect .Footballs?

Robin_Hiseman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 100m (328 foot) safety corridor. Is it enough?
« Reply #26 on: June 21, 2011, 06:37:47 AM »
Tom:

I would have thought so too and checking out my own course at Riffa Views in Bahrain, I can see that on one of only two holes we have where there are homes to either side of a single fairway, the absolute narrowest point from boundary wall to boundary wall is 100 metres, over a very short stretch, with the homes set well back from that.  It doesn't feel constricted, but the general margin is 110 metres plus.  However, in Palm Springs (which is typical of many resorts I imagine) it is certainly only 300 feet from window to window, as the following image shows.  This course is picked at random from dozens that are just the same.


The yellow line is 300 feet long.

Even if the homes are set back, I'd still want to feel safe in my own garden.  Yes, if you live on a golf fairway, you should anticipate (rarely) a golf ball or two to come over the fence, but sitting around your pool shouldn't ever be a game of Dodgeball!  That is just reckless property development.  The lesson to learn is...choose your house plot carefully!

From a design perspective, as this image shows and your own illustration explains, these linear, minimal margins give you very little scope to be imaginative.  Vanilla flavour golf design.
2024: RSt.D; Mill Ride; Milford; Notts; JCB, Jameson Links, Druids Glen, Royal Dublin, Portmarnock, Old Head, Addington, Parkstone, Denham, Thurlestone, Dartmouth, Rustic Canyon, LACC (N), MPCC (Shore), Cal Club, San Fran, Epsom, Casa Serena, Hayling, Co. Sligo, Strandhill, Carne, Cleeve Hill

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 100m (328 foot) safety corridor. Is it enough?
« Reply #27 on: June 21, 2011, 06:43:07 AM »
General masterplanning has moved dramatically away from this finger golf flanked by housing design though hasn't it, Robin?... And much more towards clusters of housing situated in amongst areas of green space...

Looking at that aerial above, you can see why can't you?!

Robin_Hiseman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 100m (328 foot) safety corridor. Is it enough?
« Reply #28 on: June 21, 2011, 06:49:10 AM »
Ally

Generally yes, but going back to my original posting, the course I was asked to appraise was very much of this ilk, at least in parts, which is why I posted the question.
2024: RSt.D; Mill Ride; Milford; Notts; JCB, Jameson Links, Druids Glen, Royal Dublin, Portmarnock, Old Head, Addington, Parkstone, Denham, Thurlestone, Dartmouth, Rustic Canyon, LACC (N), MPCC (Shore), Cal Club, San Fran, Epsom, Casa Serena, Hayling, Co. Sligo, Strandhill, Carne, Cleeve Hill