What do the professionals think ?

[Niall C]

On the Trump in Aberdeen thread there has been a lot of discussion on Donald Trump getting planning permission to build a course on a SSSI, shorthand for Site of Special Scientific Importance, a designation it got for its shifting sand dune system. The project and its obtaining planning permission has been extremely contentious and at times gained headlines in the national press that even the Open doesn't get (by that I'm referring to prominence and not subject matter).

This site has all sorts of people in the golf industry from design, building, maintenance and the running of the golf course. I'm interested to hear what there views are on what impact this development and the issues surrounding it will have on future golf projects involving sensitive sites. Will it set a precedent along the lines of "Well Donald got permission there so surely I can get it here" or will it make it harder with local authorities harder to deal with, or will it have no bearing at all on future development.

Not looking to rehash the discussion on the other thread or for people to say whether the development should have got the go ahead, I'm more interested in what implications, if any, that this project might have for future golf development.

Niall 

[Greg Tallman]

Why would any agency want to protect a "shifting sand dune site"?

What is it that is being protected? Wildlife? What species?

I don't want to sound insensitive or ignorant but what is poaaible a better use of such land?

As for future develpoment I would say that it would only be negative if the dunes build up at the sea's edge and obstruct the views of the Trump land... not that he does not have a plan for that.

For the record there is such a course in my neck of the woods built on a very mobile dune. They are fighting quite the battle on their beachfront holes. USed to be standing on 16 tee one could watch their competitors putt out on 15... one year in there is a 12 foot dune in between... mother nature is a tough lady.

[Anthony Gray]

Why would any agency want to protect a "shifting sand dune site"?

What is it that is being protected? Wildlife? What species?

I don't want to sound insensitive or ignorant but what is poaaible a better use of such land?

As for future develpoment I would say that it would only be negative if the dunes build up at the sea's edge and obstruct the views of the Trump land... not that he does not have a plan for that.

For the record there is such a course in my neck of the woods built on a very mobile dune. They are fighting quite the battle on their beachfront holes. USed to be standing on 16 tee one could watch their competitors putt out on 15... one year in there is a 12 foot dune in between... mother nature is a tough lady.

  Hmmmmmmmm.

[Greg Tallman]

Why would any agency want to protect a "shifting sand dune site"?

What is it that is being protected? Wildlife? What species?

I don't want to sound insensitive or ignorant but what is poaaible a better use of such land?

As for future develpoment I would say that it would only be negative if the dunes build up at the sea's edge and obstruct the views of the Trump land... not that he does not have a plan for that.

For the record there is such a course in my neck of the woods built on a very mobile dune. They are fighting quite the battle on their beachfront holes. USed to be standing on 16 tee one could watch their competitors putt out on 15... one year in there is a 12 foot dune in between... mother nature is a tough lady.

  Hmmmmmmmm.

Mother nature may be tough but Dr. Gray would buy her a drink.

[Adam Lawrence]

Niall - it doesn't particularly relate to the sensitivity of the site, but certainly one developer has already cited Trump as a precedent, at the Inchmarlo project in Deeside. I normally try not to plug my stories on here, but see http://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/Article/Permission-sought-for-Scottish-resort/2077/Default.aspx - the planning officials recommended the application should be rejected, but the local council committee has voted in favour; we shall see what Aberdeenshire Council has to say next month.

[Jon Wiggett]

Niall,

whilst I think the Trump venture is good for the Aberdeen area I am totally against it been in a SSSI of this nature.

Greg, I hope you are just winding people up though it is still not funny

[Niall C]

Niall - it doesn't particularly relate to the sensitivity of the site, but certainly one developer has already cited Trump as a precedent, at the Inchmarlo project in Deeside. I normally try not to plug my stories on here, but see http://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/Article/Permission-sought-for-Scottish-resort/2077/Default.aspx - the planning officials recommended the application should be rejected, but the local council committee has voted in favour; we shall see what Aberdeenshire Council has to say next month.

Adam,

Interesting stuff. I had a vague idea of the Inchmarlo development but it hadn't occurred to me that it was the same planning authority. It strikes me that now might not be the time to go ahead with a golf course development but perhaps its the time to seek planning if you have a site that has restrictions. Can't help thinking the government have created a rod for their own back.

Niall