Future of Public Course Architecture

[David Harshbarger]

Everyone's hurting out there, we know, and architects would just like work.  With that said....

How do things look for the future of public courses?
Over the next 5-10 years, who will be building new public courses?
Will any of those courses be affordable aka not resort courses?
Architecturally, where will these courses go?  Are there more Rustic Canyon's out there?
Is the sustainable/afforable movement ready?
Will renovation drive the future of public courses?
Are the public courses immune from the name brand architect syndrome?

Dave

[Tom_Doak]

David:

I think the future of public golf in the USA is fine, but I think that it will be rare for any new public courses to be built in the next 5-10 years, unless the economy makes a dramatic turnaround.  If they are built, it will be special cases such as Common Ground in Denver, where the course was given to the Colorado Golf Association for free by a retired Air Force base, and they saved money for ten years to redesign it.

Jack Nicklaus was in the news in Florida last week for having proposed a series of public courses on state park land, but the measure was quickly shot down in the press.  With "austerity" the rage now, it's hard to imagine any public entity coming up with money for golf development, whether it would create jobs or not.

[Matt_Ward]

David:

I think there may be opportunities for taxpayer jurisdictions if former private courses go under because of excessive costs to keep them running. No doubt in tough times convincing the public to bond for such purchases may be a tough sell. It may also require former 100% private courses -- to open up their availability at certain times to generate added revenue.

The issue for public golf is no different than what golf faces generally -- the game costs too much to play for many and the amount of time to play it has to be reduced. I don't see the numbers of golfers growing with Gen X & Y.

[Norbert P]

  It's a dismal outlook in the near future.  Certainly there's a heightened scrutiny of funds since the economic woes hit, and the Wisconsin debacle, which merely brought to national attention the fiducial predicaments of public moneys, but also because places like Chambers Bay set a high-profile example of spending an amount that may not ever refill the coffers. I hope I'm wrong on that.

  Here, in Oregon, a tri-county consortium  had one slated for construction but under the sway toward conservative spending it got scrapped.  The schools, police, et al, will get priority.

 As Tom states, there'll have to be some gifting to make the grass grow.

  

[Mark Johnson]

I think there will be a lot of working in redesign though.    Many cities are selling or leasing out their muni courses to course management firms to generate cash.  These firms have an interest in designing courses to be kore user friendly. 

[David Harshbarger]

With the economic conditions, is there interest among current course operators to look to more sustainable practices on existing courses, and does this represent an opportunity to bring in architects to renovate for sustainability (and strategy)?

Watching Doral I can see how GenX & Y aren't making a bee-line to the tee.  Is this just a missed opportunity over the years to engage them, or something structural, like the too much time to play problem?

[Kirk Gill]

How much of the future of public golf course architecture is tied into the future of some private clubs that might find it necessary to go public?

[Matt_Ward]

David:

The big time issue is tied to the folks in the golf industry only zeroing in on the 5-10% of the total audience because they spend the sheer greatest number of dollars. That dynamic cannot existr indefinitely -- those folks will die off and not be replaced.

Golf has equipment cost issues -- how many people can really afford a $399 driver -- when they just bought something equivalent or near that price point just 2-3 years ago? The same holds true for all the other clubs too. Golf has gone backwards because the industry only goes after the deepest of pockets.

As you mentioned David -- check out the faces of the people in the galleries at Doral. Did you see any younger or faces of color there? Primarily it was the pre baby boom generation and those of the baby boom generation in attendance.

Gen X & Y see golf in far different ways. They are tech savvy folks and they see golf as an activity that takes far too long to learn and play once you do. Look at handicap levels even with all the tech equipment advantages that exist today. Is meaningful teaching really happening? Does the PGA have a real grip on elevating the playing status so people who quickly leave the game once they can't gain anything of satisfaction from playing it.

The issue involved here are deeply structural in my mind -- First Tee has helped in certain places but golf is not really connecting with those who are less than 30 now. Frankly, as I see it a withdrawla of anywhere from 15-20% of the existing course inventory may need to disappear in order to balance out the supply and demand dynamics we are seeing.

Until the industry finally admits it is one sick puppy -- the net result of denials after denials will only mean further and further isolation and lack of progress.