I'm curious as to whether any of the architects on this board have been asked to design - or would consider designing, if asked - a 9 hole course.  Do the economics make sense (for both the architect and the developer, or one or the other)?
Is the business plan feasible?

I ask because I hear much talk about getting more people into the game, and how the expense and time involved in playing a full 18 has much to do with the stagnant participation rate. Would designing and building more top-flight, interesting and well maintained 9 hole course help?

Thanks
P

Apologies if this has been asked before; I couldn't check through all 700 topics.

I think it comes down to value - time and money vs. the experience.

If a course is AMAZING in terms of design/experience, then people will go further and spend more. If it is not so well-designed, then it has to be closer and cheaper than everything else, or the only option around.

I think that the idea of value can go a long way. It seems like everything has to be a "18 Hole Championship Golf Course" - but a nicely-designed, homegrown course with low-level maintenance which is priced right will do (and does) just fine economically.

Maybe even better.

Brain P,

What are the budgets of these type of developments - can you speak generally to that?

A

Adam,

For a nine hole course in Norway you are looking at about 1.5 million USD ex. taxes.  We just designed and helped with the shaping for exactly that price.  

It of course varies from course to course depending on many things, irrigation and rock the big factors in Norway.

Brian

Peter:
I've designed a 9-hole course in CT that should be going to construction in 2006 if (and this is a big if) the housing planned to go around it is approved.  The number$ just don't make a lot of sense if we just build the course.  Expenses for a 9-holer are very similar to those of an 18 hole course, but the revenues aren't as high.  Therefore, any "highest and best use analysis" for the property would not recommend only a 9-hole course.  
As far as the course itself, certain environmental issues and other constraints will keep the length down to about 2500 yards and a par of 33.  But it will definitely be no pushover.
There are some high-end daily fee courses in the area, as well as some other regulation-length, 18-hole public courses. So, the target audience for this course will be mostly seniors, juniors, ladies, beginners, and the countless other local golfers who can't wait for it to be open!  The good player will still find it challenging and hopefully, we'll get all types of players out there.  Obviously, 9 holes takes less time and less money.  And if the design is fun and interesting and the course is in great condition, the golfers will find you.

Peter,

Talk in the industry lately has been towards 6 hole routings sets.  Land is becoming scarce in high population areas and there is no room for a full 18 hole golf course.  The change is coming from the USGA, owners association, builders association, superintendent association.  I do not know if the PGA is involved.  The make the change happen, the PGA and USGA must change the way scores are posted.  The PGA appears locked in the view that a golf course 18 holes to be regulation and THAT IS IT.  The biggest complaint is time and money to play.  We need simple well designed golf courses that can cater to the business man taking a lunch break or wanting to play golf after work.  That is not possible with today's 18 hole golf courses (in general).

When I build my own golf course, I will look into three 6 hole routes so golfers can play 6, 12, or 18 holes and pay accordingly.  I will also maintain the golf course to standards set by traditional maintenance before the onslaught of color TV.

Troy

Tom, Troy

thanks for your generous/thoughtful answers. I have everything to learn about this subject and not much to offer, especially re: the practical issues; but it strikes me that 'new' ideas (in any field) are always discussed, at first, using 'old' frames of reference and common wisdoms; and always end up looking unworkable because of it.    

What I'm suggesting is that if well-regarded designers DID produce (even just a few new) courses like Whitinsville, The Dunes Club, or Royal Worlington & Newmarket, the whole nature of the discussion would begin to change, and eventually so would the frames of reference and common wisdoms. What happens after that is anyone's guess, but I'd bet those same developers who now have their egos wrapped around 18 hole championship layouts would soon have a new style of golf course to wrap their egos around (and probably wouldn't mind a bit, the ego being what it is).

Speaking as someone who can't play as much golf as he'd like partly because quality public courses are just too expensive, I know I'd be at a Tom Doak 9-holer in a second, and, if the course was properly marketed, so would a whole, whole bunch of other golfers who COULD afford to pay more.

Of course, maybe this kind of thinking is the reason why I can't afford to play 18 holes in the first place  

Peter
 

Has anyone played the late Walter Annenberg's Sunnylands by Dick Wilson in Palm Springs?