I'm sure the partners are in crisis mode now.  It appears nobody knows how to proceed next.

I really can't feel too sorry for them considering how much they charge for everything on the existing properties.

Quote from: David Stamm on June 16, 2007, 02:23:04 PM

Quote from: Joel_Stewart on June 16, 2007, 01:59:52 PM

I'm sure the partners are in crisis mode now.  It appears nobody knows how to proceed next.

I really can't feel too sorry for them considering how much they charge for everything on the existing properties.

Come on David, they charge what the market will bear, it really is simple economics.  

From what I have heard, they aren't having a hard time filling the rooms or the tee sheets.

Whether or not they are making a return on their investment is another story ...

Mike, I'm all for capitalism. I'm just saying I don't feel sorry for them that they couldn't get ANOTHER course built there in the Del Monte Forest. There are bigger tragedies in the world than whether a ultra rich consortium gets another super-property pushed through. But, if they can, than more power to them. They obviously know more than I on how to make a buck or two.

Adam, this is true of government at all levels these days.  Taking of the property owner's money and property itself is par for the course.  Here's an example from my construction business:  I bought the abandoned eyesore of a business next door to one of my buildings so I can build a parking lot and eventually a new office building.  I went through the mandatory asbestos testing before we started demolition. No asbestos found.  They are still making us demolish the building as if there were asbestos - a certified inspector on site all during demolition at $85 an hour.  "Wet demolition" with water sprayed on the area being demolished all the time.  This will cost me several extra thousand dollars - when the tests revealed no asbestos at all!

Aw shucks.

Looks like their was a fairly well organized group against the project and they prevailed.   Also, the CCC toured the facility and voted based on the tour.  I don't think the Pebble Beach Corp. made a very good argument that changing the zoning for 100 acres to save 1000 acres really flew?

If I understand correctly, this was an application to CHANGE the zoning, not build what was already zoned, which was in place when the land was bought.  These guys understood the rules and attempted to change them.  It's not heavy handed government to turn down a change in plan.  I'd like to get Bob Huntley's take on this to find out what the existing residents think and what the land CAN be used for.