[PCCraig]

This is a good article on the future of two historic courses in San Fran. I would be interested to hear the Nor Cal contingent chime in on this;

http://www.golfdigest.com/golfworld/columnists/2009/01/20090127bonk?currentPage=1

I'm surprised that so few people are playing these courses...is the economy really to blame in San Fran.?

[David_Tepper]

Pat C. -

Thanks for the link to the article. The status of Lincoln Park & Sharp Par golf courses has been discussed here at length on a couple of prior threads within the past 3-12 months.

Suffice it to say, losing either golf course would be both a tragedy and a travesty. I played a Lincoln just 10 days ago (for the 1st time in at least 15 years) and was reminded about just what golf special golf course it is. Talk about playing options!

I think the poor condition of the courses is probably the biggest factor keeping people away from playing them.

DT
 

[PCCraig]

Maybe it's just a golf crazy town, but in Chicago the city public courses are always packed even though they are generally really bad and in bad shape. How is the GCA at Sharp Park for example?

[David_Tepper]

Pat -

Being an A. Mackenzie design, the GCA bones of Sharp Park are pretty good. Years of poor maintenance, coastal erosion, a highway thru the property being widened, etc., have left the course a pale shadow of its former self.

If money and environmental issues were not a concern (and they most definitely are!), Sharp Park could be a wonderful golf course.

DT

[TX Golf]

Pat,

Having played many many rounds at Lincoln and Sharp Park (my first highschool tournament being at Sharp) I don't know if you understand the extent of the horrible conditions. Especially at Lincoln, conditions at many times are so bad it is almost impossible to play the course. I know there were a few SF GCAers that played a little over a week ago so they should have a better idea of the current conditions. The conditions are BAD BAD BAD!!!!

[Bill_McBride]

Pat -

Being an A. Mackenzie design, the GCA bones of Sharp Park are pretty good. Years of poor maintenance, coastal erosion, a highway thru the property being widened, etc., have left the course a pale shadow of its former self.

If money and environmental issues were not a concern (and they most definitely are!), Sharp Park could be a wonderful golf course.

DT

David, were the holes across the road all original Mackenzie holes?

[David_Tepper]

Bill -

I do not know the answer to your question. Dan Wexler or his "Lost Link book could answer that question.

I do think two of the hole east of Highway 1 (the par-3 and the following par-4) are among the best on the course.

Robert W. -

I did play with the GCA group. Sorry you were not able to join us. I played the ball down most of the way around the course and it was not that bad. Among other things, the course clearly needs a LOT of work to improve its drainage

DT

[Patrick Kiser]

Personally, this whole lack of play thing is a big lie.

I was there at Lincoln with David and it was packed.  Right David?

I play regularly and ... it's always packed on the weekends.

Likewise for Sharp Park.  Always busy on the weekends.

To me it's a self fulfilling prophecy in the works.

Let's just keep saying no one's playing these courses, that soccer fields could be built instead, etc. etc.   It's been going on and on.  City hall meetings, you name it.

The problem is the city has no money to honestly maintain Lincoln, Sharp, Golden Gate, and Harding.  On top of that, add a complete lack of will to make the tough decisions to contract out and competing priorities for other Parks & Rec activities ... you go nowhere fast.

As Gib can so eloquently phrase things ... welcome to Nutville!

[Kevin_Reilly]

Lincoln and Sharp have been in poor condition for 30+ years.  Nothing new.

Play is down at all courses in the Bay Area.

[Patrick Kiser]

Play is down at all courses in the Bay Area.

Which is why play at Lincoln and Sharp Park has gone up actually.  Folks are starting to balk at the $80 green fees when they know they can play something else ... for $30 some.

[Tom Huckaby]

I can't imagine play being THAT down on either course.... but who knows?  I do trust Patrick more than I trust the author of this article in any case.  Those courses traditionally have always been packed, horrid conditions or not.

As for conditions at Lincoln, yes a few of us were there a few weeks ago, and it was about as good as I've ever seen it.  That is, if you put Augusta as a 10 in terms of perfect pristine playing surfaces, LP on that day was a 3.  Usually it's a 1 at best... so I was pleasantly surprised.

TH

[Lynn_Shackelford]

When asked years ago why the superintendent didn't aerify the greens, his reply was that he was the only one who could do it.  The job description of his unionize workers didn't require them to perform this task.

[Joel_Stewart]

When asked years ago why the superintendent didn't aerify the greens, his reply was that he was the only one who could do it.  The job description of his unionize workers didn't require them to perform this task.

Sad but true.   Furthermore, the union workers who cut the grass are not allowed to rake the bunkers.  At Harding the maintance workers are covered by 5 different unions which is why in 2008 maintance costs where in the $5 million range.

I was at Harding on Sunday and despite light rain and temperatures in the low 50's the course was surprisingly busy.

[David Stamm]

If forced to choose, which would you No Cal GCAers rather see saved?

[Tom Huckaby]

If forced to choose, which would you No Cal GCAers rather see saved?

It depends on what is meant by "saved."

If you could tell me right now that Sharp would get the gazillions of dollars necessary to be restored to MacKenzie's plan - which would of course include removing the massive dike/seawall - then I'd say give me Sharp.

But if the question is one gets developed into non-golf, and the other goes on as it is right now - then give me Lincoln.

TH

[Kalen Braley]

I'd have to agree with Patrick on this one, this seems like a text book defintion of a self-fulfilling prophesy.

1)  Mismanage the course.
2)  Talk it down and say its not getting many rounds.
3)  Keep course conditions abysmally bad and costs high.
4)  And the declare "Well no one is playing it anymore, guess we need to shut it down".

Hell they could save everyone a bunch of heartache and a ton of money and just close it down now...but then the unions wouldn't want that would they.

P.S. Is it really true that Harding is running at $5 mil per year for maintaince due to union contracts and restrictive work clauses?  If true, what a nightmare....

[John Keenan]

In choosing between Sharps Park and Lincoln   Lincoln by a long shot.  Sharps park is too far down the road to be realistic to save. In addition it faces more environmental issues. It may have a better lineage but Lincoln has great views is in SF (versus Pacifica) and is really a nice place to play. With some repairs could be a very nice place to play

John

[Patrick Kiser]

P.S. Is it really true that Harding is running at $5 mil per year for maintaince due to union contracts and restrictive work clauses?  If true, what a nightmare....

Kalen,

I can't speak to the number.  Maybe Forrest can from his report.

Don't even ask me about the clubhouse at Harding and what went on to get that built.  DT and I went over this previously.  Just a complete abuse of the SF taxpayer.

Anyway, one thing's for sure in Nutville, this town is held hostage by the unions. 

But let's not confuse my point into meaning ALL unions are a problem or bad. 

The ones in SF certainly take the cake however... 


David,

Sharp or Lincoln?  I'm with Tom on this.  I'd wish for Sharp of old but the more realistic option would be Lincoln. 

[Kalen Braley]

I'd agree with the general sentiment with Sharpe vs LP. 

Sharpe being restored to its full glory is such a pipe dream.  The sea wall would have to be torn down, beach built back up, part of the highway narrowed, etc, etc.  Throw in the enviromental issues on top of this and I just can't see this ever happening.  If one course has to be the sacrifical lamb, this would have to be the one, especially if it meant LP could continue to live and even be <gasp> improved.

[Tom Huckaby]

 
I'm just wondering how many different ways Sharp Park can be misspelled.

Kalen's way does give it a certain panache....

John Keenan's way makes we want to have a non-alcoholic brew....

Which of course is NOT recommended if playing the golf course - one needs the alcohol.

TH

[David_Tepper]

Patrick K. -

I refuse to choose!

There had been some rumblings that the city of Pacifica was interested in buying Sharp Park GC from the city/county of San Francisco. Given the economy and the poor state of public finance everywhere, that would appear to be a non-starter.

My guess is the current & future status of both courses will be pushed to the back burner for the next 3-5 years and, for better or worse, not much will change any time soon.

DT

[Bill_McBride]

If forced to choose between the two, I would think about the fun I've had at Lincoln, a lot more fun than dodging duckshit at Sharp Park, and vote to keep Lincoln.  It would be ideal if Pacifica could buy and operate Sharp Park sans union featherbedding with a budget of perhaps $600K for maintenance.  Given the demand for public golf in SF -- does anybody really believe play is off that much -- Pacifica could possibly make some money.

Has any money been spent on either clubhouse over the past 50 years?

[David_Tepper]

Bill -

The Lincoln Park club house is pretty much the same dump it has been for the past 20-30 years. If there has been any capital investment in the property, it is certainly not visible to my eye.

I have not seen the Sharp Park house in probably 15 or more years. At one point, there was a local restaurant operating fairly successfully there. Like Lincoln, I doubt there has been any meaningful investment in the clubhouse building.

DT

[MHiserman]

I also refuse to choose! 
Regardless of the rough conditioning.  I would venture to play these while having the privilege of working in SF at a wonderful Club.  Either paying or gratis these courses in their "Bones" are all worth vying for. 
Please don't settle for these properties to become just another place to walk a dog on "The Peninsula"

[Tom Huckaby]

I also refuse to choose! 
Regardless of the rough conditioning.  I would venture to play these while having the privilege of working in SF at a wonderful Club.  Either paying or gratis these courses in their "Bones" are all worth vying for. 
Please don't settle for these properties to become just another place to walk a dog on "The Peninsula"

Hopefully the question was hypothetical.

But in the realities today... it may well be that a choice does have to be made.  We golfers have little control of such things.  If they did give us a say - saying choose one or they BOTH get axed - also in the reality that no huge funds will be expended on improvements of either - then well... my answer stands.  Sharp Park is a soggy bog with its bones picked so clean from what I gather it once was, I don't see it really worth saving.  Brutal, yes.  Honest, yes.

Lincoln Park at least remains a quirky, fun golf course with some fantastic views.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()