Trump's Aberdeen Episode

[Rory Connaughton]

Now now Pat.  If we can't cite news reports we can't have a conversation about this at all because, at least to my knowledge, none of us are directly involved. 

I never said that DT used or even requested CPO's.
All I said was that DT's group, at one time, contemplated a request to the appropriate governmental entity the use of CPO's.
That it has backed off of this is beyond dispute. I do not disagree (but I only know this because I have read about it in the papers).

Now, as I have said, a request for CPO's was clearly contemplated.  Will a quote from DT JR suffice?
From The Scotsman October 28, 2009 (Read to the bottom)

Donald Trump golf course "may be ready in 18 months"

Published Date: 28 October 2009
GOLFERS could tee off at Donald Trump's controversial luxury resort in 18 months, the property tycoon's son said today.
Sand dunes at the Menie Estate, the site of Donald Trump's planned golf course
ADVERTISEMENT



Donald Trump Jnr was visiting the Menie Estate in Aberdeenshire where work officially began on the coastal golf course.

Councillors gave the green light yesterday for the first stage of the building of the £1 billion two-course resort, which includes a hotel and almost 1,000 holiday homes.

Objectors say they are taking legal advice over Aberdeenshire Council's decision to approve the work.

But Mr Trump Jnr said the project is the "most scrutinised in the UK ever".
Speaking at the estate, he said: "Today is incredibly significant, it is the culmination of four years of very hard and very important work and something that is very near and dear to our hearts.

"It's great to no longer be at the point where we are talking about planning and development but are actually doing construction work."

The developer said he hoped golfers would be able to tee off on the course within 18 months to two years – the building schedule will depend on the weather.

The work begun today involved the laying of marram grass to "stabilise" the sand dunes.

Mr Trump Jnr said of environmental opposition to the resort: "It is very easy to say that something is not environmentally sound but it is something else to hire in teams to look at it.

"We have voluntarily brought in some of the best environmental consultants in the country, worked with governments and the environmental councils.

"We have brought in people to make sure we are doing everything right, to make sure we don't fall into any pitfalls and we have been very careful about that, so we are not at all concerned about detractors.

"But we have beaten the detractors time and time again and I think we will continue to do so."

An Aberdeenshire Council committee originally rejected the proposal for the golf course but the plan was called in by the Scottish Government, which approved the luxury resort.

Economic and investment agency Scottish Enterprise and tourism body VisitScotland are in favour of the resort but local opposition remains.
Some residents are refusing to sell their homes to make way for the resort and objectors fear that compulsory purchase orders (CPO) may be used.

Mr Trump Jnr said: "We do have a good relationship with those people despite the fact we are perhaps on different sides of the fence.

"We do continue to have that dialogue and some people will be more vocal about it than others.

"We do want to work things out very amicably, if at all possible.

"The CPO process has always been a last resort but it is something that remains on the table."

[Rory Connaughton]

Sorry, I didn't respond to your request for my comment on the use of eminent domain for commercial development in Glasgow.

The answer is . . It depends. Examine every project on the merits.

 Whether the developer is DT or someone else is not particularly relevant.
BTW, I am not against the Menie development. Now that work has started it would be foolish to hope for anything but the best.
If you go back and read my posts, I think you will see that my focus is elsewhere.

[Sean_A]

According to the article below (which is a direct quote from a Cllr) Trump did make a formal request for the Council to exercise its CPO powers on behalf of Trump's development.  I would be highly surprised if Trump didn't because it is a negotiating tactic often used.   Furthermore, Trump has been very confusing with his statements  in that he said he didn't need the land in question for the course, but that it was necessary for the hotel because the properties in question marred (putting it very mildly as this was an area where Trump's back and forth was a PR disaster) the views.  

I think Pat is a bit confused about the planning process.  ANYBODY can apply for planning permission on land they don't own.  It is done all the time. Receiving planning permission in no way obligates a planning authority to then pursue the CPO process on behalf of the applicant.    

http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/news/national-news/121845-donald-trump-admits-defeat-in-land-battle-with-pensioner.html

Ciao

[Jim Hoak]

I agree with Kevin's beginning comments that started this train of posts.  I don't find Trump's antics to be amusing--just silly, and insulting to real golf professionals.  And it's why I think in answer to another subject that has begun on this site, that he is not good for golf in any real way.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Could someone please put an "OT" on this thread....

...or tell me when we might get excited about the golf course again...

...or at least send me an IM when someone who actually knows how much input Trump has had in the design process has something to say...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ally,

That's really at the heart of the matter, how much imput did Donald have, and in what specific areas.

Rory,

I'm not interested in the comments of
Donald Trump Jr
Eric Trump
Ivana Trump
Ivanka Trump
Fred Trump
Robert Trump or any Trump other than "The Donald"

When I asked you to cite where and when Donald Trump stated that he would implore ED/CPO I expected you to produce a citation directly from "The Donald" not his relatives.

It's apparent that you can't find any such citation.
Thus a retraction will be graciously accepted(; 

[Sean_A]

Could someone please put an "OT" on this thread....

...or tell me when we might get excited about the golf course again...

...or at least send me an IM when someone who actually knows how much input Trump has had in the design process has something to say...

Ally

Even on a golf board sometimes the golf is inconsequential compared to larger issues.

Ciao

[Niall C]

Could someone please put an "OT" on this thread....

...or tell me when we might get excited about the golf course again...

...or at least send me an IM when someone who actually knows how much input Trump has had in the design process has something to say...

Ally

Even on a golf board sometimes the golf is inconsequential compared to larger issues.

Ciao

I would not only agree with that statement but add that the way this "golf" development has been progressed may have serious implications for future golf projects in Scotland. It could be argued what those implications might be but the fact that this development has been so high profile and contentious is bound to have a knock on effect next time some developer looks to develop a SSSI either sympathetically or not.

Niall

[Niall C]

"Let's move the discussion to Glassgow.
If a tenement resided in a zone where a developer was going to revitalize the neighborhood by building modern, lower, middle and upper class residences, would you stand in opposition to that project, and the implementation of ED/CPO, or, is it just any project associated with Donald Trump ?"

Patrick,

Another apt example. Glasgow is shortly to host the Commonwealth Games. Not nearly as big a deal as the Olympics but you still need to provide all the facilities such as sporting arena, athletes villages, infrastructure etc. The Council is using this opportunity to comprehensively redevelop areas of the east end of Glasgow which have been run down for decades and suffered all sorts of social degredation. A new motorway is being built, a cycle track arena is being built, an athletes village is being built and I'm sure other things which I don't know about. In order to do that a lot of run-down housing, both private and council owned is being demolished and where appropriate private owners compensated. I've no knowledge of the CPO powers used but I've no doubt that they would be used where required.

The end result will be a comprehensive redevelopment where the athletes village, the sporting facilities will be used afterwards. Hard to argue against the idea, many may argue whether the money spent is worth it but few would question the intent. Can you seriously compare that to comprehensively redeveloping an area of ground north of Aberdeen that not only didn't need to be redeveloped but had been identified in the Local Plan as an area that shouldn't be developed. I hardly need to add that these houses needed to be bought in to allow the development to proceed, all he was trying to do was improve the view, hardly a good reason IMO.

And as for comparing Glasgow to Aberdeen I'm sure you are aware that Aberdeen is unique in the UK as its economy is largely dependant on the oil and gas industry. So while the rest of the country has suffered, Aberdeen has boomed as usual. That said the locals have been moaning about what's going to happen when oil runs out (while all the while raking it in). Can you seriously see a golf course and hotel built now saving the economy in the many decades to come when the oil eventually does run out ?

Niall

[Niall C]

...and while I'm in the mood for having a rant. Lets address the question of the "berm" fronting the houses. I'm not really familiar with that term but presumably it means some sort of artificial dune or mounding used to screen out the houses. Mr Trump, and yes I'm assuming it was his decision to screen the houses, seems to think this a good idea.

Maybe he's forgetting or isn't aware that golf in Scotland isn't some rich mans game but is rooted in the community. Think of all the courses built on the edge of towns/villages with all sorts of housing bordering the course. TOC and North Berwick are the two obvious examples but really can you think of any that don't have housing or some form of development overlooking or adjoining the course ?

Niall

[Bob_Huntley]

Patrick,

I have a nephew who is a QC in Canada, he was hired by tbe UN to defend a Rwandan general accused of genocide. I couldn't understand his vigorous and and withering cross examination of the witnesses to the slaughter. On a completely different level, your defense of Trump seems to ignore the fact that he is running rough shod over some of the people his mother would have defended.

Bob

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

I have a nephew who is a QC in Canada, he was hired tbe UN to defend a Rwandan general accused of genocide. I couldn't understand his vigorous and and withering cross examination of the witnesses to the slaughter. On a completely different level, your defense of Trump seems to ignore the fact that he is running rough shod over some of the people his mother would have defended.


Bob,

On any project of this scale you're going to encounter opposition, no matter how worthy the project might be.

Should he have folded his tent and gone peacefully into the night when the first objection was raised ?

He certainly doesn't need the money that this project might generate if it's profitable.
So, why is he doing it ?
Is he pursuing the same dream that Mike Keiser had in Oregon, Kohler at Whistling Straits, Tufts at Pinehurst.

The ONLY reason people are elevating their opposition is due to the high profile nature of the developer, Donald Trump.
If Jamison McGregor was the driving force behind the project, you'd never hear about it, much the same as you never heard of Mike Keiser until after his project was highly successful.

As to criticisms regarding the golf course, they're all invalid.
NO ONE, repeat, NO ONE has played the golf course let alone walked it.

Shouldn't we wait until the course is in play before analyzing it and judging its merits ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

...and while I'm in the mood for having a rant. Lets address the question of the "berm" fronting the houses. I'm not really familiar with that term but presumably it means some sort of artificial dune or mounding used to screen out the houses. Mr Trump, and yes I'm assuming it was his decision to screen the houses, seems to think this a good idea.

"Berming" and "screening" are common, modern day, architectural features.

Time and time again, Tom Huckaby and others on this site have indicated how important the views beyond the property lines are.
If an object, a factory, open pit or homes are deemed to be an eyesore, why wouldn't you berm them to enhance the golf course and the golf course experience.

What's the difference between a well landscaped berm and/or row of trees and another house or better yet, a  maintainance barn  ?
Would you rather look at another house, a maintainance barn or a natural appearing, landscaped berm ?

You can't have it both ways.

Just look at where Sebonack put their maintainance barn and staff residence building.
Immediately adjacent to the 5th hole at NGLA.
So, NGLA bermed it.
Should they have left it open ?

You can't have it both ways.(;[/b]

Maybe he's forgetting or isn't aware that golf in Scotland isn't some rich mans game but is rooted in the community. Think of all the courses built on the edge of towns/villages with all sorts of housing bordering the course.

TOC and North Berwick are the two obvious examples but really can you think of any that don't have housing or some form of development overlooking or adjoining the course ?

Let's not lose sight of the fact that these courses were crafted 300 years ago, not last week.
You can't compare the creation of courses removed centuries from each other when the development process was seperated by light years

[Jim Nugent]

The ONLY reason people are elevating their opposition is due to the high profile nature of the developer, Donald Trump.

The only reason I object is his willingness to use compulsory purchase.  That would be true no matter who tried to use it.   

As to criticisms regarding the golf course, they're all invalid.
NO ONE, repeat, NO ONE has played the golf course let alone walked it.

Shouldn't we wait until the course is in play before analyzing it and judging its merits ?

Definitely we should wait.  It's easy for me to be skeptical at this point though.  Trump thinks his FL course is better than Seminole; and his LA course is better than Pebble.  He said he spent $61 million on one hole alone in LA.  He loves to add artificial waterfalls; and insists they are not artificial.  On top of which he's declared business bankruptcy three times.     

Is that really the guy I want in charge of turning this outstanding dunescape into a golf course?   

[Doug Siebert]

Do you drive on the Interstate Highways in the U.S.
State Highways ?
All of them used ED in the process of AROW

With your intense contempt, do you refuse to use those roads, or, do you drive over them, knowing that the land upon which you drive was seized, as you allege, through the government's use of "police powers"

If Eminent Domain is not employed, how are we going to revitalize our cities, our old cities, our cities with slums and decribit buildings ?
How are we going to modernize ?

Do you know how they do it in China where they're building and rebuilding the most modern cities in the world for their citizens ?

Please, this is rather disingenuous.  Interstate highways are government projects, the government is taking the land and owns the land in perpetuity.  I think almost everyone recognizes that some projects like public roads, dams, etc. are necessary at times and eminent domain might be needed.

That's quite different than using eniment domain for the advantage for private interests who can easily sway the government towards their personal profit via bribes, or their legalized cousin, campaign contributions.  Please note I'm not saying that Trump has ever done anything illegal or even unethical with regard to eminent domain, I have no knowledge of this either way.  You would however be quite naive to think that this sort of thing doesn't sometimes take place where eniment domain is used for private projects.  The argument that it is better for the community due to increased tax revenues could be used to justify condemning a low tax property, such as NGLA, to turn it into high tax property (high rise luxury condos)  I imagine, however, that you would not support such a thing.  But there's a lot less net tax benefit to be had from many of the previous abuses in eniment domain, such as the one that led to that unfortunate Supreme Court decision.

[Robert Thompson]

While I'm still waiting for Patrick to touch base with his contacts at the Golf Channel to find out about Trump approving episodes of Donald J. Trump's Fabulous World of Golf, I simply made an inquiry with someone at Golf Channel in media relations. Here's what he came back with:

From Jeremy Friedman, Media Relations, Golf Channel:

"Regarding the Trump series, Golf Channel retains sole creative control of the series as we are the sole copyright holder.  Donald Trump does see the shows before they air, but simply to make sure we haven't mis-represented his brand in any way. That said, we respect Mr. Trump’s point of view and if there are things he suggests regarding the show, we will listen and sometimes implement, but the final creative decisions are solely those of the Golf Channel.  The Workshop is a production company that we (Golf Channel) hired to produce the series.  We collaborate but ultimately they execute our direction.  The Workshop also produces The Haney Project series for us."

So I guess it is a not clear cut. Does Trump see them in advance? Sure does, though I'm not sure whaet "mis-represented his brand in any way," means. I read that to say the program doesn't include anything that Trump does not want included. Of course, they do say Trump presents, "his point of view," and "we will listen."

To me this is typical corporate speak. The Golf Channel "maintains" editorial control, but for fear of "misrepresenting" Trump, they allow him to clearly provide his perspective.

And if Golf Channel wants to continue its affiliation with Trump, I think the writing is clear.

[Niall C]

"...and while I'm in the mood for having a rant. Lets address the question of the "berm" fronting the houses. I'm not really familiar with that term but presumably it means some sort of artificial dune or mounding used to screen out the houses. Mr Trump, and yes I'm assuming it was his decision to screen the houses, seems to think this a good idea.

"Berming" and "screening" are common, modern day, architectural features.

Time and time again, Tom Huckaby and others on this site have indicated how important the views beyond the property lines are.
If an object, a factory, open pit or homes are deemed to be an eyesore, why wouldn't you berm them to enhance the golf course and the golf course experience.

What's the difference between a well landscaped berm and/or row of trees and another house or better yet, a  maintainance barn  ?
Would you rather look at another house, a maintainance barn or a natural appearing, landscaped berm ?"


Patrick - who says I think those houses are an eyesore or indeed take anything away from the view ? With respect to Tom Huckaby et al I was talking about Scottish Golf and a Scottish golf course and suggesting that buildings, rather than detract from the view actually add to it by giving the course a sense of place. When you're standing on the 17th tee at the Old Course what would you rather play over, a certain letter fixed to the shed or a row of nice conifers ? Patrick, its all about context and an artificial berm or screen or whatever you want to call it adds nothing other than expense, and I may add makes the Trump organisation seem petty.


"what's the difference between a well landscaped berm and/or row of trees and another house or better yet, a  maintainance barn  ?
Would you rather look at another house, a maintainance barn or a natural appearing, landscaped berm ?

You can't have it both ways."

Patrick - See my answer above.

"Just look at where Sebonack put their maintainance barn and staff residence building.
Immediately adjacent to the 5th hole at NGLA.
So, NGLA bermed it.
Should they have left it open ?

You can't have it both ways.(;[/b] "

Patrick - I've never been to Sebonack or NGLA so not really equipped to pass comment but let me suggest that while you have come up with some apt examples on this thread, in this case citing two courses on the other side of the world might not be the most relevant. I suggest you reread my original post and consider the points I'm making about the context of where this course is being built.

"Let's not lose sight of the fact that these courses were crafted 300 years ago, not last week.
You can't compare the creation of courses removed centuries from each other when the development process was seperated by light years"

Patrick - golf has been played at both TOC and North Berwick for hundreds of years and in that time both courses have been continually evolving like every other course of the age and yet in that continual process of alterations no-one has planted trees and created a screen to block out the town. And as for comparing a modern design with architecture of the past, is that not what the bulk of the threads on this site are about in one way or another. As a great man once said, you can't have it both ways.

Niall

[Niall C]

Patrick,

I have a nephew who is a QC in Canada, he was hired tbe UN to defend a Rwandan general accused of genocide. I couldn't understand his vigorous and and withering cross examination of the witnesses to the slaughter. On a completely different level, your defense of Trump seems to ignore the fact that he is running rough shod over some of the people his mother would have defended.


Bob,

On any project of this scale you're going to encounter opposition, no matter how worthy the project might be.

Should he have folded his tent and gone peacefully into the night when the first objection was raised ?

He certainly doesn't need the money that this project might generate if it's profitable.
So, why is he doing it ?
Is he pursuing the same dream that Mike Keiser had in Oregon, Kohler at Whistling Straits, Tufts at Pinehurst.

The ONLY reason people are elevating their opposition is due to the high profile nature of the developer, Donald Trump.
If Jamison McGregor was the driving force behind the project, you'd never hear about it, much the same as you never heard of Mike Keiser until after his project was highly successful.

As to criticisms regarding the golf course, they're all invalid.
NO ONE, repeat, NO ONE has played the golf course let alone walked it.

Shouldn't we wait until the course is in play before analyzing it and judging its merits ?

Patrick

Mr Trump is a property developer/investor who at the moment is specialising in golf course development. I don't doubt he enjoys his golf but you shouldn't lose sight that he's a property developer, first and foremost. Thats what he does and that why he's in Scotland. By dint of the fact that he has acquired the site and got his planning permission, he's already added value. He will add even more in due course if the houses sell as anticipated and the hotel/course attracts the custom he is banking on.

It is Trump who has elevated the profile of this development by continiously promoting the course by exploiting his fame and his image. As you would say, its SHOWTIME. The natural consequence of this is that the opposition to Trump has had more exposure in the press. If Jamison McGregor (I'm assuming thats a made up name, either that or his father was an Irishman who couldn't spell) the objections would have been just as strong and just as real however the project would have been kicked into touch early in the process.

As for criticising the course, most of the criticism has been about the fact of the course getting planning together with Trumps interaction with Martin Hawtree on the TV which brought speculation as to how much input Trump was having and whether that would be worthwhile. The focus of that latter discussion was two comments on Trump made about the pond and the width of fairways.

No one has been talking about any other specifics of the course other than Ally responding to comments by Brad Klein, both of whom have walked the routing.

Niall

[Patrick_Mucci]

The ONLY reason people are elevating their opposition is due to the high profile nature of the developer, Donald Trump.

The only reason I object is his willingness to use compulsory purchase.  That would be true no matter who tried to use it. 

You never would have heard of this if Donald Trump wasn't involved, and he DIDN'T bring up the issue of CPO's, the opposition did.[/b] 

As to criticisms regarding the golf course, they're all invalid.
NO ONE, repeat, NO ONE has played the golf course let alone walked it.

Shouldn't we wait until the course is in play before analyzing it and judging its merits ?

Definitely we should wait.  It's easy for me to be skeptical at this point though. 

Trump thinks his FL course is better than Seminole;


No he doesn't.
He's promoting, just like Budweiser, Miller, Chevy, Ford, etc., etc.
Your problem is you believe what you read.[/b]

and his LA course is better than Pebble. 

I don't believe that he believes that either.[/b]

He said he spent $61 million on one hole alone in LA. 

Not voluntarily.
If he didn't fix the landslide damage, he wouldn't have an 18 hole golf course.
You can't fault him for that.[/b]

He loves to add artificial waterfalls; and insists they are not artificial. 


Where did he state that ?
Can you provide direct source confirmation ?[/b]

On top of which he's declared business bankruptcy three times.     


That's NOT TRUE.
He's NEVER declared bankruptcy.
Please get your facts straight.[/b]

Is that really the guy I want in charge of turning this outstanding dunescape into a golf course?   

He really doesn't care who you want in charge.
Seems to me that he's the only one who could have pulled this off.

[Kevin Lynch]

Regarding the "berming" issue, I have one question.  I understand this from the course's perspective (whether it's an "eyesore" or not).

But is there an issue that the berm may be taking away sightlines that the homeowners currently enjoy (e.g. of the water)? 

A question was posed above about the difference between these houses and an old factory.  I suppose one potential difference is that the factory probably isn't concerned about having its views impeded, unlike some of these homeowners.

Now, I'm not familiar enough with the property to know if that is the case, but was hoping someone could add some insight. 

[Carl Johnson]

...and while I'm in the mood for having a rant. Lets address the question of the "berm" fronting the houses. I'm not really familiar with that term but presumably it means some sort of artificial dune or mounding used to screen out the houses. Mr Trump, and yes I'm assuming it was his decision to screen the houses, seems to think this a good idea.

Maybe he's forgetting or isn't aware that golf in Scotland isn't some rich mans game but is rooted in the community. Think of all the courses built on the edge of towns/villages with all sorts of housing bordering the course. TOC and North Berwick are the two obvious examples but really can you think of any that don't have housing or some form of development overlooking or adjoining the course ?

Niall

Niall,

For what it may be worth, here's my perspective as a golfer from the USA.  Seven years ago, four of us from North Carolina took a golf holiday in Ayrshire.  We stayed in the town of Troon for the entire visit.  Among other courses, in the immediate area we played Royal Troon and Portland, Irvine Bogside, Prestwick, Western Gailes, Glasgow Gailes and Kilmarnock Barassie.  As time has passed, I can no longer link in my mind all of the sights from each course.  I assume that while there was some development around the courses when they were originally built, since then an airport, warehouses and factories, all quite visible, have certainly been added to the landscape.  Do these industrial sites and sights detract from the golf experience?  I suppose that's personal.  But I took away only positives.  We stayed in the same old town, Troon, for eight or nine days, visited local restaurants, pubs and bars, met some locals, all, like the views from the courses, part of the rich context of our Scottish golf experience.  Frankly, if I were to visit the Aberdeen area, I'd skip Trump and go for the "real" experience at Royal Aberdeen, Murcar and Newburgh.

Carl

[Patrick_Mucci]

While I'm still waiting for Patrick to touch base with his contacts at the Golf Channel to find out about Trump approving episodes of Donald J. Trump's Fabulous World of Golf, I simply made an inquiry with someone at Golf Channel in media relations. Here's what he came back with:


Robert, try being honest when we engage in these discussions/debates.

In your reply # 91, here's what you stated:[/b]

I have some contacts at GC. I'll contact them tomorrow to see who exactly is financing the show and whether Trump has approval over the final result.

[/i]

To which I replied in reply # 92:[/b]

So do I, Sounds like a great idea, you go first.

You deliberately misrepresented my clearly stated position, by indicating that you were waiting for me to report back first.
Thus I have to question your objectivity and your intellectual honesty.
As they say, false in one, false in many.
If you're going to resort to being deceitful, I have no interest in continuing a discusson/debate with you subsequent to this post.[/b]

From Jeremy Friedman, Media Relations, Golf Channel:

"Regarding the Trump series, Golf Channel retains sole creative control of the series as we are the sole copyright holder.  Donald Trump does see the shows before they air, but simply to make sure we haven't mis-represented his brand in any way. That said, we respect Mr. Trump’s point of view and if there are things he suggests regarding the show, we will listen and sometimes implement, but the final creative decisions are solely those of the Golf Channel.  The Workshop is a production company that we (Golf Channel) hired to produce the series.  We collaborate but ultimately they execute our direction.  The Workshop also produces The Haney Project series for us."

This is what I stated, while you and others claimed that Donald Trump exercised broad based editorial control.
You were wrong, I was right.
Next case.[/b]

So I guess it is a not clear cut.

It sure is clear cut.
"THE GOLF CHANNEL RETAINS SOLE CREATIVE CONTROL.
It doesn't get much clearer than that.
If you weren't so biased against him you would recognize the meaning of "sole creative control"
Case closed.  
Next[/b]

Does Trump see them in advance? Sure does, though I'm not sure whaet "mis-represented his brand in any way," means.

Sure you are, unless you're just playing dumb.[/b]

I read that to say the program doesn't include anything that Trump does not want included.

That's PURE BS and you know it.
"SOLE CREATIVE CONTROL" says it all.
If you don't know what protecting the "Trump Brand" is, contact an attorney for assistance.
In addition to failing to be objective, you're being disengenuous. [/b]

Of course, they do say Trump presents, "his point of view," and "we will listen."

Robert, I realize how difficult it is for you to admit, defeat, but, it's game, set, match.
It's over.
The Golf Channel retains "SOLE CREATIVE CONTROL". It doesn't get any clearer than that.
[/b]

To me this is typical corporate speak. The Golf Channel "maintains" editorial control, but for fear of "misrepresenting" Trump, they allow him to clearly provide his perspective.

Robert, Robert, Robert,  No twisting of words to try to justify your uninformed opinion will suffice.
It's over, "THE GOLF CHANNEL RETAINS SOLE CREATIVE CONTROL"

Have a nice day(; [/b]

And if Golf Channel wants to continue its affiliation with Trump, I think the writing is clear.

Only in your mind[/b]

[Patrick_Mucci]

"...and while I'm in the mood for having a rant. Lets address the question of the "berm" fronting the houses. I'm not really familiar with that term but presumably it means some sort of artificial dune or mounding used to screen out the houses. Mr Trump, and yes I'm assuming it was his decision to screen the houses, seems to think this a good idea.

"Berming" and "screening" are common, modern day, architectural features.

Time and time again, Tom Huckaby and others on this site have indicated how important the views beyond the property lines are.
If an object, a factory, open pit or homes are deemed to be an eyesore, why wouldn't you berm them to enhance the golf course and the golf course experience.

What's the difference between a well landscaped berm and/or row of trees and another house or better yet, a  maintainance barn  ?
Would you rather look at another house, a maintainance barn or a natural appearing, landscaped berm ?"


Patrick - who says I think those houses are an eyesore or indeed take anything away from the view ?

Niall, it's not what you think, it's what the developer thinks.
If he thinks the houses have a negative impact on the presentation, he's free to act within the law and berm or screen those houses from views from the golf course.[/b]

With respect to Tom Huckaby et al I was talking about Scottish Golf and a Scottish golf course and suggesting that buildings, rather than detract from the view actually add to it by giving the course a sense of place. When you're standing on the 17th tee at the Old Course what would you rather play over, a certain letter fixed to the shed or a row of nice conifers ? Patrick, its all about context and an artificial berm or screen or whatever you want to call it adds nothing other than expense, and I may add makes the Trump organisation seem petty.

I don't think you can compare the surrounding environment in St Andrews to that of the site at Aberdeen.
Artificial berms can be made to look quite natural.
Would the berms eliminate views from those houses ?  Probably, but, what it houses were built where the berm would be located ?
As to them being "petty", I think he's trying to achieve perfection.  Can the two intersect ?  Probably.[/b] 

"what's the difference between a well landscaped berm and/or row of trees and another house or better yet, a  maintainance barn  ?
Would you rather look at another house, a maintainance barn or a natural appearing, landscaped berm ?

You can't have it both ways."

Patrick - See my answer above.

Ditto[/b]

"Just look at where Sebonack put their maintainance barn and staff residence building.
Immediately adjacent to the 5th hole at NGLA.
So, NGLA bermed it.
Should they have left it open ?

You can't have it both ways.(;[/b] "

Patrick - I've never been to Sebonack or NGLA so not really equipped to pass comment but let me suggest that while you have come up with some apt examples on this thread, in this case citing two courses on the other side of the world might not be the most relevant. I suggest you reread my original post and consider the points I'm making about the context of where this course is being built.


I understand that.
There seems to be a conflict of golfing cultures.
But, isn't that tangential to the conflict that development brings in general ?
Status quo versus change ?[/b]

"Let's not lose sight of the fact that these courses were crafted 300 years ago, not last week.
You can't compare the creation of courses removed centuries from each other when the development process was seperated by light years"

Patrick - golf has been played at both TOC and North Berwick for hundreds of years and in that time both courses have been continually evolving like every other course of the age and yet in that continual process of alterations no-one has planted trees and created a screen to block out the town. And as for comparing a modern design with architecture of the past, is that not what the bulk of the threads on this site are about in one way or another. As a great man once said, you can't have it both ways.


Part of that view point is rooted in the fact that the town was always there
It wasn't like TOC was an isolated spit of land with nothing nearby.
The genesis and evolutionary process of both courses is light years apart, physically and culturally.
One took centuries to evolve, the other's can be measured in months.  [/b]

[Jordan Caron]

Bob Huntley,

You know that I respect you and your opinions, but, you're missing a critical point.

It's "showtime", he's on, he's performing.

Do you think that "The Apprentice" would have been popular if he was a nondescript milktoast.

The guy knows how to promote and he produces quality projects, in his buildings, TV shows and Golf Clubs.

He's also very, very smart.

Like Don King, his hairstyle is part of his persona.

He can be a very funny, very personable individual, but, he's not on TV to act like the normal every day citizen or golfer.

It's an act and he's fooled you all.

I found the episode to be very good.  Outside of his views and opinions on CGA, he is a very intelligent man.  He seems to be a personable guy as witnessed by his exchange with son Don Jr over placement of the tennis courts.  He later said he should have gave the proper recognition for the idea to Don Jr but wasn't sure.  At any rate you could tell he thought it was funny that he missed Don Jr mentioning this. 

So people think he's ego driven and treats his employees harsh, I think of it as he's doing everything he can to teach his employees everything about business in general.  I would be trying to learn as much as I could off him and would like him to be as honest as possible. 

On last note, I really think he dropped the ball during the promo photo session.  He had to Scottish bag pipe players behind him yet he was swinging at Taylormade R9.  He should have had a old hickory shafted club if he wants to really honor the history of the game. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kevin Lynch,

If Donald Trump didn't sell the houses to the owners, with the inducement of spectacular views, he has no obligation to perpetuate those views.

If you buy a house, and while looking across the street, there are open lots that provide you with a nice view of woods and mountains or the ocean in the backround, does that mean that another person can't buy that lot and build a home for themselves, because it blocks your view  ?

Doug Seibert,

Eminent Domain is NOT solely about tax revenues.
In many cases it's about improving the community.
Without the exercise of eminent domain, you'll NEVER revitalize the cities.

As to your NGLA example, you're forgetting about zoning laws.

How quickly you forget what almost happened at Deepdale.

Niall,

I think the discussion has expanded far beyond your categorization.

As exhibit "A" I would cite Carl Johnson's post, whereby he's already, without ever having played or seen the golf course, decided that it's an inferior golf course not worthy of play.

I think this was the same Carl Nichols who made the same claims against Bandon, Whistling Straits and Pinehurst.