[MCirba]

David,

You're correct and that was my mistake, sorry.

I cut and paste that quote from a .pdf of the book which garbled a few words and in correcting I mistook "competition" with "condition".

**EDIT** -  I also just realized that the electronic version of the book seems somewhat abridged from the hardbound version I have at home.

As related to our earlier discussion about the state of development of the golf course at various times, this morning I was reading the hardbound version and CBM tells a story about the state of the course by the fall of 1907 and how while having lunch at Shinnecock a good friend of his had to walk away rather than shed tears for his friend.   I find that story to be at odds with an earlier posted article from early 1908 which stated the golf course was essentially almost ready to go.

Would someone be so kind as to reproduce that snippet here?

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

As to field work in the winter, there is no reason not to do it. I have. If memory serves, Tom Doak's first walk of neighboring Seonak was on a bitter cold day.  Sometimes, on heavily wooded sites, its easier to see through the trees with leaves off.

As I said on the earlier post, CBM and team may have had more than a few holes laid out before the actual option, but your schedule did note that the surveying occurred after the option.  That makes sense to me. And, it makes sense that this is when the property line was settled upon.

And again, you might be right that by the exact date of Dec 1906 newspaper article the whole idea of 90 acres for Founders cottages was dead, but I simply think it lasted in principle because of CBM's later notes, and perhaps as a tangible goal until May of 1907, when they figured out that there was room to do both well.

I have no real heartburn if it would be determined it was unfeasible was a bit earlier, as you say.  I don't think we can know, and I don't see the need for endless arguments.  Most of the other stuff is red herring, IMHO.

[Bryan Izatt]

Sven,

I don't know who the two parties to the original transaction were.  Your posted snippet suggests that CBM and wife were the buyers in 2007  and then sold it to NGLA in 1910.  When/if we get the deeds it'll be clear the who, when and where of the original purchase and the subsequent clubhouse site purchase.

[Bryan Izatt]

David,

The last paragraph of the article provides a pretty loose description of the property.  In fact it pretty much includes all of Sebonac Neck.  The 205 acre property doesn't skirt the RR in the south and goes nowhere near the inlet to Cold Spring Pond in the west. The plot described would be well over 500 acres.  So, the 250 acres looks like a mistake and the site location description is wrong.  I'm glad you think that the maps, undulations and mail part is correct.

Here is the Oct. 16, 1906 Boston Globe article discussing the acquisition:



There are obviously a few potential inaccuracies with this article.  For example the purchase had not yet taken place, although it is possible that CBM and HJW had reached an informal agreement. (My guess is that CBM/HJW or Travis let it slip that the developer had agreed to sell CBM property for the golf course.)  Also, the acreage is reported at 250 and not 205 yards.  Not sure if this is a mistake or whether CBM had not yet narrowed it down to 205.  Sebonac neck fits the physical description.  (Surely Mike will now relaunch his old theory about a mystery third site, but hopefully the rest of us won't take the bait.)

The reason I reposted the article is that it indicates that CBM and HJW (and perhaps Travis) had already been hard at work studying the contours, and that elevation maps had already been made and sent to overseas advisors.

[MCirba]

It’s good to see we’ve reached a point where it seems evident that there was ongoing communications and coordination to some degree between the Real Estate Developer and Macdonald.   I’ll be very interested to see what Bryan’s source is able to reveal as relates to their correspondence.   The Goddard book “Colonizing Southampton” certainly alludes to their collaboration regarding the site of the new Shinnecock Inn, which would need to be close to available transportation;

”A new site for the hotel was selected a little to the east of the Hills depot and at the southern tip of the projected National Golf Links.   This was no doubt deliberate.  In 1907, Charles Macdonald had no immediate plans for a club house, and it would have made eminent sense to Redfield that the many well-heeled golfers expected to descend on the National would need a place to stay.”

“As it turned out, he and the railroad also thought to move the Golf Grounds Station farther to the west and closer to the hotel (and thus to the National) but was stopped by the Shinnecock Hills Golf Club, or, rather, by its combustible president, Judge Horace Russell.   Russell, a self-described old railroad man himself who knew what it meant “to submit to the whimsical caprices of residents along the line of the road,” wrote to the LIRR’s president that “it would not serve anybody’s convenience, so far as the golf club is concerned, if it were to be moved to the west end of the golf club property; the Railroad Company might just was well discontinue the station altogether.”  That ended that, but one might well wonder if Redfield threw in the removal of the depot to sweeten the deal with Macdonald.   We will never know.   But the hotel went up in 1907 and was open for business that summer.”

Again, I think this is important to keep in mind as one considers the chain of events.   I’m certainly open to changing my opinion as any new evidence warrants but this is what it seems like to me;

1904 – CBM drafts an Agreement which he sends to subscribers asking them to become Founding members of his club.   Included in the Agreement is this language;

” Assuming that we buy 200 acres, it would take about 110 acres to lay out the golf course proper, and five acres for a clubhouse and accessories.   We would give to each subscriber an acre and a half of ground in fee simple.   The ground in itself should be worth $500 an acre in the vicinity of a golf course of this character.”

It should be noted that CBM is estimating exact numbers as he says “about 110 acres”, but it’s clear the implication is that whatever is left over after the golf course is completed will be split between the Founders.   His mention of the value of the land once the course is built is clearly meant as financial enticement, as an investment.

Macdonald also told us that he had 60 subscribers signed up at the time he made offers on land so it’s clear all involved bought into this “Agreement”.

1905/06 – CBM offers the Real Estate Developer $200 an acre for 120 acres of land near the Shinnecock Canal but the owner refuses.   That area is right smack dab where the developer is having Olmsted & Vaux survey and sub-divide 1320 acres of recently purchased land into lots ranging in size from 3 acres to 5 acres.  

Clearly at that time Macdonald thought he could build his Ideal course on 120 acres of land.   There would be no need for a housing component because he would have been aware of the Developers plans for creating housing plots on the land in that area.  At that price they could have probably also built a clubhouse from the get-go.

Since CBM thought he could fit his course on that 120 acres, what was so special or different about that land versus the Sebonac Neck site where he suddenly supposedly felt he needed 67% more acreage for his golf course?   Did he survey that 120 acre site first prior to making his offer?   Did he clear the land prior to making an offer?   Did he route a golf course on the 120 acres prior?   I sense no.   I think he looked at the land for the type of soils and terrain he wanted and in his own words, “Having the material in hand to work upon, the completion of an ideal course becomes a matter of experience, gardening, and mathematics.”

1906 -  CBM considers 450 acres of land up in Sebonac Neck, which was overgrown, insect-infested, had never been surveyed for housing, and CBM tells us ”every one thought it more or less worthless”.   It was simply outside of the Developers plans and there were no plans to create housing lots “adjacent” to the course as David suggested, beyond a single plot or two adjacent to today’s 9th green at the southern boundary of the course.  In fact, almost all of the land adjacent to the golf course is today holes on the Shinnecock Hills and Sebonack golf courses!

What’s more, the proposed lots that CBM had in mind would be sized based on whatever was left over after the golf course was routed and divided accordingly to a maximum of 1.5 acre lots or smaller.   I’m not sure how these would have been seen “in competition” with the 3 to 5 acre luxury sites the Developer intended on land they were already surveying?

Complicating factors of the Sebonac Neck site included accessibility, lodging, but I’m sure the developer would have told him about plans for the Shinnecock Inn, as Goddard suggests.  

In Macdonald’s words, “So Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over it, studying the contours of the ground.   Finally we determined it was what we wanted, providing we could get it reasonably…the company agreed to sell us 205 acres and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purpose”

That contract securing the land was signed on Friday, December 14, 1906, again at $200 per acre.  That weekend multiple newspapers reported that the land deal for Founders usage was part of the Agreement.   The Brooklyn Daily Eagle probably had the best information at that time, at least casting a bit of doubt when they wrote, "While the matter is not settled it is likely that the bordering land not required for the links will be set apart in individual parcels for the founders who may eventually build summer cottages thereon."

If indeed the Real Estate Developer had been concerned about real estate competition on land they considered worthless, can you imagine how they would have freaked when every major New York City newspaper ran with the story of CBM providing 60 building lots?   If indeed this wasn’t still part of Macdonald’s Agreement plan with the well-heeled Founders in late 1906 can you imagine how CBM would have freaked when that was reported?

 After that 1906 agreement was reached, CBM tells us the next steps; “Again, we studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted.”

That is consistent with the December 1906 newspaper articles where Macdonald is quoted as saying the next several months would be devoted to selecting the holes and planning the course in detail, after which the boundaries would be staked out and plaster models would be created to guide the builders.  

Obviously, the course that was then routed and built took up much more land than Macdonald’s original projections.   But even with that he addressed the issue of “Surplus Land” again in his 1912 letter to the membership where he referred to the Original Agreement as follows;

“You will note in the original subscription it was stated that there would be some acres of land which would not be required for the golf course proper.   This has proved to be true, and this land is at the disposal of the Founders, but you will note in the minutes of the Founders' meeting of December 20th, 1911, that no action was taken in the matter, it being left to the wishes of the Founders, to be expressed at some future time.”  

Macdonald wrote, again in 1912;

Some six years ago the idea was formulated of establishing a classic golf course in America, one which would be designed after and eventually compared favorably with the championship links abroad and serve as an incentive to the elevation of the game in the United States...There is attached a copy of the original agreement, the spirit of which has been carried out as closely as has been consistent with the object which the Founders had in view.

Frankly, I think Macdonald really didn’t care much to provide a housing component as time went on and clearly his first priority was the excellence of the golf course.   But to say he had already scrapped his plans for housing by the time he inked the agreement in December 1906 is baseless, frankly, and if there is any hard evidence to the contrary I’d ask that we finally get to see it here.

I think perhaps Bryan Izatt had the best summation a few days back when he wrote;

It was said multiple times that the intention was to build the course on 110 acres with 5 acres for the club-house and ancillary buildings and 90 acres for land for the founders.  It was also said that they needed to buy 200 or more acres.  Curious that they didn't do the math and say 205 or more acres.

When do you suppose in the process that CBM determined that he couldn't actually fit his ideal course on 110 acres?  Would it have been after the course was designed and he had the site surveyed?  Were CBM or the others experts on estimating acreage; 110 or 205 acres covers a lot of ground?  I doubt that most people could guesstimate areas that large.

If we take CBM's simplistic description of the property as a rectangle 2 miles long by 4 acres wide that most likely meant the rectangle was 280 yards wide.  If you ascribe a 100 yard wide corridor going out and another 100 yard wide corridor coming back in, that leaves a corridor of say 40 yards on either side.  Given that site was 2 miles long in the simplistic description, the exterior corridors could support close to 60 lots.  Now, I don't believe for a moment that the site was actually a rectangle.  I think CBM simplified it that way for the press and potential members.  But, in simplistic mathematical terms I can see how he thought there would be enough rooms on a 205 acre site.  

Of course, that would all go awry in a real world routing on a real world topographical site.  Perhaps he knew the course wan't going to work on a 110 acre site when he finished the routing.  Or, maybe it only became clear when he had the site surveyed afterwards.  Or, maybe the 1.5 acre plots were just a come-on for the investors and were never intended to be real.  Given that he made an early offer on the 120 acre site near the canal suggests to me that initially he may not have understood that his ideal course of template holes using some existing natural features wasn't going to fit on that small a plot, although, I guess, Merion subsequently managed to get a pretty good, although tightly constrained, course on 120 acres.

I just thought I would take one last opportunity to clear up how I think things happened.   Again, I’m open to change my opinion if people have any actual facts or hard evidence indicating differently rather than just stating their own opinions repeatedly.   Thanks.

[DMoriarty]

Jim,  

It was CBM who wrote the subscription letter agreement, but that was in 1904.  The hypothetical about the 90 acres of housing did not control what CBM was specifically planning to do in 1906 on this particular piece of property.  

Your version of what "Mike simply thinks . . ." is very different than Mike's version.  According to Mike, in December 1906 CBM intended to subdivide the NGLA property into 60-70 building lots for the Founders, and the reason that he didn't was because during planning and construction CBM made the fairways wider than he anticipated, and there were more swamps than he realized.

As for your comments on the Founders vs. the Board, I fail to see the significance to the issue at hand. It looks to me like in CBM's eyes, the club belonged to the Founders. Founders elected the Board to run the club, but the Founders also reserved certain powers to themselves such as approving/disapproving membership sales and the disposition of excess land.  I don't think such an  arrangement is at all unusual, nor do I think that dwelling on it helps us understand whether CBM specifically intended to carve 60 residential lots out of the NGLA property.
__________________________________________________________

Jeff,

There is a very simple explanation as to why CBM didn't take 1.5AC of land within NGLA - He wanted a 200 acre estate and bought one right next door.

Applying your same logic, there is a very simple explanation of why CBM never carved out 60-70 residential lots out of the NGLA property --He wanted from the beginning to use the entire parcel for a golf course.

I am not sure how you can look at that graphic and claim the border hugs the golf course in its entirety.  You seem to be ignoring it to make your point. It does everywhere but the 17th, where there is an extra 60-90 yards of land from the edge of the fairway.  CBM said there was extra land after the fact, the map shows extra land by 17, so really, that has to be what he was talking about, no?

Again, Jeff, you are misunderstanding my position.  What I said was that the eastern border was locked by the physical characteristics of the property (Peconic Bay, Bullshead Bay, Shinnecock GC), and it had already been determined by mid December 1906.  CBM only had room to manipulate the border to the west, and the eastern border fits snugly to property.  

As to field work in the winter, there is no reason not to do it. I have. If memory serves, Tom Doak's first walk of neighboring Seonak was on a bitter cold day.  Sometimes, on heavily wooded sites, its easier to see through the trees with leaves off.

I am not sure that what professional architects would do in 2015 is necessarily the same what a NY socialite would do in 1906. Southampton was a largely a Summer colony for the social elite, and not a lot was ongoing in the Winter.  Maybe CBM and HJW trekked out there in the winter.  Or maybe they hired Raynor to do some additional surveying on the land they had been carefully studying at the end of the previous season.  But I am not sure I buy the suggestion that they didn't do much of anything in the summer and fall, but then ramped up their activities in the winter.

(Also, we aren't talking about a heavily wooded forest of mature trees, we are talking about a property overrun with huckleberry bushes.)

As I said on the earlier post, CBM and team may have had more than a few holes laid out before the actual option, but your schedule did note that the surveying occurred after the option.  That makes sense to me. And, it makes sense that this is when the property line was settled upon.

The October 16, 1906, Boston Globe article indicates that they had already created maps with elevations by that date.  More formal surveying apparently occurred after December 1906 as well.

[MCirba]

David,

I've expressed, in detail, what I believe above.   Please feel free to quote directly from it.

Other than that, I'd ask that you refrain from paraphrasing and mis-characterizing what I "think" and "believe" in your own words.   Please trust people to read what I write for themselves and I trust you can do the same.

[MCirba]

Here's what CBM wrote in 1912 regarding most of the men mentioned in that Boston Globe article, for what it's worth;

We have also been helped by some of
the most eminent men in the game of golf
abroad, who have taken a most friendly
interest in the undertaking, and I have to
thank among these Mr. Horace G. Hutchinson,
Mr. John L. Low, Mr. 'Harold
H. Hilton, Mr. J. Sutherland, Mr. W. T.
Linskill, the Messrs. Walter and Charles
Whigham, Mr. Patrick Murray, Mr. Alexander
MacFee, and the late Mr. C. H
S. Everard, for the maps, photographs,
and suggestions which they have given us.

[DMoriarty]

David,

I've expressed, in detail, what I believe above.   Please feel free to quote directly from it.

Other than that, I'd ask that you refrain from paraphrasing and mis-characterizing what I "think" and "believe" in your own words.   Please trust people to read what I write for themselves and I trust you can do the same.

Mike, I mischaracterized NOTHING. Here is what I wrote about your position to Jim above:
Jim,
Your version of what "Mike simply thinks . . ." is very different than Mike's version.  According to Mike, in December 1906 CBM intended to subdivide the NGLA property into 60-70 building lots for the Founders, and the reason that he didn't was because during planning and construction CBM made the fairways wider than he anticipated, and there were more swamps than he realized.

Here is the same information, only with direct quotes:
Jim,
Your version of what "Mike simply thinks . . ." is very different than Mike's version.  According to Mike, as of December 1906, "nothing at all had changed from CBM's original plan to purchase 200 or so acres of which he estimated needing about 110 acres for golf and the rest for housing lots available to the Founders. His plans changed after this, either during the routing or construction processes."  According to Mike, CBM's "plans changed" for two reasons:  "First, I think more of the acreage was swampy and unusable than perhaps CBM realized. . . . Also, I think that the plan to create alternative routes for the weaker player on every hole meant that the course became effectively much wider than originally estimated."

As you can see I misrepresented nothing.  

Speaking of misrepresentations, I've read your latest version of what believe. I'll get to it in due course.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Sure, why not.....it ain't a thread until it hits 20 pages!

[DMoriarty]

David,

Sure, why not.....it ain't a thread until it hits 20 pages!

Jeff, I just noticed that I misspoke in my last post to you.  It should read, "CBM only had room to manipulate the border to the west, and the western border fits snugly to golf course."  I don't want to change it now else I be falsely accused of shenanigans.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Thanks. I noticed and thought you had it backwards, but wasn't going to say much, thinking my position, which is similar to Bryan's and maybe Mike's, but allows that you might be right on earlier timing, has been reiterated enough.

[MCirba]

As seen earlier, the first publication of the routing was published in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle on August 26, 1907.   That article refers to another published two weeks prior, which I've located.

It's probably the best article to date in terms of a "real time" report on the state of construction.  It's likely that this was some of what made Macdonald's good friend nearly come to tears as recounted in "Scotland's Gift".   Does anyone have that snippet handy to post?

[MCirba]

Mike, I mischaracterized NOTHING. Here is what I wrote about your position to Jim above:
Jim,
Your version of what "Mike simply thinks . . ." is very different than Mike's version.  According to Mike, in December 1906 CBM intended to subdivide the NGLA property into 60-70 building lots for the Founders, and the reason that he didn't was because during planning and construction CBM made the fairways wider than he anticipated, and there were more swamps than he realized.

Here is the same information, only with direct quotes:
Jim,
Your version of what "Mike simply thinks . . ." is very different than Mike's version.  According to Mike, as of December 1906, "nothing at all had changed from CBM's original plan to purchase 200 or so acres of which he estimated needing about 110 acres for golf and the rest for housing lots available to the Founders. His plans changed after this, either during the routing or construction processes."  According to Mike, CBM's "plans changed" for two reasons:  "First, I think more of the acreage was swampy and unusable than perhaps CBM realized. . . . Also, I think that the plan to create alternative routes for the weaker player on every hole meant that the course became effectively much wider than originally estimated."

As you can see I misrepresented nothing.  

Speaking of misrepresentations, I've read your latest version of what believe. I'll get to it in due course.

David,

Don't be so pedantic and stop wasting your time characterizing what I write.   No one, probably not even Patrick at this point, seems to be buying it, so just stop.

The plan to have a real estate component with whatever land wasn't used for the golf course hadn't changed by December 1906.   It's not that big a deal.   Your repeated insistence that it had to be 90 acres is really just repeating what CBM originally estimated and that unused amount obviously changed over time with the subsequent design and construction process in 1907.

If you have evidence otherwise please just produce it and I'll change my mind if it's warranted and I'm sure others here will as well.

Thanks.

[Sven Nilsen]

So in 1904 CBM has a plan to purchase 200 or so acres and use 115 for the golf course and clubhouse, with the extra to be used for building lots.

In 1905/06 he makes an offer on 120 acres.  Seems to me he had already abandoned the housing idea. 

As to why he went from 110/115/120 to 205 for the land needed for the course, this was before his trip overseas, during which (or shortly after) he finalized the concept of his ideal course.  This was also during a time when courses were being built at greater lengths than they had been previously, specifically right during the time golf in this country was adapting to the new golf ball.

Seems pretty basic to me.

Sven

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sven,

Yes, but in 1910, he advised Merion that they only needed 100 acres, and discussed 120.  However, I have a pet theory that he felt they needed 120, and recommended the 100 to help them lower the price of surrounding properties should anyone catch on they were buying and needed so much.

Either way, the recommendation came after NGLA was complete, and I wonder why he went back to that when NGLA obviously took so much more land?  At 6100 yards it wasn't that long, and Merion came out a bit longer.

[Sven Nilsen]

Sven,

Yes, but in 1910, he advised Merion that they only needed 100 acres, and discussed 120.  However, I have a pet theory that he felt they needed 120, and recommended the 100 to help them lower the price of surrounding properties should anyone catch on they were buying and needed so much.

Either way, the recommendation came after NGLA was complete, and I wonder why he went back to that when NGLA obviously took so much more land?  At 6100 yards it wasn't that long, and Merion came out a bit longer.

Jeff:

I think those are very site specific questions.  The constraints at each location were not the same.

Sven

[MCirba]

Here's a bit more on the clubhouse and on the state of the golf course in August 1909 from the "Brooklyn Daily Eagle"




Sven,

There was no need for building lots on the 120 acre site CBM offered to buy because that site and another 1300 or so acres in that area was already being surveyed for 3 to 5 acre building lots by Olmsted and Vaux for the Real Estate Company who owned the land and would have likely been surrounded by houses galore.  

The Sebonac Neck site on the other had had been deemed worthless and had not been surveyed for those purposes.

***EDIT*** I just saw your reply to Jeff and would ask you this question.

I posted the topo map of the region earlier.   What do you think would have been so markedly different between the two sites that would make CBM think he could be a golf course on 120 acres at one site yet require 67% more land at the other?

[Sven Nilsen]

So he didn't have to fulfill his promise to the founders to make lots on property available?  He was off the hook?

Doesn't seem like it was that strong a sticking point in the original deal, does it?

Sven

[MCirba]

Sven,

I just posted this question above and then saw your response so I'll ask again here.

I posted the topo map of the region earlier.   What do you think would have been so markedly different between the two sites that would make CBM think he could build a golf course on 120 acres at one site yet require 70% more land at 205 acres at the other?

As far as the housing component being dropped for the first site, I'm sure they would have figured out what to do with the savings.   Perhaps build a clubhouse?

[DMoriarty]

Sven,

Yes, but in 1910, he advised Merion that they only needed 100 acres . . .

Jeff.  That is just not true.  CBM did NOT advise Merion that they only needed 100 acres!  When CBM/HJW first went over the site, Merion was considering purchase of about 120 Acres, and CBM advised them that they probably needed a bit more land.  Here is part of what he told them:  "The most difficult problem you have to contend with is to get in eighteen holes that will be first class in the acreage you propose buying.  So far as we can judge, without a contour map before us, we are of the opinion that it can be done, provided you get a little more land near where you propose making your Club House."   Please lets not inject fictional accounts about Merion into this thread. Thanks.

Also, NGLA's 6100 yardage was from the regular tees. The course was quite a lot longer from the back tees even then.

I think Sven has it about right regarding the reason CBM needed ended up wanting more acreage at NGLA.  I'd add that CBM wasn't working off of some architect's formula about distances and width needed. He was finding his ideal golf holes, then drawing a property line around what had found!  And he had 450 acres of great golf land within which do find the holes.   The course ended up being 205 Acres because CBM wanted to use all of the incredible landforms he found which fit in with his ideas on the ideal golf course.  
__________________________

Mike,  That's what you wrote.  I've mischaracterized nothing.  Glad to see though that you seem to be backtracking on your ridiculous position about the 90 acres. Finally!  I hope it keeps up so we can get somewhere.

[Sven Nilsen]

Mike:

I think his idea of what exactly he wanted to build changed from early 1906 to late 1906.  As discussed on the Lido thread, NGLA came out longer than he had discussed in his original article of an ideal course.  

I also think that the deal they got on the "undesirable" land allowed them to purchase more of it, and to spread the course out on the property in a way that they couldn't have done on a tighter more expensive site, the opposite of what was done later at Merion (as pointed out by Jeff).

It is also possible that he had seriously underestimated how much land it would take to build what he wanted.  The practice in the US to that point had been to get by with 100-120 acre sites, particularly in close proximity to major urban areas.  Then again, perhaps it was the land itself at Sebonac Neck that necessitated a larger site, or perhaps those natural features he looked to blend into his templates were more spread out, creating a space between the holes in a way that wouldn't have been replicated on another site.

Sven

[Sven Nilsen]

David:

Judging by the contents of our last two posts (which crossed in the mail), I think we're on the same page.

Sven

[DMoriarty]

Sven,

I agree.  We are on the same page.
_________________________________________________

Here's a bit more on the clubhouse and on the state of the golf course in August 1909 from the "Brooklyn Daily Eagle"
Sven,

There was no need for building lots on the 120 acre site CBM offered to buy because that site and another 1300 or so acres in that area was already being surveyed for 3 to 5 acre building lots by Olmsted and Vaux for the Real Estate Company who owned the land and would have likely been surrounded by houses galore.  

The Sebonac Neck site on the other had had been deemed worthless and had not been surveyed for those purposes.

The same logic applies equally to NGLA's current location.

The bit about the Sebonac neck property being worthless and somehow remote from the rest of the development just isn't true.  

[MCirba]

Sven,

Thanks for the thoughtful response.  I just think it happened a bit later than you suggest and I'd simply note that the price per acre was identical at both sites, $200.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()