[DMoriarty]

David,

You are creating a straw horse to continue an argument. Everyone knows there was never a formal land plan of 1.5Ac lots.  
The only questions are how serious he was about it, and when the idea fell by the wayside. No point in bringing it up for the umpteenth time, is there?

Am I?  Mike has been arguing throughout that at the time he secured the land in December 1906, CBM was planning on using 90+ acres for housing lots for the Founders.  Here is what Mike said on the topic in his post No. 98, (his emphasis, not mine):

And yes, that particular article seems taken directly from the wording of CBM's solicitation letter to the Founders that he originally distributed in 1904.   All this really tells us is that 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.   I really don't believe that CBM was simply luring in investors with promises of golf course real estate if he never intended it in the first place.   No, instead it's quite clear that the original golf course/real estate plan was still in place when the land was originally secured in late 1906 and only changed subsequently, and thankfully.  

So Mike, at least, believes that "the original golf course/real estate plan was still in place" (whatever that means) and that CBM was planning on using "about 110 acres for golf and the rest for housing lots available to the Founders."  His words, not mine.

While you and I may agree that it is ridiculous to think that CBM intended 90 acres of lots on that property, Mike disagrees, and so the issue is very much not a red herring.  

In December 1906, CBM and many others had already been over the land carefully and had told us quite a lot about the routing itself. So where did the 90 acres of housing fit in?  

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

You could have chosen to highlight Mike's words, "His plans changed after this, either during the routing or construction processes" rather than ignore them and wrongly interpret for the world that he still believed the original plan of 110 acres is intact, when in fact he doesn't say what you repeatedly tell us he says.

As I have said before, we are on page 14, perhaps half devoted to your contention that CBM NEVER intended to leave any left over land for Founders, vs. our contention that it was an idea still in place, of lower priority than the golf course and thus reduced to the point of essentially being discarded.  And again, the semantics of "never" and "quickly reduced/discarded/eventually didn't pan out" is not worth arguing that much about.  

We know what you mean, you know what we mean, and we all know what the record says and what ended up on the ground.

There really isn't any reason for this thread anymore, unless Pat is going to produce what appears to be some erroneous info he got from NGLA regarding how much land was available beyond 9 green for the original clubhouse location so we can have a clearer idea of where the original clubhouse was intended.  Or, if anyone wants to discuss the original premise that somehow, the out and back routing was a "concession" (whatever that means) to early UK courses.  I know it doesn't mean "homage" because he corrected me on that one......

[DMoriarty]

I'm afraid I don't follow, Jeff.  According to Mike, as of mid December 1906 the plan for 90+ Acres of housing for the Founders was still intact.  Read what he wrote.  He told us exactly what I said he told us.  

As for your second paragraph, you've misrepresented my position.  I have always maintained that the founders would control any left-over land!   The question has always been, as of Mid-dec 1906, whether CBM was planning a large scale real estate component.

It doesn't advance the conversation for you to ignore Mike's words while at the same time mischaractizing mine.

[Bryan Izatt]

Just out of curiosity, what is "The Golf Club Atlas Team" and who is on it?

As a counterpoint to David's (presumably) facetious response, I think it works like this.  Every post has a "report to moderator" button where anybody can report a posting as being inappropriate in some way.  You can add comments on why you're reporting the post.  That report to the moderator gets picked up by the hosting company and apparently they send an email to Ran with the report and comments.  "The Golf Club Atlas Team" are the senders of the email to Ran that Mike posted.  I suspect they are the support team at the web hosting company and are just forwarding the report to moderator to Ran.  Part of the service the company provides.

[Bryan Izatt]

...............................

___________________________________________________________

Can someone help me interpret the original blue print from ToG?  I see plenty of golf features but I cannot find where they mythical 90 acres of real estate has been set aside for the founders?  Can someone point to where the supposed homesites were available?  Because it looks almost as if that wasn't really CBM's intent.    

Was this a serious question or just a taunt directed to Mike and Jeff?

Do you have a date for the blueprint?  Presumably by then CBM knew he had some surplus land but not 90 acres surplus by the time the blueprint was done, if not before.  Do you think the blueprint was done pre-purchase; after the end of the 5 months of detail planning over the winter of 06-07; or somewhere in that 5 months?

Apart from when CBM knew he didn't have 90 acres surplus, when do you suppose he told the founders?  Being the rich elite of the time I suspect they didn't care one way or the other about 1.5 acres off the edge of the world in the deserted Sebonac Neck, so maybe he didn't leap to tell them.  Apparently the press was never told that the 1.5 acre thing was moot, or at least they didn't report it.

[MCirba]

At some point in the final routing, detail hole planning, and/or construction phases Macdonald used more land for golf than he originally estimated and the course is better for it.  That was all after Dec 1906 when he secured 200 acres of overgrown swampland on Sebonac Neck..

There is no evidence at all that he changed his mind about offering building lots for the Founders before then and plenty of evidence that it was still part of the plan.

I do think we've learned a lot on this thread.

Jeff, do you think that blueprint was used to guide construction or is more an as-built.  I know Macdonald told us they would be making scale models to guide construction.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

My impression is that it was a guide to construction, as that is what blue prints were usually for, as opposed to the black line print of some of the newspaper graphics. Of course, I could be wrong.

David,

I am not sure why you don't follow.  It appears you strongly believe that CBM knew he would have no real estate left over by that Dec 1906 announcement while we think it was still in his plans, as this was mostly pre-design, certainly pre-construction. 

Or, you have some heartburn over some exact wording, such as believing we believe he would have a real subdivision plan in place for sale to others that would show on a map like a subdivision plan, which would not have happened until the end, IMHO.

We all agree the extra land, whatever was left, was for the Founders.  You seem to believe that "suggestion" for housing was only that.  We believe it was the plan (what else would they use the land for?) but got lost in the shuffle of other priorities.

I can't say it any simpler, and Mike has articulated it as well.  You have said (and Mike notes above) that we don't have any of the interim correspondence between CBM and Founders.  In other matters, it seems you would say the most logical interpretation would be that nothing changed unless it was noted in the record, but in this case, you believe that in absence of any documentation, surely it changed on a date before purchase.   And that seems to be based on final results, which we all agree contained no lots for Founders. (In fact, the open land he left now seems to be the maintenance area)

This despite the fact that CBM later says the idea of having extra land "proved to be true."  So, maybe you are hung up on the idea that Mike believes the 90 acres was "cast in stone?"  Because he isn't.......

Again, we aren't really saying that much different, if we are, it can't be proven by the record, and constantly posting slight differences of opinion between you and Mike is starting to sound silly.  We just can't know exactly how the 90 acres morphed down, although I think we all agree it was mostly because the golf course had first priority.

[Steve Lang]

  Beyond Silly! 

I'm surprised you guys aren't arguing about who burned down the Inn and profited!!

[DMoriarty]

Beyond Silly! 

I'm surprised you guys aren't arguing about who burned down the Inn and profited!!

What?  You think it a coincidence that CBM always wanted his clubhouse out on the bluff, and then the de facto clubhouse just happened to burn down . . .  Or perhaps the economic conditions after the Panic of 1907 had something to do with it . . .

Give us twenty more pages . . . we'll get there.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,
I've acknowledged to you throughout that your position and my position are not that far apart (see for example our exchange at around posts 70 and 70 for example) but Mike's position has consistently been much more extreme than your position.  He has been arguing throughout that as of mid-December 1906, after having gone carefully over the land for months, after having a number of others go over the land, and after having already told the world about significant aspects of the course routing, that CBM still intended to use the land for a 110 acre golf course 90+ acres of residential lots.  (Or if you don't want to use 90 acres, then a portion large enough for 60 building lots.)

Read what he just wrote.  No evidence that CBM had changed his mind before then?  Plenty of evidence that it is still part of the plan?  

Do you agree with Mike that there was no evidence, as of mid-December 1906, that CBM had changed his mind about including 60 residential building lots  fit for the millionaire Founders? If so, then given what CBM had already told us about the golf course, where would these 60 lots fit?

Do agree that there is plenty of evidence that, as of mid-December 1906, that CBM still planned to sub-divide the parcel into 60 residential building lots? If so, then what specifically is this evidence? What if anything did CBM say in 1906 that indicated that 60 large residential lots were still part of his plan?  
________________________________________________



Mike, Any chance you will list out, in brief bullet point form, the "plenty of evidence" that makes you so sure that, in mid-Dec. 1908, CBM was still planning on subdividing the property into a golf course and 60 large residential lots for the Founders?

[Jeff Fortson]

Just out of curiosity, what is "The Golf Club Atlas Team" and who is on it?

As a counterpoint to David's (presumably) facetious response, I think it works like this.  Every post has a "report to moderator" button where anybody can report a posting as being inappropriate in some way.  You can add comments on why you're reporting the post.  That report to the moderator gets picked up by the hosting company and apparently they send an email to Ran with the report and comments.  "The Golf Club Atlas Team" are the senders of the email to Ran that Mike posted.  I suspect they are the support team at the web hosting company and are just forwarding the report to moderator to Ran.  Part of the service the company provides.

That sounds logical.  Follow up question...  How does Mike Cirba have access to "Report to Moderator" complaints that are forwarded by a neutral web hosting/complaint center? 

Sounds more like to me that it is an independent group of contributors here that have coined themselves the "Golf Club Atlas Team".  If so, the name seems to assume a certain "we are the important and loyal people here" feel.  I could be completely wrong and maybe this is a "team" selected by Ran to give their consensus views on posters behavior here.  But, it does seem odd that Mike Cirba would have access to a formal complaint email sent to Ran unless he were a moderator.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff F.,  I was being somewhat facetious in my previous response. After looking at the email more closely, I think the email Mike posted was one automatically generated by the site host by use of the "report to moderator" function, and the "The Golf Atlas Team" is nothing but the automatic signature line in that email report.  Ran must have wanted to follow up on the complaint and he must have forwarded the message to whoever he emailed. Ran certainly did not contact me about the complaint, although I did notice that one extremely innocuous post of mine got deleted on an Oakmont thread.  The message and complaint have nothing to do with this thread, or NGLA.  Mike just thought he'd share some snippet of a private conversation here so as to prove that some anonymous person complained about me on some past thread.

I do get extremely frustrated with Mike's positions, because I feel that they are very often disingenuous and unsound, and this has been ongoing for years.  I'll try to temper my tone, but I won't stop pointing out what I consider to be the flaws in his positions.

[MCirba]

Jeff,

That email to Ran was forwarded to me by the person who complained and yes, Ran agreed and deleted the comment.

The reason David uses words like "disengenuous" to call into question my motives and character is because he has no facts or evidence of his own here to argue with as others have pointed out.  I trust others here can see that fairly obviously.

Patrick often uses the same tactic but Pat is an equal opportunity offender who at least has a sense of humor and Pat is not mean spirited at heart.  Major difference to me.

[DMoriarty]

Mike,

 A few days ago you claimed that in 1909 CBM, and others were only golfing at NGLA by dropping balls and playing a few holes which were ready before the rest ("some members and friends hit balls around various holes that may have been ready sooner than others.") Yesterday you claimed that they were only golfing over an "improvised golf course" in 1909, and you misquoted CBM as so saying.
  
The reality is that CBM did not say what you claimed.  Rather, CBM indicated that, while the conditions were rough, they were playing over the 6100 yard course in 1909, and that he even hosted an "improvised competition" with about twenty competitors.  
  
That is evidence of the type of "disingenuousness" I perceive in your posts. I guess in fairness I should acknowledge that, in the alternative, maybe that you are being genuine but you are just really bad at this. Either way it is more than a little frustrating after all these years.

[Jeff Fortson]

Thanks for clarification to all. Now let's get back to burned down hotels, dump trucks, hand rail, and road maps from 1905.

[DMoriarty]

Bryan,

My question regarding the blueprint was serious, although also somewhat rhetorical.  I don't think that anyone actually considering the property could reasonably believe that CBM intended 90 acres of lots of that property, and whenever it was actually created, the blue print gives us a glimpse into the planning process. So, I am asking, if CBM planned on sub-dividing the property into a 60 large building lots for the Founders (in addition to golf course) then where on the property would these lots fit?  And what would be left for the golf course?  

Do you have a date for the blueprint?

I don't have a date for the blueprint. My best guess would be pre-construction 1907.  There are center line numbers which are unfortunately indecipherable.  They could be yardages, but since they don't seem to be in uniform gaps from hole-to-hole I wonder if they are elevations.  It least one early course description contained center-line elevation changes, and seeing those center-line figures makes me wonder if there is some connection.

Presumably by then CBM knew he had some surplus land but not 90 acres surplus by the time the blueprint was done, if not before.  Do you think the blueprint was done pre-purchase; after the end of the 5 months of detail planning over the winter of 06-07; or somewhere in that 5 months?

I think it was quite obvious that he knew there was no room to divide up land into 60 building lots for founders by the time the blueprint was created.  I think the more pertinent question is, when was the course being planned? The various press accounts and CBM quotes indicate that planning process was already well under way (but not yet completed) by mid-December 1906. CBM had already told us about the location of four famous (or soon to be famous) holes, the location and general dimensions of the course, the quarter-mile frontage on Peconic Bay, the one mile frontage on Bulls Head Bay, the approximate location of the first and last holes, the types of other holes he wanted to build, etc.  He also told us that the property purchase would be tailored to the needs of the final, detailed plan for the golf course.  In short, even at this point, there was no room for 90 acres of building lots for 60 millionaires.

As for the date that final, detailed routing was complete (like the one depicted on the blueprint,) it seems to have been sometime the spring of 1907, at the latest.  CBM indicated he would complete the detailed plan before the purchase, and by early May 1907 (May 4, 1907 NY Evening post, IIRC), HJW offered a detailed description of much of the course, including exact yardages and hole numbers for a number of the holes.

So, as for the 90 acres of surplus land and the 1.5 acre lots, I do not think that had anything directly to do with the NGLA property.
 - The description to which you are referring was from a hypothetical in original version of the Solicitation Letter/Agreement, authored by CBM in 1904.
 - Presumably, CBM included a copy of the 1904 Agreement when he sent out his Notice That Payment was Due pursuant to this Agreement in December 1906.  In the version of the Agreement reprinted in Scotland's Gift, all of the language about the real estate scheme was not included.
 - The newspapers picked up on the language in the 1904 Agreement and presumed (mistakenly, I believe) that this was what CBM actually intended to do at NGLA.  
 - None of the extensive CBM and HJW quotes in the December 1906 articles mention a plan to divvy up the property into 60 lots for the founders.
 
So I don't think, on this particular site, that CBM ever intended to divvy 90 acres of land between the Founders (just as he never intended to divvy up land for the founders from the previous 120 Acre property he tried to purchase.)  

To try and answer your last question, I don't think the Founders ever had any expectation of receiving 1.5 Acre lots on this property, but if they did, their expectations were inconsistent with CBM's intentions.  The founders likely new that CBM had purchased the property from a huge, well-publicized development specializing in large, high end, building sites, but if they didn't then CBM told them that building sites were available.

[Bryan Izatt]

My short synopsis of the Mike - David building lots debate as best I can understand it (which is not well):

David - CBM had plenty of time to study and plan the property before he bought it and therefore knew before he bought it in 1906 that the course would take more than 110 acres and that therefore there would be no 90 acres left over for the Founders.

Mike - the Founders Agreement was part of the "press release" (or whatever precipitated the newspaper stories) in December 1906, so CBM hadn't figured out yet that there wasn't going to be 90 acres available for the Founders.

Neither protangonist has factual evidence of what CBM knew when, so it's a debate of opinions.

There, that ought to be good for a few more pages of debate about whether this synopsis is a shameful misrepresentation of their positions or not.  

[DMoriarty]

Bryan,  That synopsis is very similar to what I posted in post 126, which was my attempt to highlight the pertinent issue in dispute, but my post was largely ignored.  Here again is the pertinent part:

It occurs to me that perhaps all of this back and forth comes down to one issue, and it is one that has haunted these "discussions" for years:
When CBM agreed to purchase the NGLA land, did he already have a general idea of how his golf course would fit on that land, or not?
  -  If you believe he did have at least a general idea of how the golf course would fit on the land before he secured the property, then it is impossible to believe that CBM intended to include a large housing component on the land, because there simply was no place for it.
  -  If you don't believe he had at least a general idea of how the golf course would fit on the land before he secured the property, then you open up the possibility that he originally intended to use a large chunk of land for housing, but that somewhere during the process the realities of the actual site got in the way.

Is that a fair assessment of the fundamental difference of opinion here?

[DMoriarty]

So, Bryan, as you can guess by the above I agree with your assessment.   Where I disagree is with your statement, "Neither protangonist has factual evidence of what CBM knew when, so it's a debate of opinions."

We actually know quite a lot about what CBM was thinking by December 1906 because he had told us quite a lot about what he was intending to do with the property. And what he actually did on the property in the months that follow is further evidence of what he intended to do.

[Bryan Izatt]

Bryan,

My question regarding the blueprint was serious, although also somewhat rhetorical.  I don't think that anyone actually considering the property could reasonably believe that CBM intended 90 acres of lots of that property, and whenever it was actually created, the blue print gives us a glimpse into the planning process. So, I am asking, if CBM planned on sub-dividing the property into a 60 large building lots for the Founders (in addition to golf course) then where on the property would these lots fit?  And what would be left for the golf course?  

More rhetorical than serious to me. You're beating a dead horse here.  Nobody disagrees that the course as built on the 205 acre property did not leave 90 acres left over for the Founders.  You think knew before he purchased it and Mike thinks it's after.

Do you have a date for the blueprint?

I don't have a date for the blueprint. My best guess would be pre-construction 1907.  There are center line numbers which are unfortunately indecipherable.  They could be yardages, but since they don't seem to be in uniform gaps from hole-to-hole I wonder if they are elevations.  It least one early course description contained center-line elevation changes, and seeing those center-line figures makes me wonder if there is some connection.

George Bahto reported that the blueprint had no date on it and it evidently was somewhat deteriorated.  He also wrote that the numbers were most likely elevations.

Presumably by then CBM knew he had some surplus land but not 90 acres surplus by the time the blueprint was done, if not before.  Do you think the blueprint was done pre-purchase; after the end of the 5 months of detail planning over the winter of 06-07; or somewhere in that 5 months?

I think it was quite obvious that he knew there was no room to divide up land into 60 building lots for founders by the time the blueprint was created.  I think the more pertinent question is, when was the course being planned? The various press accounts and CBM quotes indicate that planning process was already well under way (but not yet completed) by mid-December 1906. CBM had already told us about the location of four famous (or soon to be famous) holes, the location and general dimensions of the course, the quarter-mile frontage on Peconic Bay, the one mile frontage on Bulls Head Bay, the approximate location of the first and last holes, the types of other holes he wanted to build, etc.  He also told us that the property purchase would be tailored to the needs of the final, detailed plan for the golf course.  In short, even at this point, there was no room for 90 acres of building lots for 60 millionaires.

I doubt anybody would disagree with your first statement.  Yes, there was some planning before the purchase and apparently 5 more months of detail planning after purchase.  You draw an inference that CBM knew he didn't have the 90 acres available when he bought the property.  That's your opinion and certainly possible or even probable, but it is not a fact.  We don't know for certain when he knew.

As for the date that final, detailed routing was complete (like the one depicted on the blueprint,) it seems to have been sometime the spring of 1907, at the latest.  CBM indicated he would complete the detailed plan before the purchase, and by early May 1907 (May 4, 1907 NY Evening post, IIRC), HJW offered a detailed description of much of the course, including exact yardages and hole numbers for a number of the holes.

So, as for the 90 acres of surplus land and the 1.5 acre lots, I do not think that had anything directly to do with the NGLA property.
 - The description to which you are referring was from a hypothetical in original version of the Solicitation Letter/Agreement, authored by CBM in 1904.
 - Presumably, CBM included a copy of the 1904 Agreement when he sent out his Notice That Payment was Due pursuant to this Agreement in December 1906.  In the version of the Agreement reprinted in Scotland's Gift, all of the language about the real estate scheme was not included.
 - The newspapers picked up on the language in the 1904 Agreement and presumed (mistakenly, I believe) that this was what CBM actually intended to do at NGLA.  
 - None of the extensive CBM and HJW quotes in the December 1906 articles mention a plan to divvy up the property into 60 lots for the founders.
 
So I don't think, on this particular site, that CBM ever intended to divvy 90 acres of land between the Founders (just as he never intended to divvy up land for the founders from the previous 120 Acre property he tried to purchase.)

I agree that on this property with the course he designed and built there was no room for the Founders lots.  When he knew that there wasn't enough left over can still only be inferred.  I haven't seen any factual evidence either way as to when CBM knew.

To try and answer your last question, I don't think the Founders ever had any expectation of receiving 1.5 Acre lots on this property, but if they did, their expectations were inconsistent with CBM's intentions.  The founders likely new that CBM had purchased the property from a huge, well-publicized development specializing in large, high end, building sites, but if they didn't then CBM told them that building sites were available.

Why did CBM include this inducement in the solicitation if he didn't intend it or the Founders didn't expect it to be fulfilled?  I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

[MCirba]

Macdonald ' s plan for years was to buy 200 acres on Long Island, estimating 110 needed for course and the rest for Founders lots.

If he secured 185 acres, or 224 acres, or 157 acres in Dec 1906 instead of 200 acres I'd certainly be inclined to agree with David's interpretation of events but I don't believe the number was coincidence when next day newspapers all reported the cottage component.  And yes, I know he eventually purchased 205 acres around July 1907 but forget where and why he added to his purchase. ..perhaps Pat can ask during his next seance.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

I will try it a different way, and hope I have the general timeline right.

1904- conceives ideal golf course plan
1905 - offer rejected on land near canal, totaling 120 acres for golf
1906 (Fall, if I recall) - Tours future NGLA property for  3 days, determines its what he wants, picks out some of the holes.
Dec. 1906 - Announces purchase agreement. Agreement allows him to select any 205 that suits him and gives him 3 months to finalize details.
May 1907 - Approximate on the 3 month timeline, Travers and others announce the final plan is complete.
Late 1907-8 Construction begins.

My take is that in January-March 1907,
CBM and committee finalized the routing. 
They then told a surveyor to mark the boundaries, perhaps 150 feet off the proposed centerlines they had staked out.
That came out to more like 180 acres over 110 acres. 
CBM may have considered reducing the golf course, but it was more important than the leftover land, so he kept it as designed. 
He then allocated the remaining 25 acres to hit the 205 total contracted for near current 17 for Founders land.  Is it any coincidence that it is on an existing (albeit then unimproved) road with some water view, which would be best for lots?
He may have contacted some founders, we do not know, but he obviously felt comfortable with a much reduced Founders parcel.

So, my take is similar to Mikes, in that the 90 acres fell apart during and after design, not before the purchase. We can't know if he had some idea before hand, but we do know he addressed the fact that there would be some left over land, and this proved to be true, to be used at the Founders discretion.

In some ways, this recalls the Merion debate, in which you seemed pretty certain that CBM had routed the course after a quick visit in June, despite writings saying otherwise.  I believe in both cases, finalizing the routing simply took more time than you imagine.  I don't believe the routing was completed prior to purchase, even if they had found enough good holes in singles to know they wanted that land.

You seem to believe that.  But, in the end, I don't know that most care to argue too much over whether he knew more in Dec. 1906 than he did in May 1907 about the final plans.

So what leaps of faith do we take?  That the suggestion of housing was in fact the most logical use at the time and was the real plan?  Believing that no one would send out surveyors to get those exact acreages prior to purchase and finalizing the routing? (If they did not, how would CBM know he had 205 acres in Dec 1906?)

You may disagree, but this scenario seems the most logical to me.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Or using David's timeline from CBM/
.1  There were 450 or so acres available on Sebonac Neck. (late 1905)

2.  CBM and HJW spent two or three days on horseback inspecting the property and studying the contours and determined that they wanted the land if they could get it at a reasonable price. (Fall 1906)

3.  The land company agreed to sell them 205 out of the 450 acres at a reasonable price, and let M&W choose the acres to suit their purposes. (Dec 1906)

4.  CBM and HJW (and others) earnestly studied the contours and figured out where the holes would go, and staked out the land they wanted. (Jan 1907-April 1907, announcement in May 1907)

5.  After staking out the land they wanted, CBM and HJW acquired on option of on the property, leaving wiggle room for the exact final boundaries to be determined later.  They had 3 months to finalize it, until about April 1907, which fits the general timeline.

6.  At that point surveying was done of the holes, and a relief map may have been created (one was created, but I am not sure of the date.) I think the survey also included the boundaries, and when done the wiggle room was gone, but accomplished before May 1907)

7.  At that point the purchase was finalized and construction began.  Agreed, about May 1907

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,  

I am comfortable with my timeline, but your additions (in red) are inaccurate.

Most crucially, in your version, all that CBM and HJW had done prior to mid-December 1906 was ride the property for two or three days, and find the locations for a few holes.  This is incorrect.  The first four points in my timeline all occurred before mid-December 1906.  

CBM told us that (in addition to this initial visit on horseback) they had already been earnestly studying the contours before they optioned the property.  He also told us that a number of others (including Travis) had also been studying site. Another report indicated that CBM had already been communicating with overseas advisors about the the course and had even sent schematics (drawings or maps or plans or something; I can't remember the exact language off-hand.)  CBM also told us that he had determined the approximate dimensions of the property and shape of the course --two miles long (starting and finishing near the Shinnecock Inn, a mile of frontage on Bullhead Bay, a quarter mile on Peconic) and "4 acres wide" which you, me, and Bryan all agree probably meant about 840 feet.  

This a crucial.  You've pushed much of the planning out of the pre December 1906 timeline, and that is inaccurate. By mid-December 1906 CBM, HJW, Travis, and others were not only very familiar with the site, they also already had a very good idea of how the golf course would fit on the site.  

As for the other dates, there are a couple of other potential inaccuracies.
  - We don't know when CBM and HJW first rode the land.  One paper suggested that they had been studying this site since the previous spring or before. If that is true, then your date (Fall 1906) for the first ride if off by a long ways.
  - I don't have the actual purchase date in front of me, but I recall it being earlier than May of 1907, I also don't think they waited until May to begin building, but I may be mistaken.  Is May 1906 a guess on your part or are basing it on anything in particular?

I'll address the rest below.

[DMoriarty]

Bryan,

I agree with much of what you wrote, but think that (perhaps because of our respective backgrounds) we have a fundamental epistemological differences.  You seem to be searching for and requiring absolute certainty, whereas I am just trying to figure out what is most probable, becasuse in matters such as these, absolute certainty is an impossible standard.  You also try to draw a dichotomy between certainty and opinions, but not all opinions are equal.  Some are better supported by the facts than others.  That is the way these things work.

For example, you wrote . . .

I doubt anybody would disagree with your first statement.  Yes, there was some planning before the purchase and apparently 5 more months of detail planning after purchase.  You draw an inference that CBM knew he didn't have the 90 acres available when he bought the property.  That's your opinion and certainly possible or even probable, but it is not a fact.  We don't know for certain when he knew.

Just so we are clear on the facts, the purchase did not occur until the Spring of 1907. He did not buy the property until after the detailed plans had been created. I assume what you mean to say is that I draw an inference that CBM knew he didn't have the 90 acres available when he optioned the property in December 1906.  That is true.  But my inference is based on layer upon layer of fact.  As you say, it is "certainly possible or even probable."  Probable means anywhere between 51-100% percent certain, and I can live with that.

I agree that on this property with the course he designed and built there was no room for the Founders lots.  When he knew that there wasn't enough left over can still only be inferred.  I haven't seen any factual evidence either way as to when CBM knew.

There is plenty of "factual evidence" of when he knew, just no direct statement by him explicitly stating that he was not subdividing the property for real estate (although he came damn close when stated that NGLA wasn't going into the bed business.) Again, you are looking for absolute certainty in areas where absolute certainty is impossible.  If you balance the evidence, it is probable that CBM did not expect to be able fit 90 acres of founders lots on that property at the time he optioned the property.

Why did CBM include this inducement in the solicitation if he didn't intend it or the Founders didn't expect it to be fulfilled?  I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

The "solicitation" letter predated the NGLA purchase by two or three years.  The discussion of the building lots was a hypothetical meant to explain that any left over land would go to the founders who could dispose of it as they saw fit.  It had nothing to do with the specifics of CBM's purchase of the actual NGLA parcel.  That CBM did not intend the hypothetical to be binding on future purchases is evidenced by the fact that he tried to purchase a 120AC parcel, which obviously did not include a real estate component. The subscription agreement and all the 1906 information makes it clear that for CBM the golf course was the priority. If land happened to be left over afterward, then the founders could decide what to do with it then.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()