Jim, this is probably no the place to get into the machinations of real property law (and frankly I don't remember much of it anyway), but if what the developer is saying is accurate, then it looks as if the developer had retained either a Possibility of Reverter or a Right of Entry in the entire property, which is a fancy way of saying that if CBM had tried to use the property for anything other than a golf course, then the property would have reverted back to the development company. (After returning payment and interest, and excepting the clubhouse.)
Of course this didn't mean that every square inch had to be used as fairway, tee, or green, but it did mean that CBM couldn't give away portions of the property for residential building lots. The developer had a a PoR or a RoE for the entire parcel, including the parts you think CBM could give away. Stripping away portions of the land for other uses would have been stripping away the developer's rights.
Another way to look at it is, if the developer is correct, then NGLA only owned the property for the purpose creating and operating a golf club. It didn't own the rights to build houses, and it couldn't grant others rights that NGLA didn't itself possess.