News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


J_ Crisham

  • Karma: +0/-0
"With that perhaps the local private clubs could open up for one day of play a week at reduced fees for the locals who have given up their course for the public good.  Perhaps maintain fee at the well reduced rate $20? The clubs could make money on food and beverage and perhaps cart revenue."

Yea right.  I'm sure the Members at Beverly CC would enthusiastically welcome all the Jackson Park golfers at $20/round.
Olympia Fields would be the logical choice given the proximity to the train, 2 courses that are Doak 7's, I could go on and on..............

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
"May 3, 2017
Statement of Friends of the Parks on Obama Presidential Center Model Unveiling

We are thrilled that President Obama has decided to bring the Obama Presidential Center to Chicago.

While we agree to disagree with the Obama Foundation about siting the Obama Presidential Center in a park, we are pleased that the Obama Foundation has invited Friends of the Parks’ input on the model and the process regarding the OPC.
“Our board has not yet had the opportunity to review the design,” said Lauren Moltz, Friends of the Parks board president and Hyde Park resident. “Additionally, Friends of the Parks maintains that it is premature to weigh in on the content and design of the presidential center itself absent a comprehensive park planning process. We continue to call for a transparent process to bring forth the data and engage the community’s voice in order to make good decisions about all of the ideas that have been floated concerning Jackson Park ‘revitalization.’”

The public has not yet seen the results of the engineering study related to the proposed professional golf course. The local community has not been presented with a thorough analysis of the traffic issues related to the proposed closure of streets in the park. There are still many equity questions about the funding of repairs for other existing park amenities and the replacement of all recreational facilities that are threatened with displacement. And local residents have great concerns about ensuring that benefits accrue to the immediate community.

“Friends of the Parks has encouraged the Obama Foundation to bring to bear leadership that ensures a thorough and transparent comprehensive planning process for this historic park,” said Juanita Irizarry, executive director of Friends of the Parks. “This is a rare opportunity to honor the spirit and design of Jackson Park’s landscape architect, Frederick Law Olmsted--who believed deeply in parks as democratic spaces--as well as the President’s and Mrs. Obama’s stated desire to establish the Obama Presidential Center as a promoter and convener of citizen participation and engagement.”

Friends of the Parks is a forty-one year old nonprofit parks advocacy group whose mission is to preserve, protect, improve and promote the use of parks and open space in Chicago for the enjoyment of all residents and visitors. We advance our programmatic, educational, and advocacy work with the support of our members, donors and volunteers, and through our governmental, community and environmental partnerships."


Seems pretty reasonable.  This press release didn't mention that FOTP wanted Chicago golfers to play shitty courses with poor maintenance.

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
 8)  Championship Golf...  and the unsustainable costs.. why does that just all sound wrong for this site and its present golfers?  Spend a couple million and fix the place up... see if that changes anyones opinion of future development.
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
From JPW.

SPECIAL GOLF COURSE ANNIVERSARY EDITION: recapping the situation, highlighting the questions, calling for action
 
Greetings, all!
 
It was just one year ago today that Chicago Park District CEO Mike Kelly e-mailed Mayor Rahm Emanuel, saying, "We have an opportunity to transform Jackson Park golf course (1899) and South Shore golf course (1907) into the strongest urban golf site the PGA has seen in 25 years. …”  The message, which was sent to the Mayor’s personal e-mail account and was later revealed by a Better Government Association investigation, continued with Kelly’s admonition to the Mayor that “it is critical for YOU that this project has the support of the Obama Foundation and the surrounding community.  Furthermore, the community should initiate the request to improve the golf courses.”

Controversy:  Elimination of current recreational and natural areas:  Today the plan referenced in that e-mail, the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance proposal for a merger, redesign and expansion of the Jackson Park and South Shore courses, is mired in controversy.  While the CPGA and Mike Kelly had repeatedly said the new course would remain within the footprints of the existing golf courses, when the proposed new design was finally released on June 21 it instead showed a major expansion. 

The proposed golf course would take out numerous well-used recreational facilities and natural areas— tennis courts, baseball diamonds, basketball courts, the Nature Sanctuary adjacent to the South Shore Cultural Center, and the south side's only dog park.  This vast expansion beyond the current golf courses is itself a major cause of the controversy.  In response, CPGA spokesmen and the Park District have made vague statements about replacements elsewhere, but these that have been received with considerable skepticism. If anything, community opposition to the elimination of existing, well utilized, and accessible natural and recreational facilities in favor of a golf course designed primarily for affluent golfers, most of whom live elsewhere, is growing. As the Chicago Sun-Times recently headlined its editorial assessment of the proposal:  South Side golf course plan full of holes.   

Controversy: Basic financial information unavailable: A further reason for growing dissatisfaction in the surrounding community and among city taxpayers more broadly is the virtually complete absence of any financial information about the project.  What would the various components cost: changes to the courses, construction of the underpasses, construction of the new clubhouse and of the winter golf practice facility, road closures, replacement of lost recreational facilities and natural areas? What are the projected sources of funding? Who would pay for what?  What would it cost city taxpayers?
 
Beyond construction costs, also lacking is any information on the business plan for operating the course.  How many pro golf tournaments are projected and how frequently?  What revenues would these bring, and who would keep the revenue?  Since the CPGA is seeking private funding for parts of this project and since potential donors would certainly insist on full financial disclosure about the viability of the project, much of this information has to exist, but it has yet to be made public.  Absent any of this vital information, CPGA and the Park District are saying in essence "trust us, it will be great." Maybe so, maybe not. Only actual data can answer the questions.

Controversy: Pledge to current golfers lacks credibility absent data: Also inexplicable is the CPGA’s continuing failure to release the one piece of information that could confirm its pledge to keep the new golf course affordable and accessible to local golfers: the projected greens fees schedule and cart fees for various days of the week, and for different classes of golfers – i.e., resident and non-resident; senior; and league members – not only for the first year, but for five years and further into the future.  For how long with the Park District commit providing caddies “at no extra charge” to golfers, a benefit CEO Kelly recently disclosed?  Which golfers would be eligible for caddies at no charge and for how long/
 
 Controversy: Public policy impact: Jackson Park Watch is quite concerned about the potential discriminatory impact of the proposed elite, expensive golf course project on the continuing availability of public recreational benefits in the neighborhoods served by Jackson Park and South Shore. As things now stand, the proposed golf course project would have a major adverse impact on these communities in two ways:  (i) by depriving community members of existing, well-utilized recreational facilities and natural areas without any equivalent, acceptable, accessible replacements; and (ii) in the absence of credible data and written guarantees, by depriving local golfers of regular, convenient, and affordable access to these well-run and much-loved municipal golf courses.
What to do: Jackson Park Watch is sending this assessment as a letter to the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance and to Park District CEO Mike Kelly calling on them to immediately take several steps:
·release all financial information needed to assess the feasibility and viability of the project;
[/color]·release the projected greens fees and other pricing for the first five years of the new course’s operation – data essential to assessing their pledge  to keep the course affordable and accessible for local golfers, and
[/color]·right-size the dimensions of the proposed new golf course within the footprints of the current courses so as to preserve the existing recreational facilities and natural areas.

You can join in:Voice your concerns and/or support our call for information by e-mailing any or all of those listed below.  As always, please feel free to share this widely and to post this on e-lists and googlegroups.
[/color]
Park District CEO Mike Kelly  -- Michael.Kelly@chicagoparkdistrict.com
CPGA Co-Founder and Director Brian Hogan – bhogan@chicagoparksgolfalliance.org
CPGA Co-Founder and Director Michael Ruemmler – mruemmler@chicagoparksgolfalliance.org
Mayor Rahm Emanuel – rahm.emanuel@cityofchicago.org
Deputy Mayor Andrea Zopp – andrea.zopp@cityofchicago.org
Alderman Leslie Hairston – leslie.hairston@cityofchicago.org; ward05@cityofchicago.org
The Chicago Sun-Times Editorial Board – letters@suntimes.com
The Chicago Tribune Editorial Board -- ctc-tribletter@chicagotribune.comThe Hyde Park Herald Editor – letters@hpherald.com

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
They should start a new committee of golf course enthusiasts like our friend, Paul O'Connor.  Its stated mission could be to provide the absolute most boring, lame, uninspiring, tired golf course possible on public land.  It should promote planting of pines and willows in front of and behind bunkers.  It should promote the idea of spending as little money as possible for maintenance of the grounds, while still allowing the nearby residents the privilege of playing the worst conditioned golf course in the metropolitan area.  I'll suggest the acronym FODZ, for Friends of Doak Zeroes.

The friends of the Parking Lots (they who blocked the George Lucas museum that could have been built on a parking lot next to the lakefront) would be a great mentor for this startup.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Doak 0 - Definition

"A course so contrived and unnatural that it may poison your mind, one I cannot recommend under any circumstances. Reserved for courses that waste ridiculous sums of money in their construction, and probably shouldn't have been built in the first place."

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
I actually had an interesting conversation with an influential and well-connected Hyde Park resident the other night.  Her idea is to provide local resident memberships at greatly reduced prices, perhaps with a limited number and/or times, and raise charitable contributions to offset the fee differential.  Given that there's probably not a huge number of dedicated regular players, this seems like an interesting potential compromise solution.  The reality is that golf course or no, this is prime lakefront real estate a hop, skip and a jump from downtown and will probably get gentrified one way or another in coming years.  Pilsen, Bridgeport and Hyde Park have all seen a bit of a renaissance in the recent past.  Additionally, Hyde Park is one of the few truly integrated neighborhoods in the city, which the Obama Library is a logical extension of.  This doesn't have to be the evil elitists descending and forcing the locals out, but rather could turn out to be a net positive for golf, the city and the neighborhood itself.  I doubt homeowners in the area would be too upset about a sharp increase of their property values, for instance.  Nevertheless, sensitivity to, and involvement with, the surrounding community is essential for this to be a true success.
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Such an industrious editor thou art.  Let's change it to FOOZ (Friends of O'Connor Zeroes) I'm confident you'll use all of your leadership skills on the project to preserve the dump that you grew up near.  All of that positivity will surely rub off on someone.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
 If I am to rub something off on someone, I can only hope it might be you.
 

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Here's a Letter to the Editor of the Sun Times on the CPGA project...not mentioned in their affiliations are that writers Harry Gilliam and Jerry Levy are both on the Board of Directors of the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance.  So this letter is from the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance in support of the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance project.  OK?

   Letters to the Editor    The Sun-Times missed the mark in its July 30 editorial about the South Shore and Jackson Park Golf Courses.
The three of us, who voluntarily visited with the editorial board to discuss this project, have spent years living in and serving this community. We held the appropriate skepticism at first. However, following many conversations, dozens of public meetings, asking hard questions and reviewing evolving plans, we believe this project will be a big lift to our community. The parks will remain accessible to residents and the golf course will be more enjoyable for players of all skill levels.
Most concerning, the editorial, in our view, implies that the current South Side courses are good enough despite evidence offered that the courses are tired remnants of a bygone era including minuscule fairways and greens, rock and mud-filled sand traps and frequent flooding. The editorial questions that there isn’t a need for — in its words — “a big, fancy course.” Really? Why not
As users of these courses and parks, as well as residents of the surrounding community, we are enthusiastic in our support for this ambitious project. Input from local golfers and non-golfing residents will continue shaping plans to foster a more active park space. Moreover, should the course offer capabilities for championship level play, we would be thrilled to showcase the beauty of the South Side’s lakefront and our neighborhoods on national TV.
Public golf has been a recreational staple in Jackson Park, since 1899.  This is not a plan to “tear up” the golf courses, rather to save them for generations to follow, providing the quality golf experience the South Side deserves just as much as any area of the city would expect.
Harry Gilliam, Director of the Jackson Park Golf Association and Golf Instructor; Jerry Levy, member of the Jackson Park Advisory Council and Volunteer Steward for Jackson Park’s Wooded Island; Cheryl Mainor, avid golfer and Jackson Park/South Shore resident and business owner

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Another Sun-Times Editorial

http://chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/editorial-new-golf-courses-showcase-hole-sinks-bird-sanctuary/

   Sun-Times Editorial Board    If you’re a golfer, the 12th hole would be spectacular. If you’re a nature lover, you’d lose.
Nothing reveals better how the Park District and a group of golf enthusiasts are pushing too hard and fast to create a championship golf course on Chicago’s South Side than their intent, though barely acknowledged, to wipe out a prized nature sanctuary to make way for the course’s most scenic hole.
 <blockquote>EDITORIAL</blockquote> They say, when asked, that the bird and butterfly sanctuary will have to be “reshaped,” but in truth it would be wiped out. They say “every square foot” of the sanctuary encroached upon will be relocated, but the proposed new setting — squeezed between two other fairways — is only a fraction as desirable.
 The dotted lines roughly approximate the existing South Shore Nature Sanctuary and the 12th hole, as currently drawn, of the proposed new golf course. Instead of taking in breathtaking lakefront views, should you visit the new nature preserve, you could be ducking golf balls.
There may be good arguments for creating the new course, which City Hall hopes would draw professional tournaments. The South Side, so often overlooked, could stand much more economic development. But nothing about this plan, which would combine the existing Jackson Park and South Shore public golf courses, has been thoroughly researched or sufficiently detailed. It’s a pig in a poke.
South Siders are being told to take it on faith that amenities lost to the new course, such as soccer fields and tennis courts in Jackson Park, would pop up elsewhere, a minimum number of mature trees would be destroyed, and the price for a round of golf for a city resident would remain affordable. Assurances are nice, but blueprints and operating budgets are better.
To understand how the Park District and the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance, the group pushing the new course, are soft-pedaling the downside of this project, consider what they have to say about the nature sanctuary.
“While the 12th hole could involve reshaping of the current natural area,” they write in a brochure, “significant portions will remain in place, as well as creating a new natural area directly north of the South Shore Cultural Center building.” And when the Sun-Times Editorial Board met with leaders of the group, they used the same words — “could” and “reshaping.”
This is terribly misleading. There is no “could.” Every PGA-caliber golf course must have at least one showcase hole, and that hole in this case would be the 12th. You can bet it would be built on the coveted spit of land jutting into Lake Michigan that now is the heart of the nature sanctuary. The scenic views are just too good to pass up.
It is equally misleading to say “significant portions” of the sanctuary would remain. As shown on the accompanying map, half or less of the sanctuary would survive, and far from the best parts. What remained would be hard up against South Shore Beach, more of a modest sandy buffer than a preserve.
The Golf Alliance and Park District tell us not to jump to conclusions. They say they are still in “the planning process” and things could change. But they also aim to have a final “framework” in place by October and hope to begin construction as soon as possible in the new year.
How much time does that leave to play straight with the public?

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Paul,


I'm a big believer in protecting the environment and the future of the planet, but this is when it gets absurd in my mind.  Its an area the size of a couple of softball fields.  A quick look on google maps reveals the entire lake shore up and down in Chicago is chock full of these natural areas to let the birds and gophers do thier thing.


I'd bet the wildlife have less chance of being harassed or hit by a golf ball than a field trip from the local school with kids running around with a sling shot or two.

Tim_Cronin

  • Karma: +0/-0
It's hard to see the cost-benefit ratio of turning 27 holes into 18 at a higher cost for players as being a win, no matter how much better the course is. That's especially true when the real cost (inclusion of underpasses, closure of roads, etc.) will run over $50 million, at least, by the time the first tee is pegged.


God bless those who want to donate to this project on the notion that it would be a benefit to the community and a plus for the Obama Center, but the money would be better spent on improving area schools. Take what's being spent now on Robert A. Black's improvement and triple it to improve both the Jackson Park and South Shore courses while supporting the restarted caddie program.


That leaves many millions for area schools where kids would be smarter, and perhaps attracted to the caddie program, and the potential of the Murphy (high school) and Evans (college) scholarship programs.


Better to have that than a lovely vista for NBC to linger on for 15 seconds during a golf telecast. (Hey, they can send a camera to Waveland if they like; the view is already there.)
The website: www.illinoisgolfer.net
On Twitter: @illinoisgolfer

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
 Kalen,
 
The nature sanctuary is just a small bit of this fiasco.  My main complaint with this entire process is a simple one:  I don’t believe that a couple of wealthy, politically connected, golfing celebrities, like Mike Keiser and Mark Rolfing, along with political hacks like Reummler, and the rest of the CPGA Board should have been GIVEN by the Chicago Park District the unilateral power to decide on the development of as important and visible an asset as the Jackson Park Golf Course and the South Shore properties.   This to me is astounding.  There were no open calls for development proposals, there was no competitive bidding on competing projects, there was no public vetting of these visions to see if we could find the best ideas.   This was Keiser and his CPGA pals, using the promise of $30 million of private funding, preempting the public process.   These are PUBLIC assets, not Keiser’s.
 
 
Who says that this CPGA plan is the best possible outcome for these courses and the neighborhood?  Keiser?  CPGA?  Reummler?  Have they provided any concrete data to support their claims?  Have there been any independent surveys taken of the people who use the golf courses to see what they would like?  Has there been any information regarding the likely costs of this project, or on likely fee increases to those who currently use these courses?  Was there honest disclosure of all the disruptions this plan would cause to traffic, to beach access, to a nature sanctuary by CPGA, when they had in their hands the Welling plans that clearly showed all these inevitable disruptions?  Not a single fucking word, they were all happy talk and bullshit at every meeting. 
 
 
I don’t hate the proposed course, as an idea it’s probably not the worst one, but I do not believe that this is the BEST outcome for these courses, the people who currently use them, the citizens of Chicago, and for the growth and development of golf in general.  These two courses, in spite of all the abuse heaped upon them, serve an important role in providing accessible golf to local beginners, older players, and those who rely on public transportation.   
 
 These courses are not supposed to be ball-busting championship layouts; they are intended to serve the higher handicap, short hitting beginners, and local older players who don’t give a shit that the course is 5,400 yards long.    They are also meant to provide AFFORDABLE golf.   $15-25 rounds of golf is what that means.   That’s a number that will certainly triple if places like Harding Park are any guide.  $75 rounds to Keiser is “affordable golf”, he’s charging and getting $200/round in Bandon, and Sand Valley.  $75/round is crazy expensive golf to the local Jackson Park player.   The fact is that the current Jackson Park and South Shore golfers are going to get screwed in this deal, and the CPGA will pretend to be the most surprised guys in the room when it happens. 
 
 
 
« Last Edit: August 11, 2017, 05:08:28 PM by Paul OConnor »

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Paul,


You raise a lot of valid concerns in your last post and I think this will be a difficult project to pull off.  I've always had mixed feelings about public golf in truly urban areas, which no doubt this location has got to be pretty high on the list.


While I also understand your concerns over price, those rates seem very low for an area with what must be extremely high property values, so its got to already be massively subsidized in its current form.  Combine that with the private money to make it happen and I'm not seeing the big downside here, compared to building stadiums for example where the tax payers are footing most of the bill.


At the same time, I don't think there's any question this would result in less rounds for locals, be it to price or availability of tee times.




Tim_Cronin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Kalen,
The two of Chicago neighborhoods immediately adjacent to Jackson Park and South Shore – the Woodlawn and South Shore neighborhoods – are among the lowest-income neighborhoods in Chicago. Hyde Park, immediately north, and that portion of Woodlawn including the University of Chicago, are much better off. But when it comes to property values, they're amazingly low given the nearness of the lakefront.
The website: www.illinoisgolfer.net
On Twitter: @illinoisgolfer

Peter Flory

  • Karma: +0/-0

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Tim,


That's the point.  While I certainly feel for the folks in the neighborhood and god knows the schools could use a massive infusion of cash, the fact remains that this is essentially prime lakefront property minutes from downtown.  It will get gentrified eventually because of the views, the proximity and the relative value compared to the north side.  I'm not saying this as a justification for the course, just as a matter of fact.  Having the Obama Library and a green space, even if it is a high end golf course, may in fact be a better outcome for city planning than more condos or a casino 10 years down the pike.  Remember the city is broke so anyone willing to invest some serious cash will get a sympathetic ear. 
« Last Edit: September 21, 2017, 10:45:29 AM by Jud_T »
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Jim Nugent

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jud, you're ok with booting out the players who now consider those courses home, so the affluent can have one more playground at their beck and call? 

Tim_Cronin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jud, the area has been in economic decline since at least the 1970s, so I wouldn't hold my breath for a turnaround soon, even though that would be most welcome. A high-end public golf course, with or without a presidential library a wedge away, won't make for a turnaround. For those wondering, the entire scenario isn't remotely comparable to East Lake. There's no Tom Cousins here.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2017, 03:33:15 PM by Tim_Cronin »
The website: www.illinoisgolfer.net
On Twitter: @illinoisgolfer

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Based on some of Terry's input, it seems a bit of a catch 22.


Do nothing and the pundits say look at the cold hearted system that's letting the area rot and citizens suffer.
Do something that involves almost all privately funded money to upgrade the area, increase property values for the locals and its bad because its pricing them out.

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
 Kalen,
This “nothing or the CPGA plan” argument is obviously logically fallacious.  Of course there are other options available between “do nothing” and “build an $80 million golf course.”   
 
And, as much as the CPGA would like you to believe, this project will NOT be “almost all privately funded money.”  Perhaps the private money will be earmarked for the course construction, but the public money required to bring this boondoggle to completion will be two or three times the $24 mil CPGA has said it will raise. 
 
 

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Another Sun-Times Editorial.

       

         
 http://chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/editorial-chicagos-tiger-woods-golf-course-could-be-too-big-for-your-wallet/

Opinion

     EDITORIAL: Chicago’s Tiger Woods golf course could be too big for your wallet

    Editorials       08/18/2017, 04:45pm 
         Sun-Times Editorial Board     If the Chicago Park District is dead-set on creating a championship golf course on the South Side, the course had better be affordable for all Chicago golfers.
Forget about tourists, wealthy suburbanites and visitors to the future nearby Obama Presidential Center. Our city’s public parks, including the fanciest of golf courses, must put Chicagoans first.
There is no reason to feel confident, though, that the park district can make or keep such a showcase golf course affordable. The district has done no studies and conducted no surveys. It has done no homework of merit on this most important question.
Park District Supt. Mike Kelly says he expects Chicago residents will be able to play the course for less than $50, but so far that’s just talk. The best Kelly can do, by way of proof, is to point at the success of a public course in Southern California in keeping prices down. He offers not a shred of comparative analysis. As if the finances of a Midwestern golf course that will do little business in winter — lovely as the course may be — are comparable to the finances of a breathtakingly beautiful ocean-side course that does terrific business all year long. There’s your apples and oranges.
The park district and a private group called the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance want to create a PGA Tour golf course by combining the city’s existing Jackson Park and South Shore courses. The aim is to put a final “framework” (whatever exactly that is) in place by October and begin construction as early as the weather permits in the new year. But the plan is full of holes.
Pricing is a key issue but not the only one. The park district has failed to explain what exactly would happen to existing amenities in the way of the proposed fairways, such as ball fields and tennis courts. The District hasn’t said how many hundreds of mature trees might be torn down, and what the economic development would be for the surrounding community. In an editorial earlier this month, we showed how the new course, as currently planned, would wipe out a bird and butterfly conservation area.
But perhaps no issue is more central than whether ordinary Chicagoans — senior citizens playing an early-morning round, children taking their first swings, weekend duffers — will be able to play the course at an affordable price. A championship course is expensive. This project should not move forward until all kinds of questions are answered:
What exactly would be the price on weekdays for Chicago residents? Currently, the cost is $30 to play 18 holes at Jackson Park. How about weekends? What about a discount for seniors? How about for young people? And for how long would the park district be able to lock in those inaugural rates? One year? Five years?
“We are very early in the process,” Park District spokeswoman Jessica Maxey-Faulkner said in an email. “I do not have specific studies to share regarding how the pricing would work.”
Early in the process? They plan to start digging in months, not years.
Time and again, supporters of the new course here point to one particular public course, in San Diego, to highlight the possibilities for Chicago. But that magnificent course, Torrey Pines, located on picturesque coastal bluffs over the Pacific Ocean, is not a good comparison.
Thanks to mild temperatures, Torrey Pines is open 360 days a year. Chicago’s course will be in hibernation, collecting little to no revenue, in winter.
Moreover, only 30 percent of reservations at Torrey Pines can be pre-booked by non-residents, Mark Marney, deputy director of the golf division of San Diego Park and Recreation, tells us. The other tee times stay open for San Diego’s 1.4 million residents. Will Chicago do the same for its 2.7 million residents? It should. But, again, our park district has not provided specifics.
To play the vaunted South course at Torrey Pines, where golfer Tiger Woods dramatically won the U.S. Open in 2008, San Diego residents pay $63 during the week and $78 on weekends. Rates are approved by the San Diego City Council, which reviews the golf business plan.
San Diego pulls in enough revenue from greens fees to help cover operating expenses of five public courses. There are no taxpayer subsidies, Marney says. Each year, the golf division pays the city a fee for using its land. This year it will be about $2.5 million.
There is wiggle room in the business plan to increase rates minimally each year to cover shortfalls or rising expenses, but rates have held steady for residents the last five years.
We looked, as well, at four other public courses that supporters and experts suggested as possible comps. In every case, greens fees are considerably higher, especially on weekends, than the $50 max being floated for Chicago.
So how will Chicago pull this off?
“We want the park district to maintain their rates near current levels,” Brian Hogan, director of the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance, said in a meeting with the Sun-Times Editorial Board last month. His group is raising millions in private, charitable donations to fund construction of the new course.
Hogan said $50 would be too much to charge in Chicago. “Our donors are not going to contribute money if [people] are priced out.”
All the more reason for the park district to figure out pricing — now. Quit asking Chicago to tee off on this dream course until you do your homework and fess up to the hazards.
Send letters to: letters@suntimes.com
 

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Plan Would Bring Championship Public Golf Course to Chicago's South Side
« Reply #148 on: September 21, 2017, 10:02:27 AM »
A Hyde Park Herald Editorial;

Written by Louise McCurry Jackson Park Advisory Council President.

AND, conveniently omitted, a CPGA Board Member.

September 13, 2017 Addressing golf course myths with facts 
To the Editor: 


For thirty years I have volunteered in Jackson Park and know and understand its characters, its history, its problems and it’s strengths. As the 24-hour media, print media, and blogosphere are putting out the stories, rumors, and accusations regularly, it is critical to separate facts from myths to clearly understand the issues.
As I understand the current envisioning planning process: we put out the initial ideas into the South Lakefront Framework Plan online (from the Obama Foundation designers, the TGR designer, and the Chicago Parks Golf Alliance) and then opened it up to the community for input so that all can help design the project by commenting and making suggestions on the website.
As the community makes its ideas and comments online, here are some of the exciting rumors out there and the dull, but actual facts:


Myth 1 – There will be a brick wall around the Golf Course so people can’t see inside.
Fact 1 – Not True. There will be an open and see through fence to keep golf balls from the course out of moving traffic, off biking paths, and out of natural areas and there will be more entrances with better paths to allow easier access to park areas.


Myth 2 – The South Shore Cultural Center natural area and most of the golf course trees will be taken out.
Fact 2 – Not True. Invasive Species trees will be removed, as we have done on Wooded Island and Bobolink Meadow. This allows room for the planting of more native species, like our new growth of Oaks, which can live for up to 400 years.  Trees that incidentally are moved in the redesign are being replaced one-for-one.
The South Shore Cultural Center natural area is not being removed and a second natural area is being planted at the north end near the horse-riding ring with easy accessibility.
The current natural area has some safety issues: severe erosion of the border areas with instability of border revetments and flooding, coyotes hunting and sleeping in natural area, remote location with 5 and 6 feet tall grasses making a lone visitor not visible to the outside world. This discourages women from walking alone in this remote area. We see drug sellers distributing their product in the non-visible areas.  We have mentally ill appearing homeless individuals sleeping on the benches unseen in the tall grasses and frightening early morning visitors.   Non-permitted fires being set in drummers circles by the homeless for the purpose of staying warm and cooking food.


Myth 3 – The Jackson Park Bark will be closed down.
Fact 3 –  As part of the Envisioning Process, JPAC has strongly requested that Jackson Park Bark stay open. The JPAC Dog Park Committee founded the Dog Park in 2011, did all the paperwork- petitions, letters, board presentations, and inspected and remodeled the two totally unused and damaged handball courts into the Jackson Park Bark. We made it a safe place for large and small dogs to run freely. Raising the $ 120,000 to $160,000 for required disease prevention equipment and safety features, we weren’t able to do, but the park district graciously allowed us to use our converted handball courts just as dogs use them all over the city.   We hope with the completion of the revitalization of park, funders will be more eager to donate to build a new and even better dog park.


Myth 4 – Golfers don’t want a revitalized, restored course.  Fact 4 – Golfing organizations from all over the Jackson Park Area are writing their own letters, so they will speak more factually for themselves.  I wonder how many people are still playing tennis, basketball, soccer, baseball, or football on fields that are 100 years old. Still playing on the same surfaces, with the same equipment in 2017 that were installed in 1910. Jackson Park golfers think it is obvious that the aged course must be restored and revitalized or South Side golfers will continue leave the South Side course for the better equipped and laid out suburban courses. Without sufficient golfers to cover operating costs, the Jackson Park and South Shore Cultural Center Golf Courses will close. Local organizations will continue to take their golfing events to the better equipped suburban golf courses until there are so few players here who want to play the 100 year old golf courses, that both historic courses close. This leaves no golf courses available for our South Side kids and adults.


Myth 5 – South Side Youth don’t want to play golf and participate in the caddy training program, and the First Tee 7-12 year olds golf program will not invest in large numbers of South Side Kids.
Fact 5 – The CPGA is committed to offering golf to all of the high schools in the area and in connecting the grammar schools with the amazing First Tee Program no child is turned away because of inability to pay.  Golf is a competitive high school sport like football, and tennis, which offers college scholarships for high school players to attend college. High school golfers play Chicago courses for free.


Myth 6 – Local golfers will be priced out of golfing in Jackson Park.
Fact 6 –  Locals will be able to play golf on restored course at same or similar rates to current course rates. Those who have found the ways to walk on and play for free will probably still find free ways to play.


Myth 7 – The walking and biking paths around the courses will be closed.
Fact 7 – The walking and biking path will not be closed. It is going to be replaced and enlarged to accommodate more walkers and bikers.


Myth 8 – The 67th Street Underpass is only for golfers to get to the golf course.
Fact 8 – The 67th Street underpass simply replaces the previous 67th Street overpass that safely allowed the community to go to the 67th Street Beach. As the previous 100-year-old breakwater deteriorated and was not restored, the 67th Street Beach protective shoreline revetments washed away. Over approximately a 10 year period, from 1965 to 1975, the 67th Street Beach and shoreline park itself, washed away and the 67th Street overpass was taken down.
This beach washing away process is currently happening rapidly to South Shore Cultural Center Beach and Golf Course. If these follow the erosion pattern of the 67th Street Beach, then the SSCC Beach and part of the SSCCGolf Course will be washed away and gone in a few years.  We could not find funders in1975 to donate the millions of dollars to fix the 67th Street Beach, but we HAVE the funders now who can help save South Shore Cultural Center Beach and SSCC Golf Course and valuable green and blue park space for our community. I invite any of you who would like to see the effects and process of this destruction to join our lakefront tours and see with your own eyes.


Final Myth – You can’t trust the Park District.
Final Fact – In my opinion, The New Chicago Park District is made up of the most dedicated, young, smart, responsive, hardworking and creative city employees I have known. They inspire me to work harder. Most are moms and dads, coaches, gardeners, avid sports participants, dog parents, musicians, artists and community volunteers just like us. We have one thing in common-making the parks safer and more enriching places with more positive activities for our communities.  Like us, they need more money to do more projects.  So they have, by necessity, become brilliant grant writers and fund raisers.   I am always grateful for everything the Park District Staff has created to enrich the lives of our south side community members, particularly our children, and our future.


Thank you community, for your many ideas and suggestions during this envisioning process of park revitalization.  We are planning a park restoration for which our grandchildren will thank us.
Louise McCurry, JPAC President

Paul OConnor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Plan Would Bring Championship Public Golf Course to Chicago's South Side
« Reply #149 on: September 21, 2017, 10:12:28 AM »
And a rebuttal in the Hyde Park Herald by a South Shore resident.  Affiliation unknown.

September 20, 2017 Exposing the made up myths about Jackson Park  To the Editor:


Please permit me to respond to the letter to the editor that appeared in your publication titled “Addressing Golf Course Facts with Myths.”


My family and I have been residents of South Shore for 14 years. We live in the 7100 block of South Crandon Avenue, which is about two blocks from the entrance of the South Shore Cultural Center. I have been a regular user of the Cultural Center area since we moved here. My daughter for several summers participated in the Junior Lifeguards program at South Shore beach. I run for exercise regularly, and my most commonly used route takes me through the Cultural Center area, along the beach, and through Jackson Park.


I can’t imagine many residents use Jackson Park more than I do. Besides running through the park, I walk our dogs at the park regularly. For about seven years I have played basketball at the courts along the east end of Hayes Drive. My daughter played AYSO soccer at Jackson Park for several years. We play tennis occasionally at the courses next to Jackson Bark (they are tennis courts, not handball courts, as the letter writer incorrectly calls them).


Those are the relations I have to the areas in question. Let me address the myth / facts enumerated in the letter.


#1 I have not heard the “myth” that a brick wall is to be built. This appears to be a straw man argument.


#2 The nature area at the Cultural Center is to be removed according to the golf course plans that have been publicly presented. The first round of plans that were publicized left it intact, but an updated version showed the area replaced by the golf course.


The paragraph-long description of the natural area (which, frankly, seems to be an argument for closing it) badly distorts the nature of this space and either is written from a position of ignorance or bad faith. Addressing them point by point:


— There is not “severe erosion of the border areas” any more so than in any south lakefront area that has not seen seawall replacement. Historically high lake-water levels have altered the shoreline, but there is no crisis of erosion. The revetments are not unstable. The area has never flooded. These assertions simply are not true.


—There are coyotes around at times. I see their scat, but I rarely see them. They are not large animals and they run away when one encounters them. News flash – coyotes at this point live anywhere in the city that green space exists.


—The flora is tall enough to be obscuring about three months of the year. Is a beautiful place worth destroying because it is remote, and because some people might not feel comfortable going there alone? Many people also don’t feel comfortable walking alone at night down a lit Chicago street!


—I have never, ever, ever seen anyone selling drugs (or looking like they might want to sell drugs) in this area. I’d guess that successful drug sellers inhabit areas where there are, you know, potential customers around?


—“Benches unseen in the tall grasses” – that is pure propaganda. The only seating is around the drum circles / fire pits, which are in cleared areas. I guess it should come as no surprise that someone advocating the creation of a PGA golf course in the community would harbor such a dismissive and unfortunate perspective on homeless members of the community. The thing about being homeless is you don’t have a home – one sleeps where one can. We share the community with all sorts of people whether we want to acknowledge them or not. And the implication that homeless people are inherently threatening is pretty sad. Begrudging someone making a fire (in a fire pit!) to stay warm in cold weather strikes me as inhumane. It also is something you’d have, perhaps, a one in a million chance of seeing in this space. That’s because I have seen during this decade-and-a-half maybe three “mentally ill appearing homeless people” in the area. I have never seen anyone setting up long-term encampments there. Another red herring.


#3 I have no dog in this fight, though it is surprising that someone so intimately familiar with Jackson Park would think there were handball courts adjacent to Jackson Bark.


#4  “I wonder how many people are still playing tennis, basketball, soccer, baseball, or football on fields that are 100 years old. Still playing on the same surfaces, with the same equipment in 2017 that were installed in 1910.”


Question: Why would one so intimately familiar with Jackson Park have to wonder about such a thing? Let me try to help.


—The basketball courts at Hayes are heavily, heavily used. This is a community gathering point that brings a lot of young men together in a relatively safe and healthy environment.


—The vast field north of Hayes, east of the Wooded Island parking lot, and west of the parking lot next to the basketball courts is heavily used by soccer players. Anyone who has so much as driven past the area on a weekend spring, summer, or autumn knows that.


—Hyde Park Academy’s home baseball field north of Hayes, east of Stony Island, and west of Cornell. Their football team also practices there. The areas is heavily used for picnics / family reunions etc during summer. The Mt. Carmel football team practices on the field west of the golf clubhouse and east of Cornell. There’s also some soccer there.


—The tennis courts would surely be used more if the Park District had maintained them. In this same vein, the person writing this letter is not advocating the upgrade of these areas. She wants them torn down to create an essentially private space for affluent golfers!


—To the extent it’s even needed (exaggerated in this letter) I am all for restoring and revitalizing the South Shore and Jackson Park golf courses! By all means, these are lovely, affordable courses that fit organically within a residential community. But the person writing this letter doesn’t want to restore and revitalize! She is advocating the REPLACEMENT of these beautiful courses with a completely different type of course that will not fit organically into the surrounding space and that will be an impediment to local small-scale play by golfing residents. I have made a point to speak to golfers at the practice center at the Cultural Center (this would be removed if the PGA course comes) and not a single person has told me they want a PGA style course.


#5 This is not a myth. This is an opinion. The “fact” attached to it is a non-sequitur.


#6 If the letter-writer has an actual pricing structure to which the proposed PGA course operators have committed I’m sure the community would love to see it. I have heard many promises to keep the new course affordable but no actual fee scale provided.


#8 The South Shore beach is NOT washing away, nor is the SSCC golf course. They are not going to be gone. These are positions taken in bad faith and for the purpose of propagandizing.


The historically high water levels in Lake Michigan have made the beach smaller, of course. This is happening at ALL the beaches in Chicago and has nothing to do with the question at hand. There is plenty, plenty, plenty, and still more plenty of beautiful South Shore beach left. Moreover, since lake water-levels are currently historically high, what reasonable person would take the position that the water-level trends of the last several years are going to continue unabated and indefinitely?


Say the lake does keep rising on a similar curve. Isn’t that a good reason not to make a massive investment in a new lakeside golf course?


The only part of the current golf course in immediate danger from erosion is the southeast corner. The lakefront along the north side, at 67th, has been altered by high water, but it does not immediately endanger the course. It is just a guess, but there might be potential fix for this issue that doesn’t require replacing this lovely nine-hole course that is perfect for seniors, kids, beginners, and local residents who want to pop in for a quick round, with a PGA course.


Want to know the real, imminent threat to the SSCC golf course and beach, spaces we should treasure, rehabilitate, and preserve? The proposed PGA-style golf course

-Marcus Hersh