Loop Links, no. 8
The fight for affordable public golf
I don’t think it’s been any great secret what my mission is with Great Lakes Loops. The current golf media options in Michigan, to me, don’t reflect the daily golfing options for most Michigan golfers. Sure, it’s great to talk about Arcadia, Forest Dunes, and the Boyne courses, but how many times per year can the average golfer play those? Speaking for myself, those are, at best, once per year trips that I have to save up for. It doesn’t reflect the 90% or more of my rounds at affordable public venues. These places have a hard time getting the same publicity in a pay-to-play media environment where advertising is traded for preferential coverage.
Leveling the playing field is my most obvious mission. It’s not my most ambitious. It may be a pipe dream, but I want Michigan to unequivocally be the best place for public golf in America. Golf Digest recently ranked Michigan T-2 for public golf, tied with California and behind Wisconsin, based on the number of Top 100 courses in the state (9). Almost all of these are destination courses, though, targeting national golfers as much as local golfers, and don’t capture what I am talking about. I’m considering the level of depth and quality across all price points. If you were picking a place to represent the heartbeat of public golf for the average golfer in this country, would it be Michigan?
Even if you said yes, it’s not a no-brainer for Michigan to lead that category. We certainly have the depth in courses, we have the numbers of golfers, and despite what some ill-informed Southerners may believe, we actually have a pretty strong golf season. The quality of our affordable public courses and what kind of experience we expect from these courses as golfers, however, is uneven.
Our public, non-resort options in the state cover a wide spectrum, from old Donald Ross courses, to a countless number of more modern courses from Jerry Matthews, Arthur Hills, and Ray Hearn. We have courses from the early 1900’s that have found a way to last for over a century, and owner-designed, mom and pop type courses that are barely hanging on after enduring the last recession and Covid. Many are in need of infrastructure upgrades, have lost green and fairway space over time, or have become overrun with non-native trees, blocking off views of the property and making turf conditions more challenging to manage.
To me, this begs the question - how are these updates going to happen? Is anyone funding public, non-resort golf projects these days?
Is This a Thing?
My working theory is that without the financial backing of a resort, standalone public courses aren’t being built, and existing ones can’t cover costly renovations. Just to make sure I’m not imagining things, I scanned the past 10 years or so of new build courses and renovations to see if I could spot any public options, gather how many of them are affordable, and see how many of those projects were affiliated with a resort.
This is by no means a comprehensive list, and I may have overlooked something, but here is what I’ve come up with.
Forest Lake CC (private) is undergoing a renovation by Chris Wilczynski. White Lake GC (private) is being renovated by Ray Hearn. Pine Lake CC (private), as I’ve covered, is finishing up a renovation by J. Drew Rogers. A new Ray Hearn build, the short course at Boyne Highlands (resort), is expected to be completed this year. The Cardinal course, another Ray Hearn renovation, will be open this year at Saint John’s Resort. As part of a long-term renovation plan by Chris Wilczynski, Country Club of Jackson (private) will begin renovating it’s bunkers. The closest we will see to a full 18-hole new build this year is Tom Doak’s High Pointe, which reuses several holes from the previous rendition of the course, and is also ultra-private.
Should we zoom out a little bit, things are still a bit murky. Stoatin Brae was built by the Renaissance Design team in 2016, and I would say is bordering on affordable. It is part of the Gull Lake View Resort, however. In 2016 Michigan added another resort course (or is it two?) in The Loop, while 2017 saw the introduction of the South Course at Arcadia Bluffs.
The last new, major non-resort public course built, which was really a full overhaul renovation, was American Dunes in 2021. This is such a unique project, I’m not quite sure how to judge it. With profits from the course going to Folds of Honor, it’s not an affordable golf experience, and many of the normal costs of construction for a project this ambitious were donated for the cause.
So that leaves the closest thing to an affordable golf project being Wolf River Golf Park, which I’ve covered and is worth a read. Even still, this is a casino property. Everything about the Wolf River project aligns with a sustainable mom and pop public course, but would the funds for its transformation have been there if not for the casino?
The Challenges
I recently chatted with the owner of an ambitious new project being led by one of the big name architects in the business right now. His original intention had been to build one of the elite public courses in the country, but he then changed direction and has made it a private venture after trying to put together the numbers to make the public option work.
If an elite public course is your goal, he said, you have to be prepared to invest up to $25 million for the build. At that cost, you have to be able to attract a large number of high-end golfers and your price point has to compete with Pebble, Sawgrass, Kiawah, Bandon, and similar courses. You are talking somewhere in the $600-$1200 per round range. Not only is it tough to come up with the money for the initial build, but it’s also risky because you have to nail it. Even if you are targeting a price point around $150, “you are playing with fire”, as this owner put it, as your course construction costs don’t necessarily come any cheaper and your margins are so thin. This model only works when paired with a hotel or resort, he says, which is where you get your Arcadia South, the Loop, and Saint John’s Resort type of courses in Michigan.
I asked about a semi-private model, where tee times are reserved for members and a small number of allotments are made available to the public. This is the type of model that Pasatiempo uses, and more locally, Belvedere. It’s also the model being pursued by the DeVries Detroit project, which I mentioned here. “It doesn’t work”, he says. “If people are paying all of that money for initiation and dues, they are going to want exclusivity. If you look at a place like Pasatiempo [GLL note: or Belvedere], it’s been around for, what, over 90 years?” The model works there, he says, because they are old enough that their costs have been covered over so many years, so there is not that pressure to recoup so much investment cost. As I stated in regards to the DeVries project, it’s success or failure will be a bellwether for if these types of projects are viable today.
A more feasible approach may be to renovate existing courses to address needed infrastructure upgrades, provide more interesting design options, or help the course’s sustainability. The costs for such projects are still high, however, as detailed in this USGA article by Bradley Klein. I’ve drawn out some key points here.
“Big jobs used to be $4 million. Now they’re in the $10 million to $20 million range.” - per one course developer
Two recent examples: Bend Golf Club (OR) completed a successful course-wide bunker renovation for $550,000 and always kept nine holes open for play. Worcester Country Club (MA) is completing a Gil Hanse overhaul of its bunkers and tees with some additional tree work, greens expansions and fairway adjustments for $3.7 million.
Neither course needed irrigation work, which can be $2.5-$4 million, depending on location and access to water.
When dealing with new greens, cart paths, or regrassing large areas, it’s not uncommon to see costs between $8-$16 million.
Rising demand and lingering supply chain disruptions have driven up construction costs.
Even despite the costs, some are still going forward with it. The same course developer: “Money is not as tight in this economy as it used to be. The attitude seems to be spend it now and set yourself up for the next 20 years.”
A Plan to Go Forward
Is there a reasonable path forward to see more public golf improvements in Michigan? There are many factors involved, and there aren’t always easy answers. But it starts with sustainable golf. The concepts seen in the Wolf River renovation could be a great example to build from. Things like minimizing bunker coverage, making them small but well-placed, challenging the preferred line of a good player while allowing plenty of options for the high handicapper, and reducing maintenance time, are efficient and cost-effective measures. The same goes for a single cut mowing height. This makes the game more fun for beginners while making mowing more efficient. Proper tree management can help improve turf conditions, reduce time for maintenance staff spent clearing debris, and open up views across the property.
Bradley Klein’s USGA article has more ideas. A big concept is investing in ideas that provide a good return on investment, while identifying and eliminating plans that contribute nothing to a course’s bottom line. For example, rerouting holes can be an expensive endeavor. Is it being done to gain length off the tee, in an effort to provide a “championship test”? Or is it being done to gain space for a driving range, short course area, or putting course? The former may stroke the egos of a few people at the club, but the latter is going to provide a better ROI.
Let’s tick off a few more dos and don’ts from the Klein article. Don’t look for big name architects. Do seek out the architect-in-waiting, if you will, who has been working for the big names, or try a local architect who is familiar with the area. Do expand greens to access more pin locations and help reduce wear in high-traffic areas. Don’t rebuild or regrass greens with the express purpose of trying to hit higher readings on the Stimpmeter. Unless you are hosting elite championships, don’t spend money on ventilation systems, perfect bunker liners, tee to green cart paths, and bright imported sand. Do invest in better forward tees to make a more inviting experience for beginners, women, and shorter hitters. Consider tree work to improve turf health and reduce chemical inputs. In areas where water is scarce, invest in drought tolerant turf to help reduce water input.
Some more thoughts by a pair of architects who have done work locally in Michigan:
“I’ve yet to do a project in which cost was not a factor,” says course designer Andy Staples [GLL note: who was behind the 2016 renovation of Meadowbrook CC in Northville]. “There is no magic bullet to managing costs,” he went on to say. “If you want to save money, you have to do less.”
That means prioritizing. Staples, for example, lists the elements of a master plan from top to bottom to communicate not only what is most important structurally, but also which tasks produce the highest value. Examples include focusing on new forward tees rather than redoing all the teeing grounds. Or deploying some grass hollows in areas where the old historic maps might have shown unnecessary sand bunkers.
Architect Brian Schneider, a design principal with Renaissance Golf Design [GLL note: and part of the Stoatin Brae build], is among many who think that some courses are too willing to spend and indulge in infrastructure excess when a more cautious approach would make better sense. “I have great respect for superintendents and appreciate the excessive demands and expectations placed upon them. It is fair of them to want every available tool at their disposal. However, I often find myself trying to talk them – or the golfers at their course – out of spending for things they might want but don’t need, especially if that extra infrastructure might compromise their original architecture.” For example, rebuilding greens to improve drainage has obvious practical benefits, but perhaps not at the risk of losing something special about the design.
“Even if they can afford it now,” said Schneider, “there’s always the possibility of another recession looming, so courses need to think about whether these upgrades are going to require extra long-term maintenance, or whether they’d rather save the money for a rainy day.”
The Plan in Action
All of this advice sounds good to me on a theoretical level, but doesn’t mean much if there aren’t concrete examples of affordable renovations and new builds taking place. In an act of great timing, the Fried Egg recently hosted a pair of podcasts that shed some light on two such public courses that are leading the way. I’ve included some notes here, but it’s worth looking into each one and listening to the full conversation.
The first conversation is with Clay Payne, the head superintendent at Buffalo Dunes, a municipal course in Garden City, KS, which is in the midst of a six-year renovation project (follow the link… the course looks great!). The podcast is titled “Is It Possible Nowadays to Renovate a Golf Course on a Tight Budget?”
Here were some bits of Clay Payne’s recipe for renovating on a budget:
The site needs to be conducive to easy maintenance to be affordable. In other words, not every site can be saved. For example, courses built strictly for housing development are often on sites where golf simply should not have been built.
Build your own nursery instead of purchasing sod.
Remove as much irrigated acreage as possible, converting it to native vegetation. Added benefits: It creates different hues and colors across the property, and you can repurpose any sod removed during the process.
Do as much work as possible using small machinery. It will take longer, but it reduces equipment rental costs.
Don’t move irrigation, if possible. Anything else is fair game, but confine your changes to the current footprint of irrigation to avoid major costs.
The other conversation is with Mike Young, the owner and architect at The Fields Golf Club in LaGrange, GA. The podcast is titled “How to Build a (Profitable!) Mom-and-Pop Golf Course”. Once again, I recommend a full listen, because Mike has a lot of things to say, and much it was far beyond what I could keep up with. Here are the scattered notes:
Monostand - most people don’t know the difference. He was talking about killing off the grass at a course and resodding or reseeding it fully in order to have just a single type of grass, an expensive process that most people won’t even appreciate.
He planted grass at the new course, rather than using sod. Most courses used to sprig, but now will sod an entire course so that it can open sooner. Sod is about $1.10 sq ft, though, a price that he compared to carpet. Sprig takes longer but is more affordable.
On the topic of opening courses quickly, he mentioned that old courses took 2-3 years to open, maybe longer. If you can be patient, you will save a lot of money on costs doing it the old way.
Buying a mom and pop course is still a much more affordable deal than starting a new one.
When working with an architect, steer away from architects who want to build an elite course to see their name on top of lists. They won’t want to build an affordable course.
Building a Top 100 course is a hard road. The best affordable architects are unknown, local names.
Some architects present their budget, rather than hearing the owner’s budget first. This is another sign of an architect to avoid.
Our Role
One point that Mike Young made that I want to point out is the difference in generations and the way they play golf. Is his mind, the older generation wants to be at the club, and many older couples want the social membership as much or more than the golf. Some older golfers don’t even like golf, he argues, but they felt the need to do it because it was good for business, or part of the social scene at the club.
He believe millennials, on the other hand, can lead the way towards more sustainable golf. They appreciate the game in a different way, he says, preferring to play in comfy clothes and bringing their dog with them. Those types of players aren’t into fluff, and don’t need perfect conditions to enjoy the game.
I think you can nitpick with his characterizations of the generations and what they believe, but I agree with his conclusion about leading the way forward for the future of the game. We need to adjust our expectations. When we are playing local public golf, we shouldn’t be rating our experience based on the speed of the greens. We shouldn’t be expecting Sawgrass- or Augusta-like conditions at the muni, and we shouldn’t be rating courses poorly for not reaching those expectations. If conditioning is truly what sets a golf experience apart for you, fine, shell out to go to the big resorts and find what will make you happy. But don’t judge local courses on the same scale. It’s not sustainable.
I don’t think I’m exaggerating here, either, when I say that this is how a lot of golfers rate a course. I look at Golfpass reviews and other sites frequently, and the top comments on a course usually don’t relate to the design of the course, or if it was a fun experience or not. It always begins and ends with “the course was in great shape! The greens were fast!” or “it was in terrible condition!”. I hear the same types of reviews from other golfers I play with, as well.
Do some courses need updates to improve conditions that have deteriorated over generations? Sure. But updates shouldn’t be made with an incorrect standard in mind, one that provides very little return in golfer experience. Embracing the sustainable upgrades mentioned throughout this article and focusing on high-impact, affordable improvements should be the goal of any future plans at public courses in the state.
In lieu of being able to personally finance public projects to enhance existing courses or build new ones, I can only contribute to public golf in the state by calling out and highlighting what works, like interesting and sustainable design, and doing the same for what doesn’t work, like unrealistic expectations for conditioning, or expensive rounds that provide a lot of fluff without much substance. If we slowly changed our expectations, away from conditioning and towards unique and memorable experiences, I think it’s entirely possible that we could become the true standard for sustainable public golf in the US.
The entire golfing country looking towards Michigan to set the trends… that sounds good to me!
Detroit Golf Club Renovation Announcement
In a complete 180 from what you just read, Detroit GC announced that it just narrowly passed a vote to undergo a $16 million renovation to restore some of the lost Donald Ross elements of the course. Presumably it’s also to try and get out of the bottom 5 of the Worst Venues on the PGA Tour rankings (not necessarily my opinion, but it’s out there).
The most details are available in this Detroit News article, which is behind a paywall. Fewer details are available in this Golfweek recap, but it’s not behind a paywall.
This news came out on Monday, so I wanted to give it a mention. This is just a preview, however, as I have a lot more to share on the project. You see, I may have, or may not have, initiated this whole renovation plan. I’m still trying to figure out just how much of an influence I had. More details next week!
Do you think the impact of less-instensive maintenance, like at Diamond Springs, could have an effect on other courses?
This was a great read! For many (me included), it starts with the condition of the teeing area and the greens. Everything else, we look at with a nod of understanding. But if the teeing area is decently maintained, and the greens roll nicely (not fast, but true), you're half way there. Keep muni's fun and affordable, they are so important to growing the game!