Golf Time Between Developers Results in Lower Land Bids

In an era of increasing development, higher land prices and new golf courses are cropping up at a phenomenal rate, it’s worth asking if the golf course developer model is really affecting the results in other areas. Is golf time between developers results in lower land bids?

Modern golf courses are often constructed to some of the strictest ecological standards in the world, and yet the amounts of rainforest and wildlife land cleared to make way for golf courses is increasing rapidly. But it’s not just in this sector that developers are trying to extend the playing area. One of the biggest promises in golf property has been of course greens fees – not a far-fetched demand when you consider that some courses have managed to generate annual revenues in excess of $100 million.

While golf courses are not the only locations where people create harmful noise pollution, there are also other issues, such as noise from construction, construction site noise and air pollution from manufacturing plants and oil refineries. These environmental factors can put citizens at risk for a variety of illnesses and can make them more susceptible to the public health threats that the industry creates.

Unfortunately, as long as golf courses remain the focal point of business, they will be one of the most important business models in any given area. Take a look at how many new homes are being built close to courses in some regions of the country. Quite simply, this is evidence of a preference by people for such amenities.

The Impact for Developers and Land Bids

It might seem like a bizarre result, but there are also ways to mitigate against the impact of time between developers results in lower land bids. Developers can set aside space for nature conservation efforts and wildlife habitat improvements – both areas that will both be healthy for residents and also vital for the ecosystems in which they live.

But if the “curb appeal” of golf courses is such that developers prefer them to anything else, why do they need to protect the natural world? What sort of an image are we trying to present? The main message that comes through from this study is that preserving the natural environment in any region is better than developing it.

For instance, when it comes to noise pollution, there is now a government-funded study underway at Stone House that suggests creating green space surrounding golf courses could significantly reduce noise pollution over a period of time. It’s a good step, but it may be too little too late for a lot of area residents. Do you think that in 20 years’ time, Stone House will still be studying the implications of the extent of green space?

It is hoped that over the next decade, the area’s residents will have greater access to noise reduction technologies, which may reduce noise pollution, but which do not actually resolve the problem of the environment. This brings us back to the golf course, which looks to some to be the perfect place to promote sustainability and wildlife conservation. This study has shown that there are limits to what the golf course developer model can do for us.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.