This is Jackson Park golf course, owned by Seattle Parks and Rec. It is one of the cheapest ways to play the game in all of Seattle.
It opened May 12, 1930. That’s before the Interstate and the light rail.
There are plenty of places to shit on golf courses. This one is probably a miss. Without mixed use space, this area has been a heavy car use zone with low walkability. The section from the freeway north of the park is also a steep hill, reducing the accessibility of the area.
Additionally, the plans provided do not meet the requirements for development. Specifically, how are you going to get a fire truck to the six story buildings in the middle. Is there enough space for.emergeny services to maneuver and to keep a fire from jumping buildings.
Talk and MS Paint is cheap. Good urban planning in not.
Reminds me of AtomEve’s situation in Invincible. Everyone think they are an architect till shit isn’t engineered correctly.
Okay, so put a road or two through the middle for emergency access. The walk ability part is supposed to be solved by the light rail they mentioned.
Golf courses aren’t inherently bad, but I think just about every one out there is weirdly exclusive and definitely wastes water.
Disc golf is a good example of a sport that doesn’t monopolize space. It’s built into existing trails. Generally speaking the public can’t walk on golf cart trails (I’m sure there are exceptions)
There are city-owned golf course around me that I presume aren’t that exclusive (I dunno, I don’t play). That said, they’re also implicated in draining all sorts of toxins into the local waterways.
I think they are inherently bad. They waste water, their turf needs constant care that puts nasty stuff into the rest of the water supply, and the space can’t be used for anything else. It’s not merely a game, either; it’s the defacto way for rich people to network and talk about how they’re fucking the rest of us.
Disc golf is just sticking a few goals into otherwise typical park. You are gently tossing a soft disc over maybe 60-90 meters so you don’t need to be extra careful to make the way clear.
Golf by its nature demands huge amounts of space for few people to enjoy. Further the landscaping and irrigation demands on a golf course are immense. You can’t have too many things on a course or people walking around, because a pretty hard ball comes flying from 200 meters away.
Minigolf is the superior and family-friendly alternative to golf, TBH.
Correction: The discs are not soft. They are hard and can be sharp-edged as well. Keeping throws away from walking and bike paths is super critical.
Ok, guess I may not have exposure to the scene as much. My experience is probably more ‘filthy casual’ level, at a few parks and a corporate campus that seems to just have goals installed without much regard for where the trails are, and the few times I’ve participated it was just random folks with pretty mundane frisbees.
I do. It is a giant waste of fucking space and resources so that some rich people can enjoy hitting a ball around.
The worst part is usually they take an undeveloped scenic natural space and turn it into a waste of water that pollutes from all the lawn chemicals.
Same weirdos who defend the horrid use of land will say “Fuck off we’re full” to immigrants trying to not die from wars and ethnic cleansing.
The US is very sparsely populated overall. Of course cities are densely populated, but that’s because they’re cities.
Michael Moore in one of his books suggested we repurpose golf courses into public housing. They tend to be in better school systems to begin with so there’s an added bonus.
There isn’t any context on where this is, but:
- there aren’t enough golf courses to really impact housing supply
- parks and recreational facilities also serve a societal good assuming they’re accessible and serve the community as a whole
- golf courses aren’t usually located along transit
There are enough to reduce housing supply issues.
Private golf courses provide little to no benefit to anyone especially after we factor in the environmental costs.
Golf courses not being on pubic transit is the only part I agree with.
1 and 3 are not good reasons not to try something like this. 2 feels like bad faith because this isn’t either of those things, it’s a golf course. Less than a quarter of golf courses in the US are freely open to the public, and a quarter of them are members only. That’s thousands of golf courses that are taking up space/land and water and returning next to nothing of value to the community or the environment, or worse than nothing in many cases.
Source for numbers: https://mygolfspy.com/news-opinion/study-percentage-of-public-vs-private-courses-in-the-us/
Sure I’m not arguing against, per se, more that it’s not enough to be worth worrying about.
Of the private golf course that are where people would want to live and where transit would be viable, that would not be better turned to more public parks and recreation, and where a locality can afford eminent domain, go for it. I’m sure there there are such projects. However I’m also convinced it would be a lot of work and expense for a vanishingly small percentage increase in housing supply.
Just as soon as somebody buys the LA and and develops it into affordable homes. Because I’m sure as hell never gonna be rich enough to fix a stupid golf course into something useful.
I wish we’d just do non luxury apartment high rises with underground parking in HCOL areas. Then there is room for green spaces, and more people can be accommodated.
Parking is always expensive, and even more so for underground. The counter argument is that you can build much cheaper without, so the units can be more affordable.
I don’t entirely buy that, since developers could already choose less high end finishing for more affordable units and they usually don’t.
Also, “less parking” is not the same as “no parking” and that hinges on their being useful transit or walkability. I know that’s one of the points of a district like this, but this is why you do need to think big, so that an individual developer can make the choice
See also “transit oriented development”. Boston is one of the cities that has been pursuing that idea. Recently it was extended into the suburbs with new higher density zoning being a requirement for every community served by the regional transit authority
All that goes up are luxury units that nobody can afford and it is usually the same stick built BS that is inefficient in use of space and adds more tarmac
Sure, but zoning has some effect - developers will build to maximize their profit within what is allowed by zoning.
- if zoning allows multiple units, they maximize profits by building as many as they can
- if zoning requires less parking, they may maximize profits by replacing some parking space with more units (assuming sufficient transit to allow them to sell)
- if zoning creates areas of higher density, a town center type of area can create a synergy that draws more people, more profit.
- while not everyone wants to live in a town center or a large building, more housing supply can drive down prices for everyone: supply and demand
I’m not claiming zoning is sufficient nor does it act quickly but it can be a tool for improving livability, setting the conditions for developers to profit more by building what the town benefits from.
Currently zoning is mostly a weapon enforcing the status quo, but it doesn’t have to be
housing
no parking, all walkable BS
You people just want to give a huge middle finger to every single person with mobility issues, don’t you?
Fuck you.
I have mobility issues and car infrastructure does nothing for me and in many cases makes my life harder.
Nobody said you couldn’t build paths between places.
Fuck you.
For people with no assistance that just have to walk, it’s ableist and hateful. And if you really had mobility issues, you’d be against these dystopian car-hating people, too.
Thanks for the link! I’m saving that!
I’m happy you’re disabled enough and/or rich enough to get fancy-ass fucking disabled bikes for yourself. Privileged shitlords. The rest of us are fucked.
Because public services and transportation hasn’t and can’t provide services to disabled people? You really think that? Fuck man, these systems can work and provide for you easily. Japan and the Netherlands have a lot of handicap support and you can get around without needing to be privileged. I hope you get the help you need.
I can’t use public transportation. They make a nice show of how they’re “accessible” but they’re really fucking not. Fuck public transportation. Cars are so much easier and go RIGHT TO AND FROM WHERE YOU WANT TO GO.
You’re just being ableist and parroting the same anti-car bullshit.
I’m not. But you’re unwilling to have a productive conversation. With unproductive language. So it’s pointless to really continue this.
Both countries still have cars. You can still get around with a car. The idea is to reduce car usage so that people that have a need for a car can and with less traffic. You’ll get to point a and b quicker without people that don’t need a car clogging the street. But hey I’m apparently being ableist. When you’re willing to be productive in conversation we can continue with this. But if you’re gonna be thick about it. I’m not interested in continuing this.
What the fuck? I’m in the poorest
5%4% bracket of my country
Why do you love dystopian cars?
Why do you love dystopian societies where people aren’t able to get around freely unless they are privileged?
Fun fact: massive parking lots also cause problems for those with mobility issues. So do really wide roads. Dense and therefore walkable city infrastructure is also the most disability-friendly city infrastructure, full stop.
God, I don’t want to imagine how awful it must be for a person with mobility problems to cross those wide ass roads they have in the US…
What. Effective public transport and less car centric infrastructure is far and away better for those with mobility issues. Walkable areas does not mean the abolishment of cars, it means more effective use of space and transport. Try visiting Austria or the Netherlands. Getting around is far, FAR easier than any city in the US. I have mobility issues, and require a cane to get around if I’m standing for significant periods, and yet the easiest time I had getting around was the time I spent in Vienna after living in different parts of the US for my whole life.
How do you have an easier time with a cane walking around everywhere than riding in a fucking car? I think you’re lying.
Bus. Tram. Subway. Train. And yes, I do drive if necessary. Walkable does not mean walking is mandatory, and a huge part of the push for a decrease in car only infrastructure is the increase in public transportation. The idea isn’t to remove the ability for cars to exist, but to make other forms of transportation accessible and possible, and make reliance on cars a thing of the past. I don’t know why you’ve got it so wrapped up in your head that cars are going to vanish and we will only be walking, as if there aren’t dozens of other forms of transportation accessible for those of us with disabilities. The time I’ve spent living in places with good public transportation is the most independence and self determination I’ve experienced. I’m not lying, you’re just disingenuous, stupid, or misinformed.
YOU HAVE TO FUCKING WALK TO AND FROM THE BUS, THE TRAM, THE SUBWAY, AND THE TRAIN. THOSE ARE NOT POOR MOBILITY FRIENDLY OPTIONS.
HOW FUCKING HARD IS THIS FOR YOU TO FUCKING UNDERSTAND, YOU HATEFUL SHIT?
I’m not hateful. The bus stop is never more than a short walk away. If you need a car to go 100 feet, then you shouldn’t be living alone. Do you think every disabled person is stupid? I’m not going to choose an apartment up 3 flights of stairs on the other end of the block from the bus stop. I’m going to use the ADA apartment on the ground floor that is a shorter walk to the bus stop than half the parking lot. If I need to get somewhere that I can’t access with public transportation without excessive walking, I’ll drive or get my fiancee to drive me. I’m sorry you think I’m hateful for sharing my own lived experience. That’s on you for lack of comprehension, not me.
Edit: And again, I USE CARS. I will continue to use cars when necessary. An increase in walkable cities and good public transportation means the roads will be more free for those that need them! It’s just an all around win, even if you absolutely need a car for any form of transport for some odd reason (even those that require a wheelchair use public transport over cars in most cities that have good transportation, because the infrastructure is built with us in mind).
You seem to think having mobility issues is an all or nothing, can’t-move-at-all or you can run around at will thing. I swear to fuck, people like you are the goddamn problem.
Grow up and figure out the reality of the world. Then get back to me. I am not going to live somewhere where I have to walk a path, pull myself onto a bus with tons of other people, cram myself into a seat, ride where I need to go, get what I need, CARRY THOSE THINGS BACK DOWN TO THE BUS AND GET ON THE BUS WITH THOSE THINGS, AND THEN GET OFF AND WALK BACK HOME ALSO WITH THOSE THINGS. Hell, even if I was healthy, that’s a pain in the ass.
Do you not understand such fucking simple things? Maybe you need to take the time to think about them. Don’t reply to me for a couple of days. Look at people who have mobility issues that don’t look that bad. See people getting out of their cars in the mobility parking that just snap up right out of their cars and walk seemingly without issue to the place they’re going? Hint: most people who do that are not faking a disability. Disability can manifest itself in many ways, and it doesn’t take much beyond simply walking down the street or living alone and being able to do enough basic tasks to get by safely to run into their actual problems.
Grow up, shut up, think, and get back to me. If this was any other goddamn condition, you’d be ostracized from society for being so goddamn hateful, but for some reason, ableism isn’t a real enough thing to people for them to be angry, and it absolutely should be as someone who does have some serious mobility issues.
You. Don’t. Have. To. Use your car! It’s not being taken away! You will have EASIER access to the roads with less people on them. I’m genuinely dumbfounded by your inability to understand this, or your apparent belief that disabled people either don’t live in or don’t use public transportation in places that have great transport. Seriously. You’re fighting ghosts here with how off the mark you are.
Why wouldn’t it make more sense to provide mobility assistance like motorized chairs for the 1% of users who need such to get them to and from transit options including parking even if its not house side.
Lol, what makes you assume they couldn’t build parking?
I fucking hate me, so this tracks
or we could not sacrifice our very limited green space to property developers overlords?!
i’m not saying don’t use green space better… but keep it green.
ps: i live in a very high density area and love it… but build up not out.
I see a lot of people saying build up not out, but you still need a place without houses to build denser housing (parking oceans should be place #1). I would keep way more of the green space than they do (and add in some community gardens?), but this might be a good option depending on the surrounding (sub)urban context. Its certainly not a good option for every (or probably most) golf course, but its going to be the best option sometimes.
my suburb is build on old light industrial area. close to everything, great transport and bike paths.
the main problem we have is land banking property developers just sit on land and wait for its value to go up so they can flip and make bank for doing nothing. also what gets built is to maximise profits not provide appropriate housing for all, so we get a lot of “executive suites” with italian tiles, european appliance and other wank shit that’s only there to drive up the price.
the answer as always is good quality public housing available to all (see vienna and singapore).
Cause no way in crap would that many people living that close together not cause issues
Under which rock have you been living? Ever heard of “a city”?
imagine being so antisocial that you’d rather drive to buy some fucking bread
you should visit honkers
Let’s also get rid of golf courses in arid deserts in the midst of droughts
You had me at “Let’s get rid of golf courses”
This is a municipal course as well, so Seattle could literally do this. The city government doesn’t want to.
This heavily neglected sidewalk, next to the fenced off golf course, alongside a high speed and very busy highway onramp just 2 blocks from a light rail stop, tells you just how much the city cares about the area.
There is no excuse not to cleanup and widen this sidewalk except apathy and malaise from the city.
@mosiacmango @PugJesus
My wire cutters, pipe cutters and bolt cutters are cheaper than your fence.That lady is Seattle personified.
A fairly generic lady and that’s what you took from that guy’s comment?
There’s nothing generic about that lady in fact that’s a pretty cruel thing to say about someone.
I’m a fairly generic looking person, we are more than our looks. She has nice glasses and isn’t unattractive or anything it’s just there’s basically nothing there to tell you where the picture is taken. There aren’t even visible brands anywhere.
Other than maybe being able to guess the pacific northwest based those maybe being barefoot shoes, which is still a reach, what else is there?
Also damn, going after me for being “cruel” while reducing her to a stereotype of her city? On a post about sidewalks I mean fuck, who asked you anyway?
Sorry, I didn’t mean any offense but it really feels like you’re trying to start a fight here and I don’t want any of that.
You’re probably not going to save 95% of the trees given the major earthworks likely needed for managing sewage, stormwater, and other utilities. You’ll probably save most of them, though.
40k looks pretty optimistic for the size and number of buildings, too.
probably not going to save 95% of the trees
I was wondering that too… maybe they meant: plant new trees, and the total number of new trees would be 95% of the number of old trees?
I’m guessing they’re just not aware of construction impacts on trees. It’s not something most people think about.
I supposed they meant “And this amount of space is still available for greenery” rather than “These, specific, trees will be preserved”
Depends how many floors they have but yeah, that would be quite high density at 60k/km²
I don’t know if it’s the same in USA but with all these new regulations building houses these days is an environmental disaster
Not sure how it works in the US but here in Oz (where water scarcity is always present in our collective psyche) golf courses are usually placed on flood plains where it would be dangerous/too expensive to build housing. In addition most allow people to walk through them and many even allow dog walkers so they have quite a lot of public amenity.
I would still prefer if they were just designated as public parks rather than having huge swathes of grass that needed frequent watering, but they’re not nearly as bad as most make them out to be.
Yeah, here in the US, golf courses can be extremely wasteful. There’s two golf courses on my drive into the city, one is on a river floodplain, the other is a HOA golf course full of sprinklers that could absolutely be more housing. If I go the other way, there’s another HOA golf course that could be housing too. So, to start with, there’s three golf courses in a 15km radius.
One of the HOA ones is exclusive access to the surrounding retirement community, the other HOA one doesn’t have a fence or anything, but idk if they chase people off. The one on the floodplain you have to pay to access the grounds.
But you know you have to be a certified rich asshole to live in those HOAs.
Public golf courses are one of the best things about Oz. They provide a forest island for birds and mammals among the suburbs. Many golf courses have large swathes of natural bushland around them. They are often run by the local council, and are hence not for profit, and generally they are very cheap to play.
They make most of their money via selling beer and expensive golf clubs.
Turn them over to property developers, and they’ll pave it with cheaply built single dwelling houses and flog them for way too much money resulting in just more urban desert and padded the obese wallets of billionaires.
That’s if they are even build able. Some areas on floodplains and marshes that serve as a local soak for stormwater, hence the water hazards. Some are built on landfills that contain mu icipal waste or even asbestos, hence you can’t risk putting houses on them where someone might dig up the asbestos or waste. Turning them into a revenue-generating forest parkland is one of the few good things you can do with that land.
The revenue earned by the golf course that is used to offset local parks and recs costs would otherwise be gained by taxing the local residents through land rates.
I used to hate on them a lot before I learned that the economics of public courses is way different to that of private ones. There are still some private courses, and I wouldn’t be opposed to these being taken back into public hands and/or converted into affordable housing. To the gallows with the greedy exclusive fucktillionaires.
In Germany most courses only have a few public walkways and if you leave them security will escort you right out
I work at a golf course and I’d rather be doing something meaningful like building homes so this post speaks to me directly.
Unfortunately the big thing lately is we’ve been dropping a bunch of trees.
If you just repurpose for housing you just wind up with 40,000 people needing transit and overloading the system you’re trying to promote.
We need to think beyond housing and towards having communities that largely provide the needs of the people living with them. Shops, offices, other non-office/shop jobs, and recreational activities need to be considered as well.
The neat part is that businesses can be in the bottom couple of floors. Though often this doesn’t seem to be done unless it’s the CBD…
