Originally posted by pdizo916:Why do you think the city's golf course day's were numbered? I don't live there, so I don't know.
I meant to say once the new stadium got the green light and construction commenced, I had the feeling the city-owned golf course's days were numbered. Apart from the misgivings concerning being built atop reclaimed landfill, it's pretty obvious with a new stadium on the way and relatively (to candlestick) less parking/tailgating areas... (though yes, surrounding office buildings will allow their lots to be used on gamedays, we all know it wont be the same and will probably involve restrictions on drinking, BBQing, etc.) ...It seemed inevitable, with all that green open space across the street owned by SC, the golf course land would eventually have attracted potential developement attention. It's all a matter of $$$ frankly...will parking fees and retailer/business rental fees generate more revenue than a municipal golf course and which option has the less upkeep costs? If the EI/earthquake study shows the land is feasible for developement it's a no-brainer for SC. If the golf course was privately owned and world class or even poshy like a country club, there might've been more hurdles to clear for developement, but frankly I get the feeling the city of SC will be glad to turn that land into a moneymaker, and I don't see many people lamenting the SCG&T club's demise. There are plenty of golf courses in the South Bay.
[ Edited by Dr_Bill_Walsh on Apr 8, 2013 at 12:33 PM ]