• YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    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/

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      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.