[alwann]

What a great parkland layout. Lots of elevation changes. However, not worth the price ($47 and change) right now. Fairways were quite thin. Many bare spots where rough should be, as well as debris. Greens rolled true but were also thin. Worse, they had been "painted" with some kind of green, chemcial treatment to cover the bare spots.

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by alwann

What a great parkland layout. Lots of elevation changes. However, not worth the price ($47 and change) right now. Fairways were quite thin. Many bare spots where rough should be, as well as debris. Greens rolled true but were also thin. Worse, they had been "painted" with some kind of green, chemcial treatment to cover the bare spots.

Is this a new course and just needs time???

[Rollie]

We golfed there back in November, and thought the same thing. Fairways in pretty bad shape and some bare spots on the greens. Too much sand for my taste. This is a newer course, but old enough that the grass should be established.

Rollie

[alwann]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

Is this a new course and just needs time???

It opened in 1964. It was originally called Golden Hills Golf & Turf Club, a Rees Jones design, and was reportedly refurbished 2 years ago under new owenership.

[Vill01talk]

We golfed there today. The fairways were thin and the greens were very bumpy, did not roll true. So far, the best off campus course was at Del Webb. Just the humble opinion of an average golfer.