Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-08-20 Town Council Minutes11 MINUTES SPECIAL EVENING MEETING, AUGUST 20, 1592,'7:00 P.M. A JOINT PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE TOWN OF VAIL AND THE VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT REGARDING THE PROPOSED BOOTH FALLS PAR 3 GOLF COURSE PROJECT A joint public meeting with the Town of Vail and the Vail Recreation District regarding the proposed Booth Falls Par 3 Golf Course project was held on Thursday, August 20, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7-00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Mery Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob LeVine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ken Wilson, Chairman of the VRD . Rob Robinson, Director of the VRD Mayor Peggy Osterfoss gave a brief meeting overview. In response to community residents questions and concerns, the Vail Town Council and the Vail Recreation District (VRD) organized this meeting for input on this proposed project before final Council approval of a lease between the TOV and the VRD for development and subsequent operation of a Par 3 Golf Course on a parcel of land in Booth Creek. Ken Wilson, Chairman of the VRD, reviewed the chronology of the Par 3 Golf Course planning and public meetings from August 9, 1989, through August 12, 1992. Mr. Wilson gave a detailed analysis and follow-up to the results of a 1991 informal survey used to obtain public input regarding organizational changes the VRD was contemplating. He stated the VRD prioritized its funding endeavors in response to the survey results, and noted the Par 3 Golf Course was ranked as item 13 on that survey. Rob Robinson, Director of the VRD, gave a financial update on the proposed project, including estimated construction costs. He later indicated this course would pay for itself and produce additional revenue for the VRD. Ernie Bender, Vail Golf Course Superintendent, discussed environmental issues related to the is proposed golf course, specifically water use and use of fertilizers and chemicals as part of an integrated pest management program. Dick Bailey, Golf Course Architect, displayed a preliminary site plan of the proposed course design, reviewed the course layout, and discussed safety factors figured into the design. Jim Morter of Morter Architects, the firm selected to design the proposed course starter house and parking layout, displayed the proposed site plans for both the building and the parking area. He said the starter house would be less than 2,000 square feet, and indicated the Planning and Environmental Commission had determined 24 regular and 2 handicap parking spaces would be sufficient at this time. Following the VRD presentations, Council questions focused primarily on concerns about environmental impacts, water use, safety issues, TOV's legal liabilities, problems with the bus stop and turning of buses on Bald Mountain Road, parking in general, and winter usage of the starter house. There was brief discussion about what permitted and conditional uses were allowed for the site. Kristan Pritz later briefly addressed permitted zoning uses. After Lou MesKimen, member of the VRD, first spoke in favor of the project, Charlie Langmaid spoke in opposition. He read, in full, a letter dated April 1, 1992, to Rob Robinson from Richard M. Phelps, golf course designer. Mr. Phelps had originally been selected by the VRD as one of three finalists being considered to design the proposed course, but, after his review of aerial photos of the proposed course site, he wrote to ask the VRD to withdraw him from further consideration as a possible designer of the course. His letter elaborated on a number of concerns regarding safety issues related to site limitations. Mr. Bailey, the architect chosen for the project, said Mr. Phelps' response was based on preliminary sketches. Rob Robinson stated the VRD had taken that letter very seriously, and be advised the letter had been reviewed point by point. Larry Eskwith spoke briefly about legal liability and governmental immunity. Public input followed. Paul Hay, Liz Webster, Robert Ansel, Flo Steinberg, Evie Nott, Larry Benway, and Barbie Christopher expressed mutual concerns in opposition of the proposed course. Their concerns included landscapingissues, bus stop and bus turn -around problems on Bald Mountain Road, fertilizer and chemical use, water use, berming problems, noise issues, safety issues, course design problems, parking problems, concern about potential changes to neighborhood characteristics, and a desire to maintain open space. Paul Rondeau, resident on the Championship Golf Course, inquired as to where the proposed Par 3 Golf Course would be in relation to the 1,400 acres of TOV open space, and how the 1,400 acres were categorized. He felt many residents were unaware of where TOV's open space areas were. Evie Nott, Founder of the Nature Center, displayed recent photographs of the proposed golf course site, and included a list of wildflowers now there. Ms. Nott proposed a joint stewardship between the Nature Center and the Vail Alpine Garden to preserve the site. She stated Helen Fritch, Founder of the Vail Alpine Garden, was interested in that concept. Peter and Joan Jaffee, Dennis Nichols, Hermann Staufer, Rick Pirog, and Scott Darrel all spoke in favor of the project. Diana Donovan said she was not against the project, but asked for proof of its need. She felt there was a need to create a process to address the use of agricultural open space, and felt strongly that the safety concerns expressed by Mr. Phelps needed much further consideration. Ken Wilson called for Council to confirm their original approval by making a decision on the signing 40 of the lease. Mayor Osterfoss advised the approval or disapproval of the lease would not take place at this meeting. Mayor Osterfoss called for final input, and then Council members were individually polled for their response. Jim Shearer was for the project, feeling this project was a good blend of use for the site; Jim Gibson was 100% in favor of the project, and believed the VRD would do everything possible regarding expressed safety concerns. Tom Steinberg stated he was not ready to make a decision. He noted Larry Eskwith had been directed to look into a land trust with a built-in required vote of the people, and he wanted to know what would be done with the $1 million cost of this project if the golf course was not built. Mery Lapin said he was 75% in favor, but indicated he still had some unanswered questions, primarily about use of municipal water. Rob LeVine was for the project, but expressed concern about the bus turn -around situation. Bob Buckley, who resides on Bald Mountain Road, said he was for the project, primarily because he was for development of Booth Creek. Mayor Osterfoss spoke of the importance of maintaining balance, and said she felt a golf course was a form of open space. She advised there were still issues to be addressed before approval of the lease, particularly the safety and environmental questions raised by many in attendance. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ' Mar; et A. OstAss, Mayor ATTEST: - S. RvaLi) Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Data 9 GNINSMAY5.92 HISTORY OF PAR 3 PUBLIC MEETINGS AUGUST 9. 1989* VRD places a par 3 golf course on its agenda to begin discussing the feasibility of a par 3 course located at the Booth Creek 13th filing. Correspondence is sent to the Town of Vail asking for • information concerning the TOV project review process. SEPTEMBER 25. 1989* Par 3 course appears on VRD agenda as preliminary review. Staff is instructed to send out letters via certified mail to all homeowners in 3rd, 11th, 12th and 13th filings announcing a public meeting scheduled for December 13, 1989 at 6 PM, Town Council Chambers. OCTOBER 23. 1989 VRD staff sends out certified letters to all homeowners in the 3rd, iith, 12th and 13th filings announcing a public meeting scheduled for December 13, 1989 at 6 PM, Town Council Chambers. The certified letters cost the District $320 to mail out. DECEbfBER 13, 1989 Public meeting held on tentative par 3 golf course as well as a public presentation of Vail Aquatic Center. Community members overwhelmingly support the idea that the best use of the Booth Creek land is for a par 3 golf course. DECEMBER 20. 1989* • Par 3 golf course appears on VRD agenda to discuss planning process and options to lease the Booth Creek land from the Town of Vail. FEBRUARY 14. 1990* Par 3 title search, covenants, zoning and cost estimates for conditional use permit was discussed. APRIL 16, 1990 Lee Hollis and Susan Rychel petition homeowners in 12th and 13th filings to obtain support for the par 3 golf course. VRD receives 55 letters supporting the development of a par 3 golf course at Booth Creek 13th filing. JULY 11. 1990* Presentation to VRD Board on 9 hole course budget analysis. JULY 26, 1990 Ron Phillips sends memo to Brian Jones, VRD business manager stating that Kristen Pritz from the Community Development staff will set up a public meeting in the near future and the Town Council will then decide on a lease agreement. • OCTOBER 24. 1990* Budget analysis revised by new Executive Director and public meeting set for November 6, 1990, 7:30 PM, Vail Town Council Chambers. NOVEMBER 6. 1990** Public hearing was held during the Vail Town Council meeting to seek public input concerning the Par 3 golf course. Minutes from the meeting indicate that resident comments were supportive of the 1 District's efforts. Mery Lapin made a motion to allow the VRD to, proceed through the planning process including any rezoning that may be necessary to allow the District to build employee housing on the project if so desired. Peggy Osterfoss seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously 7-0. DECEMBER 11, 1990 Robinson, VRD Executive Director, sends letter to Ron Phillips and • the Vail Town Council thanking them for the approval to utilize the 13th filing for the development of a par 3 golf course. Letter outlines the development process with a statement that construction and architectural plans should be completed by spring 1992. JANUARY TO MAY. 1991 VRD researches feasibility studies to include environmental analysis, construction feasibility, pro forma and bonding regulations. JUNE 251991** Rob Robinson and Ken Wilson approach the Town Council to discuss the terms of the ground lease for the 13th filing in order that VRD can complete the pro forma. The Town Council agreed that the District should look at a rent free agreement in exchange for Town of Vail employees receiving free golf and tennis passes. After this period of time a rent based on a percentage of the gross should be implemented. A 7% figure was generally agreed upon. Ken Wilson, VRD Chairman of the Board, emphasized that he would like a letter of agreement signed by the Town Council prior to the upcoming council election and a sign of support from the council before the district begins spending money on the project. The Vail Town Council members again voiced unanimous support for the Par 3 course to be constructed on Town of Vail land at Booth Creek. OCTOBER 19. 1991** Ron Phillips presented to the Town Council a letter of understanding that he and Rob Robinson drafted concerning a general understanding of agreement that would be the basis for a ground lease for the par 3 golf course. NOVEMBER 13. 1991* Robinson presents letter of understanding to the VRD Board which the Town Council had directed Ron Phillips to sign which states the basic conditions of the lease including a provision that the land be rent free for a minimum of 5 seasons or until the golf course realizes a net profit for an entire season, whichever occurs later. In exchange for the free rent, the VRD will provide the Town of Vail full-time employees golf and tennis season passes. At such a time that the golf course realizes a profit the District will pay a percentage of gross revenue (7% was discussed) and the Town will revert back to paying the District for its employees, golf and tennis passes. (see attached Letter of -Understanding). _VRD Board__ ,_ members authorize staff to begin expending budgeted funds on the Par 3 course now that we have a signed agreement from the Town of Vail. NOVEMFER. 1991 To JANUARY 1. 1992 VRD hires Dick Bailey to do a disaster check and routing plan for the Par 3 golf course to insure it can be safely constructed within the 13th filing land parcel. JANUARY 8. 1992* Dick Bailey presents disaster check and routing plan to VRD Board and insures the Board that a 9 hole, par 3 golf course can be safely constructed within the land parcel and in his professional . opinion can be accomplished in a first rate manner. JANUARY 22. 1992* Brian Jones, VRD Business Manager, updates the Board on the par 3. FEBRUARY 26. 1992* Robinson updates the Board on the selection process for the starter house and course architects. MARCH 11. 1992* VRD Board interviews building architects and tables decision until next meeting. MARCH 25. 1992* VRD Board selects Morter Architects as the starter house architect. APRIL 8. 1992* VRD Board interviews golf course architects and Dick Bailey is awarded the contract. MAY 13. 1992* • Colleen McCarthy is selected, with Gail Molloy as the alternate, as the Board representative to attend planning meetings as they relate to the course and starter house construction. MAY 26, 1992** VRD appears at Town Council work session to discuss specifics of the lease. The consensus of the Council is to sign a long term lease, either 40 or 49 years. A percentage of gross will be utilized to determine the rent basically at the same rate as the championship course (roughly 7%). Council indicates to Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney, that he and Rob Robinson and Ron Phillips can work out the details of the lease and they feel no further Council input is necessary at this time. MAY 27. 1992* Robinson reports that the wetlands hydrologist will be here next week to perform the wetlands analysis. A soils testing will also occur shortly. Robinson received input from the Board members on their concept of the starter house. JUNE 24. 1992* • Jim Morter and Dick Bailey give the Board a par 3 update. The wetlands review is completed. -although the report has yet to be written. Indication is that there is minimal designated wetlands where the starter house and parking lot are proposed to be situated. The next step, once the formal report is written will be to contact Mike Claffee of the Corps of Engineers in order to initiate any necessary mitigation. Robinson stated that he assumes we will have to mitigate with the Corps, but that we can hopefully stay on schedule to break ground this fall. JUVE 24, 1992 VRD hosts another public input session for the par 3 golf course. VRD expends $535 in advertising the meeting, an article appears in the Vail Daily discussing the meeting, letters are sent to all Booth Creak homeowners and VRD staff visits all homes in the vicinity of the course and delivers flyers by hand and/or tapes notices on doors if no one is home. At the public meeting VRD receives majority support to build the par 3 golf course. A show • of hands has a count of 54 individuals supporting the course and 6 opposed. JULY 22. 1992* Robinson reports that the Corps of Engineers has been on site several times inspecting the wetlands. while mitigation is going to be necessary the total amount of wetlands amounts to roughly 1/2 an acre. The area designated as wetlands may actually be considered head waters run off by the Corps of Engineers which will make the approval process even easier. Morter will follow through with Claffee on the mitigation process. The Par 3 is scheduled to go to PEC on August 10, 1992 to discuss parking. AUGUST 10. 1992 VRD expends $304 in advertising for the PEC meeting and sends letters to Booth Creek homeowners. PEC designates that the parking area should consist of 24 parking spaces and 2 handicap parking spaces with room to expand up to 30 spaces. AUGUST 12. 1992* Robinson updates the Board on the PEC meeting and informs the Board . that the Town Council has set another public input meeting to occur on August 20, 1992, 7 PM, Vail Town Council Chambers. To date the Vail Recreation District has held 4 public input sessions concerning the Par 3 golf course (includes the 8/20/92 meeting). The Par 3 golf course appears is times since 6/9/89 on the VRD publicly posted agenda. The Par 3 golf course appears a minimum of 4 times on the Town of Vail Council publicly posted agenda. *Vail Recreation District published meetings per the Colorado state Statute. **Appears on the Vail Town Council meeting agendas. w\work i' TOWN OF YA1L 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 -479-2100 AX 303-479-2157 LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING This letter of understanding is to confirm the Vail Recreation District Board's understanding of the agreement reached between the Vail Recreation District and the Town of Vail at the June 26, 1991 sub -committee meeting. Our understanding is that in exchange for continuing to allow free resident golf and tennis passes (on which certain restrictions concerning times of play may apply) to Town of Vail full-time employees, the Town agrees to lease the Booth Creek parcel of land to the District free (or for nominal consideration) for development and subsequent operation of a PAR 3 Golf Course. •The rent-free arrangement described here would continue for a minimum of five seasons starting with and including the initial season of play, or until the golf course realizes a net profit for an entire season, whichever occurs later. At such time, the Town and the Vail Recreation District could elect to extend the agreement under the same terms or renegotiate. In the latter case, the Town would revert to paying the District for its employee golf -tennis passes, and the District would pay a percentage of gross revenue (7% was discussed) at the PAR 3 course, to the extent this amount does not exceed net profit, to the Town. The dates of initial development of and play on the proposed PAR 3 golf course are uncertain at this time. it is understood that this Letter of Understanding is a conceptual and broad outline of the parties agreement and that the details of the possession and use of the property known as the Booth Creek parcel shall be set forth in a written lease between the District and the Town and that this Letter of Understanding shall be subordinate to the lease. •Rond V. Phillips, Date Robert Robinson, Date Town Manager Executive Director Town of Vail Vail Recreation District CAvomMu m VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT POSITION STATEMENT SUBJECT: 1991 SURVEY RESULTS CONCERNING FUNDING PRIORITIES In41992 the Vail Recreation District employed a recreation student intern to assist the District staff in conducting an informal survey. The District was contemplating several new organizational changes and was desirous of public input prior to implementing these changes. As a result of the survey the following specific action occurred. The District prioritized its funding endeavors in response to these survey results. RANKING FUNDING PRIORITY ITEM VRD ACTION TAKEN 1 More teen programs -Addition of new teen special events -Renewed cooperative relationships with high school groups -expanded teen center hours 2 & 8 Nature Center/Environ- -Hiring of a full time outdoor specialist mental Programs/ -Expanded outdoor programs Outdoor programs -Addition of new outdoor youth programs -Nature Center fund raisers (duck race) to • help improve Nature Center displays and trails -In 1993 we will begin administering environmental youth camps and outdoor adventure camps -Currently the VRD subsidizes the Nature Center and its environmental programs by $18,000. -Currently the. VRD subsidizes Outdoor recreation programs by $36,376 3 Community special Events -Hiring of a full-time special event supervisor -Addition of new events -VRD took over control of all events previously administered by the VRA and TOV 4 & 5 More Youth Sports Pro- -Reorganized Youth Services to create a full - grams & camps time youth sports coordinator. -Greatly expanded youth sport programs & camps 6 Dobson Arena -$20,000 spent on capital projects -Recently hired two new full-time skating pros to expand Dobson's role as a skating mecca. Currently VRD subsidizes the Dobson Arena by $183,339 7 More 6-12 year old programs -Youth programs have increased by 400% over the past two years -Spent $35,000 on the renovation/construction of a youth service room dedicated to this age group. -Currently VRD subsidizes Youth Services by $136,279 0 Improve Athletic Fields -Funding of $24,500 for new fencing project -Reorganized golf maintenance staff to create an athletic field maintenance branch -Purchased several new capital project items in order to improve athletic field conditions -Currently in the process of spending $50,000 for athletic field lavatories 10 Vail Golf Course -In the past two years the VRD has spent $709,140 to improve conditions and upgrade the Vail Golf Course 11 Programs for the 1-5 year old -The VRD continues to run its Potpourri Camp and Pre -Potpourri nursery at a subsidized rate lower than most valley day care centers. The Eagle -Valley task force on this issue recommended more day care centers, but suggested they should be operated by certified day care administrators 0 12 Funding of Tennis -Construction of Ford Park tennis facility at a cost of $500,000 -In 1992 the District sponsored a professional team tennis franchise to help promote tennis in the Vail Valley. -The District reorganized its tennis branch to add additional staff in order to increase league and tournament play. 13 Par 3 golf course VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT PROPOSED PAR-3 GOLF COURSE vT LIKELY SCENARIO) $15 GREEN $15 GREEN 118 GREEN f20 GREEN f20 GREEN (NOW -GREEN FEE REV PROJECTED FEE FEE FEE FEE FEE TO INCREASE 10X/YR) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 REVENUE: ................................................ GREEN FEES 150,000 150,000 180,000 200,000 200,000 (BASED ON 10,000 ROUNDS) PASS REVENUE 5,000 5,500 6,050 6,655 7,321 (BASED ON 50 0 5100) MISC CONCESSION REVENUE 7,500 ....................................................... 8,250 9,075 9.983 10,981 TOTAL REVENUE: 162,500 163,750 195,125 216,639 218,301 (EXPENSES PROJECTED TO INCREASE 5X/YR) EXPENSES: SALARIES (6 NO. SEASON, 2 STAFF N-AUG, O.W. 1 STAFF) KER'S COMP INS MEDICARE, FICA PRINTING (BROCHURES, BAG TAGS, ETC.) ADVERTISING BUILDING REPAIR 8 MAINT ALARM FEES UTILITIES/WATER 6 SEVER UTILITIES/ELECTRIC d GAS TELEPHONE CHARGES TRASH REMOVAL (1100 NO X 6 MO) JANITORIAL SUPPLIES GOLF OPERATING SUPPLIES (SCORECARDS, PENCILS, TEES, ETC.) MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES (FIRST AID, LIGNTBULBS, TRASH CANS, ETC.) BANKING SERVICES CLEANING SERVICES OPERATING EXPENSES: 0 25,000 26,250 27,563 28,941 30,388 1,100 1,155 1,213 1,273 1,337 1,915 2,011 2,111 2,217 2,328 1,500 1,575 1,654 1,736 1,823 500 525 551 579 608 500 525 551 579 608 280 294 309 324 340 750 788 827 868 912 1,200 1,260 1,323 1,389 1,459 600 630 662 695 729 600 630 662 695 729 500 525 551 579 608 3,000 3,150 3,308 3,473 3,647 800 840 882 926 972 2,000 2,100 2,205 2,315 2,431 1,000 ----------•----------- 1,050 1,103 ....... -------- 1,158 1,216 41,245 43,307 45,473 ----............. 47,746 50,134 --,.,pi:CLak GL�tilLf'iKs� rr 06 8 6a cu - ellA�W 11 VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT PROPOSED PAR-3 GOLF COURSE 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 ....................... ............................... SALARIES (2 STAFF/DAY X 8 NRS/DAY 45,675 47,959 50,357 52,875 55,518 X 225 DAYS • 3/4 ASST SUPT TINE) SUPERVISION, IRRIGATION CHECKS 4,DOD 4,200 4,410 4,631 4,862 FERTILIZER, HERBICIDES, FUNGICIDES 3,000 3,150 3,308 3,473 3,647 MISC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1,000 1,050 1,103 1,158 1,216 SOIL, SAND, ETC. 1,500 1,575 1,654 1,736 1,823 IRRIGATION MAINT 6 REPAIR 500 525 551 579 608 LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES 1,000 1,050 1,103 1,158 1,216 MAINTENANCE EXPENSES: ............................................... 56,675 59,509 62,484 65,608 68,889 TOTAL EXPENSES. 97,920 102,016 107,957 113,355 119,022 • FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR DEBT SERVICE: 64,580 60,934 87,168 103,283 99,279 (REVENUE LESS EXPENSES) DEBT SERVICE (10 YRS, S75DK DEBT) 102,584 102,584 102,584 102,584 102,594 NET PROFIT (DEFICIT) ...-----•.............................................. ($38,004) ($41,650) ($15,416) $699 ($3,305) SOME DEBT SERVICE SCENARIOS: (WITH INTEREST RATE = 6.5%) DEBT = $750,000 ................... 5 YR PERIOD: ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE - $176,898 7 YR PERIOD: DEBT SERVICE = $134,213 10 YR PERIOD: DEBT SERVICE = $102,584 15 YR PERIOD: DEBT SERVICE $78,649 it PAIL RECREATION DISTRICT ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS - PAR 3 GOLF COURSE (AS OF 8/20/92) COURSE CONSTRUCTION: Misc Consulting/Professional Fees Architectural Fees • RBI Construction Bid: Clearing Excavation Topsoil Grading Rock Picking Lake Seating Drainage Grassing Maintenance Paths Bridges Retaining Wall Landscaping Irrigation TOTAL Constr Bid a ter 6 Sewer Tap Fees Total CLUBHOUSE: Architect Building Constr Costs Landscape Paving Furniture Voter t Sewer Tap Fees Phone Total OTHER: Bond Issue Cost (est a 3%) PC, ETC Machines Mist: Startup Costs • TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS 16,950 33,000 9,115 164,200 8,000 8,000 40,000 31,575 11,400 12,000 8,820 22,500 165,125 MOST LIKELY SCENARIO 15,000 75,000 530,685 93,000 713,685 15,000 15D,000 15,000 27,500 3,000 10,000 1,000 221,50D 24,000 4,000 2,000 ------------- 30,000 965,185 • NOTE: This bid amount is contingent upon starting construction by no later than September 15, 1992. Delaying the project until spring of 193 will result in additional costs. Booth Creek Par 3 Environmental Review The goal of VRD's golf/parks maintenance program is to produce Stxcellent playing conditions in an economical and environmentally sound manner. This goal is accomplished by responsible use of climatically adapted turf and plant species, water, fertilizer and pesticides (if required). Our professional approach to turf/landscape management is based on university proven cultural practices including integrated pest management (I.P.M.). I.P.M. involves constant monitoring of plant health, proper diagnosis of pest injury, selection of the safest effective control (chemical or otherwise) to prevent economic damage to the landscape. The staff combines college level training, Colorado pesticide applicator licenses, regular turf industry seminars, and years of experience to professionally maintain our facilities. In addition to consulting with Colorado State University, U.S. Golf Association agronomists, a sports turf consultant help us use the best up to date technology to accomplish our goals. Water Use Considerations • Irrigation for golf turf is based on its needs for adequate growth to recover from wear and provide an aesthetically pleasing landscape. The cool season grasses we use require about 35 inches of precipitation annually. We attempt to replace 75-80% of evapotranspiration daily or as needed. Excessive watering that would cause run off is avoided. The 8 acres of irrigated turf on the proposed Par 3 course would require approximately 217,O00 gallons per week to supply 1 inch of precipitation. Based on 20 weeks (or 5 months) of possible irrigation the course would require about 4,340,000 gallons annually. Supply will be a 3" tap from municipal supply lines near the east end of the site. This tap will have no affect on water pressure in the Booth Creek area. Fertilizer/Chemical Use Considerations Fertilizer use is based on annual soil analysis reports. In addition, nitrogen (the primary nutrient used by turf) is applied at the rate of (1) pound actual N per 1,000 sq. ft. per growing month. (The averages 60-65 lb. Nitrogen per acre per growing month). Pesticides used include herbicides (broadleaf and grassy weed) and fungicides (primarily for snow mold, a winter/spring disease). Pesticides are used .only as needed with preventative treatments used on greens, tees, and fairways for snow mold. No restricted use pesticides are used although they are legal for golf course use. Sprayers and spreaders are calibrated for exact rates according to label instructions. Virtually all pesticides we use are available to the general public as are Material Safety Data Sheets outlining potential hazards and preventative safety methods. The presence of deer, foxes, marmots, waterfowl, squirrels, beavers, and the abundance of birds is clear evidence that we are preserving the environment and not destroying it as some would have us believe. •- • • 48 Challenge Of The '40s: Safeguarding Golfs Future Understanding Groundwater's Vulnerability Careful pest management and chemical handling practices — coupled with identifying and protecting points of potential vulnerability — can reduce the potential for contamination. Groundwater Is water that lies below the soil surface and fills the pore spaces in and around rock, sand, gravel and other materials. Contrary to popular belief, ground- water does not move through vast underground rivers and lakes, but through water -saturated zones called aquifers. The upper level of an aquifer is called the water table. The level of a water table fluctuates throughout the year, lowering as water is removed from wells or discharged at streams and springs. The water table rises through recharge from rain and melting snow that seeps through soil into the aquifer. Groundwater is subject to con- tamination from many sources, including industrial and municipal waste, leaking underground storage tanks, road salts, agricultural fer- tilizers and pesticides. For years it was thought that the natural filtering of water during its slow movement through the soil, sand, gravel and rock formations was adequate to cleanse it of con- taminants before it reached ground- water. Today, many chemicals, including some pesticides, have been detected in groundwater, Studies have shown that recharge can carry pollutants down to aquifers. Further- more, it seems clear that human activities can lead to contamination of the recharge water. Not all groundwater is similarly vulnerable to contamination by pes- ticides. The deeper the water table is below the soil surface, the less likely pollutants are to reach ground- water. A deep aquifer provides more opportunities and time than does a Safeguarding golfs future through environmental understanding calls tot an awareness of the permeability of geo- logic layers, among other factors. shallow aquifer for pesticide adsorp- tion, degradation and other processes to occur. The permeability of the geologic layers between the soil surface and the groundwater is also important. If the materials above the water table are very coarse, such as sand or gravel or highly fractured rocks, water can move to groundwater more readily than if less permeable layers of clay or solid rock are present. Carbonate bedrock, such as limestone, can make groundwater particularly susceptible to contamina- tion because it's easily dissolved by water to form solution channels and depressions in the land surface. The depressions, called sinkholes, can provide a direct connection between the soil surface and the groundwater below. Contaminated water that drains into a sinkhole can readily enter groundwater because the soil that lines the bottom of a sinkhole is often thin and provides little filtering of pollutants that enter it. Wells A well is a direct conduit from the land surface to groundwater. The method of well construction, the fre- quency of well inspection and main- tenance and the proximity of a well to a pesticide source are important factors determining the potential for contamination. Pesticides can reach groundwater by moving along the outside of the well casing or by entering the top of an improperly capped or sealed well. The well casing forms the wall of the well and keeps the borehole open. A cement compound or grout is Continued on p. 50 Golf Course Management / February 1990 I till-, r r a till it .gNa�I FRS .B� 3 ro 7R, I t F f M2, I., I WE 8it It fl aaft Cjl ?teT.g3�4aR gF �3���� &�Q. '�g�'A•�'�0 `�5' r$EF��,�~�3 � T p YaRE q iL Eggg�e E $4R df r •E � 2' cyR 3 13 5 pEg,' 20 LA+ 7a 3 nE� •�e4 � Lim, a3(�'s�•9� �� �py�ypS '6R ��pc�a��.^R `n �RR A ° ��". q�q`���� �37 �`.°� �!?� n sg�0.�M���b .,%6 �g qE��• $rq' a R9� �o G��W§ �. 33 c a'd 5o f �c�r'�' ps !-FIR n.E`�° p 3r 4. �',"c— p 7• , e R � ���d^ °'�$' do.�"�aaM �b .Tc17 17 '^ATaw 4k.w�.m ''"off'. Vt9 � k�°,aS�'8.J R ��fft(���( �•_S gT�e� ^Q3S��p�,'�y��� S� �� C.� A � �qEm nb ��YD c. � oS'R���o, � it 69 � i The Environmental Fate Of Pesticides . A working knowledge of what happens to applied chemicals is essential for superintendents to answer questions. n this day and age, the environ- mental soundness of a golf course Is constantly being questioned. Whether the course has been in exis- tence for decades or is simply being pro- posed, concern over the use of fertilizers and pesticides dominates much of the public's attitude toward it. One-sided mass media coverage of pesticide use in general has helped fuel much of that concern. Unfortunately, occasional Instances of irresponsible abuses of pes- ticides on golf courses and other turf areas occur and only serve to fan the •flames of public outcry. Fertilizer and pesticide use on golf courses is necessary to provide a play- ing surface that is adequate to satisfy the requirements of the game. Proper choice and use of fertilizers and pesti- cides is fundamental to sound manage- ment strategy and provides the back- bone to which other maintenance practices are connected. At the focal point of fertilizers and pesticides is the golf course superinten- dent, who makes the decisions con- cerning their use. As a result, it is incumbent on superintendents to be as conversant and literate about fertilizers and pesticides as possible. Central to the issue of pesticide literacy is having a working knowledge of pesticide fate. With this knowledge, golf course superintendents can appropriately answer questions about pesticides and the environment, whether the questions •are posed by a golfer, a club official, local citizens or even members of the media. Common Perception Most people assume that when fer- tilizers and pesticides are applied to golf courses they either move off the site in runoff water or move downward with percolating water until coming in con - Continued on p. 22 18 EtZ the richness and complexity of the golf course environment are manifested in many different ways on each Individual course. An understanding of the variables involved can help superintendents work to address members' and public concerns about the fate of pesticides applied. fl'! 4f &1P, i flit a �MIM 8 gab p 3. r/Y R'�� �36� R . I� psg r7p} Q$ �4q oip�, qG. a'&q m. W_�.�o £�'O� y�3£ 3n. sw� �i Wf��� Co�.�y`�. gn �r. •h 6 7 w 4 9 Z S $�€j�. ' C• $ E•• �jQw' e$ V3p b ° w '� ^ a 4HO ya..g� DS.Og 2uRRn EE R'�E3e A i IF I �n ,�oS ELF a�a � sgb Q j Wig $» RINN q d a �' Ads. Sp.S'X R•° £itt °w R,? io'R s 4o2.�r•2Aa n', g'o'x °.�r� 33�y RA � �p d�� 2 K`�:po�3 aaxosgga_��8�sC..g'�qR$»�T p ,g'93"33a. ,g^ 9q 5 e.a-^q' yy o r R n, bn ng.1"S, om $$ggg E'Q � g iia 32. c3 S11p p���"T L� g E iii E" K p bg aar$$$ggyyy �Q3�i^s b �_ o...ga4QR�4 �wFa"�oQ ;!If qaq^3n�o `,���y{9..v�d w 7g6Qa'�aFo �," ad ^q�g,K,4 a'"'4•�S.d�. p. $v3eo a n_o's3 x'3aafdd 3"S"3'�gRp3 .&� gwgRQ�r $ Rs p3¢gga�5gg4 R°aggAg L $. 4�. �� w n 44° $»a'� a 4y� uRR�RR 9,�gq&xt3 R'❑de ae, 16y�' 5' '9� f)x$$39»o^I'? RSA?CX�%wR'�-£'S�iSk3'S, T1�e teal Ling � FVal��aGr�,ng ester ldes 0i'I'alristas J. u t gieHatd°gp Amne"s` ��„ecsnv of N1° atdN a daO'A on � al mil ne"'steP ut a^. ndWatetbovoo 'Ro1' tioAeyV- °tOqtlYo4W O° try ePvee uWaet thaI o°�awe eKm oon,°Q y 4 teltes °^a d deca ae is pOt tep su b,gtau'i alone. 4e we ComPlishtd sact-'091les hau within water mU, i,ewal —.0910 0 Ae com�Ufiity stes, a t,,fgraS6 ttcatian t1COJO -'Oil" npF Owo yet eomFasition of „bare so bee^ t � ro ua c is tat am . - "to Hate©arse jnr different fT° a d"°tn ve io lrw° din^attt 1te amt t° n Soif °^. a+V;" e,seatutt4�thteate wtelad�e4 appttcat°nm y tou^d ate a1 of bac+g,Tnedlal m°C Nen touad to hosett.0 gotl °that wed Pt°ut°osHJt+,'t° be eDP�' ewPe MedeQ za0s "o, sose,1901" p s'N ate that a� �a hb n m StH thebe °IAO he °rtg m'_�_,ttq� tatolnatio^ce ,go- wthan 3Q , at sma tws Agroo Pe � envho 5s about �, ateM' Wte atd c° e � F tk acttotr vebeenctosee'Cgntamit�utaats t0 phlwuahs4�ow„to aP°agavetsO 'At took standd�^° cwu"ve thatha k d bV so t bQ d, the ma^�eva�t tt Wt age sltbe _11"$ , s^b^ba°d sarised ai mntam>Hah t d chet^tcals hat u such ash t thatw,e I a, Wells and ha sty�desw 'dam vent . so+1- t Least 6 Wnh a9tt t course °ped4 cat+tam\natudm9 nlachto n vehees ttk ha lde total � RUNOFF bem p. r of a tudgrass community. The follow- ing overview is provided to summarize the nature of a turigrass community as well as recent research results as they apply to the movement of tudgrass pesticides - The Nature And Composition Of A T dgmas Community Any analysis of the potental for a pesticide to leach to groundwater must take into account the amount of applied material reaching the soil surface and the amount that in fact moves down through the soil past the root system. Thus, plant density, rooting and thatch development have a significant effect on leaching potential. 6entgrass is often established in the northern United States on those turf areas that we most intensively managed and that receive the most water, i.e., greens, tees and fairways. One pound of bentgrass seed contains 6.25 million seeds with bentgrasri areas typically seeded at rates ranging hour 0.5 to 1.0 lb. /1,000 square feet. Thus, you can expect about 1,400 to 2.800 plants per square foot in the held 9 you assume initiation and a field survival of 50 per- cent Cod -season species (Kentucky bluegrass, line ferscues and perennial ryegrass) commonly seeded for rough — and perhaps fairway — turf result in between 1,000 to 1,200 plants per square foot. After seeding, tudgrass plants have a great capacity to produce additional plants from the one primary plant that develops from the original seed. This process of lille ins, as well as rhizome or valon prod rsCdon, enables is tudgrass A moderate thatch layer Is useful in tying up pesticide residues and preventing leaching in soil. area to maintain and actually increase Its density over a period of years despite the fact that existing plants are matm- trg, senescing and dying because of erwironmental stresses and pests. Although we think of tudgrass as being perennial in nature, Individual plants are not truly perennial and seldom live stand as a whole is perennial only because of Its ability to continuously produce additional plants that grow and mature in take the place of those that are dying. Given the tremendous capacity of turfgrasws to multiply and produce a dense plant canopy I> 2,000 plants per square loot). a soil cover of plans is rapidly developed that is capable of intercepting and drastically reducing the amount of applied pesti- cide available to reach the soil surface and potentially leach. Each of the several thousand plants growing per square foot of turf develops a root system to provide an for water d nutrient uptake. As with shoot develop- ment and tillering, the roots of turf - grasses are not lag -lived perennials and must be replaced on a regular basis to maintain men function. Thus, in a Period of one Io two years there exists an extensive and well -developed net- work of roots underlying healthy turf• grass areas. Root systems underlying bentgrass and Kentucky bluegrass turf have been observed to reach maximum depths of 12 and 48 inches respectively, with a majority of the root system occurring within the top 4 to 6 Inches of soil. C hn fr y. 12 Pit high plant densrly. malOn chrW-pm•nl end ex1en roof Iysf•ma Of w Jr--f—ird run/ era among me taerOrr Ihaf eMlribule 10 minlmrring pashcide leaching pofenaal of golf'WIMa. Cw40 Crone Min,yfemmf / rebr q, f990 RUNOFF Jr p. to While root development will vary with soil texture, moving height, fertility and other factors, these estimates provide an appreciation for the extensive nature of a typical tudgrass root system. Tudgrass rod systems are quite extensive and fibrous and are capable of adsorbing and absorbing applied pes- tkides that might penetrate the canopy and match and reach roots. Indeed, numerous pesticides are formulated as systemic materials designed to be absorbed by plant roots. The prolific rooting of healthy turf helps to reduce the vertical movemem of applied pesticides. Thatch Development And Organic Matter Accumulation The constant production and turn- over of plants in a tudgrass community results in the accumulation of a large quantity of leaf, stem and root tissue that awaits decay by microbes. In a vigorously growing turf environment such as a Boll course she rate oil (issue accumulation often exceeds the rate of decay, resulting in the development of thatch. Thatch is defined as o layer oI living and dead plant material that accumulates between the mne of green vegetation and the soil. A moderate thatch layer is useful in tying up pesti- cide residues and preventing their leaching in soil- Thatch has also been shown to encourage the degradation of certain pesticides. The eventual decay of leaves, stems. roots and thatch inaeraws the organic matter content of underlying soli. This Increase in soil organic matter may bid in binding pesticides and retarding their movement 10 groundwater The abdity of a perennial grass stand to Improve the structure and organic matter content of a soil is well krwwn; the soils of the prairie states are a good example. The organic matter content of a native mineral soli may average, depending on the particular soil, 3 percent to 5 per- cent. Even in cases where a putting green is constructed of 100 percent sand, over a period of five to seven years the organic matter content of the upper layers of the green may increase to 6 percent to 8 percent as a result of the organic matter generated by the growing tud. In addition to the tendency of the turf system itself to adsorb pesticides and limit then vertical movement, other pracesses interact to degrade or adsorb pesticides applied to turf and thus reduce their potential to leach. Depend- ing on the compound applied, avenues Several studies have demonstrated that a well -maintained, dense turf can reduce runoff to near zero. of dissipation include: • Gaseous losses (volatiltation). • Photodegredaaon by ultraviolet light. • Microbial decay. • Hydrolysis (breakdown In water). • Cotiverslon to other compounds. • Adsorption to sod in unavailable forms, Enesronmental Impact Of Pe,snClde Application Concerns about possible adverse effects of tudgrass pesticides on the environment generally focus on poten. tial pesticide movement in runoff, or groundwater contamination. Taking into account the previous discussion regarding turfgres density, rooting and thatch development, one might con- clude that pesticide application to a dense, well -rooted tudgrass area would not be likely to result in environmental pollution. Indeed, numerous research studies to date have shown this to be the case. Runoff. Several research studies have demonstrated that a well. maintained, dense turfarea can reduce runoff to near zero. This is due in Large part Io the fact that a turfgrass area has tremendous potential to absorb precipi. ration. It has been estimated that a 150-acre golf course has the capacity to absorb 12 million gallons of water during a heavy (3-inch) rainstorm. The velocity of overland flow of water across a dense tudgrass stand is sufficiently slow that, under most conditions, the vast majority of water will Infilrare into the tud/thatch /sod profile before it can move horizontally from as sae as runoff Studies conducted In Rhode Island revealed that during a two year period, overland runoff from lawn.type turf (3 percent dope) occurred on only two occasions. and both resulted from unusual climatic conditions. In one case, rainfall fell on snow-covered frozen ground, and in the other case extremely wet conditions preceded a 5-inch rainstorm that generated mnaR. In the tatter case, depth of runoff was less than 1/ 13 inch even though a tad of 10 incises of rain fell within one week. Work in Pennsylvania deter- mined than Irrigation applied at a rate of 6 inches per hour was necessary to cause measurable runoff from sodded slopes of 9 percent to 14 percent over- lying a dry soil. Runoff from natural rainfall did not occur during the study 0985-19881. In many areas of the Northeast. storms generating rainfall of even 4 inches can be expected to Occur only once every five years. Because tent areas have a gnat capacty to absorb precipitation and prevent runoff, runoff from golf course turf would not rou- tinely travel from fairways, greens nr tees into adjacent non -target areas. Leaching. Research concerting the effect of pesticide application on groundwater underlying turf areas has tncreased substantielly within the past five years. Most of this work has focused on the fate of hatfictdes and insecticides. The fact that these materials are In many cases intended to each soil and are mote penistant than most fungicides makes them a gnatere concern fce leaching than materials that are targeted for above -ground pests. Work In Ohio by Niemczyk et alhas consistently shown that tudgmu In, ticides normally penetrate no deeper Cenaawd rn a 1e C Af Crone Management y {ervew, /rig RUNOFF fmm P 12 than 1 to 11/2 inches into the soil pro. file. When commonly used turfgrass Insecticides, including bendiocarb. chiorpyrifos. ethoprop, isazafos and Isofenphos, were applied to a golf course fairway, 98 percent to 99 per- cent of the residue remained in the thatch layer rather than leaching Into the soil below Iris determined one to two weeks aher treatment). Residues in the upper inch of soil never exceeded 0.8 ppm during the 34-week sampling period. Indeed, one of the factors ham- pering soil -inhabiting insect control Is the inability of turf insecticides to pene- trate below the first few centimeters of the soil profile. Research evaluting the vertical motal- try of pre -emergent herbicides applied to tuTfgTau has recently been reported by Krause and Niemczyk. When applied to thatched turf, 78 percent to 100 percent of recovered residues of pendimethalin, bensutide and oxadia- wn were found in the thatch layer. When applied to thatch -free turf, 82 percent to 99 percent of recovered residues of those herbicides were located In the upper inch of soil. Other work evaluating the pre-errlergence herbicide pendimethalln has shown it to be relatively immobile and not suscept- lble to leaching. The mobillty of the broadleaf herbi- cides 2,4-D and dicamba has been 14 evaluated by Gold et al. following appli- cation to Kentucky bluegrass growing on a sandy loam soil- Both herbicides were applied at standard rates (2.4-D: 1.0 lb,/acre: dicamba: 0.09 lb -/erne) either during June alone or three limes yearly during April, July and Septem- ber. in addition, duplicate treatments were ri-e—twed by applying 1/21nch of irrigation Three times weekly regard- less of rainfall. During the two-year study. 2.4 D and dicamba concentrate tions were less than 1 ppb in 80 per cent and 91 percent respectively, of a total of more tban 350 samples. No increase in sods concennations were detected during the second yew. indicatingthat degradation of both her- bicides was sufficient to prevent accumulation. Average concentrations of 2.4-D ranged from 0.55 to 0.87 ppb while dieambe "waged 0.26 to 0 55 ppb. Federal drinking water standards for 2.4-0 and ditatnba era 300 ppb and I2.5 ppb, respectively. These researchen stated that the thatch/soil zone underlying Kentucky bluegrass creates an aerobic zone high in organic matter that enhances microbial degradation and adsorption of the herbicides. They concluded that ..given the current water quality stan- dards. routine applications of 2AD, and dicamba to home lawns do not appear to threaten groundwater quality." Evidence concerning the immobility of mdgram fungicides and herbicides has also come from recent groundwater sampling studies on Cape Cod, Mass.. golf courses, Four cape Cod courses were chosen for study because they Tepresemed a "worst case scenario" for leaching of pesticides and nutrients into groundwater. All four courses were located on highly permeable and sandy soils, were more than 30 years old and had a history of high pesticide use. In addition, sampling wells were located where the depth to groundwater aver- aged 28.5 feet and was as shallow as 5.3 feet below the surface in one case. Cohen et al. reported that no cur- rendy registered uafgrass pesticides were detected in toxicologically signifi- cant concentrations. In addition, they concluded that "use of turfgrass pesti- cides by the four golf courses with vul- nerable hydrogeolcgy was found to have minimal impact on groundwater quality." Concladon The potential environmental hazard associated with most turfgrass pesticides appears to be minimal for several tea - sons. The pesticides most frequently used on golf courses are not generally highly mobile. highly toxic or very per- sistent. Those herbicides and insecti- cides that are intended to reach toll are not usually applied more than once or twice per year. In addition, tudgran pesticides are normally applied in extremely dilute solutions rather than in concentrated forms. Processes such as volatilimfton, photodegradation. hydrolysis and microbial decay often act to break down existing residues. And finally, the dense carwpy of a well - maintained golf course and highly adsorptive thatch minimize runoff and potential feaching. The pesticide binding capacity of a turf is strongly related to plant density, thatch development and rooting. which are all improved through proper fertili- zatfon and pest management. Rather than threatening envtronmeruat quality. improved turf quality achieved through judicious use of pesticides can prof", the quality of water emanating from a Conanurd oa p 16 Lott Course Mm>gemenl / Febr y I" RUNOFF from P. 11 golf course compared to poorly main- tained course or other tend .- While the evidence n strong that use of turfgrass pesticides does not appear to threaten groundwater, one should not take this asa license to apply pesti- cides excessively or without due cau- .n. Cultural and biological approaches to pest control need to be more fully integrated Into golfcourse management plans with an eye toward reducing pes- ticide application. There is little doubt that golf course pesticide use could be reduced substantially by employing primarily curative spray programs for non -lethal pest problems and by mcreased adherance to integrated pest »....>ne.1 madir — R"weecaa ek.ium. BE. ad D J WAw 14e5 it,. I e d diw.on .PD4.d m aurce.a lal Ap•acn,v Jam nd TT to t.rm CaI .5 Sr—i NxAraw.0. rdaN.A Owed 2A 5•w d990 Apaw,dwrxe mauw.9 K.avb paxcdn uW aysaau.r.drrram.m s=s caa+a on Cp Goa G d Maae,x,e Rnw. I--. w.PPra a FeTb , r. fAacn. .dlaeI Gold, A J. T.G. Wit SuWm..nd J Mal-- Isis t.rrmrad 2.a0.nd aNrM+lro,n twine Valor wear. Al, and Spd Paaunen 3r:12Li29 Ha+Kar, s A . T.L. W We . rid G tlr,xdrari 1969 Nuavnn rho 9rraaaa aid lrMlyrr Imm inyw.a �w4s� rani Al— se Krwr.. A A , rnd M D taanad, 1989 Vaatd nwWty d Mr prr aaaernca Iw.u.eWsd b wd eMr Ayawmv GAter w. P tAxwn. S G.. A J old.xw ave, M Sui4ea Inaans. d o.sn..r.a,y lea lan4raavn,n avoem baa 124 2dJ.t2h. H.,„rys.H o 19aT.. lta „Ma,a d,ppsr.twn a,aon r..er,.e.ta..pnar d.lardraar. dvauts a ealnP�a w rdnad d Jsrs Lralr rr n x+lvm Ja..rW d Eapar Eenaxyr 8P 4at em IAr.nrolk.MD.�aA wr,r naf 0.erd.r,on W aea,Yy d kiaceadrr 4piN re MI/rrM A4'�a^v Alr.z6 a r62 Kraaaa, ad K O lax l9TT tn.eh L 26M.nen +,wines dd.reeln OlvR 2a spxn.l .su_ canna.a. re wdw • v r966 caua..,.ew, .. r*wrWw.aaspa A,. wa.n,.wa d me .p«+d lrgeddw .sot xeeM K. J st— C Std Mrea.rrra 5rd.y4 1 K.PJ SlaiRC Swww.dRn t,s, ri l— DapdstlyrnaardnAg— . Ndtl P It rrw, rarKx, a,d d Ayovnv AM a 166 SY,W. G K P J TA,ra. D R T­ rho R C Sa.H,o.n I4aa MnN.,wr wd draeraar d aria daa�Yn n xaa,d,y a4—r ad Mana,N L T W urcl4r L. 5 Hr.mn, aid G W MoaRon taJ99e..+.waia, S W0 Vas Aseo oar ,.. pal+ t C A G..n ..r,a. Rand 27Ill SK Fodowine axnameiV aaeyy nmrar, waiar from antis edleoant M DWI courses — esgabey sere. iron-porppa swracn teen Sit •Dols, rnMa, dnrewoys and pared parrs — -SYG a IAtlia source of rnnoN do soma focanoaa titan rho MM" M apfalnp run enaa of me rouse. C, h Coursr Atrnageminr / FeaNeN line Ch.jj,,,g. Of The '90s: Safeguarding Golfs Future The Cape Cod Study GCM presents the results of a major scientific field investigation of the effects of golf turf chemicals on groundwater. Stu ur Z. Cohen a.wvi— It. s, emtffc community began to cem about a turf pesticide affecting and surface water quality The ¢mplsayye the study of nitrates in of fenuii. grourdwater was published in 1978. Dubie et al, {groundwater as a resuh ration in the mid- to late 19701 TM damorsammod that arsenic was lost in the and root zone leachate of a emphasis on the study and regulation i c des in groundwater also began runoff turf "mete' at toxicologically signifi- of pe late in that decade. By the mid-1980s, cant concentrations. The turf plot simu fame lawn — go percent Ken. has of thousands of wills were found laced a to contain elevated nitrate concentra- tions and detectable concentrations of at Key T �sPi5'c�' 19e�EA sonen. su nidyo� But few, d any, ul the dam points were codected from malls associated with the • Seven of the tested Curl pesa- detected. nation's 13,626 god coupes. The first comprehensive Ifeld inves- .ides were never • No currently registered peal - sides were deheted at toxicokxpcallY trgation d the effects of cud cherntcak significant concentrations. on groundwater was recently com- pitted on Cape Cod. This article aid Lower nitrate concentrations when less nitrogen, slow - de+cribe that study and descuss its results iot a brief overview d the rewfted release nitrogen' bI both, was used. in in 1M context water quality issue. Thus, reasons tie changes management practices can minimize Busclsaraasd nitrate concentrations. The earliest paper expressing a con, rocky biuegrass and 10 percent red fescue. (A lysrmeter fs a device for codecring soil mofuure below the root zone. The type of tysimesn used most frequently in rod research has been the gravity or pan lysimeter, where ceramic plates are installed below the root zone la collect ieachate. Tile drains under greens are crude gtaviry lysimelers. The other rype of lysimeter generally used in (zestkid¢ studies is the suction lysimeter. This lysimeter is a hollow rube, typically 1 inch by 1 to 4 feet, closed at one end with a rounded. Porous, ceramic cup. suction lysimeter, are InsW)led through the turf. and suction is used to sample pore water that may contain turf chem- icals leaching to groundwater. The EPA often requires the use of suction lysimeter,, so you may team more about them if a groundwater study is required at your golf course.) Coennuad on p. 28 Tna arudY rnd—r•tl that mosI pastiudex do not Nusa A" proundweter, sysn in an area Cl vurnt ropealo¢Y, Vn addi I—. fna rreoy round that minH eoneenrranonr could Da reduced ar altarine ma en Con Courar Management f Fearuary NW 26 • ChaPenge Of The '90s: Safeguarding Golfs to CAPE COD hem p 26 The Geriests Of The Cape Cod Groundauster study In late 1983, significant citizen con- cerns raised the groundwater issue to the national level. The Board of Health of the Town of Brewster (Cape Cod, Mass.] wrote to the EPA about the pro- posed Captain's Golf Co.,.. The board asked an intelligent, responsible question that could be summarized as follows: "We would like to have a new golf course, but we would also like to ensure good quality lot drinking water —ave the two compatible?" Each pesticide was evaluated for mobility, persistence and human and ecological toxicity. We im EPA) performed arisk -een- ing exercise, or risk assessment of the potential pesticides, establishing a con- ceptual process that is ,fill used. Infor- nu tlon on the following PwarneWns was used to develop a risk assessment, which is an integrated evaluation of chemical toxicity and exposure potential. The pesticide parameters were: • Mobility — sod/water distribution coefficient; water solubdlty; volatility. • Persistence — aerobic and anaem. bic soil metabolism; hydrolysis: photolysis. a Human toxicity — chronic health advisory leuels based on acceptable daily intakes for non -carcinogenic effects and a onein-a-million risk level for cancer Incidence. e Ecological toxicity (tor surface water cc--$) —acute lethality data (LC- or LDr., values) for the apProPd- ale species, typicat)t rainbow trout, bob- white quail, daphnia magna and far - head mtnnow- (This parameter was not 28 The Site Of The Study oo. eatr.ns Tha tourgolr couraes friar wan aelMtest for hionlronng Were char" On the ba11a or patricide and larrllhes, use, ade AM ny411090010940 yprm"Wllf y. evaluated for the pToposed Brewster least be familiar with these principles. site because of the lack of significant , runoff potential.] Our conclusion surprised us. We The site parameters wete: assumed that most pesticides would • Hydrogeology — soil type, depth to groundwater; net aquifer recharge pose an unreasonable risk In such vul- resulGng from predpilatlon and Irrtga- nerable hydrogeology. But after a Gorr: aquifer Permeability on and latudc thorough evaluation of available data con; equity). and use of the Pesticide Root Zone • Nearest drinking water well cap- Model (PRIM), we concluded that only a few of the pesticides might threaten tore :oats. Why are the principles behind a 1983 groundwater quality (Cohen. 1984). assessment being restated in a 1990 The Captain's course was built and a amcie7 Because you had better be groundwater monitoring program was aware of these principles if there are any instituted, and the course is currently in concerns in your community about the operation. effect of your S golf course on water qua]- miler questions were raised when ity. You can rely on such technical the Bayberry Golf Course was pro. experts as university, extension prof-- posed for construction in West Yar- sap and c—lusms, but you should at conanved an p 32 Goll cw Marug—, / february tow. tp ■e f t ! ! f .:� f •¢ YE T N i f •:� r�� r s f f:E / �e - f 9 P n r t � s � � • � r # • r o f v;Q v;q v v v Y Challenge Of The VN: Safeguarding Golfs Future I • Challenge Of The '90s: Safeguarding Golf's FutT CAPE COD yes• F. >• In he suspended phase of the ground- preferential lbw In the bound phase wafer sampkes This led us to speculate through macropores ar v r" aou- chkedanc was uswd as a tuff insecticide on the mop likely route for the chke- contamination during well installation. for took crickets (while grubs) and as dens to reach the aquifer. The two meet Macmpoms can be solution covitles. a herbicide, Records are insufficient as likely pouibiiitles seemed to be Cenenwd en p 40 to whether and how much chlordane was used on the golf courses in the Nilrate-N Groundwatils Results study, There are no Indications of sig- oat Ceww war+ low M7.fOBB Ownfl niftcant termhncide use In the area. The Awrep. s44dl#a R&M. Alerag. Nagtsn Rang. Avieiga real mystery is how the chlordane/ thaw yW heptachlor epoxide reached the a SA6 9,00 5.8012.0 9,76 7.00 6.60.7.50 0,02 groundwater. T 2.21 1.30 0.10.7.00 0.52 0.50 0.10-1.00 1.03 F 3.99 4,00 1.30d 50 6.16 0.00 4.40.10.0111 4.16 n 0.3 0.2 127 1.25 0.10-3.21 4.55 4.80 0.1".00 2.79 eaw.nt no Technical chlordane a olio 0.50 0.10ano 0.40 0.40 roo.10 clog T 191 1.50 0.103.OD 9.10 0.4a NDA.aO 0.99 Is persistent, but o ism q00 2. 0o aos i000 1 o6ao ea1 It is also Immobile Fumexne and therefore not B 0.10 0.+0 0.100.+0 0.10 0.10 ND0.10 0.10 likely to leach .... T o.74 0.70 0,401.ao 1. 136 1,10-240 1.54 F (mt rwisnpla it aaenplas - 0.30 and 0.10) O Z.53 1.5. OA04.w 1.40 OAS 0.6041.00 7.44 +ry.atvspar B 0.11 2.10 0.W0.20 1.78 1.50 ND-0.10 0.10 2,24 T 3.46 220 04".00 3,53 2.50 +.40-6.50 324 Technical chbndene, H perduent, bW F 7.92 3.60 told0 4.39 2.20 1.406.50 32A a is .lo Immobile and therefore not 0 7.63 7a0 4.OD10.N1 4.06 4.20 1.40a.50 5A2 likely to leach to groundwater In the a npulla in mglt. 0.tec.on limb . 0.10 mpn. aqueous phase. In fact, a special anal- NO • nondatect 10.1 9aiWs do Allact delactiant) ysis was dona that showed chlordane B . b.en0eovno wall. T . tM wen. G . green wall. was bound to aquifer or sod materisk A Few Facts About Groundwater Wls.t it woundwowA Gdurdw.br N waste found in the asntraied *arse- The "Named none is ran. sues beneath the ground anr- face where r port V- aryl 4xtsdr ail flYed with VAW- Wher Is an a F4 "? - An aped er 11 a geobpsc kunadm cordaiNnp groundwater der is cape• bk of yMNrg water to . well. Typi- cel oge il."ere send land gravel. h'acumW rock and ketr lfnestine. Often, papicukrly In the wap.rn [kited Sum. mess own wee asquter Ova un,iorlas devrieca. This it an HnpoRYli factor to consider when condooli rig wafer supply or giound- 38 tessa monitoring studies. Iykas is groundu.Wr je7unefT Gtvurhdlrater urhdalks mar d dr lhlaad St1res. k can be as aid toes as 9 test below tie elnfece ion pert ZI FkrWa or 60D fed deep In q� lit Hensel. Groundwater con- sousss 14 percent of ills worid-s htaah ewer supply. In cm*". tell slwb/gMcla; and lies/ee.cvdn ,psis. up8s pnceM and O.s pe twit of the Ear&* fresh water supply. How etoes It mesh? It Is better to drink of grourdwaer asatrapYnp radter than lbwty Ike An underground stream. Typical groundwater Bow velocities an 1/2 itch to 1 fog per day. Groundwater Bows from aseas of hipster head or .kya m a seas of lower bend at elevation. Groundwater usually Bows award the fotoablg discharge Palms safes, stmai dw ocean sand walls. Senme stream may whlapy rerdl.gs squdm during certain th- d tlw year, Who COntYltle. pourdwotar? One Ilelf at t!w total Unaad StatW population .rid 95 percent of tha u.swill population r.6w do groundwater as Its main .ounce of drurkasp water. r•- CAPE COD hoe, a 38 between the surface cement and the Some spatW trends in pesticide ana- bemmnile plug above the well screen. sines were noted as well, Most findings earthworm burrows, decayed root However, this was not done. Instead, of pesticides and related compounds in channets and so on that He beneath the the well drlller followed the standard groundwater centered on the greens ground surface. It has been demons practice at that lime for that area by and tees. All eight green and tee well rated that water and solutes can travel rapidly downward through maaopores using the native soil obtained during had at least one detection during the drilling to backfill that portion of the study. whereat only three fairway well when the surrounding soil is saturated annular space. Thus, if the soil can- and two bac]eground wells had dertec- after prolonged rainfall or irrigation or rained chlordane and if the integrity of tions. The difference Is even more both. Macropore flow is of particular - apparent when examining total, concern to agricultural researchers individual chemical detections for each because of the increasing use of cooler- well. Using this approach, the follow- vation tillage, whereby reduced filling Darr was the only ing numbers are obtained: green wells regimes allow the continued formation organic chemical detected - 12 detections; test wells - 12 dewc- af macropores. Therefore, macr re flow is one possible route of transport tons; fairway vmlH -seven dMettbns; I in the background teens. and background wells - two detections I of chlordane to groundwater, other lac- This suggests the (bosh were DCBA, the apparent herb)- tors being equal, I{ possibility of tide impurity). The original plan was to install off -site source. Three conclusions ran be drawn from monitoring wells with a grout sealant an this assessment Ground aratat Va. Ground Water One ward or two? Ms c ert" not the most pressing question coneam- Ing groundwater of ground water). but it Is an I.. that has drawn Its share of adentan. The author of this aracle H a firm believer W ground water and can produce dozans of ovations In sup- port of making it two words, Includ- Ing a number of dictionaries, techal- cal glossaries, )our all and rep". On the other hand, the style that this magazine has followed for three years is grounduaur, and were not alone in our spelling. Publications of various Institutes, other magad as and jounak w weB as private 00M- panies male it one word, Turning to the EPA for an answer fmis to shad any additional light on the Hew, as the agency caw both spellings in its publications. But for our purposes - because magazne style is bawd on the prin. clpls of consistency a an aid for den - groundwater wit comurw to appear as one word. - D.M.M. Coll C-m Manaarmenr / fcanwrr 19e 40 . • pesticides and related compounds ` r slure found in areas where peaIcidu If the bantonita pig will somehow tom• era mom inwnsively applied - the promised, contamination direcilydown greens and tees. the borehole would be a distinct • Chemicals that may have leached possibility. I to groundwater under greens and tees Both of these possible explanations do not appear to have migrated extan- of the chlordane results should be con, sively to the other welt, sidered in the context of the temporala The mystery compound - DCBA trends that were evident. Significant - was the only organic chemical ever deciines occurred in the pesticide con- detected in the background wells. This centratans between the first round of suggests the possibility of an off -site sampling and the second round and source. between the second and third rounds. The nitrae results were encouraging- Betweenthe first and Second roundsof Although the golf courses definitely sampling. 14 detections of chemicals in increased nitrate concentrations In wells declined, and six increased. groundwater at several locations. it - Between the second and third rounds, appeared that lower nitrate concenim- 10 detections of chemicals in wells tionsresuhedwhen Mum, slow -release declined, and three increased. In the N - or both - was applied. last round of sampling, only five wells The Falmouth course seemed to use contained detectable pesticide concen- the highest proportion of slow -release trations. Chlordane was only detected nitrogen fertilizers, and It had the lowest once - in Hyannisport - in this final concentration of nitrate -IN In ground - round Thew trends are consistent with water. The Eastward Hol golf course the possibility of crosstontammmion had the greatest nitrate-M groundwater during well installation. concentrations in 1986 and also tended It Is my opinion that both the macro- to apply more water-soluble nitrogen. pore Bow and cross-connminaoon When nitrogen application was signth- phenomena contributed to the chlor- cantly reduced in 1987. groundwater i dons results but that more of the detec- concentrations of nitrate-N warm also tions were due to cross -contamination significantly reduced. These trends , than macropore Bow from the surface. cannot be explained by the rainfall data. This is another mystery that may never The result, Indicate that reasonable be resolved conclusively. C--i ell. p. 42 Gal! C.- Management i February 19➢0 I - - -- -- - CAafkngs of Tits 90s: Ssfs8 9ts Goy: Fukrre CAPE COD here p. M chonga in mamogen ent procdces can Irwdmipe contominoaon m the golf course enWanmentsthat were sndied. They are also generally consistent with some of the data and principles sum- manzed recently In an excellent review art,cie by Pelrovic (Golf Course M.rmogemew, September 1989). Broad" Implications If we axismkhe the sdantdre data on god courses and groundwater, we find K is bmhted, but encouraging. 1 men - owed eadlor the findings of Duble, at al. 119781 regarding arsenic. Gold el al. fl9881 conducted an analogous turf yvnater study with 2,4•D and dicamba — 90 percent Kentucky bluegrass/10 percent fescue plan. Dicamba is mobile and persistent, and 2,4-D is mobile but not persistent. (Information on estmat- i g groundwater coaam""morl potesl- 11 based on mobi sty and per i se nor data can be found in Gustafson 09" and Cohen. et al. (1984)), Gold at al, 42 stradkd leaching of these herbicides At The Florida Department of Elnviron- high and low application rates and low, mental Regulation found EDB In And ovawater angmion r¢5pmes. They groundwater samples associated with found that 0.4 percent of the 2,4-D was 12 golf courses of 22 sampled. EDE is lost in the soot mite leachate — a worst- a mobile, persistent and toxic sdl fumi- rase scenario for groundwater contsmi- gant nematiade that wssba d by the nation potential — generating EPA in 1983. The range of concentra- 0-55-0.97 ppb maan concentrations. tuns was 0.03-11.0 Pitt), end the .. .....----'...- ._ .I hearth advisory level less than or equal to 0-10 ppb. IThese data are the sub- ject of A court rase.) It we examine the Niemcryk and Krueger (1987) scientific data on golf damonstrated that thatch significandy, retarded the movemem of i.a Ihios courses. we find it (Triumph) through Ohio turf. (We have limited, but encouraging. successfully calibniod the PosticWt Row Zone Model with these data.) Akhough other agricultural studies _ —:=---,... -. =-v dennrswate a A.A. kw mass percent One percent of the dicamba was lost In of pesticides loathing through the roe the ieach to generating 0.9.6-0.55 ppb zone, the work by Niatncryk deron- mean concentrations. The health advl- strafes an additional barrier to leaching gory levels far 2,4•D and dicaroba are found in only the thatch of tudgrass. 70 ppb and 200 ppb, respectively. There is also limited information Therefore, there would be no toxico- available on turf runoff. Again, the logo, Gems for these leachatas under available Information is encouraging. the conditions of this study. Ca -d oo p e9 One Superintendent's Observations On The Cape Cod Study Ed Nash g,pnYemdae d Goa Counn Tawh d ysee tor, rA' When the Town of Yarmouth sought to construct a second municipal golf course near wall field.. we wm asked to show, due the course would not pollute the towns ddnkkg water. The town's main concert) was our proposed use of fertlYaers and, pesticides on the site. Available studies were presented to various town and county Million - ties, but no information was evaia- ble spodficaty for Cape Cod. The available information was generally viewed As beksg fnpdtlrunt b Poor our case. 0 Rea4ting that litany new gov courses might never gat bulk without mains kscal information. the Cape Cod Turf Managers Association Agreed to parsidpare in a ground- water monkonng study of our golf courses. The EPA, Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development Com- rmtseion and the state pestickie bond provided most of the funding for the study. To get funding from dose groups. proposed projects head to damon.trau "local enures." The nehvspapars Povldad uswtth pknry of speculative. negative coverage so we had — prablam with dot. Spe- cial Conks should be given to my 9.9 —mission At Bass River Golf Course. superintendents Charlie Passio.. CGCS, and Bob St. Thomas of Hyamirport GC, Brian Cowan of Eastward Hof GC And Bucky Hall of Falmouth GC. Beause of the way that the media covered the only stages of the study. we had more than one maeti g to decide whether we wanted to con- tinue with the study - Tart wrts watt drill on greens. ten and fak—y. of the four old. Co.h.d w, p. es Challenge Of The '90s: Safeguarding Golfs Future _1 CAPE COD ham. P- 42 its* show up in groundwater, but it is Cd , 52.. R F. Cod, SA, Craer. wd C.G. equally wrong to assume that the soda, IM -PMmwtlpPme C - ---- -d thatch the t tedthe c Waoeon Apecuae.tUnm:ln T,ro t Morton, et al. (198S) conducted A humeter and turnoff study with nitrogen feraezers. Their Kentucky bluegrass/ fescue plots in Rhode island had 2 per- cent to 3 percent slope and sandy loam soil on both irrigated and non-tr igated and test plots. Overlrunoff occlmed on or* two storm events during the two Wan of monitoring. One of these events was generated by rainfall on w tracer, ground with snocover. Our own calculations done Accord- ing to standard Soil Conservation Serv- ice methods indicates that runofferc volume from turf should be 0.1 pent to 65 parent of the mn ff volume from com, depending on the soil type and the rainfall intensity. Conclusion Aad Recomrneedadons The limited data avallable an the effects of turf chemicals on water qual- ity are enoouraging. The Cape Cod study was done with one set of cheml- cah in one type of hydrogeokhgic set. ling. More studies like It are needed, particuiedy at golf courses that use nemado ddes and are located In environ. ments with shallow, fractured bedrock Aquifers or solution kmanone. It is wrong to assume that most pes- ticides applied to golf courses will even- OBSERVATION 1—P. 42 sandy soiled golf courses. The idea was to see front much of the lertlkzer and pesticide we used might be detected in groundwater directly below where they were Applied. This would provide us with a wom-case scenario from which we could decide whether further studies were needed. To me, the most important Infor- mown that the study revealed was that: 1. The average nitrate level under fertilized areas of our four courses is better than the Call CMM AtnMeeA / FrarwwF 79" - 44 • ense plan sys m - D*peed d Prod. w—, R.E. w..e...d J.N. bieactive root mite will answer all sur. s„ hr. tre..l. m. 297.329. Aewerr. Cn.,,vall face water water and groundwater quality en WraHaa'-DC. eUncerS. Co . 62.. C. Eden..oe MN. taew. rWfi 'rerevp G W.re b P.ardn' w Evmnw. t t e 4Pa sa.a.- --wae.W.Y. G—.Rc. rke a.wdMKtnep tat1.ro 171%.bind. — c1 al swey. WMvpen. n.C. ft is wrong G bk. R.L.. JC TI,— MK W &own. IM -A„vhr r. _ rem, lA,derdd,eg, ad wd ep. to assume that Gel C—.- 4,° 1 4.70 71 Cale. AJ. TG P46— W M most pesticides applied tzeaw 19311 -LrsN,gdY,0.D�D,u,ae.,lope to golf courses "21°" """' w ant axe"' " 37. ra eventuapy show up o.aw,xh.o t%9 ^cowswaw Awwsa.: A Slnak Mnhdla AM.M gP.atnee Le.ehdd"-" An groundwater. J E,u.pn re.. Chen, . v 9, nit. t,9,,p Mdbn. GR 190 -thrower d Aak a al ct. s w aaaad W—, a'­v d ant R_ -. ,e APAwA.alrnPeem Ganeerr_ACwewn,n, 0„ulr, tJ.brdu. ,rue,u nt]. 1986. W. 1Jtt. Golf course superintendents and `ontl weer wit A..p . o. m.e pe M 'T G. A J C."w-0 w M Soa r. 196S others should be aware of the potential s,aMaa.do e,.rM,va.,d EeNmrman Kleapn risks of the chemicals they apply. As Lw,., norm ltawe Lu "J Eawon P„d-.. 17, ! always. they shld consider the mobil- w outt4t3o -P— ity, persistence toxicity of ode. and toxic [w,enyx. MA a"e R Ktv.er 1987. P wq ls.tayd i am). -su sd,^ applied to the golf course. Rick screen- J &an EenwW ... Bono. nor. 9so.9s2 Ingexercises should be done, egwri.Uy P.o.9"x. M. m9r9. ^Gan C— Mr,.ps,..,a for golf courses that could conceivably sum. w SrJA aaNCa,s MouPrwe,r, v. threaten sensitive water supplies. O us BweprnndltasxaA—. ]%% -P. ere. w Gmod wow Dx. Is— 19ns bonne ""1.- 0" e d Prarbker,,, biEA•ypwan i . Cahn, s 2 Its S EYAI n.,— tor. I'm who- Fw r Gha,,,d Wan arr Wd, D C 'Maud ro 5 9.—. is e d ik.Ha. U 5 a.amera s,_ l9 w— 5—. , row, d N.- P ern. M.a any tYM - Hyd.doae Er $.WW w—. Cahn. a 1 — MOM err S. ,i caa,ra. p,u N Tali, who nroW wwa aeeeurcw" 1AGs err, FAWwn.,. k Pabmc Warb.'lhr,ngm Rr When Suypy Pe.m 2M w. 93a15. t1.5. Gavwn. n,n. `urn' Jvnr le. r99e. vex Peen. oaatl. wrn.vaa. D C state drinking water standard 2. The highest detection of any currently registered pesti- cide right under where It was applied was less than 1/5 of the material's health guidance level. In most tests no detec- tions were made at all. The town of Yarmouth, after reviewing preliminary monitoring data from our study, allowed us to build our new Bayberry Hills Gulf Course. We have a working ground- water agn semwnt with this town that limits And monitors amounts and types of fertilizers and pesticides on the site. Because we are near wog fiekk, — hove 20 sampling sees that are monitored by the state pesticide board. The course was opened in 1988 and 1. data the monitoring results have been excelleol. Five other golf courses on Cape Cod have gained approval for con- stnRAon since we Initiated the shdy, so I think our work was Important and worthwhile. I'm happy to see that the use of fertiliters and pesti- cides on Cape Cod's golf counter does nor pose any signtlranr threw to our municipal drinking water sup- pres. After 4.1 drink the water. too, Gay C-- Atanagemenr I February IM RICHARD M. PHELPS, LTD. GOLF COURSE ARCHITECT P.O. BOX 3295 EVERGREEN, COLORADO 80439 303-670-0478 • April 1, 1992 Mr. Rob Robinson Executive Director Vail Recreation District 292 West Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Rob: Thank you for your letter of March 24, 1992, informing us that we were selected to be one of three finalists for the proposed 9-hole par-3 golf course in Vail. We are always honored to be in serious consideration. However, now that we have received the aerial photos and copies of the preliminary sketch done by Mr. Bailey, we must beg your forgiveness and ask that our name be withdrawn from consideration. Had we been aware of the site limitations earlier we would have spared ourselves and you kind people this embarrassment. In our opinion, the s�te�s of arg�,enoueh to design, construct and operate a safe golf facility. In to v'S litisious society, we are very concerned that serious accidents acid disruptions will oc ur that will result in lawsuits against the Llistnct, tht4glf course arc-RIMTf-a'nr' otg ers. A number of our concerns are enumerated below. Existing homes — the existing homes on the north side of the site have enjoyed the luxury of a peaceful, quiet, safe environment. Constructing the course will undoubtedly result in golf balls entering these properties; noises maintenance eguipmentp the moraine will be noticeable and_ ��I�eLcase nsers" otn by t err back yards will be an anno ance. This is lways when o course Is pikef«r,pousing has seen established. The Oil we nw^et5 ^� say ratert. ;10 +ntreducing thhPse interferenres and dangers next to existing homes. 2. Interstate 70 is a high-speed highway (65 mp.h.)-gdjacent to the proposed course. Not onlv is it very close to.tjte golf site it is below.xhesiie..making it tb,Bt much more susceptible to errant golf balls. A sha cd windshield at 65 m.p.h. could be devastating. Should ou o� a�ne d with this course we would suggest a clockwise routing of the o es to seep the s ice s ank onhe . site rather than allowing it to fly onto the interstate or into the homes. 3. The corridor width is 15 ' hrou`gh the center of the site which is considerably less that that recommended by the American Society of Golf Course Architects and the National Golf Foundation. A corridor for a regulation hole is a minimum of 300'. so even considering the Var-3, it should not be less than 200 feet. A side -by -side golf hole scenario has a I of JUO' with consideration for the pareholes, his might drop to AMERICAN SOCIETY OF GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTS AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS NATIONAL GOLF FOUNDATION Mr. Rob Robinson April 1, 1992 Executive Director page 2 Vail Recreation District is should feet. Once again, the Courts are well -versed in these dimensions and, should injury or damage occur, an "expert witness" familiar with these standards will testify as such. 4. F&LIUgh as thost nd tw en 1 to 2, to a7 to 8 a,re III dangerous considering, ose peop e htging a s directly at t the 'walker." 5. Several centerlines of fairways are within 30 to 40 feet of the property line. Even assuming perfect shots from the type of clientele who will be playing this course, this is entirely to close. 6. Sketching in realistic green shapes and sizes further creates extreme dangers. Considering a 5,000 to 6,000 square foot green, the right sides of those greens on most holes, but particularly 3 and 4, would be within 10 to 15 feet of the property line. There is no room to move those greens left as they would fall dangerously in front of holes playing the opposite direction. The same - sized green on hole #5 would not leave room for tee #6. Greens at 02 and #7 would likely be combined into a double green which, again, is extremely dangerous on a course such as this. 7. The topography or slope of land from side to side further complicates construction and will result in some difficult fill slopes on the downhill sides of greens and tees which will cause more extreme bounces toward I-70._ These can be mitigated by excavating on the uphill side but they cannot be totally eliminated. 8. The area shown for parking, entry and starter shack is extremely limited. Grading would be crucial for this to work — required setbacks from the entry road could likely limit availabin space and neighbor objections as to the starter building aesthetics and placement could be obstacles as well. Rob, we just feel there is not enough room to fit what you would like into this site. We detest turning down possible work, but in clear conscience, we cannot recommend that you do this project. Thank you most sincerely for inviting us to, be interviewed. We hope your #4 candidate may be willing to take our place. We wish you good luck on your project, but we also hope that you will strongly consider the comments above. We realize that we are commenting on a preliminary sketch plan, but after 30 years in the business, we do not see a reasonable solution that would vary that much. Please dolt hesitate to give me a call if you have any questions. Sinc a y, Richard M. Phelps, ASGCA RMP/tmp _YZq--,L4 --ata cn -OVI 5% • i r� OAAL 'n 6 oub 14-t J P� 4200 V�/L 33 s �4-, Z�-_. C4 Lo SL"),6z oes7-- 2d37 SWn1,51,1?57-,a2 , 1?o