Subject: Seattle GOLFERS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

From: [email-masked] (David Sucher)
Date: 14 Jan 1995 22:53:20 GMT

Some background: 

The City of Seattle has a site for a new nine hole 'executive' course.
It has been attempting to develop the course for a number of years. A
year ago it decided to issue a 'Request For Proposals' (RFP) to
experienced developers of golf courses. It is in the final stages of
preparing the RFP before solicitation. A friend and I reviewed the
Draft RFP and made the following comments. 

I am circulating this letter in hopes of finding golfers and golf
'sympathizers' (in the Seattle area particularly) who agree with and
will endorse our letter. 

As with any public process, government action comes only when people
participate. The 'sqeaky wheel' etc...I should point out, however, that
when we presented our letter to the Parks Superintendent and Parks
Board at a recent meeting, they were very interested, sympathetic and
even enthusiastic about our approach.

We're calling our little ad hoc group GOLFERS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. We
invite you to join us. Please call 206-545-4523 if you would like to
help.

***

January 12, 1995

Seattle Park Board   
Parks Superintendent
Department of Parks & Recreation
City of Seattle

RE:     Interbay Golf Course RFP        

Dear Members of the Park Board and Park Superintendent:

We have reviewed the Draft RFP for the Interbay Golf Center (dated
January 1995) and would like to comment. As enthusiastic golfers we
look forward to being able to play the new Interbay course and to using
the expanded practice facilities. But we are concerned that the City's
RFP and the review process suffer from some fundamental flaws. Our
intent in this letter is not to criticize but to offer suggestions that
will make it easier for the City to do this job right the first time.

Environmental Issues not Addressed Adequately

The January 1995 Draft RFP fails to adequately address a variety of
environmental issues ranging from water use to wildlife habitat.

For example, the RFP does not directly address the environmental
impacts of the ongoing management of the golf course. Going to the
heart of the impacts associated with golf courses particularly, the RFP
does not offer clear guidelines for water, fertilizer, herbicide,
pesticide and fungicide use. 

For a site such as Interbay, where there are no existing natural
systems of great value to protect, the core of the environmental
problem might be characterized as Ôlawn care.Õ Prosaic as it sounds,
the central environmental problem of golf courses revolves around
management of fairways, green and tees through the use of water,
fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides and fungicides. What guidance does
the RFP give to the potential developer? We see virtually none. We
think this is a dangerous scenario for all parties.

It Will Pay to Address Environmental Issues Up Front

There are several reasons why attention should be paid to the
environmental impacts of the course at this relatively early stage. 

For one thing, such foresight is required by the law of the State of
Washington. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires that the
environmental impacts of a proposal be integrated into the
decision-making process and the impacts of alternative actions be
addressed at the earliest possible moment. Practically speaking, to
ignore or give short-shrift to such an imperative is a flaw and could
make the process legally vulnerable to a SEPA challenge. Such a
challenge could lead to further delay of a process that has already
taken far too long. 

Further, the City of Seattle has adopted Ôenvironmental stewardshipÕ as
a core value; the development and management of the Interbay Golf
Course should reflect this value. We believe that the course could and
should be designed from the outset to be environmentally sound because,
as the City Council has recognized in its adoption of the CityÕs
Comprehensive Plan, it is the right and wise thing to do. With the
Interbay Golf Course we have an opportunity to set a nation-wide
standard for environmentally-sound golf course design and management.
We believe that such a goal is consistent with the will of the people
as reflected by the City Council.

Give the Developer a Fighting Chance

Most importantly, clearer environmental parameters and guidelines for
other aspects of the project will let potential developers know exactly
what is expected. 

The RFP demands a lot. Yet it gives very little. For example, it asks
the developers (as part of their initial proposals) to prepare quite
detailed site plans of the course and detailed building plans (floor
layout, elevations) for the facilities. (Whether very many developers
will be willing to invest so much on a speculative basis is another
question and will be interesting to observe.) Yet it provides little
specific guidance. Especially when it comes to environmental issues,
the RFP provides no constraints. The tighter the requirements and more
explicit the CityÕs goals, the easier for respondents to provide a high
quality proposal. 

For example, suppose Seattle undergoes another severe drought and water
use is curtailed. Is the developer required to or prohibited from
decreasing irrigation? Conversely, suppose one developer decides that
substantial economies could be made by installing irrigation for only
the greens of the par-3 holes. Will that developer be at a disadvantage
(or advantage, for that matter) in suggesting such in its proposal? Are
they expected to keep the fairways bright green all summer? Will they
be prohibited from doing so? Are there possibilities of re-use of water
>from  the Metro Sewer Plant at West Point which might mitigate this
issue? Clear design parameters work to the benefit of all parties.

Golf Courses Provide Environmental Opportunities

While golf courses have a potential for creating environmental problems
through excessive use of water, fertilizers, etc., they also provide
environmental opportunities, such as for wildlife habitat enhancement. 

The CityÕs Environmentally Critical Areas Policy calls for the
protection of wildlife habitat. Yet the RFP has no requirement for
course managers to use plant materials and other design features to
create habitat. The Audubon Society of New York has a Cooperative
Sanctuary Program aimed at just this very subject. The Nature
Conservancy Council in Britain has also published some interesting
materials to aid golf course managers in habitat management. But such
an approach is not even alluded to in the RFP.

Public Input Necessary

Given the inadequacy of the draft RFP, it seems imperative that the
public have the opportunity to offer the City input that will
ultimately result in a smoother development process and a better final
product. The proposal review process as outlined in the draft RFP
offers no such opportunities. Will there be no public review of the
proposed course design and its impacts? Shouldn't the future users of
the facility have some opportunity to influence the process of its
design and development?

Some Other Issues

Elements of the RFP other than those noted above remain worrisome. For
example, on page 8, general guidelines for the design of the golf
course are laid out. This section encourages the developer to integrate
interesting features such as, "water hazards or island greens, sand
traps, bunkers, contoured landing areas, etc." while still giving
consideration to speed of play and safety. Any golf course requires
that the elements of challenge and playability be balanced, but heavy
bunkering and many water hazards are usually not appropriate on
municipal coursesÑsuch "challenges" most often result in excruciatingly
slow play. There is no mention in the RFP of balancing playability and
challenge, a fundamental aspect of course design.

Another assumption that concerns us (page 10) is the role of carts at
the Interbay Center. The RFP says that '[p]ath surfaces must facilitate
the use of carts.' We believe that carts should be deemphasized. It is
a short course, with no lengthy par 5s. Carts should be allowed but
restricted to those persons with real physical need. With less usage, a
limited carts policy will allow the course to be built with 'softer'
cart paths and at lower cost.

Seize the Opportunity with Detailed Goals

Without clear expectations from the City, the design process will be
muddled and Seattle golfers ultimately will be shortchanged. Interbay
Golf Center provides an opportunity to create a benchmark facility for
other cities around the country to admire and emulate. We encourage the
City to make the most of this opportunity. 

We stand ready to help.

Sincerely,

Organizing Co-Chairs

cc: City Council Parks Committee Chair