Houston Botanical Garden At The Glenbrook Golf Course

[Sunstar]

According to their Web page, they cannot take possession of the site until they meet their 2017 fundraising goal, which they don't mention. Based on the prestigious design firm, my guess is it won't be cheap. 

[cloud713]

$93.4 million, I believe..

[samagon]

I'm going to get in some extra games at the golf course anyway, whether they make their mark or not.

 

I'm glad they chose this course over Gus Wortham. Not only is Gus always more busy, but Gus has a lot of real history to it (and of courses that are affordable, it's probably the most fun to play).

Edited January 14, 2016 by samagon

[jmitch94]

I'm going to get in some extra games at the golf course anyway, whether they make their mark or not.

 

I'm glad they chose this course over Gus Wortham. Not only is Gus always more busy, but Gus has a lot of real history to it (and of courses that are affordable, it's probably the most fun to play).

 

I actually just played Gus on Tuesday and it is a very nice for the price, very hilly for Houston (since it is on the banks of Brays bayou) However I did almost get bitten by a very large cotton mouth looking in the tall grass. 

[samagon]

It's a fun course, for sure, and the backdrop of the refineries adds something very Houston to the feel of the course. The natural elevation change on some of the holes is also fairly amazing. It'd probably get more play if it were reconfigured to have freeway access, hell the botanical gardens, should they be built, will have more guests with freeway access. I mean it's right there. Why not make a really awesome entry with a long winding freeway access to the parking lot?

[Urbannizer]

Now on West 8's website: http://www.west8.nl/en/projects/masterplanning/houston_botanic_garden/

[Urbannizer]

Plans for botanic garden move forward, despite neighbors' protest

 

 

 

Until now, the proposed Houston Botanic Garden has delivered more pain than gain to some neighbors in the southeast quadrant of the city. The future garden site is still functioning as Glenbrook Golf Course, and some residents would rather keep it just as it is.

 

But as organizers have continued to meet with community members, tweak the master plan to include some of their suggestions, ratchet up fund-raising goals and exercise their option to lease the 120-acre site from the city, plans for the garden are taking shape.

 

In December, the group met its first fundraising goal of $5 million. The next goal is an additional $15 million by the end of 2017.

 

At that point, the group could begin construction, with the hope of opening to the public in 2020.

 

 

Ross prefers not to say how many millions more will need to be raised but says that fundraising will be done in multiple phases over a span of 20 to 30 years.

 

 

 

[H-Town Man]

Every neighborhood protest against the Houston Botanic Garden so far, whether in the East End or in Glenbrook, is basically the expression of silent fear of something that is different than a golf course. A golf course is safe, familiar, comfortable. One may not play golf oneself, but one knows what it is, and is reconciled to it being there. A botanic garden is strange, unfamiliar. Who goes to it? What do they do there? It's terrifying.

[IronTiger]

One of the cool things about Houston is it's right at an intersection where oak tree areas, pine tree areas, and palm tree areas all come together. It would be nice if they all co-mingled at the Gardens.

[Twinsanity02]

You are right Iron Tiger. We are near the northern edge for Palms, the western edge of the Southern Pinelands, and the southern limit for some northern trees, Amazing variety for plant nuts like me.

[jmitch94]

This is going to one nice park if it gets built, but I am sad that another golf course will be lost. 

[Twinsanity02]

If this is half the quality of the Jungle Gardens on Avery Island, or the Cypress Gardens in Florida it will be outstanding. Sorry about the golf course.

[H-Town Man]

This is going to one nice park if it gets built, but I am sad that another golf course will be lost. 

 

If we lose 83 more, there won't be any left.

[bobruss]

The neighborhood groups should be so lucky. It could have become an industrial park, a box store parking island, or a mixed use development.

Whoever is scaring these people are probably ignorant to the facts.

I'd love to have a botanical garden near my neighborhood. 

Isn't that in proximity to Hobby airport. It can't get much worse than that.

They should thank their lucky stars.

Look on the bright side you won't have to dodge errant golf balls and listen to drunks digging around your yard for lost golfballs

and broken windows.  FOUR!!!!!!!!!!!!

[intencity77]

By golly, who knew trees, flowers and gardens would be so threatening to Houstonians. Honestly, the East End should be kicking itself silly for protesting and passing up on such a positive project. Instead these lovely gardens will now be sandwiched in between a dank freeway and a smelly petrochemical plant. As for "saving" golf courses, I don't understand the nostalgia for them, especially when the local mentality is to tear down almost everything historical in the first place. These gardens will serve the public so much more than any golf course ever could.

[kylejack]

By golly, who knew trees, flowers and gardens would be so threatening to Houstonians. Honestly, the East End should be kicking itself silly for protesting and passing up on such a positive project. Instead these lovely gardens will now be sandwiched in between a dank freeway and a smelly petrochemical plant. As for "saving" golf courses, I don't understand the nostalgia for them, especially when the local mentality is to tear down almost everything historical in the first place. These gardens will serve the public so much more than any golf course ever could.

Gus Wortham is the Texas' oldest golf course, there's history there and not everyone wants to tear down all history.

Edited February 5, 2016 by kylejack

[jmitch94]

I don't under stand why people dislike golf courses. Its not like they are wasting space many people play golf. There are only 11 inside beltway 8 and three are very expensive country clubs not accessed by the general public. 

[BigFootsSocks]

I don't think it's an issue of people really hating on golf courses so much as it is people liking Botanical Gardens so much more.

[cloud713]

"There are only 11 inside beltway 8"... Oh, and how many Botanical Gardens do we have inside of Beltway 8..?

Yeahh...

This is a huge opportunity to bring another world class amenity to our great city.. Botanical gardens are something everyone can enjoy. Golf courses are only for golfers. Side note: I play golf.

[Twinsanity02]

I haven't read anyone loathing golf courses. My take is most folks are excited due to the beauty and uniqueness of these botanical gardens.  How far must one travel today to see something like this? I know golf courses are also individualistic, but there are several to pick from.

[bobruss]

Apparently this golf course not to be confused with Gus Wortham course, was underachieving and frankly not meeting expenses.

I haven't seen this course but I doubt that it has been properly maintained due to a lack of interest, funds or interest.

I'm thrilled that Gus Wortham was saved for its historical aspects and its natural beauty but I'm really pleased that we are going to have a world class botanical garden in Houston. 

[kylejack]

The conflict arose because the botanic gardens people didn't want to secure their own land but wanted to take over existing land that was already in use for a golf course. Nobody had a problem with a botanic garden existing... the problem was that they wanted to take over something else rather than buying and building on their own.

 

They got massive pushback at Gus Wortham because it has a deep connection to the community there, because it has a long history,  and because it's a pretty good municipal course (important, because municipal courses allow those with less money to get into the game rather than having to be a rich country club kid). They got only minor pushback on Glenbrook Valley because it's not quite as nice, doesn't have the deep history, and isn't used as much. The objection at Glenbrook Valley was mostly people a few people that use the course for jogging. I think they ended up at the right place, in the end.

Edited February 6, 2016 by kylejack

[cloud713]

The conflict arose because the botanic gardens people didn't want to secure their own land but wanted to take over existing land that was already in use for a golf course. Nobody had a problem with a botanic garden existing... the problem was that they wanted to take over something else rather than buying and building on their own.

They got massive pushback at Gus Wortham because it has a deep connection to the community there, because it has a long history, and because it's a pretty good municipal course (important, because municipal courses allow those with less money to get into the game rather than having to be a rich country club kid). They got only minor pushback on Glenbrook Valley because it's not quite as nice, doesn't have the deep history, and isn't used as much. The objection at Glenbrook Valley was mostly people a few people that use the course for jogging. I think they ended up at the right place, in the end.

Im pretty sure it was the City of Houston that determined the property was losing money and would be better served leased to someone else besides a golf course, thus putting the site up for lease.. It's not like the Botanical Garden people just came in demanding the golf course..

[kylejack]

Im pretty sure it was the City of Houston that determined the property was losing money and would be better served leased to someone else besides a golf course, thus putting the site up for lease.. It's not like the Botanical Garden people just came in demanding the golf course..

 

That's exactly what they did. It was driven by the botanic garden people pushing for the Gus Wortham golf course to be switched to them, not by COH looking for another use. They were speaking at public comment session at City Council, and making their case elsewhere.

Edited February 6, 2016 by kylejack

[cloud713]

ah yes.. blame the big bad bullies at the Botanical Garden for the city wanting to redevelop the money losing golf courses.. Yes, the Botanical Garden people would have preferred Gus Wortham over Glenbrook.. but the garden people would of never decided Gus Wortham was preferred if the city werent trying to find a better use for the existing golf courses in the first place... the courses are owned by the freaking city. you really think some private garden group is able to come in and just take over without the cities cooperation?

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Council-green-lights-leases-on-2-city-green-spaces-6031407.php
 

At Gus Wortham Golf Course east of downtown, the Houston Golf Association plans to pour up to $15 million into restoring and renovating the course. At Glenbrook Golf Course, a few miles farther east, the Houston Botanic Garden wants to launch what could be a $40 million effort to develop a signature attraction for the city.

 

"I have been in the weeds of these two projects for the last year, and I can't tell you how excited I am … not just for District I but for the city of Houston," said Councilman Robert Gallegos, whose district includes both courses. "These agreements will allow both organizations to pump over $50 million in private dollars to improve these green spaces, and it will be a great addition to our city's many cultural offerings."

Officials have discussed for more than a year whether one of the eastside courses would give up golf operations in favor of a garden, amid a backdrop of stagnant or falling revenues at most of the city's municipal links. Houston Botanic Garden named Gus Wortham its first choice but it became clear community members opposed the idea, preferring a push by private citizens to raise money to renovate Gus Wortham. 

After the Houston Golf Association offered to step in, the council voted in November to stick with golf at Gus Wortham and offer the Glenbrook course to the garden instead. 

The council formalized that approach by approving lease agreements Wednesday with both nonprofits.

[kylejack]

Officials have discussed for more than a year whether one of the eastside courses would give up golf operations in favor of a garden, amid a backdrop of stagnant or falling revenues at most of the city's municipal links. 

 

Over a year, eh? Exactly my point. The botanic gardens people were targeting Gus Wortham at least as early as 2013. This discussion began and they ran in to this opposition because they were targeting a historic golf course rather than buying their own land.

 

As I said a few posts ago, I'm glad they have found a successful plan at Glenbrook Valley.

As to profit, I don't expect public services or facilities to turn a profit, I expect them to provide a public service. Parks like Hermann Park or public services like METRO aren't turning a profit either, nor would I expect them to.

Edited February 6, 2016 by kylejack

[cloud713]

You've got to be kidding me.. "Over" a year could very well stretch back as far as "2013". Your assumption that the botanical garden organization just up and came in demanding Gus Wortham/a golf course lease is completely false. Again, if it weren't for the city offering these unprofitable courses for lease in the first place, none of this would be possible. Oh, and as for Gus Wortham.. If it weren't for the city offering it up for lease/a potential botanical garden showing interest in taking over, then the "friends of Gus Wortham" or whatever likely wouldn't of had nearly the incentive/support of all the donors who eventually forked over the $15 million dollars needed to renovate it into a better course/preserve it for future generations.

And to respond to your edit... Wow. How many golf courses currently exist in Houston? Someone threw out a number earlier that was in the EIGHTIES... Now how many botanical gardens are in Houston? ZERO. I'm not saying I disagree that certain public run enterprises shouldn't be expected to turn a profit.. But geez, maybe we should diversify some of our amenities/city offerings?

Edited February 6, 2016 by cloud713

[kylejack]

You've got to be kidding me.. "Over" a year could very well stretch back as far as "2013". You're assumption that the botanical garden organization just up and came in demanding Gus Wortham/a golf course lease is completely false. Again, if it weren't for the city offering these unprofitable courses for lease in the first place, none of this would be possible. Oh, and as for Gus Wortham.. If it weren't for the city offering it up for lease/a potential botanical garden showing interest in taking over, then the "friends of Gus Wortham" or whatever likely wouldn't of had nearly the incentive/support of all the donors who forked over the $15 million dollars needed to renovate it into a better course.

 

If you have some evidence that the City offered this course up for lease prior to 2013, I'd love to see it. 

I'm glad that a good deal was worked out for all parties. We'll have a botanic garden replace a little-used course and HGA will renovate a historic course that a lot of people love. 

Edited February 6, 2016 by kylejack

[cloud713]

You're using the word demanded, not me.

Uhh. I original said it's NOT like they demanded Gus Wortham.. And then you responded saying "That's exactly what they did".. So tell me how you weren't the one accusing the botanical garden people of demanding Gus Wortham.

Evidence.. Lulz. You have no evidence that the botanical garden people specifically seeked out a city owned golf course prior to having knowledge that the properties were being put up for lease.. Just give it up and stop slandering an organization with a fantastic vision for the city of Houston and its residents.

[H-Town Man]

It sounds like what the botanical garden people did wrong was to seek the best site for their garden. I don't understand the complaint that they targeted a golf course rather than "found their own land." That's like saying that Hilcorp shouldn't have bought Foley's for their new tower, they should have found their own land. That's how you find land - see who's willing to sell.