Harvest Hills Golf Course Sold to Developer [Archive] - Beyond.ca - Car Forums

BigMass

11-03-2014, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by sabad66
Good idea. We have enough golf courses in this city... Use the land for something more useful

yeah but why press to develop land that's already developed when we have so much undeveloped land in this city sitting around doing nothing. When I drive around this city, even through the inner city, I am constantly amazed at all the empty dirt lots that have been sitting this way for the past 30 years or more. Even the downtown core is littered with empty unused space. Until that's used up why even bother to blow up a golf course in buttfucknowhere?

speedog

11-03-2014, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by codetrap
I'd be pretty pissed about it. Especially since those properties along the golf course were more expensive because they were supposedly backing onto a greenspace "forever", without the threat of having houses built onto them. So, with this decision, those homes just took a huge hit in the property values.
So who sold these home owners on this idea of a green space forever?

Their realtor, the developer? Harvest Hills resident Mandy Young (from the linked news article) moved there in 2007 so it wouldn't have been a developer who sold her her home with any pretences and last time I checked, the CoC doesn't make any promises either with respect to what might happen to a certain piece of land.

People need to do their homework a bit more when purchasing their homes - the community where we bought 18 years ago, well we were more then well aware that expansion/improvements to roads on the perimeter would have an effect on our community at some point in the future (hasn't yet but it's coming) as well as the zoning of the lots in our community. The previous community we owned in - sold and moved away because we knew the the 16th Ave expansion was on the books and that would negatively affect the property we owned there.

Never the less, someone who purchases a home that backs out onto what they consider to be green space - well if it's not a provincial park like Fish Creek or isn't a CoC owned green space that can't be developed due to it's terrain, then one shouldn't just assume that it'll be green space forever and especially so in the case of a privately owned golf course. Over the past 35 years I've lived in Calgary, I've seen undeveloped parcels of land built on that I never though would be developed - as land value goes up, so does the willingness of someone taking a bigger financial risk to develop riskier plots of land. In the end, this Mandy Young needs to give her head a shake - a privately owned golf course in a fairly desirable location is at some point in time going to attract some attention in the form of it's ability to be redeveloped.

sputnik

11-03-2014, 09:32 AM

AbSRCjG-VLk

finboy

11-03-2014, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by speedog

So who sold these home owners on this idea of a green space forever?

Their realtor, the developer? Harvest Hills resident Mandy Young (from the linked news article) moved there in 2007 so it wouldn't have been a developer who sold her her home with any pretences and last time I checked, the CoC doesn't make any promises either with respect to what might happen to a certain piece of land.

People need to do their homework a bit more when purchasing their homes - the community where we bought 18 years ago, well we were more then well aware that expansion/improvements to roads on the perimeter would have an effect on our community at some point in the future (hasn't yet but it's coming) as well as the zoning of the lots in our community. The previous community we owned in - sold and moved away because we knew the the 16th Ave expansion was on the books and that would negatively affect the property we owned there.

Never the less, someone who purchases a home that backs out onto what they consider to be green space - well if it's not a provincial park like Fish Creek or isn't a CoC owned green space that can't be developed due to it's terrain, then one shouldn't just assume that it'll be green space forever and especially so in the case of a privately owned golf course. Over the past 35 years I've lived in Calgary, I've seen undeveloped parcels of land built on that I never though would be developed - as land value goes up, so does the willingness of someone taking a bigger financial risk to develop riskier plots of land. In the end, this Mandy Young needs to give her head a shake - a privately owned golf course in a fairly desirable location is at some point in time going to attract some attention in the form of it's ability to be redeveloped.

Your comments remind me of the two houses that went up on the west side of crescent hill. Down the hill a house was torn down because the hill really isn't that stable. Two rich families showed up, did a lot of work to make some stable foundations, and threw two houses up in from of homes that had a great mountain view.

speedog

11-03-2014, 09:39 AM

Of note, golf courses seem to be prime targets lately - McCall Lake (on hold for now?), Highland Park, Shawnee Slopes are just three that come to mind in recent years.

There's other plots of land that are being redeveloped as well that receive far less press - Midfield Mobile Home Park, the little shitty one that used to be out on 17th Ave SE betwwen 44th and 45th Streets, probably Greenwood in the NW at some point. One can look at sloped plots of land that sat vacant for years that are all of a sudden getting developed - have seen this along the northern perimeter of Winston Heights in the central NE. Drive-in movie theatres - all gone and mostly due to the value of the land.

Odd thing is this has been happening for decades in one form or another and it's just not the current city council and mayor that may or may not have any influence on this. Every drive-in movie theatre I attended in past years is gone and all have been redeveloped - the land just became too valuable for the owners to ignore.

benyl

11-03-2014, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by BigMass

yeah but why press to develop land that's already developed when we have so much undeveloped land in this city sitting around doing nothing. When I drive around this city, even through the inner city, I am constantly amazed at all the empty dirt lots that have been sitting this way for the past 30 years or more. Even the downtown core is littered with empty unused space. Until that's used up why even bother to blow up a golf course in buttfucknowhere?

Simple, that lot downtown probably costs as much as the entire golf course.

Most developers don't have $2-300 million to build a highrise.

sabad66

11-03-2014, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by speedog
Of note, golf courses seem to be prime targets lately - McCall Lake (on hold for now?), Highland Park, Shawnee Slopes are just three that come to mind in recent years.

There's other plots of land that are being redeveloped as well that receive far less press - Midfield Mobile Home Park, the little shitty one that used to be out on 17th Ave SE betwwen 44th and 45th Streets, probably Greenwood in the NW at some point. One can look at sloped plots of land that sat vacant for years that are all of a sudden getting developed - have seen this along the northern perimeter of Winston Heights in the central NE. Drive-in movie theatres - all gone and mostly due to the value of the land.

Odd thing is this has been happening for decades in one form or another and it's just not the current city council and mayor that may or may not have any influence on this. Every drive-in movie theatre I attended in past years is gone and all have been redeveloped - the land just became too valuable for the owners to ignore.
Its because there is too much competition in the Calgary golf course market these days. Inner city courses just can't compete, especially when they consider how much the land is now worth.

I used to work for coc golf courses and there was a time when they actually cleared profit every year and contributed to city coffers. They stopped being profitable around 09 or 10 because there are so many cheaper/better options for people that don't mind driving an extra 10-15 mins.

Sucks for the people living along who will have their property values drop, but honestly I don't feel bad. People need to understand real estate is an investment with risk just like anything else.

codetrap

11-03-2014, 10:08 AM

Originally posted by speedog
So who sold these home owners on this idea of a green space forever? You don't think the homes along the golf course were sold way back in 1991 at a premium because they were along the golf course? Or that every single person who bought a house along there didn't buy it in part because it was along a golf course? C'mon man. Blaming the residents and saying they didn't do their research? Seriously WTF man.

Here's the link to the project. The SW area is pretty much perfect for townhouses, and not much else.... to go from a golf course to a construction zone with heavy machinery.. Yeah, I'd be pissed.

http://quantumplace.ca/projects/harvest-hills/

speedog

11-03-2014, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by codetrap
You don't think the homes along the golf course were sold way back in 1991 at a premium because they were along the golf course? Or that every single person who bought a house along there didn't buy it in part because it was along a golf course? C'mon man. Blaming the residents and saying they didn't do their research? Seriously WTF man.

Here's the link to the project. The SW area is pretty much perfect for townhouses, and not much else.... to go from a golf course to a construction zone with heavy machinery.. Yeah, I'd be pissed.

http://quantumplace.ca/projects/harvest-hills/

Couple of things - there is at least one resident whose home backs on to this gold course who has publicly stated that they're glas to see the golf course being gome - not sure why you'd buy such a property if you has issues with a golf course being your neighbor in the first place.

Second, as it appears that it was Genstar that developed both the golf course and the surrounding community, shouldn't the anger be directed at them and especially so for the original people who bought in that area. For people like Mandy Young (who purchased in 2007), a little bit of homework should've been done - it's not like other golf courses being sold and redeveloped hasn't been in the news and aside from that, who sold her on the idea that that golf course was going to be in her backyard as a green space for the unforeseeable future? That's who she should be directing her anger at.

Now I'm not disagreeing that the affected residents shouldn't be upset - it's just where they should be directing their anger that is more the issue here. If they've got something in writing from Genstar, then I'd say they have something to pursue but there's always that fine writing to be aware of.

lasimmon

11-03-2014, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by speedog

Couple of things - there is at least one resident whose home backs on to this gold course who has publicly stated that they're glas to see the golf course being gome - not sure why you'd buy such a property if you has issues with a golf course being your neighbor in the first place.

Except they don't list the interview. For all we know they asked that resident "How would you feel if the golf course closed and it was turned into a big park?"

codetrap

11-03-2014, 10:58 AM

speedog.. LOL at one resident. What research would you have recommended that Mandy Young, who's lived there for 7 years now, should have done? Called up Genstar and asked them, hey, do you plan on selling this in 7 years? No? K thanks bye. Checked the Zoning? Special Recreation? Perfect. A community that was sold on the basis that it was single family homes? Perfect.

Now FF 7 years later and a developer is coming along and wants to have it re-zoned and put in high density housing? Realistically, that's about all that will fit in that one area. I hope the community goes and opposes the re-zoning and development in force. This in my mind is about rights... The right of the developer to make money vs the rights of 100's of families to maintain the character of their community.

speedog

11-03-2014, 11:03 AM

So is there a solution to this. People in Varsity (or was it Silver Springs) upset because a school is going on what they though would remain green space. People in Springbank Hill upset because a playground is going to be put on some green space. People in Shawnee Slopes upset over the golf course redevelopment there.

Hell, I remember the whole Crowchild Trail expansion/expropriation deal for the SW and central NW parts that were widened or the people upset about the west LRT and the homes that were bulldozed for that. SW ring road and the pissed off homeowners there. SE ring road community access and the pissed off home owners there. Crescent Road trail redevelopment/improvements and the opposition from home owners up there. Queens PArk off leash are and the issues that stirred up. Centre Street LRT/whatever - that 'll be a doozie that's coming.

There's always going to be upset people who'll be angry over some development in their backyard and yeah, they might be justified in their anger but sometimes that anger is misdirected. Whatever the case may be, our city is growing and land is becoming more valuable and things are going to get torn down/redeveloped and infrastructure will also have to be built to support this growth - some people will get the shitty end of the stick and some will have a but of foresight an d be ahead of the curve. IN the case of this golf course, there probably wasn't no getting ahead of the curve. Interestingly enough, the Highland Park golf course redevelopment is not seeing that much opposition - probably because it will help land values there and will be an attractive development by the looks of things. Never the less, things will move along as they always have - if one doesn't want the potential of redevelopment in one's back yard, then one best be buying a home that best guarantees that.

speedog

11-03-2014, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by codetrap
speedog.. LOL at one resident. What research would you have recommended that Mandy Young, who's lived there for 7 years now, should have done? Called up Genstar and asked them, hey, do you plan on selling this in 7 years? No? K thanks bye. Checked the Zoning? Special Recreation? Perfect. A community that was sold on the basis that it was single family homes? Perfect.

Now FF 7 years later and a developer is coming along and wants to have it re-zoned and put in high density housing? Realistically, that's about all that will fit in that one area. I hope the community goes and opposes the re-zoning and development in force. This in my mind is about rights... The right of the developer to make money vs the rights of 100's of families to maintain the character of their community.

C'min - it was you that stated "that every single person who bought a house along there didn't buy it in part because it was along a golf course?" and there's at least one intsance where that's not true.

And a community that's single family homes - Google satellite view will show that not to be the case.

I'm not disagreeing that people don't have right to be upset - they do but it's maybe where their anger should be directed at. Moving forward, yeah get engaged at the community level and even via their Councillor although this one might be difficult to get changed, not sure how much sway a CA will have on this and by the way, there's probably 10 times as many Harvest Hills residents whose homes don't back out onto the golf course as one who do - maybe their view of what Harvest Hills character is might be different from the approximate 145 or so homes that actually do back out on to this golf course (164 if one includes the homes along Harvest Hills Gate NE). For reference per the CoC web site (link (http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/community_social_statistics/harvest_hills.pdf)) - there are 2520 private dwellings in Harvest Hills.

codetrap

11-03-2014, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by speedog

C'min - it was you that stated "that every single person who bought a house along there didn't buy it in part because it was along a golf course?" and there's at least one intsance where that's not true.

And a community that's single family homes - Google satellite view will show that not to be the case.

I'm not disagreeing that people don't have right to be upset - they do but it's maybe where their anger should be directed at. Moving forward, yeah get engaged at the community level and even via their Councillor although this one might be difficult to get changed, not sure how much sway a CA will have on this and by the way, there's probably 10 times as many Harvest Hills residents whose homes don't back out onto the golf course as one who do - maybe their view of what Harvest Hills character is might be different from the approximate 145 or so homes that actually do back out on to this golf course (164 if one includes the homes along Harvest Hills Gate NE). For reference per the CoC web site (link (http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/community_social_statistics/harvest_hills.pdf)) - there are 2520 private dwellings in Harvest Hills. I wasn't able to find a reference to this single homeowner that you're talking about who came out against the golf course. Also, I've ridden my bike through Harvest Hills a lot, and there are 2 sections that have duplexes/condos. One on the corner of Harvest Hills/Country Hills/Panorama, and one another very small one beside the professional center & 7-11... The rest is single family homes with the odd duplex mixed in. So, not sure what you're talking about with google satellite showing that's not the case.

Either way, all those homes are probably going to take a 50k hit to value because of this, based on what I'm reading. That's a pretty significant loss, and I would be pretty pissed about it too.

01RedDX

11-03-2014, 02:45 PM

spikerS

11-03-2014, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by 01RedDX
If the Shawnee situation is anything to go by, it will be at least 10 years before they see shovels in the ground, but I would consider getting out now.

Yeah, but the damage is now done. Anyone looking at a property there now is going to know, or should be informed by their realtor of the impending change, and prices will adjust accordingly.

There is no homework to check for something like this. I live in the area, and this is the first I have heard of the city shopping the golf course.

speedog

11-03-2014, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by spikerS
Yeah, but the damage is now done. Anyone looking at a property there now is going to know, or should be informed by their realtor of the impending change, and prices will adjust accordingly.

There is no homework to check for something like this. I live in the area, and this is the first I have heard of the city shopping the golf course.
The city didn't shop this golf course as it wasn't owned by the city - Windmill Golf Group owns this golf course, private sale.

flipstah

11-03-2014, 03:15 PM

That sucks because that course was fun.

ercchry

11-03-2014, 04:13 PM

Originally posted by spikerS

Yeah, but the damage is now done. Anyone looking at a property there now is going to know, or should be informed by their realtor of the impending change, and prices will adjust accordingly.

There is no homework to check for something like this. I live in the area, and this is the first I have heard of the city shopping the golf course.

if it was me i'd wait for spring when this isnt fresh in people's minds and hope for a shitty realtor to come along with a typical buyer who doesnt do any research before a major purchase

speedog

11-03-2014, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by codetrap
I wasn't able to find a reference to this single homeowner that you're talking about who came out against the golf course. Also, I've ridden my bike through Harvest Hills a lot, and there are 2 sections that have duplexes/condos. One on the corner of Harvest Hills/Country Hills/Panorama, and one another very small one beside the professional center & 7-11... The rest is single family homes with the odd duplex mixed in. So, not sure what you're talking about with google satellite showing that's not the case.

Either way, all those homes are probably going to take a 50k hit to value because of this, based on what I'm reading. That's a pretty significant loss, and I would be pretty pissed about it too.
Was responding to your statement "A community that was sold on the basis that it was single family homes".

Never the less, it is a shitty situation for those affected and I am very glad I am not in their position.

As far as one homeowner being happy that the golf course was being sold and being redeveloped - saw it on one of the news articles I read today, I'm not going to search it up but like I stated earlier, I don't understand someone buying a home that backs onto a golf course and then bitching about golf balls landing in one's back yard.

bignerd

11-03-2014, 06:21 PM

Its not even in my backyard and I find it annoying. I think 2015 is the year to move from this shittily managed ward. The Northern Hills are starting to suck.

Its obvious that the priority is development, development, development.
Both sides of Country Hills West of Deerfoot are to be developed. SW of Deerfoot I see they are putting in another McDonalds....because the one 5 minutes down Country Hills isn't close enough??

Its nice to have some open, natural, green space... to see deer or coyotes, the fog in the valley over Nose Creek.

This whole area is becoming a cement jungle of light industrial, commercial, and housing, with a few man made retention ponds thrown in.

Cos

11-03-2014, 06:26 PM

spikerS

11-03-2014, 06:39 PM

Originally posted by Cos
. This is a big city with lots of space. Why do we need to wreck all of it?

Because money and greed.

FraserB

11-03-2014, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by Cos
Traffic is about to get a lot worse in there. I am lucky, we were very close to buying in Harvest Hills. Growing up it was a decent area, now there is only really 2 decent cul-de-sacs that back along the water.

I guess my biggest thought, yes those people have to be aware that it is private and could turn into anything else, however who is to say we should live in a city where there is no green space? Let's just pack em in like sardines? Save the green space for the mountains? Come on.

Hell, can you imagine how much housing they could get on Nose Hill? Fuck it lets develop that. People need a quality of life, whether it is sitting in their back yard, golfing, walking, whatever. This is a big city with lots of space. Why do we need to wreck all of it?

Nose Hill isn't privately owned land. The golf course is located on private land which the owner can sell to anyone for any legal purpose they want.

If people want that to change, they need to tell city council that they fully support the expropriation of private land when the proposed use might not fall in line with the feelings of a small number of people. Then they need to shut their mouths when their taxes go up to pay for all the expropriation and when it happens to their private land.

Cos

11-03-2014, 06:58 PM

speedog

11-03-2014, 09:19 PM

Gonna play the devil's advocate here - let's say they hold open houses and it's all of a sudden that the majority of the 2,520 homeowners in Harvest Hills are supporting what ever redevelopment is proposed, then what?

This is in the very preliminary stages - it could be like Highland Golf course which was allowed by the owners to fall into disuse and disrepair. Still a green space while the owners wait for the right time and offer to come forward. Maybe some blame needs to be placed st this golf course's owners.

Never the less, about the only safe green spaces are probably cemeteries. Personally I am disappointed that the natural areas along Nose Creek are getting developed - it's kind of nice to have undeveloped natural spaces although I'd bet most people don't really use them.

malbadon

11-03-2014, 09:48 PM

Harvest Hills is/was owned by the group that owns Silverwing, Springbanks, Hamptons and a few others. If I recall they are building a new course? Gotta assume easiest way to increase funds for building that course is to sell one of them, explains why they'd sell an otherwise successful course.

I wouldn't think Cedarglen would shell out the bucks to buy the course unless they already had council in their pocket to rezone the land. But seriously, this won't be cut and dry, it could easily end up like Highland park which has sat delinquent for years because they can't get it rezoned for what they wanted it for.

speedog

11-03-2014, 10:12 PM

Originally posted by malbadon
Harvest Hills is/was owned by the group that owns Silverwing, Springbanks, Hamptons and a few others. If I recall they are building a new course? Gotta assume easiest way to increase funds for building that course is to sell one of them, explains why they'd sell an otherwise successful course.

I wouldn't think Cedarglen would shell out the bucks to buy the course unless they already had council in their pocket to rezone the land. But seriously, this won't be cut and dry, it could easily end up like Highland park which has sat delinquent for years because they can't get it rezoned for what they wanted it for.

Highland Park is more interesting - the brothers who owned that tried a couple of times to get the driving range lands rezoned for a senior mid-rise building and git turned down by the city. As best as I can recall from what I've read on the city's web site and in the news in past years, after their final failed attempt to get the driving range rezone, they basically shut the whole golf course operation down and about 18 months later sold the golf course to a developer who is now in the process of redeveloping those lands. Not sure on timelines bt it appears this redevelopment will happen at some point in the near future - lots of engagement with the local community (Highland Park) and the community seems to be in support of the proposal. Yeah, it's a nice overgrown green space to look at but it's not that enjoyable to walk through as the grass is so deep as to make it a very difficult slog.

J-D

11-03-2014, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by bignerd
Its not even in my backyard and I find it annoying. I think 2015 is the year to move from this shittily managed ward. The Northern Hills are starting to suck.

Its obvious that the priority is development, development, development.
Both sides of Country Hills West of Deerfoot are to be developed. SW of Deerfoot I see they are putting in another McDonalds....because the one 5 minutes down Country Hills isn't close enough??

Its nice to have some open, natural, green space... to see deer or coyotes, the fog in the valley over Nose Creek.

This whole area is becoming a cement jungle of light industrial, commercial, and housing, with a few man made retention ponds thrown in.

The density game is going on all over the city, save for some of the super wealthy neighborhoods. I find the growing pains in my commute to be fairly evident, but that's the deep SE for you.

codetrap

11-04-2014, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by speedog
Gonna play the devil's advocate here - let's say they hold open houses and it's all of a sudden that the majority of the 2,520 homeowners in Harvest Hills are supporting what ever redevelopment is proposed, then what?

This is in the very preliminary stages - it could be like Highland Golf course which was allowed by the owners to fall into disuse and disrepair. Still a green space while the owners wait for the right time and offer to come forward. Maybe some blame needs to be placed st this golf course's owners.

Never the less, about the only safe green spaces are probably cemeteries. Personally I am disappointed that the natural areas along Nose Creek are getting developed - it's kind of nice to have undeveloped natural spaces although I'd bet most people don't really use them. I can't see how they would, considering that all the infrastructure there is already strained, plus it goes against the human resistance to change. You're probably right about the cemeteries, and provincial parks though being the only safe areas.

One of the comments was to give the homeowners a shot at buying into the property, but I can't see that taking off. There's too much land in there and it would be too expensive for them. I guess the best scenario would be for the city to purchase it and maybe put down a new school/parks and rec area, but I don't really see that happening either. I suppose if the city purchased it as a natural area and they could let it go wild after paving some paths through it, that at least would have some benefit to people other than the adjacent residents.

I also heard from our realtor friend, she's been steering people away from this area for months now because she heard rumors of this happening.