The demise of Stonebridge

[em69]

Is there any date being shared on when the development/changes will begin? The file shared only indicates Jan-Feb 2020 rezoning application will go to planning committee for approval.

When will the shovels be in the ground?

According to their website, construction started in October 2019.

[Stonebridge]

According to their website, construction started in October 2019.

As stated on our website, we plan to close the Front Nine to begin work on October 13, 2020. No work was started in 2019.

[Billythe3rd]

I don't think a 6000 yard par 70 course is what golfers want. They will go elsewhere. In a declining market that is a nail in a coffin. It may satisfy the homeowners (for now) but the course will never be what it once was. I assure you that 10 years from now, the course in that form will be making no money at all, will be in ratty condition due to lack of funds, and no longer be worth keeping open. What a shame. I loved that course.

I think it's not what most serious golfers want but I think you are wrong in assuming its going to go into a death spiral. I think there is room in the market for a short tough course located in a developed area.
One of the main reasons people are moving away from golf is the time it takes to play a round and a shorter course should mean a shorter round. I'm in my early thirties and I'm looking forward to the changes at Stonebridge. If I want a challenging course to play on the weekend I can go to Marshes, Loch March, Renfrew, Equinelle, Sorcier, Greensmere and a few others. For a quick weekday round after work I really only have Cedarhill and I don't find it to be that challenging.
I might be wrong but i just think there are a lot of options in the area for courses like the old Stonebridge so maybe some differentiation is good for the local golf scene; although i will add that I'm expecting a price cut to come with the new layout.

[Johnyc]

I think it's not what most serious golfers want but I think you are wrong in assuming its going to go into a death spiral. I think there is room in the market for a short tough course located in a developed area.
One of the main reasons people are moving away from golf is the time it takes to play a round and a shorter course should mean a shorter round. I'm in my early thirties and I'm looking forward to the changes at Stonebridge. If I want a challenging course to play on the weekend I can go to Marshes, Loch March, Renfrew, Equinelle, Sorcier, Greensmere and a few others. For a quick weekday round after work I really only have Cedarhill and I don't find it to be that challenging.
I might be wrong but i just think there are a lot of options in the area for courses like the old Stonebridge sos good for the local golf scene; although i will add that I'm expecting a price cut to come with the new layout.

I do agree that the new layout will appeal to some. I also agree that playability will change. Some will find it easier some might find it harder. Public golf courses struggle with slow play as you often end up behind a group that plays once a month and if they are only out once in a while there isn’t a big rush to finish up
In under 4 hours. Pace of play standards IMO are too low. Really there is no reason why 4 golfers can’t complete 18 holes in 3 hours and 30 mins max. Unless there is a lengthy transition between greens and tees 3:30 is a very manageable number but most facilities aim for 4:15.
Anyway just wanted to chime in

[jvincent]

Does anyone here remember the original super fast greens, high fescue, strictly enforced pace of play days at Stonebridge?

Back then you really had to golf your ball to score there. And you still got around in a reasonable time.

[BullDog]

I do. If you didn't keep up, I believe you were offered a nine hole rain cheque to come back another time.

Standards slipped and lots of things changed since those days.

Does anyone here remember the original super fast greens, high fescue, strictly enforced pace of play days at Stonebridge?

Back then you really had to golf your ball to score there. And you still got around in a reasonable time.

[em69]

Played yesterday with a Marshall...and it seems there is a chance the work might not start this year. Anyone have some any info?

[rajah]

From 20 years of marshalling. 95% of the blue tee players should be playing from the white tees. 80% of white Tee players should be playing from red tees and 90% of red tee players should be playing for seniors tees. Most golfers think they are lot better then what they are. Especially for men over 40 it plays with their big self centered egos. In fact if most golfers played from the appropriate tees they would enjoy the game more. The pace would be better and it would be a good experience for all golfers.

I think the shorter course will do very well.

[golfisforfun]

From 20 years of marshalling. 95% of the blue tee players should be playing from the white tees. 80% of white Tee players should be playing from red tees and 90% of red tee players should be playing for seniors tees. Most golfers think they are lot better then what they are. Especially for men over 40 it plays with their big self centered egos. In fact if most golfers played from the appropriate tees they would enjoy the game more. The pace would be better and it would be a good experience for all golfers.

I think the shorter course will do very well.

people have every right to play whatever tees they want, as they have paid to play.

as long as golfers can finish in the time specified by the course, then all is good.

and this pace of play thing is crazy, golf should not be a race, 3h30min is nuts, why the hurrry???

4h is perfect, even 4h15 is fine

[Johnyc]

people have every right to play whatever tees they want, as they have paid to play.

as long as golfers can finish in the time specified by the course, then all is good.

and this pace of play thing is crazy, golf should not be a race, 3h30min is nuts, why the hurrry???

4h is perfect, even 4h15 is fine

Hopefully I never have to play behind you. Unless there is a significant transition between greens and tees it’s simply unacceptable to take 4:15 or longer over 18 holes. Hopefully those who play at this pace are shooting low 70’s and letting others play through.

We played as a foursome, walking, in just over 3 hours this morning.

[golfisforfun]

Hopefully I never have to play behind you. Unless there is a significant transition between greens and tees it’s simply unacceptable to take 4:15 or longer over 18 holes. Hopefully those who play at this pace are shooting low 70’s and letting others play through.

We played as a foursome, walking, in just over 3 hours this morning.

That is great pace, good for you. But that does not mean EVERYONE needs to play at that speed. I enjoy the walk, I like to relax, I am not in a rush AND I shoot mid 70s. 4 golfers shooting in the 90s can play at a good pace and it still takes 4 hours.

[Johnyc]

That is great pace, good for you. But that does not mean EVERYONE needs to play at that speed. I enjoy the walk, I like to relax, I am not in a rush AND I shoot mid 70s. 4 golfers shooting in the 90s can play at a good pace and it still takes 4 hours.

It’s true; not everyone will play at that pace. It’s like driving on the highway; the left lane should be reserved for quicker traffic. Same with the golf course. If you are playing significantly slower than the group behind then step aside and let them play through. Improves the level of enjoyment for all parties.

[slash]

I get it if the group falls behind more than a hole to let the group behind go through but if they are groups ahead of them it's the marshal responsibility to try and get the pace going. Not everyone walk at a pace of 3 hours to play 18 holes of golf

[Johnyc]

I get it if the group falls behind more than a hole to let the group behind go through but if they are groups ahead of them it's the marshal responsibility to try and get the pace going. Not everyone walk at a pace of 3 hours to play 18 holes of golf

For sure. Again, pace of play is probably the biggest difference between private and public courses. In the last ten years, including club championships and other member events I’ve never had a round exceed 4:15. Generally rounds are 3:45. If you play in the AM as one of the first 5 groups it’s almost always 3:00 to 3:30. Our course has a very small transition from greens to tees and is an easy walk so 3:30 is very easy over 18.

[justsomeguy]

If you are playing significantly slower than the group behind then step aside and let them play through. Improves the level of enjoyment for all parties.

You've actually got this backwards. There is only lane on the golf course. The onus is totally on your group that if you are playing so significantly faster than the group in front that you actually catch up to them at the tee box while they are teeing off or before, then and only then should you ask if your group can play through by teeing off with them and then playing first to the green.

Otherwise your group is too late, and all that "stepping aside" will do is make THEM wait for your group to catch up and then get far enough ahead, which improves things for YOUR group but will slow down the pace of play for everyone else on the course.

[Gofish2]

You've actually got this backwards. There is only lane on the golf course. The onus is totally on your group that if you are playing so significantly faster than the group in front that you actually catch up to them at the tee box while they are teeing off or before, then and only then should you ask if your group can play through by teeing off with them and then playing first to the green.

Otherwise your group is too late, and all that "stepping aside" will do is make THEM wait for your group to catch up and then get far enough ahead, which improves things for YOUR group but will slow down the pace of play for everyone else on the course.

I think a little bit of both. Some groups are reluctant to ask to play through so no harm in waving them up. Courtesy on the course makes for an enjoyable day.

[jeffc]

For sure. Again, pace of play is probably the biggest difference between private and public courses. In the last ten years, including club championships and other member events I’ve never had a round exceed 4:15. Generally rounds are 3:45. If you play in the AM as one of the first 5 groups it’s almost always 3:00 to 3:30. Our course has a very small transition from greens to tees and is an easy walk so 3:30 is very easy over 18.

It's not really that different. I played Royal Ottawa 2 weeks ago in 3:50 with 3 of us walking but no one in front of us really. I play Meadows consistently in under 4 hours with 4 guys walking on a busy course and often in 3:30. We don't play super fast, we are just ready to hit when it's our turn. I play a private course in Cambridge in 4 hours regularly. Played Loch March a few weeks back in 4:10. I play a lot of courses in Ottawa at all times, weekends, after work, etc and can't remember one longer than 4:15 in a long time.

[justsomeguy]

I think a little bit of both. Some groups are reluctant to ask to play through so no harm in waving them up. Courtesy on the course makes for an enjoyable day.

If your foursome regularly plays 18 holes in 3 hours then you should expect to catch other groups at the tee box and therefore NOT be reluctant to ask to play through. By the same token, if your group has been caught at the tee box by the group following you then you should also NOT be reluctant to offer them the chance to play through.

The harm in waving people up comes from groups waiting at the tee box so the smaller/faster group behind them can finish putting on the previous hole and then play through. I've seen this way too many times and it is a recipe for disaster for everyone else playing the course.

[rad]

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...aramedic-chief

"Under the deal, Mattamy can apply to redevelop a different part of the golf course land and will be required to continue operating an 18-hole golf course until at least Oct. 30, 2029."

[hx101]

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...aramedic-chief

"Under the deal, Mattamy can apply to redevelop a different part of the golf course land and will be required to continue operating an 18-hole golf course until at least Oct. 30, 2029."

Sure, but we are still losing holes 7, 6 and part of 5. This will all become houses that will start to be developed at the end of the 2021 golf season. Unfortunate, that such a nice course will be torn up.