Granville Township Trustees table vote on proposed golf course renovation

Granville Township Trustees have postponed a vote on proposed updates to the Denison University Golf Course, after widespread concern brought more than 30 people to the Granville Township Trustees meeting on Sept. 23. 

Trustees will convene for a special meeting on Wednesday, Sept. 30 at 7 p.m. in council chambers to address the proposal, which would include major adjustments to holes 15-17, add more open space and remove at least 362 of the thousands of trees on the course. 

Renovation supporters and dissenters alike packed into the township meeting room on Sept. 23, dragging extra office chairs behind them as the room filled with residents. Of the residents, 12 stood up to speak before the trustees. 

Niel Zimmers, a resident of the Bryn Du Woods development that borders the golf course, spoke first. 

“I would say it’s most unfortunate that we have to gather here tonight, and the trustees have to confront this problem,” Zimmers said. “For one reason, and one reason only – and that is the impact on the homeowners in Bryn Du that has been caused by Gil Hanse’s design.”

Hanse, a renowned golf course architect, was hired by Denison to create a new version of the course that builds upon Donald Ross’s original 1925 design. Earlier this week, Denison published a new website outlining Hanse’s contribution to the project and the goals of the renovation. 

While it was originally planned for a vote on Sept. 9, the renovation has been met with significant pushback from neighbors of the golf course and community members in other parts of the township and village. Many are concerned that the plan – and the construction required – would violate the conservation easement placed on the golf course in 2014. 

“Mr. Hanse, who, after being provided with the conservation easement limitations, chose not to follow those limitations, and instead went ahead and disregarded them and designed the changes. He ignored them,” Zimmers said. 

Other residents highlighted potential updates that could be made to the golf course renovation that would ease concerns about environmental impact. Andy McCall, who served on the Granville Township Land Management Committee for several years, said that the construction proposed violates the easement without question due to the number of trees it would remove. 

“I note that the easement does make allowances for maintenance of the golf course. The key word is maintenance,” McCall said to the trustees. “And as I read it, without such means, the golf course, of course, would not be able to operate properly. Given that the course has operated for many years with the trees in place, it seems the removal is not just about maintenance. It’s an aesthetic one.” 

Bryn Du resident Matt Harleman, however, told the story of a specific tree.

“I have a tree in front of my house, it’s the biggest tree in that section of the golf course,” Harleman said. “It’s huge, and it’s 15 feet from my property.”

Harleman said that while he heard plans for which trees would be removed and why, he wasn’t expecting to see a removal tag on this specific tree. 

“My worry is that we don’t understand what the plan is, and that’s not these guys’ fault,” Harleman said, gesturing to the Denison employees in attendance. “They’re just executing to get their mission done, which is to renovate the golf course. But the biggest tree on that course was tagged for destruction. 
If I hadn’t gone down there and said, ‘Why is this tagged?,’ it would have been removed.”

Similarly concerned about the impact on the local tree population was Mary Tuominen, who lives on the west side of the golf course. She encouraged the trustees to commit to the policy of “tree neutrality” if they approve the renovation – meaning for every tree removed from the golf course, the university will plant at least one new tree somewhere within the village or university property. 

Denison University President Adam Weinberg told The Reporting Project in early September that the university will commit to tree neutrality. 

“If the trustees choose to accept some form of Denison’s proposal, I think it’s really essential that this language about tree neutrality be included in whatever is adopted, for a number of reasons,” Tuominen said. “I think it’s good public policy, because it will ensure clarity and accuracy about how everybody understands what tree neutrality is, the specifics of it, how many trees, which trees, and how they will be replaced.”

Earlier in the week on Monday Sept. 21, Denison employees held a discussion with village residents to explain the project more in depth and answer questions regarding the proposed golf course. All 80 properties that neighbor the course, and other residents from the village, were invited to attend. 

Jake Preston, the director of physical plant and capital projects at Denison, said there is a purpose for each tree that they plan to remove. 

“Nobody from Denison went out and said we want one, two, three, four, trees removed. We brought Gil out. Gil has been on the course, Gil had in hand the old Donald Ross sketches, his intent was to restore that original design intent,” Preston said during the Monday neighborhood discussion. 

During the meeting residents raised concerns about tree removal and impacts on their own property from construction, like increased noise and dust.

Preston answered questions about tree removal, outlined the construction timeline, communicated plans for equipment and discussed plans for ongoing communication with residents during the process. He also addressed concerns of erosion control and drainage flow.

Also during the Monday neighborhood discussion, the conservation easement was of particular concern for many residents. 

Vivian Opelt, a Granville resident, asked Preston about the legal basis for the project, given the conservation easement. 

“What’s the legal basis for you doing this project given the existence of the conservation easement and in my opinion the language in that directly contravenes this project? So how are you proceeding? What are you talking about with the trustees? Are you amending anything? How is it going to work?” she asked.

To that, Preston said as part of the conservation easement, they are required to share their plans, including the excavation and tree removal, with the trustees.

“We feel that the work we’re doing lives within the conservation easement. Ultimately they make that decision, so we will be in front of the trustees and they will pass judgement on that,” Preston said. “I will say that all three of the trustees have toured the site so we can share with them key impact. It’s important to us to be transparent as we work through this and show them exactly what it is we intend to do.” 

After the neighborhood discussion, Opelt said, “I feel like today we didn’t get answers.” She expressed continued concern about the conservation easement. “There is nothing in there that would allow a wholesale removal of 360 trees just like that.”

During the neighborhood discussion, Opelt also read a statement from her neighbor, Joan Kent. Joan Kent is the widow of Bob Kent, who sold the golf course to Denison. 

“When my husband Bob and his partners were owners of the course there was an effort to comply with Granville’s wishes and when making changes to the course there would be an effort to preserve as many healthy trees as possible,” she read. “I believe Denison should be less concerned with making the course more like a Donald Ross course in Scotland and more concerned with the history of the course in Granville. Donald Ross was not concerned with having too many trees on the course. If Denison wishes to be a good neighbor they should pay attention to the village’s expectations in this matter.”

Laura Joseph spoke at both the Monday neighborhood discussion and Wednesday meeting. Her house borders the golf course. 

“You know it is my backyard but like a lot of people, I’m less concerned with Denison even replanting the trees. I think they will replant trees. But it’s this process of not respecting the conservation easement that is making me increasingly angry, or not considering that there needs to be any kind of legal decision about whether this project complies with or does not comply with the easement,” Joseph said. “It’s concerning me more for the long term and future green space levees and just being able to trust what these people are doing with our taxpayer dollars.”

On Wednesday, Joseph presented a slightly different perspective. 

“I want to reiterate a question that I asked in the open house that I didn’t really get a good answer to,” she said. “Other residents were asking for more information on the size, species, and location of the trees slated for removal… but we really didn’t get too much of an answer.”

Joseph said that since the trees have been marked, it’s safe to assume that there are documents listing these details.

“So, the question is, really, will you, as trustees, holders of conservation easement, request this information, specifically, to find a count, number of species and location, including the trees around the wooded perimeter and upon the nursing green, as part of the approval process?” Joseph said.

Of the 12 people that spoke Wednesday night, only one spoke directly in support of the planned renovation – Ben Barton, who said he has served on golf course boards throughout his life and “knows what it’s like to run a golf course.” 

“Everyone’s taken the article from The Reporting Project, and taken one sentence, and made that their bullet point,” he said, referencing the concern surrounding tree removal. “And I’m telling you, this is one of the greatest opportunities to protect a body of land into perpetuity, and improve your backyards, then we’ve ever seen before. You’re getting an $8 million landscaping upgrade to your backyard. And y’all are complaining.”

After Barton spoke, the trustees closed public comment, and the time came to vote on the renovation. 

After pausing, Rob Schaadt turned to look at his fellow trustees. 

“I’m going to make a recommendation that we do not take a vote until we have the time to properly vet the most recent information,” he said. “We don’t have time to address every concern, we’ve addressed some of them before, but the thing that keeps coming up is that we are amending this easement. That is factually just not the case. The easement is what the easement is.”

Trustees Leonard Hubert and Bill Hoekstra agreed, and committed to holding a special meeting on Wednesday, Sept. 30 at 7 p.m. 

“The sole item on the agenda [will be] to address the request for golf course improvements,” Schaadt said.

Margo Ellis and Ella Diehl write for TheReportingProject.org, the nonprofit news organization of Denison University’s Journalism program, which is supported by generous donations from readers. Sign up for The Reporting Project newsletter here.