<body><div><figure><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=1UR2gw_1GqAnzfo00" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=1UR2gw_1GqAnzfo00" width="1100" height="690" ><figcaption>A golfer waits for his turn to tee off at Ridgemark Golf Club south of Hollister. Photo: Robert Airoldi</figcaption></figure><p>San Benito County needs housing. But as officials consider the proposed redevelopment of Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, they should look beyond the number of homes a new plan could deliver. </p><p>They should also ask what recreational, environmental and economic value the property already provides—and what the redesigned site would retain.</p><figure><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=0q84s0_1GqAnzfo00" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=0q84s0_1GqAnzfo00" width="1100" height="921" ><figcaption>Sean Petersen</figcaption></figure><p>Located southeast of Hollister, Ridgemark combines an 18-hole golf course with lodging, dining, practice facilities and golf events. Those uses serve golfers and can bring visitors to the area. Their contribution deserves serious consideration before the county makes a decision about the property’s future.</p><p>The proposed project includes 160 market-rate single-family homes and 30 below-market-rate units in duplexes or duets, along with commercial development, open space, a park, infrastructure improvements and a redesigned golf course. The county’s planning process remains active; its latest available project materials do not establish that the development has received final approval.</p><p>The right question is not whether San Benito County should build housing. It is how to meet that need while making an informed decision about the property’s existing value.</p><h2>Green space has value beyond golf</h2><p>Golf courses are sometimes viewed simply as recreational facilities. Research published by the United States Golf Association identifies other potential benefits, including cooling, wildlife habitat, stormwater management, groundwater recharge and improved air quality. These benefits depend on a course’s location, design and maintenance; they should not be assumed without examining the site.</p><p>That distinction matters at Ridgemark. The county’s environmental review addresses drainage, flooding, water quality, biological resources and other site-specific concerns. Officials should use that evidence to determine which existing landscape features provide environmental value, which impacts the proposed changes could create, and how the final design could reduce those impacts.</p><p>A redesigned golf course and additional open space may offer opportunities to retain some benefits. But the county should require evidence of what will actually be preserved, rather than treating a golf component on a plan as proof that the environmental outcome will be positive.</p><h2>Tourism is part of the economic picture</h2><p>Travel spending supports businesses well beyond hotels and attractions. Restaurants, retail stores, recreation providers and transportation services can all benefit when visitors spend time in a community.</p><p>According to Dean Runyan Associates’ Economic Impact of Travel in California report, visitors spent about $138.9 million in San Benito County in 2024. That figure covers visitor spending across the county, not Ridgemark’s individual contribution. No verified figure establishing the golf course’s specific economic impact was identified in the available research.</p><p>That gap is a reason to investigate, not a reason to disregard the issue. Before approving the redevelopment, the county should examine the current operation’s role in attracting visitors, supporting local jobs and generating spending, then consider how the proposed development could affect those activities.</p><h2>Make the whole property count</h2><p>The county should assess Ridgemark on more than its housing yield. It should examine whether the final plan will provide meaningful recreational access, retain viable visitor-serving facilities, protect valuable natural features and address the environmental impacts identified in its review.</p><p>That approach does not require preserving Ridgemark exactly as it exists today. It requires weighing the benefits and costs of change before deciding what the property should become.</p><p>New housing is a legitimate public need. So is responsible planning for the community’s economic, recreational and environmental future. San Benito County should pursue the former without overlooking the latter.</p><p>Ridgemark’s future should be measured not only by what gets built, but by whether the final plan leaves the community with a better balance of housing, recreation, tourism and environmental protection.</p><p><i>Sean Petersen is the founder of</i> <i>Golf Trip Junkie</i><i>, a golf travel company that develops custom golf trips. His experience in golf course operations and golf travel informs his perspective on the relationship between golf properties, visitors, and destination communities.</i></p></div></body>

Block Source: sanbenito.com

Misinformation

Clickbait

Old or repetitive news

Explicit content

Location not relevant

San Benito County needs housing. But as officials consider the proposed redevelopment of Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, they should look beyond the number of homes a new plan could deliver. They should also ask what recreational, environmental and economic value the property already provides—and what the redesigned site would...

Guest View: Before Ridgemark changes, county must consider what it could lose

NewsBreak

San Benito County needs housing. But as officials consider the proposed redevelopment of Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, they should look beyond the numbe

Guest View: Before Ridgemark changes, county must consider what it could lose

Comments