Rumor: Changes on Horizon for Grand Club Golf Courses

Outside investors, Matanzas sale, splitting up Cypress and Pines courses.

Palm Coast, FL – August 25, 2014 –My rumor antennas are quivering. After hearing on and off for months about the on again/off again sale of the Matanzas Golf Course I can now say for certain that something is probably going to happen at the Pines and Cypress too. The Pines Golf Course, the Cypress Course and the closed Matanzas course, collectively known as The Grand Club, are owned by Golf Group of Palm Coast LLC.

As the story is related to, two new “investors” from North Carolina are now in the Grand Club picture. There is apparently an interim agreement with the new group having an option to buy the Pine Course. Beginning early next year, Golf Group LLC will operate the Cypress Course while the new group will take over Pine Lakes.

The Matanzas Course is still rumored to be under contract for a reported $200,000. A few previous closing dates have been rescheduled. I understand that the potential buyer has asked for a boundary survey before closing.

In what is perhaps a related matter, Golf Group of Palm Coast filed a Quit Claim Deed on a vacant single-family lot at 166 Laramie Drive to Henry Angle. Angle is listed as one of three Managers of Golf Group of Palm Coast LLC. The lot is located behind the 18th tee of the closed Matanzas Golf Course.

Rumor: (noun) A current story or statement without confirmation or certainty as to facts

4 replies
  1. Miss Lee
    Miss Lee says:

    The Grand Club

    Your info is incorrect. Doreen Holl & Chris McLaren are New Yorkers from Long Island…not from N.C. They partnered and bought into the Regent Golf Club in Charleston, S.C. and that’s where their history began in the golf business. They owned an alternator business on Long Island and prospered and bought into the Regent Golf Club.

  2. George Edward Chuddy
    George Edward Chuddy says:

    Federally Ordered Palm Coast Golf Courses

    Perhaps newer Palm Coasters may want to read how Palm Coast Golf Courses came into being.
    Firstly , I / we early Palm Coast Pioneers paid for them Secondly, the United States Federal Trade Commission ordered them / recreational areas ‘…significant areas of conservation…’ and ‘…significant areas of preservation…’ and ‘…significant areas of Recreation…’.
    Federal Trade Commissions ‘ Consent Agreement C-2854 and Federally ordered ‘ Compliance Report ‘ with exhibits A & Exhibits B.
    United States of America
    Federal Trade Commission
    Washington, D.C.
    Date: September 20, 1991/October 4, 1991
    FROM Joseph J. Koman, Jr. Attorney
    Ronald D. Levis, Investigator
    Division of Enforcement/BCP
    Sugject: Show Cause Order
    International Telephone and Telegraph, ITT, ITT Community Development Corporation ICDC and Palm Coast, Inc., Docket No C-2854
    To : Commission
    That the Commission issue a show cause order as to why the existing fifteen year moratorium on sale of registered residential lots at Palm Coast should not be extended for an additional five years. Note: The extension must be ordered not late than the expiration of the fifteen year period, which expires on December 27, 1991

    Nature of Case
    International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation ( ITT) , its land sales subsidiary, ITT Community Development Corporation ( ICDC), and ICDC subsidiary Palm Coast, Inc., 1 . were charges with misrepresenting ITT’s obligations and responsibilities of ICDC and Palm Coast, unfairly and deceptively selling land by misrepresenting the investment values of Palm Coast lots, misrepresenting the types of amenities and facilities available at Palm Coast and failing to provide cancellation and refund rights and failing to disclose other pertinent information.

    1 ITT is one of the major industrial corporations in the United States. The 1991 Standard & Poors Register lists ITT’s revenue as $ 20.05 billion with 119,000 employees. ICDC is a land sales and development firm engaged in selling and developing Palm Coast, a land development in northeast Florida, and also some surrounding areas. Palm Coast is located in Flagler County, between Daytona Beach and St. Augustine, Florida. Attached is a map which shows the various communities that comprise Palm Coast. On the reverse side is an aerial photograph of Palm Coast that clearly shows where growth and development have occurred during the past fifteen years.


    A consent order was issued in this matter on December 10, 1976. The initial compliance report of February 28, 1977, a spot check investigation report of December 28, 1978, a compliance investigation report of April 1, 1981, and the final complance investigation report of October 6, 1983, were accepted by the Commission. The Atlanta Regional Office (ARO) was responsible for this matter until December 1989, whereupon the Enforcement Division took responsibility for future compliance activity.

    Scope of the order

    The Major purpose of the order is to prevent misrepresentations and to require disclosures concerning: (1) the extent of Palm Coast’s developoment, (2) ITT’s financial responsibilities for the development, (3) the investment potential of Palm Coast lots, (4) total lot costs, (5) the current extent of lot use and the timetable for development, (6) the proximity of Palm Coast to major roads, cities and necessary facilities and amenities, (7) number and size of facilities, amenities, and residents, and (8) notices of cancellation.

    a second purpose of the order was to make Palm Coast a self-sufficient community with the necessary amenities for year-round living. To assist in this goal, order paragraphs required certain improvements to be developmed and constructed in Palm Coast. These included: (1) shopping center, (2) office building , (3) commercial, manufacturing, and research park, (4) corporate headquarters, (5) I-95 interchange, (6) St. Joe Road improvement. All of these improvements were developed and constructed within the time limitations imposed by the order.

    The order also requires written and oral disclosures in Palm Coast’s promotional material, contracts, property reports, easements and covenants and sales presentations. Furthermore, respondents are required to conduct in-house surveillance of their sales personnel as to compliance with the disclosure and representation requirements of the order.

    By terms of the order, respondents are also limited in the size of their development for at least 15 years to 42,000 acres and a maximum of 48,000 registered residential lots. 2. The 15 year restriction on expansion was explained to the Commission in
    2…for a period of fifteen (15) years after the service upon respondents of this order,….respondents shall limit and restrict the development presently known as Palm Coast and consisting of approximately 93,0000 acres, to a maximum of approximately 48,000 registered lots in a maximum of 42,000 acres,….and, accordingly, respondents shall neither register any lots nor sell any registered lots in the balance of such approximately 93,000 acres.

    earlier ARO staff pre-order memoranda as probably the most significant order accomplishment. By reducing the acreeage 55%, the Palm Coast community takes on a manageable size, and ICDC must concentrate its development efforts on a smaller parcel of land. With a limited number of lots to sell, the provision alters the business of ICDC from a mere subdivider to a community builder. This provision, as well as the one providing for the building of a basic infrastructure, were designed to stimulate the development and population growth of Palm Coast and to produce a fully-planned and self-contained thriving community. The order also required respondents to submit a report 13 years after date of service. If housing units built or under construction do not equal 50% of the deeded lots, the Commission may extend the limit on the size of developoment for an additional five years.

    December 1, 1989 Compliance Report

    As required by the order, ICDC filed its December 1, 1989, compliance report in a timely fashion. The order provided that the written report be filed 720 days prior to the expiration of the fifteen (15) year moratorium period. The filed report described the extent of the development at Palm Coast, including the number of dwelling units, recreational facilities and public and commercial services (Compliance Report Materials File I, December 1, 1989, Report).

    The December 1, 1989, reeport disclosed that at that time there were 7,552 dwelling units (6,784 single family and 768 multifamily) at Palm Coast and a population of approximately 15,000 ( 60% of Flagler County’s total population). Richard Braunstein, Assistant General Counsel for ICDC, orally reported that at the time of the December 1, 1989 report, there were approximately 34,513 deeded lots. Thus, the report indicated that the number of dwelling units located or under construction at Palm Coast after the expiration of the fifteen year period was not expected to be equal to at least 50% of the number of lots at Palm Coast then authorized for residential use as to which deeds are at that time held by purchasers or their assigne. The order provision provides that if the 50% figure is not achieved, the Commission’s Rules to extend the fifteen year period for an additional period not to exceen five years. Any such extension must be ordered not later than the expiration of the fifteen year period ( December 27, 1991)

    August 27, 1991 Compliance Report

    On August 7, 1991, staff requested ICDC to provide updated data on both the number of deeded registered lots and dwelling units at Palm Coast. ICDC’s August 127, 1991, compliance report shows the following analysis of ICDC’s deeded registered lots and dwelling units as of November 30, 1989, and July 31, 1991:

    Registered lots deeded November 30, 1989 33,700
    Number of dwelling units on registered lots
    single family 6,600
    multi-family 800
    Total: 7,400

    Registered lots deeded Julyu 31, 1991 35,800
    Number of dwelling units on registered lots
    single family 7,700
    multi-family 800
    Total 8,500

    The current data reveals that as of July 31, 1991, less than 24% (23.7%) of the deeded lots have dwelling units thereon. This percentate is only slightly higher than the 22% comparison (of dewlling units to registered lots) which the November 30, 1989 data indicates. It falls far short of the 50% mandate. According to the report, the Palm Coast population now numbers about 18,000.

    Staff’s August 1991 on-site inspection of Palm Coast

    After the December 1, 1989 compliance report was submitted by ICDC, the Enforcement staff received a number of letters from Flagler County Officials, various lot owners, and civic associations at Palm Coast and a number of individual lot purchasers regarding possible Commission action about the extension of the moratorium for an additional five years. Most wanted to make some personal input into the decision-making process and express their likes and/or dislikes of ICDC and the Palm Coast community. Staff explained there would be a comment period where interested parties could submit written statements and views to the Commission; however, a number of the parties requested Commission personnel be made available for oral comments. As a result, the staff made itself available to meet with and discuss the applicable order provisions and community development during the week of August 19 through 22, 1991. All of the parties spoken to were in favor of extending the moratorium for another five years. It will undoubtedly take more than the additional five year period to achieve the order’s 50% dwelling units objective; 3 . however, the additional time period will provide all interested parties the opportunity to insure orderly groth and development of Palm Coast will continue.
    3 At a rate of approximately a 2 % increase in dwelling units to registered lots over a 1 year , 8 month period of time ( i.e., from November 30, 1989 to July 31, 1991, the percentage went from about 22% to 24%) it would take another 21 1/3 years to reach the 50% build out. However, since the time frame November 30, 1989 to July 31, 1991, reflects a period of housing recession, it would be unwise to conclude that it will take that length of time to reach the 50% build out.

    The Flagler County Officials are of the opinion that an extension of the moratorium would be in the best interest of the county and its residents. According to Mr. Noah McKinnon, the attorney for the county commissioners, if ICDC wanted to develop and sell new lots in the county, their plans would have to be interfaced with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) adopted by the STate and ICDC in 1974, and amended in 1977, when a more limited 42,000 acre subdivision was adopted. Using CLUP, Flagler County plans five (5) years in advance for lands that will be needed over the next five (5) years for schools, parks, administrative buldings, etc. Such planning helps to keep county taxes lower and encourages adopting strong regulatory or zoning rules to scrutinize incoming industry and hlep protec the environment. Therefore, if ICDC were sudenly to announce a plan to plat, register and marker new residential lots, the county would view the proposals under a magnifying glass ( one of the county commissionser, Al Jones, specifically used the term “under a magnifying glass’) to ensure that corporate plans would not upset the delicate growth and develpment balance in the county.

    Furthermore, since the state now has requirements ( Concurrence Acts) for all utility, etc., infrastructure to be in place prior to selling homesiet property, the infrastructure would not only be prohibitively expensive for ICDC, but it would mean the county would face additional concerns involving water, drainage, solid waste, etc.

    By extending the moratorium, Flagler county authorities will be assured that ICDC will continue to develop existing Palm Coast acreage in the county for at least 5 more years, and be intimately involved in the same issues that the county must face, i.e., water and utility management and use of public lands. In essense, the moratorium provides an extension of the continuity of the cooperative business relationship currently existing between the county and ICDC. Perhaps Mr. Guy Sapp, the county’s deputy tax appraiser summed up the situation best: If it “aint’t broke, don’t fix it.”

    The staff spoke with ICDC officials on Augsut 27 and 28, 1991. Mr. Braunstein advised that ICDC will not oppose the Commission in extending the moratorium another five years. ICDC still has an inventory of unsold registered lots at Palm Coast and in recent years it has decided to upscale the area east of the Intercoastal Waterway. ICDC is centering most of its development acitivites and financial resources east, from the existing core area at Palm Coast towards the Atlantic Ocean. It will take anywhere from ten to twenty years to develop this area. ICDC is not interested at this time in developing lands outside those contained in the CLUP Agreement. ICDC is pouring millions of dollars into making this area a ‘Second Palm Beach” in which only the wealthy can afford to live. For example, it has spent more than $11 million on a Mediterranean-styled Equity Country Club, to be used exclusively by residents in the communities.


    Respondents have not met the order’s proscribed target goal of 50% build out of deeded Palm Coast residential lots ( only 24% of deeded residential lots have dwelling units constructed thereon since service of the order); and staff’s inquiry does not disclose the existence of any valid reason as to why the moratorium should not be extended for an additional five (5) years. An extension will encourage continued construction of dwelling units within the sections comprising Palm Coast. Moreover, respondents do not oppose the extension of the moratorium for an additional five years.

    Therefore, it is respectfully recommended that the Commission, pursuant to Section 3,72 of the Commissions’s Rules of Practice issue the accompanying order to show cause as to why the existing fifteen year limitation on the sale of registered lots ( maximum of approximately 48,000 registered lots in a maximum of 42,000 acres) should not be extended for an additional five year period. A draft Federal Register Notice is attached to the file.
    1. Aerial Map of Palm Coast
    2, Order to Show Cause
    3, Draft Federal Register Notice
    Justin Dingfelder
    Assistant Director
    Division of Enforcement/BCP
    william S. Sanger
    Associate Director for Enforcement/BCP

    Compliance Investigation
    At the time staff of the Atlanta Regional Office concluded the last compliance investigation, they reported that the Admiral Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of ITT, was developing property east of the Intracoastal Waterway ( Hammock Dunes, a private community of 2,250 acres:, and therefore, they were attempting to verify whether this acreage was part of the 42,000 acres within which ICDD was permitted to register and sell lots in accordance with the Commission’s order. To assist them in making this determination, ARO requested that respondents forward a copy of the application for development approval ADA for a development of regional impact DRI which Florida statures required developers to file with State and local authorities. However, previous to ever receiving the ADA/DRI application, the Commission closed the compliance inquiry with the caveat that ARO monitor the situation as it developed. The Secretary’s letter advised respondents of the Commission’s continued interest in the Admiral Corporations’ development activities.
    After this matter was assigned to the Division of Enforcement, staff reviewed existing files and upon discussing the matter with respondents counsel discovered that the previously requested ADA/DRI application had never been forwarded to the ARO. Therefore, we again made the request. Staff will review the ADA/DRI application, as well as the Comprehensive Land Use Plan CLUP, and existing maps of the area at or prior to the time the order was issued, and conduct discussions with knowledgeable persons to determine whether Hammock Dunes, as well as the five or six other developments east of the Intracoastal Waterway, fall within the restricted 42,000 acres. The company maintains that all of these development are within the permitted acreage. They also maintain that by deplating lots within the original Palm Coast subdivision, they have been able to register lots in Hammock Dunes, etc. and still stay within the order’s proscribed cap of 48,000 registered residential lots. As of this time, the staff has been unable to locate the two maps relied upon to show the areas comprising the 42,000 acres. 5
    With regard to the cap of 48,000 lots, the staff has also discovered that the respondents in recent years have engaged in a substantial buy back program. ( approximately 8,000 lots bought back from previous ICDC purchasers to replenish its lot inventory for additional lot sales, lot and home packages and sales or exchange programs such as the Harbor Club time sharing program in which equity can be applied to a lot and house package. The manner in which this buy back program affects the cap of 48,000 lots has yet to be determined. It is clear, however, that the purpose of this order provision limiting the number of lot sales was to change the busineess attitude of ICDC from a seller of lots to a community developer and builder. At the time of the order 38,000 of the 48,0000 lots had been sold. by 1983, there were only 2,000 lots left in inventory October 6, 1983 report by ARO which was in line with the decrease in lots the Commission envisioned. The Buy back program, however, has put a new twist on the meaning of the previously arrived at numbers….

    Staff has also been advised by a number of Palm Coast residents that respondents have shown an increasing disinterest in furthering the growth of Palm Coast and are attemptiong, by frivolous means, to extricate themselves from the financial burdens of canal maintenance, road improvements or providing utility hook ups to existing plant facitilties. For example, there are certain sections of Palm Caost in which alternative methods to sewer hook ups are used. These areas have holding tanks in which the effluent flows and pumping of raw sewage is done on a….

    Page 7
    (total 93,000 acres, 42,000 buildable acres, 51,000 acres moratorium)

    5 Pomeranz Exhibit A was the map used before the order was accepted by the Commission. Lister Physical Exhibit C
    was the map used in the intial compliance report.

  3. Pride of Cucamonga
    Pride of Cucamonga says:

    What is Henry going to do with 166 Laramie?

    So, the question of the day is what is Henry going to do with 166 Laramie? Somehow, I doubt he’s coming up here to live and have a home on the 18th fairway! Welcome Henry, if you are going to live here. If not, well, we’ll deal with it as time goes by. Time will tell.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply