Some options to consider in offering a par 3

I’ve read several articles and letters to the editor regarding the proposed sale of Kent’s Riverbend Par 3 Golf Course. I’ve also attended a Kent City Council meeting and the open house held by the Parks Department at the par 3 clubhouse. I have spent considerable time discussing the situation with several golfers.

After thinking about all this, I have come to some conclusions regarding the options.

One option is to build a three-hole par 3 course. Although this may benefit children’s programs, such as First Tee and Douglas Youth Group for their lessons, I see issues with this option. I don’t know of anyone who would want to drive into Kent just to play three holes of golf. As far as going around three times to get in nine holes, the backup would be troublesome.

Another option is to put forward tees on the 18-hole course. The reasons seniors and kids golf at the par 3 are the course length and difficulty (no bunkers or water hazards), cost and duration of playing time. Putting forward tees on the 18-hole course would not alleviate the distance. Players would still need to get to those tees. They would also have to contend with bunkers and water hazards. This would make for a longer time period of play. I’m sure the cost would also be higher than at the par 3 course.

A special note to those who have written previously – thanks for the contribution of your ideas and opinions. One additional item you might consider. You may have golfed at the par 3 recently, but I have not seen a few of you on the course.

In addition to attending council meetings and writing letters, you also need to support the golf complex by golfing at the par 3 course. I know the weather hasn’t been that great, but there have been a few days of very good golfing weather.

Hope to see you on the course soon.

– Ken Johnson, Riverbend Par 3 Senior Men’s Club member