June 2025 – Laurel Creek is a planned residential golf community that opened in 1988 and was designed by Arnold Palmer. As noted elsewhere on the blog and rankings, I am a bogey golfer and by no means a golf architectural guru (there are a ton of other sites that specialize in that). While I understand and appreciate a good golf course design, it is weighted lower on my rankings versus the overall experience I get at a golf course. Aesthetics, though, is a big driver of that overall experience.
I like to hike but am by no means a hiker so I substitute parks and trails for a golf course and in my quest to play 1,000 different golf courses, I love playing a course that is like a beautiful hike through a park, oceanfront vista, desert landscape, et al. For this reason, I take huge points off my rankings for houses that spoil these views. Now some of the classic old courses like Bel Air had houses built on them but the course was built first and the houses came later and they are not a quilt of inane McMansions with backyard pools, decks, porticos, patios, etc. on hole after hole. Funny enough, I LIVE on a golf course but again the course was here first and while I don’t rank Skippack any where near my top golf courses, the homes are not the issue. In fact, Skippack GC is a nice walk through an actual State Park it’s just that the course itself is meh. For me, it’s the combination of good design, good walk, good conditioning, and good amenities.
All of this is to say, Laurel Creek loses huge points for being of the planned golf-residential community ilk. The course is good (though with some unfair holes) but the procession of houses drops LC from any consideration in my top area private courses. While I have played pre-planned residential courses just like LC throughout the US, some egregious examples come to mind: Blue Bell CC, PineCrest, RiverCrest (just to name three in the Philly area), Ironhorse in West Palm, St. Andrews in Boca and a lot of the FL area courses. There’re a lot more if I went through my list. Even Pasatiempo loses points for me for the encroaching houses – look at the below satellite image!!!
While I agree with the golf nerds that Pasatiempo is a great course in and of itself, how the golf mags don’t take points off for the homes here as they do with other courses (and rightly so) I’ll never understand. You are literally teeing from peoples’ decks on some of the holes.
And poor Arnie. In his design prime, residential golf communities were all the rage. Here, Mid-South, Blue Bell, Governor’s Club (TN), Plantation at Ponte Vedra, to name just some I’ve played are all planned residential golf communities that score a near zero on my golf aesthetic scale. Even my home club Commonwealth in PA is an Arnold Palmer-designed planned commercial golf community and loses huge points for the office park that the front and part of the back nine are designed around.
OK so that’s a super roundabout way to get to the point I’m trying to make about Laurel Creek – while it’s a good (not very good nor great) golf course design, it is in a planned community and I take huge points away. You know it’s too crowded with homes when it affects when and where you can pee and I had several bladder holds that impacted my score (both on the course and rating the course).
To get to the course from the clubhouse at Laurel Creek, you have to cross a bridge. Now we played LC as part of a GAP Member Play Day and unfortunately started on four. BUT, if we played it regular, it would take points away from my ranking in access to booze. If the course is separated from the clubhouse by a bridge, have a really nice halfway house at the turn so you don’t have golfers going back and forth to get drinks at the turn. Now, I add points in that we found a kid who worked at the course and he gladly ran across to get us drinks. But to note, I am a scratch drinker and only a bogey golfer.
One. We played the medal tees (6,160 yards 69.9/135). That is a pretty healthy slope for the yardage so you see how forced carries and blind shots impact the toughness here. Like this as an opener (even though we played it third to last). Bite off as much as you can to improve your approach. I hit a nice safe drive but pussied out on the carry so was too far out to successfully get on in two and bogeyed.
Missed the second – a 354-yard par four and 8th handicap where I would double and this is the 137-yard par three third. We killed our match as our buddy had to sit out so it didn’t matter that I took a nice little 8 to the apron to the 137-yard par three and would bogey for what would be a push and match win.
Four is a mid-length par four at 358 yards. We started here for the shotgun. Blind drive and there are a bunch of them at LC. Had a nice drive, GIR but would three putt for bogey. Liked Arnie’s big greens here though didn’t play them as well as possible.
The fifth is a sub-500-yard par five from the medal tees and just the 16th handicap. The hole features various water hazards all along the left to avoid right through the green which is on a bit of a peninsula. I was unable to keep it straight and would double.
Six is a longish par four (408 yards) and the number two handicap hole on the course. My bogey net par would win us the hole. Water is not really a factor here. Houses though are close.
Seven was playing 173 yards with a menacing bunker to contend with to the left of the green which I was right in the middle of. Double.
Eight comes back and as you see there are quite a few narrow and intimidating drives. Just 313 yards and I would par again.
Here’s my approach on eight from my drive.
Here’s nine from the tee. To the right of the bunker is a small fairway that sets you up for an attempt to go for the green. The left is the safer route but either way you will need to chop off the water fronting the green on your approach. I put it right in the bunker and after a nice six iron out I plunked it and a double.
Here is the long approach on nine.
Ten is a straight away par four measuring 361 yards from the medal tees. Driving range left and Creek Rd. right. There is a rest area by the green that I damn near put my approach into. Use any bathroom you can because this is a pee unfriendly golf course. Triple as we couldn’t find my approach shot.
Eleven is 345 yards and a par four. Homes left and right here and a tiny spot to land your drive. Was OK and took a bogey after just missing my par putt.
The approach on 11.
A repeat of eight? Nope this is the 12th and another super intimidating drive. Long par four (412 yards) and the number one handicap. Very happy with a bogey net par on this one and won the hole to even the match.
Here’s 13 again, 361 yards and #5 handicap. Another blind drive and not sure how I fucked it up but took a double.
I missed the 14th (146-yard par three that I would bogey) and this is 15. Another short par 5 at just 466 yards and another missed par putt cost us the six-hole match.
The green on 14.
I missed 16 which is a 368-yard par four and this is the 17th. 200 yards. No room to play a fade or draw. Stupid, unfair hole that we would all lose a ball on. And 17 irritated me so much that I didn’t shoot the 18th which is a nice finisher that I would bogey net par on to square our match that we would ultimately abandon as our buddy Joe had to sit out the last three holes (which were the course’s first three holes) from the heat. In all, I rate Laurel Creek pretty harshly because of the homes. Condition was good and really liked the mixed grille which has a shuffle board table and I think a pool table and opens up to a nice patio. However, as noted, the clubhouse sits across a bridge from the rest of the course so the view from the patio is of the golf cart staging area. For post game dinner, we went to a chain that was up the road called Tommy’s Tavern & Tap which I guess is a chain that none of us ever heard of. Food was decent, I put all the weight I sweated off on the course right back on with a coal-fire grilled calzone but Tommy’s has pizza, bar grub and sushi. Odd combo but it was good for a casual bite.
Golf Scrapbook 