It’s no huge surprise that the Vancouver Park Board voted against a plan by the city to investigate alternative recreational uses for part of Langara Golf Course in South Vancouver.

Never mind that the number of golfers using the city’s three 18-hole courses dropped 11 per cent between 2013 and 2016, mirroring a North American trend. (There has been an uptick since then, so the sport isn’t dead, but its popularity in most places is waning.) Forget that the swampy Langara South Vancouver course needs $3-million in repairs to mitigate drainage problems. Oh, and don’t even think about the $58 it costs to play a round on a summer weekend, a fee that, while bargain basement by golfing standards, is still out of reach for many Vancouverites.

This is an election year and there will be little boat-rocking between now and Oct. 20 when votes are cast. This is a park board that even in non-election years postponed its most controversial decisions. The proposed dog park strategy and the VanSplash plan charting future swimming pool development and closings have been discussed for years and remain in limbo. Now it’s possible those stalled for good reason. But refusing to even entertain new ideas for a portion of the Langara Golf Course is a mistake.

Story continues below advertisement

The proposal came in the form of a motion from Mayor Gregor Robertson asking the park board to consider turning some of the land into a park that could include restored wetlands and ecosystems, a trail network, sports fields and a competitive class track and field facility. Mr. Robertson was not advocating a total closing, merely transitioning from an 18-hole to a nine-hole “executive course” so the land would serve more people.

The Langara course sprawls across 49 hectares of prime real estate not far from Canada Line in South Vancouver. Averaged over a year, approximately 150 people a day golf at the course, a minuscule number compared with much smaller urban parks such as East Vancouver’s John Hendry Park (Trout Lake) which is only 27 hectares and back in 2013 averaged more than 2,000 visitors per day.

Cleverly designed, even a modest space can pack a lot of recreational punch. A proposed 3.6-hectare multi-level park, forming part of the Oakridge mall redevelopment, is designed to include an 800-metre walking path, off-leash dog area, music pavilion, green space for sports, children’s playgrounds and more. Imagine what could be done with even half the Langara golf course land, which is so much larger.

As cities grow and land values rise, urban golf courses across North America are under siege. The Globe’s Frances Bula has reported that in Canada, public golf courses, most of which don’t earn enough revenue to cover maintenance, are under review in Calgary, Winnipeg and Toronto. Kingston shuttered its only course last fall.

South of the border, CityLab, Atlantic Magazine’s city-building publication, cites a study done by the golf industry group Pellucid Corp. that states the number of regular golfers dropped by nearly one third between 2002 and 2016. The blame is being placed firmly on the shoulders of millennials who it seems don’t have a taste for “an expensive, poky sport,” the article states.

Rejecting the mayor’s motion puts Vancouver’s park board in a stalemate with city council and for now, city staff have stopped exploring other options for the land. But to foot a repair bill of the magnitude necessary to remediate the Langara course, the park board needs council approval. And because the park board and city disagree on next steps, questions are now being asked about which government body should control the course. Parks, according to the city’s definition, should be free for all residents. So, the city believes golf courses, which charge people to play, should fall under its purview. The park board disagrees.

It’s difficult to see how, in an expensive city where many have little money for luxuries after paying for housing, that the demand for golf courses will suddenly explode. Our green space is precious and scarce and as the city grows, we should take stock of how best to use it. Many would consider sacrificing half a golf course to serve far more people an inadequate half-measure. I call it a good first step.