# Describe golf-course lot context without implying access rights.

A golf-course lot page should describe the location relationship your records support and the view your dated image shows. Keep frontage, lot control, home status, membership and course access separate. Publish approved statements with clear scope. Direct unresolved rights questions to the responsible reviewer before adding them to buyer copy.

## What relationship is verified?

Start with the phrase you want a buyer to understand. “Near a golf course,” “beside a golf course” and “golf-course frontage” make different claims. Put the proposed phrase beside its supporting record before you choose the headline. If that record is missing, hold the relationship claim.

Write the location description independently from the opportunity status. You might have an approved description of completed work without a current lot to offer. You might receive an inquiry about an owner-held parcel without controlling that parcel. Neither situation establishes an available home. Your public label needs its own current source.

Use the [community and lot page guide](/articles/builder-websites/community-and-lot-pages/) to choose the relationship label. Keep this narrower worksheet for the course context. The broader [land and lots library](/articles/land-and-lots/) covers other public lot explanations.

Separate a claimed boundary relationship from a view across land. Ask the responsible project reviewer which record supports the wording. Keep legal interpretation with the qualified reviewer assigned to that question. Do not draw a boundary from a photograph or repeat a casual description as verified frontage.

| Public topic | Record to request | Keep separate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Location relationship | Approved parcel description and supporting location record | Membership or permission to enter |
| Photographed view | Original image, capture date and approved viewpoint description | Future view conditions |
| Claimed frontage | Source identified for qualified project review | Visual proximity or an informal map label |
| Lot control | Current status confirmation from the responsible role | Past construction in the area |
| Home status | Approved project or inventory update | Course operations and amenity access |
| Publication permission | Approved release scope for the selected material | Project approval or access rights |

These are proposed editorial record categories. They do not establish a required legal document set. Ask the responsible party what evidence resolves each actual question. Preserve the answer and its limits in your private project record.

## What does the image show?

Describe the image as a dated observation from a specified viewpoint. Record whether it shows an existing house, an undeveloped parcel or an illustrative view. If the viewpoint is unknown, say so internally and hold any caption that depends on it. Do not label an unrelated course photograph as the lot view.

Review the crop with the proposed caption. A narrow crop can remove the foreground that explains where the camera stood. Keep enough context for the approved statement. Do not add a proposed home silhouette that makes an unreviewed orientation look settled.

W3C guidance says an informative image's text alternative should convey its meaning in context. Its supplement example separates visible information from adjacent explanation. Use that approach for approved lot imagery. See the [W3C informative images tutorial, Overview and Example 2](https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/informative/). That guidance concerns image presentation, not land conditions or property rights.

Keep the capture date visible when the page relies on a view. Name the approved viewpoint without exposing a private location. A caption can identify what the photograph records while leaving future conditions unknown. Do not turn a view in one image into a permanent outlook promise.

Check the heading, caption, alternative text and thumbnail together. “View from the photographed position” cannot support a thumbnail label saying “permanent golf views.” Treat each version as public copy with the same evidence boundary. If the selected image changes, review the words again.

## Which rights remain separate?

List the questions before you draft an amenities paragraph. Course entry, playing access, membership, paths and other facilities need their own confirmed scope. A visible course is insufficient evidence for any of those rights. Keep unknown access conditions out of feature lists and page titles.

The FTC states that advertising must be truthful and non-misleading wherever it appears. See the opening paragraphs of [FTC Truth In Advertising](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising). This supports checking the overall message, including implied access. It does not validate a parcel claim or prescribe this worksheet.

Give each unresolved question an owner. A rights question may require qualified legal review. A question about current membership information belongs with the party responsible for that information. Keep both separate from the builder's project-status confirmation. Do not ask the website writer to reconcile conflicting answers.

### How do you use the adjacency and rights worksheet?

Copy this proposed worksheet into your content brief. Use one record per proposed phrase. Keep private documents in controlled project files. The public statement field contains only the wording approved for publication.

```
Adjacency and rights worksheet
Proposed phrase:
Source:
Verification date:
Responsible reviewer:
Scope:
Unresolved right:
Approved public statement:
```

In “scope,” identify the parcel, image or opportunity covered by the source. In “unresolved right,” state the specific unanswered question. Write “unknown” when the answer is unavailable. Do not leave a blank that another writer could read as a completed review.

Keep rejected phrases with their reasons in the internal brief. If “membership included” has no supporting confirmation, record why you held it. A later writer then has a clear boundary instead of an attractive phrase waiting to return.

For the broader review sequence, use [lot due diligence content](/articles/land-and-lots/lot-due-diligence-content/). That explanation prepares buyers for record review. It does not settle the specific rights question on your lot page.

## What belongs in the inquiry?

Ask which parcel or published example the buyer means. Capture the page reference, their lot relationship and their intended home use. Let them describe the course-related question in their own words. Do not require them to choose “membership included” or another answer you have not established.

Ask for documents already available to the buyer through your approved intake route. Do not request public posting of private records. If the buyer has no documents, retain that absence as a missing input. A completed form confirms receipt, not lot control, access rights or project acceptance.

1. **Identify the page.** Record the exact lot or example that prompted the inquiry.

2. **Separate the buyer's statements.** Label ownership information, observations and questions independently.

3. **List available records.** Preserve the stated date and source for each supplied document.

4. **Assign the open question.** Route rights, status and project questions to their responsible reviewers.

5. **Prepare the reply.** Confirm what you received without predicting the review outcome.

6. **Approve public changes separately.** Do not publish private inquiry details as new lot facts.

### What would a fictional example look like?

This unnamed example is fictional. It represents no builder, community or available property. Suppose a draft page combines a completed-home photograph with the heading “Golf living with access.” The brief contains an approved location description and a dated image record. It contains no verified course-access statement.

In the worksheet, the proposed phrase is “Golf living with access.” The source is the fictional approved location note and image record. The verification date stays “not supplied” for this exercise. The responsible reviewer is the project record owner. The scope covers only that completed example and photograph.

The unresolved right is course access. The editor holds the access phrase and removes the inventory implication from the draft. Claimed frontage, membership, amenities and current lot control all remain unknown. A different image or a different parcel would need its own record.

### Which public excerpt follows from that example?

This completed-home example is shown beside a golf course. The photograph records the view at capture. Current opportunities, membership and course access are not established by this example. Identify your parcel and question when you inquire so the responsible reviewer can determine which records are needed.

This is sample wording for the fictional brief. Before using it, confirm the location description and replace the image reference with approved capture information. If you cannot verify the relationship, hold the opening sentence too.

## Who maintains changing facts?

Assign a page owner and a review trigger to each changing statement. A new project status, replacement photograph or revised access statement should prompt a review. Keep the source date separate from the date someone last opened the page. Looking at old copy does not renew its evidence.

Record these responsibilities in the [Operating profile stage](/process/operating-profile/). Use the [build process documentation guide](/guides/writing-down-your-build-process/) to explain how approved findings become public wording. Keep role names consistent across the brief and publishing checklist.

When a fact changes, inspect the page title, summary, image caption and inquiry confirmation. Check any public excerpts maintained elsewhere by your team. Hold disputed wording until the responsible reviewer resolves it. Preserve the earlier version privately so the reason for the change remains traceable.

Keep other site observations on their own evidence track. If the parcel also has visible slope, the [sloping lot inquiry guide](/articles/land-and-lots/sloping-lot-builder-page-content/) separates observations from qualified project conclusions. A confirmed course relationship does not resolve those site questions.

## Which golf-course lot page questions need separate answers?

### Does a course view establish playing access?

A golf-course view does not establish playing access for your public content. Obtain a separate approved statement from the responsible reviewer before describing access or membership. Keep the right unknown when supporting information is unavailable.

### Can a completed-home image show a current opportunity?

Label a completed-home image as a completed example. Confirm current lot control and home status separately before presenting an opportunity. The image alone supplies neither confirmation.

### What if the source confirms proximity but not frontage?

Use only the approved proximity wording on the golf-course lot page. Hold the frontage claim until the responsible reviewer confirms its source and scope. Do not infer a boundary relationship from the image.

### How should an unanswered membership question appear?

Keep an unanswered membership question explicit in the internal worksheet. Public copy can explain that membership is unconfirmed. Do not list membership as a home feature or imply that an inquiry secures it.