A new layout with nothing special but a few mistakes.

-Amenities: Except tee signs, solid. Course kiosk, concrete tees, Mach VIIs.

-"Friendly": Easy to play, hard to lose discs.

-Shot Shaping/Gameplay: Generally, a suitable open challenge. Occasional trees dot the landscape, such as hole (3) forcing a calculated hyzer shot or the approach of (7) through shorter spaced out trees.. A couple of holes have thicker woods, but those are addressed below. There's also mild length variation, though most fit into the 300's. If looking to work on a drive, this would be a pretty solid option.

Far too many for a brand new course.

-Tee Signs: Pretty, but not good. The maps are either misleading or downright wrong.

-Navigation: With multiple baskets and tees in sight on most of the course, it can be hard to navigate around. Some next tee cues would be a good investment.

-Unreasonable Lines: The wooded holes are not artfully designed. Hole (1) is a two-shot shape, but under 400' and a par-3, which yields no real birdie line. Hole (4) should be the best on the course, a gentle downslope to a protected basket. Unfortunately, the trees and/or tee is in the wrong place, and there's no real line.

-Openness: Much of the course has zero shaping requirements. Wide open shots are the norm, and we all know how interesting it is to throw those hole after hole. This has an aesthetic effect as well, as it exposes all the telephone poles and asphalt that are a bit of an eyesore.

-Park Hazards: Park items come into play out here. Walking paths, a barn, and most egregiously, an amphitheater within the fairway space of hole (7).

Richland is a layout that I don't remember with any fondness. Holes were wide open except for ones that had no fair lines to the basket, or amphitheaters in the way. It has decent amenities and believable holes for the most part, though, so it earns a Passable rating.