News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« on: January 30, 2003, 04:07:53 PM »
I promised a few weeks ago that I would post pictures of Kingsbarns before construction started and now here are some of them.  I hope this dispels any more thoughts that the developer Mark Parsinen had a great site to work with because he didn't.

From what I have learnt he put together a great team of people to 'create' Kingsbarns which as you can see was a lot of agricutural land.  Underneath this was a table os sand which was used to build the course.

This is the 10th hole



This is the first fairway.



This is the site of the 1st green looking south.



This is the site on the upper level looking north.



Here is the 17th green on the lower level of the course.




I will explain about what I have learnt from people like Stuart McColm and Dr. Paul Miller who were both involved in the site tomorrow.

All pictures were donated by Dr. Paul Miller who I will try to get to jump in with comments about the project.

Cheers

Brian.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:01 PM by -1 »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

mdugger1

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2003, 04:26:01 PM »
Wow, is all I can say.  And here we are fighting over whether or not Rees Jones did a nice job taking advantage of what the land had to offer on Sandpines in Florence Oregon!

Could that farmland possibly be any more flat and featureless?  What a fantastic wonderful out of this world job those guys did in building the golf course.

If you haven't viewed the finished product you must go and check it out.  Here it is...
http://www.kylephillips.com/linksmag/gallery/kbgallery.htm  

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Weiman

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2003, 05:08:53 PM »
Brian:

Thank you very much for posting these pictures. Much appreciated. Very interesting.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Michael Whitaker

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2003, 07:04:30 PM »
Thank you, Brian, for posting these pictures. They are testament to what genius and imagination can do. I'm crazy about Kingsbarns and can't wait for the next opportunity I have to play there (this summer, I hope).

I hope these pictures don't fire up the "boo birds" who can't abide anything that isn't "natural." I have read comments here complaining about Kingsbarns being "manufactured." Duh! It's still a beautiful course and will mature into one the GREAT courses of the world.

And, by the way, I vote for Kingsbarn's Ian as the best bar manager in all of Scotland. (Sorry, Ian, I'm embarassed to say that I don't remember your last name due to all the pints!) He is BY FAR the most congenial and funloving person I've met working at any club. If you visit make sure you introduce yourself... you'll be glad you did!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Solving the paradox of proportionality is the heart of golf architecture."  - Tom Doak (11/20/05)

Gary_Mahanay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #4 on: January 30, 2003, 07:36:44 PM »
Brian,

    Did they have to put "catch basins" all over the place to handle the drainage or will the sandy soil there drain fairly quickly?  I'm not too familar with their climate, but can't they get some pretty good rains there at times?

Gary
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:01 PM by -1 »

Paul Richards

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2003, 07:49:29 PM »
Brian:
Thanks for those pictures.  It truly is amazing to see that that was what Kingsbarns looked like before because seeing it for yourself today, it sure looks like its been there for a long, long time!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Something has to change, otherwise the never-ending arms race that benefits only a few manufacturers will continue to lead to longer courses, narrower fairways, smaller greens, more rough, more expensive rounds, and other mechanisms that will leave golf's future in doubt." -  TFOG

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2003, 11:27:54 PM »
Very interesting.  I think that if one could marry Whistling Straits with Arcadia Bluffs, you might get an offspring that looks something like Kingsbarns.  At any rate, the artistic interpretation of links like features, manufactered as they are at Kingsbarns, is quite admirable in my estimation.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

J_Olsen (Guest)

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #7 on: January 31, 2003, 12:04:44 PM »
Gee, I wonder what Rees Jones would have built on this site? ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ForkaB

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #8 on: January 31, 2003, 12:19:32 PM »
If Ress were the architect and he had used containment mounding, as Phillips and Parsinen did at Kingsbarns (to the benefit of this great golf course) would we have reacted differently?  Just wondering.......
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #9 on: January 31, 2003, 12:35:55 PM »
If they looked uniform and fake....yes
If they looked like what it there now.....no
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Rick Shefchik

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #10 on: January 31, 2003, 01:13:15 PM »
Rich has a point here -- If Rees Jones (or the owner) had decreed that native grasses should grow on his mounds at Sandpines, wouldn't that course look a lot more like Kingsbarns? And wouldn't it have found more favor here? I agree that the Sandpines mounds are more uniform than those in the photos of the finished Kingsbarns (following the link in mdugger's post), but those long native grasses have a huge positive effect on a course that otherwise might have looked far more artificial. Maybe Rees Jones' problem is not his mounding, but his grassing.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"Golf is 20 percent mechanics and technique. The other 80 percent is philosophy, humor, tragedy, romance, melodrama, companionship, camaraderie, cussedness and conversation." - Grantland Rice

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #11 on: January 31, 2003, 01:59:40 PM »
I think that is a very fair and accurate was of looking at things, Rick.  Good job.  While of the subject, however, I'll add that it might possibly be more than just the grass, although it may help considerably.  

In keeping with the Dr. Mackenzie philosophy of making artifical features which are indistinguishible from nature herself, it is more than the grass.  It is the shape.  It is the varying distances between each of the mounds.  It is in EMULATING nature, which is random and rugged, not 'tiding it up' or 'organizing it'.  I guess it's just where the artistry is IMHO.  

Some people find Rees' ameoba bunkers artistic.  Some like nice, even and gently curving lines.  I, personally, never see that sort of order in nature, but whatever floats your boat.    
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Richard Wax

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2003, 02:45:28 AM »
I was most interested to see the discussion on Kingsbarns. I was called in as golf consultant by Fife Enterprise Board and Walter Woods, Keeper of the Greens at St Andrews. The Project was going nowhere and I gave my opinion that the existing plans and routing were doing nothing for this truly Outstanding site, the finest I had seen in over 1,000 I had examined during my time with Trent Jones II.

I called in Kyle Phillips and the rest is history!

The magic moment for me was asking the developer whether the site extended past the trees to the east. He replied that some land could be acquired form a friendly neighbouring farmer. This permitted the creation of the 12th which compares favourabaly with 18 at Pebble Beach. This is a wonderful testimony to Kyle's creativity and is appreciated by all who play.

Errnie Els told me after the Dunhill that the course is "phenomenal" and I have had feedback from long handicappers who say they've had the most enjoyable round of their golfing lives around the Kingsabarns Links.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2003, 04:38:02 AM »
Brian:

Are you sure the first two photos aren't some you may have taken in Kansas? I was looking closely at those first two and I thought I saw Dorothy and Toto!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Weiman

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #14 on: February 01, 2003, 08:15:15 AM »
Richard Wax:

As someone who has not yet seen Kingsbarns, I am curious about your comment that it was an "outstanding site".

It appears you meant outstanding prior to construction?

If that is the case, how so? What positive qualities did it have?

How do you reconcile the description of the site as outstanding before construction and the pre construction photos Brian shared with us?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2003, 08:44:13 AM »
Tim,

I was also surprised by that statement and I have heard rumours that 4 other architects had turned the site down before Kyle Phillips.

I have always been under the impression that Mark Parsinen and Co. brought in Phillips themselves as well as all the others that were involved to create such a great course.

Brian
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Tim Weiman

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2003, 09:43:17 AM »
Brian:

The more I look at what Richard Wax said, the more I hope he will come on and clarify.

Notice Richard said that Kingsbarns was the best site he had seen out of 1,000 examined will consulting for RTJ II.

Based on your pictures I find that amazing. I'm not in the golf business, but have seen numerous properties better than what the pictures show.

Have I misundestood Richard? Or did the Kinngsbarn site have qualities not shown in your group of photos?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2003, 11:39:54 AM »
Tim Weiman;

You asked a good question when you asked what 'positive qualities' did the Kingsbarn site preconstruction possess?

It's often not easy to pick out interesting landforms, certainly small ones, when viewing photos but even if there really weren't any on the Kingsbarn preconstruction site, there could be the possibility of another very interesting aspect.

Certainly, the overall atmosphere of the area might have something to do with the aesthetics of the golf course's general area but that really doesn't exactly involve the ramifications of golf architecture and the details of it per se, in my mind.

But when most of us think of positve things for golf on raw sites we almost always seem to be talking about topography in one sense or another even if it's small in scale (as actually so much of TOC is).

And when we think of topography (contours) we almost always think of it in the vertical dimension in one way or another (perpindicular to the horizon, again no matter how small).

But it occurs to me that Kingsbarn could have done  something else we may never think of. Possibly they have done two things with it that is rare today if done really well. First, perhaps they simply maximized their use of the HORIZONTAL! That to me would be maximinize the use of available WIDTH, in scale, in architecture and for golf. Width to me is one of the most valuable commodities available to any architect to make clever and interesting use of for golf.

So I certainly hope they did that as it would seem to be a tragedy not to if real width was available to them for routing. And if they could use real width in routing certainly they could design into that width and flattish scale anything they wanted to.

Then of course that would get to the second thing--what did they do to enhance the vertical dimension as that site certainly does appear to be sort of a flat blank canvas?

Imagine what a clever architect and really accomplished shapers could do there by producing a multitude of random small scale vertical features everywhere not unlike what TOC is naturally. That would seem to take a huge amount of creative work but it certainly could be done.

I was very surprised watching Gil Hanse shape some lovely little random contours on a green he did at Gulph Mills with what I thought seemed to be a pretty large blade so I know how it can be done. It took him awhile on a 5,000 sf green but just imagine if shapers who are as accomplished as Gil taking that basic look clear across a flattish site no matter how large.

Of course if it was done like some of the poor art and unnatural shapes that we see used in some architecture with  parallel mounding and such with unnatural looking "lines" it would probably be a disaster aesthetically in relation to the overall "lines" of the kingsbarn area.

But maybe that's what they did there on a sort of blank canvas site--shape in a multitude of small scale random verticality and used some real width with it. If they did and really made it look to fit naturally to that preconstruction land somehow that would be really significant.

Whatever they did I hope they used the available width they had--the horizonal--to the maximum and for the sake of golf I hope it would be really wide. Width in golf and architecture is so valuable, in my book--not many have it anymore and even if they do they never think to use it, it seems.

Modern "shot dictating" architecture and "shot dictating" strategies in architecture really don't even seem to think width is necessary anymore as some architecture is so center line or middle oriented, so strategically one dimensional why would they even think width was necessary?

I've never seen Kingsbarn but I hope they have and also use real width on the holes and have a lot of interesting features and hazards going on inside that width to play around, short of, over, whatever.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Weiman

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #18 on: February 01, 2003, 05:51:09 PM »
Tom Paul:

The Kingsbarns site may have had some positive qualities prior to construction, but I'm still wondering how a professional in the golf industry would have found it to be the best of some 1000 sites he ever saw.

I'm still hoping Richard Wax will explain that statement.

A few years back Art Dunkley asked me to join him for a tour of the finished course. He spoke with great enthusiam about the course. However, he never even mentioned the raw land. His emphasis was was all about the work done by his business partner Mark Parsinen and Kyle Philips.

Can anyone else speak to Richard Wax's comment?

Was Kingsbarns one of the very best pieces of land available?


Brian Phillips:

Are the pictures you posted misleading in any way?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Bill Overdorf

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2003, 08:31:29 PM »
Gentlemen:

I would like to offer my impression that perhaps we are too  focused on site values as related to physical landforms; rolling natural topography, intriguing horizons and appealing distant vistas while the true site values may lie in the described sandy soils, superb drainage, convenient grading, etc.

It stands to reason that with such conditions, a cut and fill exercise can be performed over the entire site to create the appeal of the rolling, undulating surface, whereas lesser quality, tighter soils would not permit this degree of grading without major drainage problems. To take this issue further, one must think in terms of  elevation change. Three feet of cut pushed up in the form of three feet of adjacent fill quite naturally results in six feet of grade change with the most economical fill imaginable. Tight, unyielding soils will not permit this form of site gradiing as a general rule, but sand is another matter entirely. I am compelled to think this had a lot to do with the stated value pf the site. This is the dirt business in concert with intelligent design and a creative eye, folks. It all can be made to work very well indeed, even given a very flat, uninteresting site if one has proper values to aid in the application.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Weiman

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #20 on: February 01, 2003, 09:42:01 PM »
Bill Overdorf:

I would think that the best site out of 1,000 considered would be strong in both physical landforms and soil conditions.

Brian Phillips:

Bill appears to be speculating ("I am compelled to think...")about the soil, drainage an grading conditions at the Kingsbarns. Can you comment on these factors as they pertain to the site?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ForkaB

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #21 on: February 01, 2003, 10:17:07 PM »
Tim and Bill

From some previous conversations with one of the developers, my understanding is that the soil which was underneath Brian's pictures was not sandy "linksland" soil, but soil more characteristic of farmland, which it had been for many generaitons.  A fascinating part of the construction process at Kingsbarns involved the stripping of most of the topsoil, mixing it with sand to a desired consistency, and then spreading it back over the landform before seeding.

Hopefully Brian can confirm this and describe this proceess in more detail than my memory and layman's knowledge allows.

I too am sceptical of Richard Wax's comments knowing what I do about the property and the development process.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tim Weiman

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #22 on: February 01, 2003, 10:43:40 PM »
Rich:

Thanks for your comments. I always get frustrated when someone weighs in with a very strong statement (e.g., best site out of 1,000) and then goes away.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tommy_Naccarato

Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2003, 11:16:29 PM »
Rich,
The artificial containment mounding that is used by many golf architects today is a blight on the Game of Golf. It serves little purpose other then to control play which removes options, and in more times then less, provokes the golfer to hit the ball in one specific place.

The mounds that Rees Jones designs are not only artificial looking, they are also costly to build because there are so many of them.

The mounds that Tom Fazio designs are mass volumes of earthmovemnt that do tie-in with the fairways, but ultimately produce the same result--"HIT IT HERE."

The mounds that Ted Robinson produces are usually nothing more the mass land movements for housing tract pads that elevate those pads above the action, (You know, like a luxury box at a football stadium) and push the ball to the point of which the golfer was SUPPOSED to hit it at.

I haven't seen any of Kyle Phillips and Mark Parsinen's work other then pictures, and of those images, I didn't see a whole lot of containment in them--THANKFULLY!

But now you have to go ruin it by saying they are in fact there.

My heart swims in blood.............
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pre-Construction pictures of Kingsbarns
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2003, 03:07:50 AM »
Tommy,

There are contaiment mounding at Kingsbarns but they are shaped to perfection.  Some were put in to hide fews of farmland like on the left of fairway one but you don't notice them.

Tim,

I will start another thread called construction of Kingsbarns today to show the process they went through.  This course is a combination of many people:

Mark Parsinen and his partner -  who turned a reasonable site with FANTASTIC views into a fantastic course with even better views.

Kyle Phillips - I don't know much about the process that was used with the brief and how many times he was on site.  However I have seen one of his construction sketches and it is detailed and matches what was built on site.

Suart McColm - Project Manager of Southern Golf (now head greenkeeper at Kingsbarns) who loves his work and you see that in his passion for the job and the way he explains the job.  He says the job nearly broke him but look what at what he achieved.  Stuart and Co. are using hardly any fertiliser on the course which is giving nearly pure fescue greens.  No other course in the area can claim that.

Mick McShane -  the stroppy shaper but he is gifted.  Do not walk on his topsoil if it has just been spread!!  Probably not that well know but he is the boss on site most of the time.  He was also the shaper at K2 in Ireland.

Dr. Robert Price - He was called in to advise on the mounding.  Apparently (correct me if I am wrong Paul) the team had shaped up mounding but it didn't look right.  It didn't look like dunes.  There are many types of dune formation but the ones that are normal for that area are sharp edged dunes where the sand builds up and then just drops off to create what looks like a  very steep cliff.  This is what Price taught the team.

Dr. Paul Miller - He was asked to walk the site with Mark and teach him about grass.  Paul helped him understand basic grass theory and Mark is now pretty switched on when it comes to types of grass.

I hope Paul chimes in today and if any of you would like to meet him he will be in Atlanta from the middle of February at the GCSAA conference.

Brian.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf