[Patrick_Mucci]

Most golf courses are created by individuals with a specific purpose in mind:

Resort
Public
Community
Private

In some, if not most or all cases, the controlling individual issues marching orders or directions with respect to features, holes or the golf course.

Mike Keiser, Mike Pascucci and others had some influence over the finished products.

This is a question for architects ONLY.

If you had NO CONSTRAINTS from the developer, and you were designing courses for:

Resort
Public
Community
Private

What would you do differently now that you have unbridled artistic freedom ?

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

I am not sure, if it weren't for the developer's input, that I would approach one type of course any differently than the others.

The cliche is that resort courses should have more visual features, public courses fewer penal hazards, private club members will be more likely to appreciate local-knowledge features, etc.  But, in the end, Mike Keiser's "retail golfer" is the primary customer for all four types of courses, and every single type benefits from return customers.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

If you were the owner/developer, what would you be free to do, architecturally, that you might not be able to do if you were working for someone else ?

Would you attempt more unique, quirky or controversial features and holes ?

[Lloyd_Cole]

Pat
Let me get this straight
Only architects can answer your question
After they have answered, you can post a follow up question, can anyone else post a follow up question?
It's Ok for us to read this, isn't it?

[Mike Nuzzo]

Here are some of the freedoms that we have come up with designing a course for one person:

5 short par 4s
Tiny, tiny tees that surround the green so everyone has a short walk
Grass selections
Maintenance practices
No cart paths

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

Actually, when I re-read your first question of post #3, there's always a chance that the client won't like ANY particular feature you build, whether the architect thinks it's controversial or not.  I've been asked by a client to tone down a feature or idea, but only a handful of times in the course of my career.  It's not as if I am constantly wishing for the handcuffs to come off.

By the same token, there have been a couple of times recently where I had a green light from the client to do pretty much anything we thought would be cool ... at Barnbougle Dunes and at Ballyneal.  

At Barnbougle, there were three features in particular which I said at the time I didn't know if would have done anywhere else ... the two short par-4's under 300 yards, the tiny green of the short 7th, and the wild "Sitwell Park" type green at the 13th.  If I'd had the same property in the U.S., I might have hesitated (particularly on the last feature) for fear that somebody would think I had gone off my rocker.  But I reasoned that if the features backfired, and Barnbougle wasn't successful, no one would go down there to see them anyway.  

Maybe I should offer to reduce my fee by 10% or 20% if the client will let me do anything I want.  I wonder how many would agree?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat
Let me get this straight
Only architects can answer your question

Correct

After they have answered, you can post a follow up question, can anyone else post a follow up question ?

Sure, as long as it's a question to the responding architect that's on topic.

It's Ok for us to read this, isn't it?

Sure, but, evidently you didn't understand it, so, I'd suggest that you have someone explain it to you.
 

Architects are the only ones qualified to answer the question.

But, being unqualified to respond hasn't stopped you in the past.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

Now that Barnbougle Dunes has been well received are you more inclined to try a feature like Sitwell Park's green ?

Or, is the desire to remain architecturally "moderate" your modus operandi

[Patrick_Mucci]

Here are some of the freedoms that we have come up with designing a course for one person:

5 short par 4s
Tiny, tiny tees that surround the green so everyone has a short walk
Grass selections
Maintenance practices
No cart paths

But, what would you do if you had no individual to be accountable to ?

[Lloyd_Cole]

Pat
Let me get this straight
Only architects can answer your question

Correct

After they have answered, you can post a follow up question, can anyone else post a follow up question ?

Sure, as long as it's a question to the responding architect that's on topic.

It's Ok for us to read this, isn't it?

Sure, but, evidently you didn't understand it, so, I'd suggest that you have someone explain it to you.
 

Architects are the only ones qualified to answer the question.

But, being unqualified to respond hasn't stopped you in the past.

Now, Pat

If architects are the only ones qualified to answer
What qualification does one need to ask?

[jeffwarne]

My question for the architects is would they show more or less creative restraint if they were also the owner/developer and the investment represented a large majority of their net worth?



 

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff:

I am always conscious of the owner's situation, and assume I would be more so if the money were actually my own.

Still, I have tended to take the most chances on the projects where money was a bit tight.  Barnbougle and Ballyneal were both out in the middle of nowhere, and if they didn't have features which people would talk about, nobody was going to travel all that way to play them.  Therefore, to me, it was worth taking the chance of doing something more radical with the design.  The second course at Stonewall is more daring than the first because the members wanted it to be different than the first course, and because I had their full confidence.

The opposite end of the spectrum, in my work to date, is probably Beechtree.  There was clearly a market there for a high-end public course and it would have been stupid to build something which might turn people off.  It's not a "dull" design, as there are some pretty cool greens there, but it's not as free-wheeling as High Pointe or Ballyneal.

So, the situation of the project is important, but how one chooses to approach it is a more complex question than whether you have "creative freedom" or not.

[Jerry Kluger]

Tom: Could you please explain what you mean by "radical" in the design of Ballyneal - I believe that many of us would consider it a very effective design that works well with the surroundings and weather conditions.

[paul cowley]

Patrick....You probably won't like my answer, but I have difficulty with such broadly worded hypothetical questions.
My designs are always the result of reacting to the various 'givens' that are always present in any design scenario.
It is very difficult to design in a vacuum.
I would have equal difficulty if you were to ask me "what would you cook for yourself if you had no restraints?"

...But I'll try to answer your question and the one I posed as well.

I don't think I would change much as I feel I design for the 'retail' golfer most of the time. It would be nice to have a little more money to spend at times, but not always, because sometimes having not enough can spur one to get more out of the design dollar. Sometimes having too much can be bad. I think its best to keep the design mind lean.
One thing I wouldn't mind having would be the the ability to revisit and tinker with my designs from the past.....a lot like Ross and #2.

Now for the other question.....Right now I think I would cook maybe a little Pad Thai. I love the combination of fresh herbs, noodles, sprouts and heat, especially in the morning.

[BCrosby]

Paul hints at an interesting question.

Do you architects ever feel defensive about spending LESS than your budget? In those situations do you worry that the owner will think you gave less  than your best effort?

Bob

[paul cowley]

Not at all Bob....... I feel real good when I can deliver the client savings on overall costs [but not savings on design fees as it takes more creative effort to save money than to spend it].

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bob,

My tendency would be spend to the limit on things that would save the owner money in the long run - more efficient irrigation (or more coverage), cart path curbs to avoid roping, and always, drainage, again, around and about the cart paths and major circulation areas.

The most dramatic example of that was Wild Wing. The first two courses were built for under $3Mil. I proposed a $4Mil budget, which was accepted when the owner saw the detail. My earthmoving, green size, etc. was all the same, but the extra funds were for irrigation wider, more drainage, etc. as above.  They realized they were looking to add all those items on the first courses anyway, and accepted the budget.

The best owners are ones who have been through the cost cutting before and know the results.

Pat,

In addition to the above, with no handcuffs, I would probably make sure I had the budget to do the landscaping and tree planting (if any was required on that site) with fairly mature trees, so I could avoid having that done later.  Its usally too close to the fw to consider growth, in straight lines rather than clumps, etc.  The same kind of problems all older courses face.

I would trend towards larger greens with more contours, and more dramatic bunkers.  (For an example, go play the Quarry where I had the Owners confidence from the first coures and general direction to build something good, but little day to day interference)

I doubt I could ignore all I learned in the past about what makes a course work. For example, I would still pay attention to drainage, circulation (foot and carts, if applicable) and microclimates.  Unless it were certain to be a 5,000 or less round course, for example, I wouldn't do postage stamp greens, nor would I design greens without cup areas at  3% or less, or ever do a postage stamp green in a shady area.  For that matter, I would still clear trees out as required to provide the proper micro climates, etc.

I'm sure there is more, but I am off to the office to design yet another project with handcuffs!  All things considered, spending your day designing courses, even with handcuffs, ain't a bad way to spend your day......

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()