Butterfield CC (Langford) in Oak Brook, IL

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Smyers work at Olympia Fields South has paid off:

www.cybergolf.com/golf_news/smyers_to_update_butterfield_cc

[JR Potts]

I wonder if the vote to hire Smyers passed 50.1 to 49.9 as well?

[Dan Moore]

This will be a fascinating project to watch.   

I thought this was an intresting line:  "We are going back to the style but not the size," said Smyers.   

Over the years the Langford Moreau features have been all but eliminated or lost in the trees even though the overall course routing hasn't changed.   I doubt if any of the current greens are L/M originals.   Smyers comments about L/M use of ridges, hillsides and little plateaus as landing areas is dead on.   

He and Patrick would be well advised to visit Lawsonia, West Bend, Ozaukee and Spring Valley in Wisconsin to see an abundance of original L/M features including the amazing greens at Ozaukee which date from the same time Butterfield was built.

[Jeff Goldman]

It would be very cool if they actually did do it in the Langford style, but I'm not sure the membership would go for it.

 

[J_ Crisham]

I've avoided posting about this for a while now because I have friends and, more importantly, family there.

$6MM is LOL funny, though. I was told it's going to cost $13MM and change.

Dead flat fairways?  GMAB...Butterfield has more fairway contour that almost every club in Chicago.  It's a very nice, rolling piece of property -- fairways included.

This article also makes it seem like Ginger Creek is some sort of raging whitewater torrent. That's funny...I don't think I've ever seen water actually move THROUGH it...

Shivas, I also have been waiting to see where things would be when the smoke clears. This is probably the top piece of golf realestate in the Chicago area. As you stated quite rolling with nice mature trees but not overwooded. Great amenities. Certainly worth watching-I hope Smyers is able to duplicate the high quality of his work at OFCC South.
                         Jack

[JR Potts]

[/quote]. As you stated quite rolling with nice mature trees but not overwooded.
[/quote]

I don't know about that.  The quality of their grass is likely directly attributed to the monstrous trees that are mere steps off of most of the greens and tees at that place.  Plus, if I remember correctly, there are tree canopies all over the place in the interior of the property.

I loved playing Butterfield.  Although I look forward to playing it again after the re-do, I can't say I m that ecstatic about the renovation. But then again, why do I care - I'm just a guest, I'm not the one ponying up the assessment.

[Will E]

With the budget I'm reading about, would it be reasonable to think that if a thoughtful restorative work is carried out that the genius of Langford would be realized by many? Could Smyer's work create a climate that would spark many more Langford designed clubs to follow Butterfield's lead?
Jeff-
I'm sorry to hear that you feel the membership might not go for Langford's style. Well, at least they got it right once.
We can always go to Lawsonia!

[JWinick]

An assistant pro I know used to work at Butterfield.   Apparently, the membership voted on this issue twice.   Support was fairly strong.   Given the clubs central location, golf courses throughout the region should be able to support the membership while the course is redone.  In fact, they've made arrangements with over two-dozen clubs to provide 2 or so tee-times each weekend morning.   

[tlavin]

Like a lot of older courses, Butterfield has just gotten tired looking.  It is over-treed in a big way.  The bunkers look like something out of the 70's and the three nine's are indistinguishable to most observers.  Smyers will do a great job making it visually interesting and I'm guessing that he will do well at taking some boring holes and making them exciting.

There sure was a lot of conflict about getting the project done, but I think that was more the product of a lot of assessments over a short period of time for various capital projects.  Now they're taking care of their number one asset.

[Will E]

So Terry
It sounds like the membership has no regard for the historical significance of the course.
Would you agree?
I'm not questioning Smyer's talent, Old Memorial alone speaks for that; what I am questioning is his lack of appreciation for one of the most prolific architects of all time. Ignoring (as the membership has for years) what has the potential to raise awareness of Langford upsets me.
I'd hope Symers would take the short ride over to Skokie to take a look at the work done there. While it's done mostly in the Ross style, I think he'd get an idea of what Langford was all about.
If not I'll look forward to a fun Symers modern course with big bunkers and lots of kickers.

[Mark Smolens]

Regard for the historical significance of a course is all well and good, and for the folks who spend time here on gca it is a major part of the way the see the game, but I would wager that at least half of the members of Butterfield have no idea who designed the course.  They have spent big money to join a club, a wonderful place, and a large number of them were reluctant to give up their course for 18 months during this renovation project.  But for someone to be upset that a group of individuals who have joined a club are "ignoring" the opportunity to raise awareness of the guy who designed the course is somewhat absurd in my view (keeping in mind Mr. Morrow's recent post on the subject of discourse and disagreement).  When you pony up your $100k, you get a voice. . .  I wish I had the spare cash to do so.

[tlavin]

So Terry
It sounds like the membership has no regard for the historical significance of the course.
Would you agree?
I'm not questioning Smyer's talent, Old Memorial alone speaks for that; what I am questioning is his lack of appreciation for one of the most prolific architects of all time. Ignoring (as the membership has for years) what has the potential to raise awareness of Langford upsets me.
I'd hope Symers would take the short ride over to Skokie to take a look at the work done there. While it's done mostly in the Ross style, I think he'd get an idea of what Langford was all about.
If not I'll look forward to a fun Symers modern course with big bunkers and lots of kickers.

I really don't know if there is a group of members who are into restoration.  I'll do a little homework and get back to the thread in a day or so.

[RJ_Daley]

It sounds like a lot of $$$ is going to be spent on remodelled bridges and engineering the new water courses flow.  It doesn't cost so much to take out trees, so what is left may be a nice palate for Smyers to work on.  He sounds like he is into looking at the old photos, and remodlelling L&M LZs to pay tribute to the style and stategy they followed.  So, I hope they get a great result.  At least it is an opportunity to try to do something good rather than allow continued overgrowth of trees and neglected drainage issues.  How can they not get a much better course.   All that remains is if Smyers has the right take on L&M, it seems to me.  I think Smyers knows there enough critics and traditionalists out here that will eventually see his remodelling and will have critical evaluation of whether he accomplishes what he has publicly said he intends to do (maintain the L&M styling and strategy).  good Luck.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

that seems like a bit too much change to me as well. It would be very cool to have a true Langford there.

[JR Potts]

An assistant pro I know used to work at Butterfield.   Apparently, the membership voted on this issue twice.   Support was fairly strong.   Given the clubs central location, golf courses throughout the region should be able to support the membership while the course is redone.  In fact, they've made arrangements with over two-dozen clubs to provide 2 or so tee-times each weekend morning.   

The first vote BARELY passed.

It's actually amazing that Butterfield got all those clubs to provide reciprocal play as I have it on good authority that they have not been supportive of other clubs during their renovations/events.

I know one club where those times will not be held.

[Mark Smolens]

Ryan, you may be correct about Butterfield's history, but with rounds down all over the District, the extra income in the form of guest fees will undoubtedly be welcomed by those other clubs.  And I don't know of many pros in the District who haven't gotten along with John Cleland and his successor Alex Mendez. . .

[JR Potts]

Ryan, you may be correct about Butterfield's history, but with rounds down all over the District, the extra income in the form of guest fees will undoubtedly be welcomed by those other clubs.  And I don't know of many pros in the District who haven't gotten along with John Cleland and his successor Alex Mendez. . .

That may be true about the pro.  In fact, I haven't met a member of Butterfield that I did not like.  That being said -  what's good for the goose....

[Peter Flory]

Reviving a very old thread here because the geometric feature question got me thinking about Butterfield.  I knew that it was originally a Langford course, but the features were definitely gone or hidden in the trees before the Smyers renovation.  And after the renovation, I don't think that anybody would say that it has Langford features either. 

I went back to find the historical aerial to see what the original version looked like, and I am surprised by it in a few ways.  First of all, the routing is exactly the same as far as I can tell.  The holes that currently have forested areas that affect play seemed to also have mature trees in similar areas in the original.  On such a big property with 27 holes and so much water, I would have expected things to have been rearranged over the years.  And it really is a great routing, so I'm glad to see that Langford's work is preserved in that respect. 

The biggest surprise though, was the bunkering in the original.  Specifically the grass islands in the traps.  I haven't counted, but there must be over 40 of them.  The bunkering looked very unique.  Was there any other instance were L&M had bunkering like this?