Changes the Architect Didn't Want?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Talking with another gca today, who lamented a pretty nice project that got some poor reviews because of a waterfall on the project. However, it was added after he left the project, by the Owner and against his wishes.

I got to wondering if other gca's here, or maybe well traveled golfers, know of other instances, current or past, where changes were made soon after the architect finished the project, totally against their wishes?

I will list mine later......it will take a while.

[Carl Johnson]

Talking with another gca today, who lamented a pretty nice project that got some poor reviews because of a waterfall on the project. However, it was added after he left the project, by the Owner and against his wishes.

I got to wondering if other gca's here, or maybe well traveled golfers, know of other instances, current or past, where changes were made soon after the architect finished the project, totally against their wishes?

I will list mine later......it will take a while.

Sure, I know of one - a new tee was added by the Board, following a major renovation, where the architect for the renovation did not want one.  However, it was explained that this happened as a result of a "misunderstanding" - Board explained they were led to believe the architect had belatedly approved the tee, although in fact he had never been contacted, and expressed his objection when he found out.  Thankfully, after several years the Board removed the tee, reverting to the architect's original plan.  So, I regard this as an "all's well that ends well" situation, although at some additional expense to build and then later remove the tee.  I don't have first hand knowledge of this, but folks that do have told me about it and the story is plausible.

[Ken Fry]

You mean like high profile courses being changed by the owner at the time to the point where one of the contributing GCAs pulled his name off the project?  I can think of two projects alone that's happened to in the midwest.

I remember a project I was involved in where maintenance practices were changed after the course was open for a couple years which altered the "intent" of some of the course's features.  It doesn't have to be changes with a bulldozer.

Jeff, I can only imagine what you and other GCAs encounter when returning to one of your courses after an absence.

Ken

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

Within a few years after a fine tuning/alteration/redesign at Boca Rio, a Green Chairman began disfiguring the golf course to suit his own golfing needs.  Amongst other things he dumbed down the course and made it significantly easier

Strangely, or co-incidentally, I had a dream last night that someone had totally rerouted and redesigned Boca Rio

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jeff,

Strangely, or co-incidentally, I had a dream last night that someone had totally rerouted and redesigned Boca Rio

What a group of morons.  We even dream about golf design.  Anyone else find that fascinating?

[Tommy Williamsen]

Talking with another gca today, who lamented a pretty nice project that got some poor reviews because of a waterfall on the project. However, it was added after he left the project, by the Owner and against his wishes.

I got to wondering if other gca's here, or maybe well traveled golfers, know of other instances, current or past, where changes were made soon after the architect finished the project, totally against their wishes?

I will list mine later......it will take a while.

Jeff, I think that we at Four Streams do it right.  Smyers comes back every year to make recommendations.  We don't make any changes unless he agrees to them.

[Garland Bayley]

So which course of The Donald are we talking about?

[Jeff_Mingay]

Jeff,

I'm wondering if there's a project where a change the architect didn't want wasn't made

Here's an interesting minor one:

I was involved with a bunker renovation project where the superintendent was going to change the fairway mowing patterns to relate to the new bunker locations/shapes after the "official project" was complete. This additional work was going to be an in-house capital expense, which isn't that unusual. Just before the bunker project started, a new superintendent was hired. The new guy wasn't as comfortable with economically changing the fairway patterns by mowing down existing grasses, over-seeding, topdressing, etc. over time. He was worried that the newly cut areas would "look bad" for too long.

Well, I guarantee those newly cut areas wouldn't have temporarily looked as bad as those fairway patterns that don't relate to the new bunker schemes/shapes do now. It's very difficult for me to look at the course without feeling a sense of flu-like symptoms.

[Mike_Young]

Jeff,
We all know that happens frequently.  I had a guy purchase a course and add a 19th hole with Island green in front of the clubhouse.  There was no talking to him.  
IMHO the reality is that a prominent "signature" designer can demand no changes and the membership will not dare offend or argue with him but if a new super or pro or greenchair happens to want to do something to a course one of us regional guys did they may not even call you.  Just the way it is.....

[Ronald Montesano]

Tell me again about the par-four finishing hole at Sebonack...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ron,

Mike Pascucci made the right call on # 18 at Sebonack.

As a par 4, 95 % of the golfers playing Sebonack would have gone home unhappy, with the memory of a poor or disastrous last hole stuck in their minds.

A happy golfer is a repeat golfer.

[Tom_Doak]

Tell me again about the par-four finishing hole at Sebonack...

There's a big difference between a client bringing up a different idea during the design process vs. when the course is finished.  Sebonack has examples of both, actually.  

I had no problem with Mr. Pascucci requesting the 18th hole be a par-5 instead of a par-4 ... we just had to sort out whether there was enough room to do it.  He brought it up during the clearing phase, so there was plenty of time to weigh the choices and figure out how to make it work.  

By the same token, I was not a fan of the changes made to the 14th green after the course was completed.  But, it's Michael's course now, so he gets to do what he wants with it.

I guess I've been luckier than some architects on this score, but we all work for clients with minds of their own, so it's bound to happen on occasion.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom,

Your thoughts on the repositioning of # 16 green ?