American architects in Ireland

[Adam Lawrence]

Ronald:

I was going to answer that maybe they're not hiring the right Americans.

They hired the right Americans to build the wrong style of course.  The business plan was flawed. I'm not sure an American style course will ever be accepted or successful over there.

But the thing is Joel, you are wrong. Adare, K Club etc are very well accepted and pretty successful. Do Americans go there to play that sort of course, no. But in the local market, which they were built for, they have established their own position.

[Thomas Dai]

Tom, thanks for the correction and more about St Patricks.
Atb

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

Ronald:

I was going to answer that maybe they're not hiring the right Americans.

However, I have looked at two or three projects in Ireland over the years, and in every case there was an Irish consultant or outsider in the picture, actively badmouthing all American architects by association, because Jack and Trent got the drainage wrong in their first courses.  There is more anti-American sentiment in Ireland than anywhere I have looked at a job.  I have no idea why that's so.

FWIW Jack did get the drainage right at Mount Juliet (their first Eire course), admittedly the other big names that opened around the same time didn't and the work the Nicklaus and Mount Juliet teams did was lumped in with them.


In reply to the thread, and as eluded to in other posts, most of the Irish golfers, especially in the Celtic Tiger era loved the highly manicured American style golf course/resort so that's what the architecture was catered to. I'm sure the local architects/consultants didn't like it as it was a complete change from what was done before.


Remember these courses were also built before the current 'renaissance' type courses were the in thing so they were just building a) what the local market wanted and b) what was in vogue.


If you look at these facilities most also were built to be a destination so many were built on old estates with manor houses which invariably were inland properties. With the cost of the land over there at the time, others were built on land that was cheaper as it wasn't ideal for houses. In most cases the American architects just didn't get the dream sites to build on. I also seem to remember some hoo-ha at the time when Doonbeg was built and how building on links was so rare as the land was protected - of course that could have been marketing bs....


My point is the courses were mostly built to a non gca crowd so to say that they are bad because of that is not right. Think about it this way, most Americans who love architecture dream to go to Ireland to play the links as there's not much like that in the US - Similarly in Ireland they had the links and wanted to play the manicured US Tour palaces they saw on TV every weekend so they just built them at home.


As for Scotland, if you look back though the 90s, golf didn't really explode during the same period like it did in Ireland so there wasn't as much of a proliferation of "American" courses (which also probably had to do with local tastes). I think the argument here that Americans have been more successful in Scotland is largely due to those courses being built more recently and in line with the renaissance type philosophy.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Ally


Part of the question is why haven't Americans been given more seaside opps in Ireland.  Okay, not all that many opps have come along, but it seems to me that Ireland has largely (whichever nation produced the archies) missed the boat in terms of seriously high quality designs.  Scotland has fared much better with not many more opps.  Perhaps some of that has to do with the land, but the Scots examples did have some serious bulldozing involved. 


It would be interesting to have your take on why Ireland lagged behind Scotland...or perhaps you don't believe it did/does.


Ciao

Sean,


Most of the Scottish examples followed on chronologically from the Irish links courses. There was a lot of new links work in Ireland from the 70's through to the 90's. Since then, European legislation has made things much more difficult (although Sandy Hills did slip through the net in 2003). Most Scottish links development has been done in the last 15 years, kicking off with Kingsbarns in 2000.


Trends (and budgets) have changed beyond recognition in that time-frame. The new school of architects have been hired in Scotland whereas they weren't there when the Irish courses were being built. And the budgets are in a different ball park, Doonbeg being the only exception on the Irish side - again a high quality design given the land restrictions and slightly awkward parcel of land.


So Eddie Hackett was the man in Ireland. Hackett has produced more timeless courses than any other architect. You can't date his courses because he moved so little earth. However, we can all probably admit that he wasn't a detail man, overseeing fairly simple greens construction and bunker placement and shaping, usually by on-site crews. Then we had Pat Ruddy. He has tended to design more modern style courses on links-land, something that is less in vogue with those who only consider the golden age and before. But just because Pat provides something different, doesn't mean it should be written off. I played The European last summer for the first time in 8 years and had forgotten how excellent it was. Tough, tight in places yes. But just superb and we should celebrate it exactly because it is not a golden age wannabe. The Irish public certainly celebrate it. So they do - quite rightly -with many of Hackett's designs.


Let's not forget The European ranks up there with the big five of RCD, Portrush, Portmarnock, Lahinch and Ballybunion in most magazines. So does Waterville. In fact only as trends and tastes have changed have we started to see Lahinch get back in to that grouping (Lahinch being my favourite course of them all).


Another difference between Ireland and Scotland has tended to be the topography - Ireland's dunes on the west coast are much more wild and difficult to tame.


My general tastes are the same as most but in answering your question Sean, it is first and foremost chronology. As I mentioned before, most new build developments that have or have nearly gone ahead in Ireland since 2000 have been looking at the same set of designers that Scotland did (Doak / C&C at Kilshanning; Urbina at Inch; Kidd then Hanse at Bushmill Dunes)


David,

Regarding Belmullet, Jim Engh did an initial routing back in 2004. That routing changed dramatically over the next three years in consultation with those at the club. Some early construction works were undertaken then the project was put partially on hold around 2007. I took over in 2010, did some re-routing but held quite a lot of what was there before, provided the full detail design and saw that through construction until the soft opening in August 2013. Since that point, I've been consulting at the club on an ongoing basis.


EDIT - I see I crossed with Alan Fitzgerald's post. We make many of the same points between his take and my two posts on this thread.

[David Davis]

Interesting thread.


I certainly side with what Ally, Alan and Adam have stated. Right on as to all the information I have heard and read.


I don't want to say this is always the case but most of the time when a Nicklaus, Palmer etc get the job there are houses to be developed and sold or they indeed just want to have some beautiful parkland manor with lush green fairways, and pretty landscaped flowers surrounding. Nothing wrong with that in a country full of excellent links golf. After all the grass is always greener on the other side.


I would love to see Ireland challenge this original premise by offer Doak, C&C, Mike de Vries etc etc a glorious piece of links land to work with. However, the fear might just be that a new #1 in Ireland arises and humbles all the critics.

[Gary Sato]

Thanks to all who righted this thread.  I agree it was poorly worded but the discussion turned out to be enlightening.

[Martin Toal]

Ronald:

I was going to answer that maybe they're not hiring the right Americans.

However, I have looked at two or three projects in Ireland over the years, and in every case there was an Irish consultant or outsider in the picture, actively badmouthing all American architects by association, because Jack and Trent got the drainage wrong in their first courses.  There is more anti-American sentiment in Ireland than anywhere I have looked at a job.  I have no idea why that's so.

The Irish have an affinity for Americans and America, so apart from the natural tendency to take the piss out of everyone, they have no standing cultural animosity towards Americans. So any animosity in GCA is based on experience.


To answer the question, the issue is not the country of origin, but the golf and cultural values the architect brings. Many in Irish golf look at the K Club and see a travesty, likewise Mount Juliet and they hate the Americanisation of Old Head. Trump wouldn't be too popular either, but that is hardly unique. One tip is not to say "Hey buddy, I am Irish too, do you know my cousins in Dublin?" just because one of your grandparents came from here.


But an architect who is simpatico with the terrain and wants to adopt a natural authentic style would be welcomed, so I suspect that after initial skepticism, you, Tom, would fit right in. Adopt a dry, sarcastic sense of humour and some degree of self-deprecation "How many fountains do you want?", "Do we need on course fans for intensely hot days?", that sort of thing, and you will fit right in. One day you will hear one of the locals say "Ah your man there isn't so bad after all".

[Niall C]

Ally


Part of the question is why haven't Americans been given more seaside opps in Ireland.  Okay, not all that many opps have come along, but it seems to me that Ireland has largely (whichever nation produced the archies) missed the boat in terms of seriously high quality designs.  Scotland has fared much better with not many more opps.  Perhaps some of that has to do with the land, but the Scots examples did have some serious bulldozing involved. 


It would be interesting to have your take on why Ireland lagged behind Scotland...or perhaps you don't believe it did/does.


Ciao

Sean,


Most of the Scottish examples followed on chronologically from the Irish links courses. There was a lot of new links work in Ireland from the 70's through to the 90's. Since then, European legislation has made things much more difficult (although Sandy Hills did slip through the net in 2003). Most Scottish links development has been done in the last 15 years, kicking off with Kingsbarns in 2000.

Ally


Call me Mr Pedantic if you like but before Kingsbarns you had Skibo, Craighead and Craigielaw although Craigielaw opened after Kingsbarns because of legal issues. All coastal but none that could really be called true links. Opening up the scope a bit and you also have the Roxburghe, the Dukes, St Andrews and the Monarchs at Gleneagles. All relatively big golf developments. I say relatively because I suspect Kingsbarns set a new benchmark for Scotland in terms of cost and amount of earth moved. In my opinion it also set the benchmark and continues to be the benchmark for creating a golfing landscape from scratch.


The above doesn't include the Alyths, Letham Granges, Murrayshall and even the Kintyre developments that all happened pre-Kingsbarns, so Scotland undoubtedly had its golf boom although maybe not as heralded as the Irish one.


Niall