As to the restoration, I say improvements were sorely needed. I'm eager to check out #4, 8, 10 and 14 in particular.
Though there are several fine, fine holes (3, 6, 9, 15), and good holes that are reported improved (4, 5, 10, 14) I'm still cool to Knollwood as a first rate course in the larger measure.
#1 is an unattractive hole, #2 is revealed as monotonous with repeat play, #7 is one of the more awful holes you'll find on decent course, 12 is penned in by property margins and 13 is one of the stupidest holes still in use. A lot of people like #18 - and I'm not denying it's a challenging, big boys hole, but it more often leaves a sour note on the average players' day (and often proves anti climactic in match play as my 6 beats your 7X) rather than a zest to head back to the first tee.
The property is a rough, talk walk, enormous slopes that you cover up and back. Unfriendly bounces and the kind of sloped turf that (you know) doesn't hold grassing very well. The neighborhood that grew up around and with the club organically now chokes any further innovative design-oxygen, and so there isn't much to be done
I've played, caddied and thought about Knollwood a lot over the years (it shares a bit of its property with the MGA offices, and so sees many tournament hostings and many visits) and the problem for me comes down to this.
It, as so very, very many fundamental first clubs of this founding district did, should have moved off the original Van Etten-designed property. When you think of St Andrews (5 moves north in first 20 years) and Siwanoy (4 moves around Mt. Vernon/Tuckahoe in first 12 years), Fairview (3 moves in first 12 years) and those that moved or reconstituted to their current home in the 1910 - 1925 period (like Century and Old Oaks) and then you take a look at this property, you may share my view.
cheers vk