GolfClubAtlas.com > Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group
Del Paso CC-Fowler? Soon to be redone?
Michael Dugger:
Mindy,
I think a great many of us here appreciate your point of view. Probably more so than you realize. Considering that you appear to be a newcomer, so to speak, I'll give you a brief recap of recent events.
Your distinction between renovation and restoration is an apt one. It's discussed quite often, in particular, more recent discussion has centered around Merion, Pasatiempo, Yale, Oakmont, Inverness, The Creek, Riviera, Cypress Point, MPCC and SFCC to name a few off the top of my head.
Some have gone even further than restoration and have created a new notion of a "sensitive" restoration. It is the sensitive resoraton that I think you are advocating, based on the significance of the architect's place in the history of GCA. Why redo the Mona Lisa, right?
Yet, at the same time, I think you recognize that even a wonderful Frank Lloyd Wright home can become run down if it is not properly maintained. Even a wonderful Frank Lloyd Wright, such as the civic center in Marin, could use a facelift or "remodel" if it is not longer large enough to house the # of people that is demanded of it.
Now, I readily concede that this is a stretch, but I think you understand what I am getting at in regards to your Fowler course. Thus far I believe that I've read that your course has some encroaching underbrush that has squeezed the fairways. I've heard a need for a new practice facility and more parking for the members. I think I read that the club has purchased additional land that could be incorporated into a couple of new features to the course.
Like in so many disagreements, the respective parties seem to be going polar on this one. It happens here at GCA all the time. SOmeone like Tommy is fanatical about his "hands off" policy. Others are at the entire opposite of the spectrum. I'd like to think the wise endeavour lies somewhere in the middle. Especially in light of your clubs circumstances.
Of the courses I mentioned above the following has occured:
Merion-Complete bunker renovation. Some like the new bunkers. Some hate them. The routing was not altered. Some claim the new work has violated the tradition of the "white faces of Merion". Has it defaced the historical work of Hugh Wilson.....you tell me?
Pasatiempo-Here is a great example of a sensitive restoration. Tom Doak and his crew have worked, based on old photography, to restore what Mackenzie originally built. Routing not altered, just bunker work.
Yale-See the "tragedy at Yale thread". It's been renovated. Most hate it, think it has ruined the course. Definately not a good example of a successful renovation.
Oakmont-They undertook-may still be undertaking-a massive tree removal program. The goal is to get the course nearer to what the Fownes original design entailed. You could call it a sensitive restoration I guess, although the greens and what not haven't been messed with. Still, there is a goal in mind.
Inverness-Many hands have worked here. Art Hills, Fazio. A lot claim that the new work is inconsistant with the original work of Donald Ross. It's been renovated and not is another candidate for a sensitive restoration, if you believe what's there now is inferior.
Riviera-Sensitive restoration by Coore and Crenshaw, Renovation of a couple of holes by Fazio. Highly controversial.
Cypress Point-Sensitive restoration of the bunkers.
MPCC-Renovation, perhaps a good course to look at when it comes to examining whether or not a renovation will give you a superior product. Most are raving about Strantz's work, about how it will make a vastly superior course to what they had before.
SFCC-Unlike Pasatiempo, Doak reworked a green or two here. What is the key, in my opinion, however, is that his new work fits with the old. There is no loss in consistancy.
Lastly, I'd add that what would The Country Club at Brookline and Shinnecock Hills be if it wasn't for William Flynn's work there?
I hope this helps and that I've got all my facts straight. I'm sure someone will point out the truth otherwise.
I hope that if Kyle Phillips renovates your course that he works to incorporate as much of the original Fowler into the final product as possible. AND, that he works to make his new features mesh with the old. Retain the consistancy in style.
Mindy:
Just to clarify something, the additional land that was purchsed was done so in the 1960's. The original land purchase was done in January of 1916.
Mindy
Forrest Richardson:
"Oakmont-They undertook-may still be undertaking-a massive tree removal program. The goal is to get the course nearer to what the Fownes original design entailed. You could call it a sensitive restoration I guess, although the greens and what not haven't been messed with. Still, there is a goal in mind."
MDugger: The Fownes only "original intent" was to create America's most chellanging and different golf course. I enjoy your comments, but you fail in this example to arrive at the most suitable conclusion: Oakmont — to be a true legacy — will never be finished. At least it should not be.
If you were to "restore" Oakmont where would one determine is THE point in history that you might choose? Before the Chruch Pews? — of course not. Rid the course of the grand trees which buffer the Pennsylvania Turnpike? — of course not. Make the course a par-82, as it once was? — of course not.
No, the best approach is often an historic interpretation. Perhaps what you mean by "sensitive"...?
Anyway, the fact is that a golf course often is best brought along from where it is, many times the absolute best route is to allow it to change and be re-invented and along the way, yes, re-discovered. This is not to say that history should not be embraced. For it is always good to link to the past.
A_Clay_Man:
Mindy- Perhaps someone who knows the numbers can attest, but it seems to me that doing a restoration wouldn't be as expensive as re-doing the course. And I suspect that most of that 10mil will go for the other physical plant improvements.
If that is the case? I would also think that seperating the projects into two different budgets would show everyone how much you value the courses pedigree. Another sensible approach is being done at Beverly Cc where the restoration of one hole allows the membership to actually see the difference.
Forrest Richardson:
Adam, my good friend who is often misguided by the fresh air of New Mexico,
Don't you feel it might be more sensible to — first — find out whether there is anything to "restore" — and also, what this might be? I can think of no good reason to suggest Mindy consider your recommendation without knowing more facts and understanding what has already been proposed — and why.
I have very limited knowledge of Del Paso, but it seems like there have been many architects and pros monkying with the course over the years. I would be very surprised to learn that Fowler's design (whatever level he may have left) could even be brought back — I would also be surprised to be convinced that this would be a good idea without severe interpretation and leeway on the part of someone learned in the art and science of golf course architecture.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version