[Ronald Montesano]

Who would or who should?

To begin with Donald Ross...

Kris Spence at Carolina GC
C & C at Pinehurst #2
Ron Prichard at Aronimink
Brian Silva at Seminole
Ron Forse at CCBuffalo
Tom Doak at White Bear Yacht Club

There must be more.

Same for Tilly, Travis, Thompson, CBM, Raynor, Mackenzie, et al.

You want someone on site as much as possible. You want someone who goes through historical aerials, club notes, architectural plans and maps. You hope that the decision is not based on who knows whom. The only work I've seen done of this ilk is Ian's work at Cherry Hill. I hope to get up to Taconic to see what Gil did there. Knowing both courses pre-renov/resto is critical for me.

[Tom_Doak]

Doak and his team have to be invited, but I'd be scared of the price tag.

Mac:

Please don't say stupid things like this on this web site without any knowledge of what we charge for our work.

I'm pretty sure you have no idea, and I doubt that we've charged any more for our restoration work than most of the other architects named on this thread.  In fact, I am pretty sure I charge LESS.  However, we only take on jobs out of respect for the older courses, and we can't afford to take on very much of it because it will impinge on our new work.

[Kalen Braley]

Based on what I saw in the before and after pics at Pasatiempo, and my one playing after the work was done...it appeared to me that the restoration was nothing short of fantastic.

Twas a pity the original tee box on #1 couldn't be restored for safety reasons.

[Mac Plumart]

Tom...

it is not stupid.  It is a fact.  I'd be scared of your price tag.  If I wanted you to forgo all of your new work and come work on my restoration...it would be YOU I'd want there for A LOT of the time.  That would be expensive.  I know it for a fact.  Hence the comment.

Right now you are the MAN in the GCA world.  I'd be hiring you, not your firm.  You.  I know that won't come cheap.  I'm not an idiot when it comes to business.  Far from it, in fact.

[JR Potts]

Just to set the record straight in at least one instance.

A club I'm associated with recently hired Tom...despite the cries from some that he would be too expensive.

His price was no higher than the other people we interviewed.

[Mac Plumart]

Pat,

The over/under is 11.5 posts not including my own.

I'll take the over. 

[Don_Mahaffey]

Tom...

it is not stupid.  It is a fact.  I'd be scared of your price tag.  If I wanted you to forgo all of your new work and come work on my restoration...it would be YOU I'd want there for A LOT of the time.  That would be expensive.  I know it for a fact.  Hence the comment.

Right now you are the MAN in the GCA world.  I'd be hiring you, not your firm.  You.  I know that won't come cheap.  I'm not an idiot when it comes to business.  Far from it, in fact.

Mac, with respect, if your trying to tell Tom how to best do his job, I'm going to question your business sense.

[Kalen Braley]

Tom...

it is not stupid.  It is a fact.  I'd be scared of your price tag.  If I wanted you to forgo all of your new work and come work on my restoration...it would be YOU I'd want there for A LOT of the time.  That would be expensive.  I know it for a fact.  Hence the comment.

Right now you are the MAN in the GCA world.  I'd be hiring you, not your firm.  You.  I know that won't come cheap.  I'm not an idiot when it comes to business.  Far from it, in fact.

Mac, with respect, if your trying to tell Tom how to best do his job, I'm going to question your business sense.

I think if you read Macs post, he does pretty well to clarify why it would be pricey.

Sounds like he would want Tom to be there the majority of the time...which I'm guessing is not his normal m/o for restorations done by his company.

[Tom_Doak]

I think if you read Macs post, he does pretty well to clarify why it would be pricey.

Sounds like he would want Tom to be there the majority of the time...which I'm guessing is not his normal m/o for restorations done by his company.

Kalen:

If Mac insisted that any of these other architects was there every day, their fees would be pretty high, too.  But, it would be silly to have us there every day.  It's not like you make a million decisions every day in a restoration ... you are trying to get it back to WHAT WAS THERE, and in most cases that's not extremely difficult to figure out, unless they have blown things up and you're starting over.  The main thing is to have guys on the equipment who are trying to put it back exactly right, instead of doing it their own way, and I am just not as good on the equipment as they guys who work for me.

My objection to Mac's post was his implication that my fees are high, or that I only take jobs where someone will pay me the maximum amount.  I think I've proven that demonstrably false over the years.  If I wouldn't reduce my fee for the right job, we never would have built Barnbougle Dunes or Ballyneal or Common Ground or the facility for Midnight Golf ... or at least one of the projects I'm working on right now. 

I'm lucky to be able to afford to take jobs that will pay less, if those are the ones I really want to do.  But, you are correct, I'd probably charge a lot if I had to hang out on a job every day for 2-3 months and answer Mac's questions while my guys were rebuilding the place. 

[Ronald Montesano]

you could hire a stunt double to throw him off the scent...

[Brett_Morrissy]

Jeff and Steve,
can you elaborate on your use of the term for the restoration architect having "the right temperament" please?

[Mike McGuire]

Kye Goalby

[Rob Rigg]

In no particular order - I would interview the following architects/firms:

- Team Doak based on restoration work at various sites around the country
- Jim Urbina based on restoration work at various sites in the US and Canada
- C&C based on restoration work at Pinehurst
- Kyle Phillips based on restoration work at Cal Club (based on photos)
- Gil Hanse based on restoration work at various sites in the US
- Mike Nuzzo based on work done at Wolf Pointe and because he gets it
- Ian Andrew for his work at Highland Links, other Thompson courses and because he also really gets it

In the current market you could probably get the attention of any great firm because new projects are really slow (at least domestically).

Seems like a great time for a reno! I know of one course that had a bunch of heavy hitters come in to "interview" on the restoration and I think the architect who they hired is knocking it out of the park.

[Mike_Young]

This thread is a circle jerk.  First, what would a guy like Donald Ross say about who did his rework.  Would he want a guy that had designed his own courses or would he want a historian running around using various contractors on different jobs with different looks on each?  There are plenty of guys out there that can do good restoration work and many have been named.  In recent years so much BS has been added to the restoration business that it has become hard to decipher.  Tom probably explained it best in his earlier comments.  IMHO if a course needs a 10 million dollar restoration it was FU'ed to start with.  Restorations need to be spoon fed not contracted out ...JMO

[Ally Mcintosh]

Generally, I agree with Mike's last post...

A $10m restoration... These are renovations and redesigns make no mistake...

Is this thread really about restoration or just "who would you hire to work on your favourite classic course?"... My initial answer tackled that question... There is no definitive period to "restore" the course I play at to... There is no restoration worth doing... There is only improving or disimproving...

[Sean_A]

Sometimes there are horses for courses - guys that the love the course and want to see it be the best it can be.  It may be a struggle to identify the horse, but with due diligence it should be possible to do so.  Other than that I would be looking for the guy who is willing to do the research, find out what was or likely was in place and if feasible, push to restore what was lost.  I think it also important that the guy not be in any rush to see the project completed.  I like the idea of ideas hashing around and a solution coming about after some experience with a course.  On the other hand, there are bound to be situations in a reno which call for archie creativity in solving problems so the guy can't be afraid to step off the reno angle and make his peace.  Unfortunately, this type of knowledge about a guy usually only comes within a relationship or at the very least having seriously trusted sources.   Bottom line, I don't know who I would hire.  That answer takes research which I haven't conducted. 

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Can we all get the terminology correct:

Restoration: To "restore" features or characteristics of a course that were original or from a desired point in time. Strict restoration is hardly ever done because it means rolling back maintenance practices. Melvyn would love it. More commonly, restoration means reinstating certain features such as bunker shapes, plantings and other things that have developed quite often just through day to day practices and in-house small works. Best done by photograph, by hand and slowly.

Renovation: To "upgrade" a course to tie in with modern equipment etc... Or simply to give it a face-lift because it is getting a little tired looking. Includes new tees, new bunker styles and positions and smaller green works...

Re-Design: Again an upgrade to a course but at a much more major level. Re-design work involves re-routing holes and major overhaul of green designs.

The three "R's"...

Many renovations and redesigns are carried out falsely under the banner of restoration...

Carry on...

[Steve Lapper]

Jeff and Steve,
can you elaborate on your use of the term for the restoration architect having "the right temperament" please?

Brett,

   While I cannot speak for Jeff (I do suspect he might, at least partially, agree with this description), "the right temperament" is best described as the necessary personality to deal with the various factions and agendas that an existing private club bring to the table. Given that any proper restoration is fundamentally a juggling of alteration, improvement, interpretation, modernization, and reconstruction across the terrain of an existing golf canvas, it's absolutely imperative to be able to successfully navigate the emotional attachments and pre-dispositions of an existing membership/ownership.

   Some architects arrive with pre-existing biases on how they believe the course should evolve or what features they might change. Some even use their position of expertise to suggest what they "think is the best way to restore the ODG's intent," occasionally with little or no real evidence to support such a result. Often they believe the existing powers that be at a club haven't a clue of what they really want (very true sometimes) and believe it is their job to "teach" them what "they should want!"

  The "right temperament" in the case of Jim (and I strongly suspect this fits Gil's approach) is to come in when asked, seriously survey and inform themselves about the course, poll the reigning powers...asking insightful and expansive questions, including exactly what they hope to achieve, with what kind of budget for both $$ and time. Their job is to next understand and measure their fit together with the club, it's management and membership, and course to decide whether this is a job that fits their personality. In the case of both Jim and Gil, they don't just take any job they've been asked to do. Their "right temperament" helps them balance their most precious commodity: time, with their desire and ability to produce a successful result.

  I trust this helps explain the term?

[Mike_Young]

"Finding the right temperament" is mentioned above.  What does that really mean?  Does it mean finding someone who will lend justification to the ideas of the owner or the membership?  Does it mean finding the guy who will "paint" the best conceptual rendering to place int he lobby of the clubhouse?  Or does it mean finding the "expert for a particular ODG " recommended by an ODG society?  

I think most on here have a very romantic notion of the restoration/reno/re-design business.  The average course really has no business being restored in the first place and not all classics.  For me, if they come along great but I think it is dangerous ground to label yourself as a restoration architect.  
Why?  
1.  Most likely 50% of the people at a R/R/R club will not like what was done.  Excluding the very few "classics" there isn't much money in it for the architect so work has to be created and the club in most cases is glad to go along with such for ego reasons.
2.   With few exceptions it is a contractor driven business nowdays with one or two guys capturing an area and every golf pro/ supt falling all over these guys because they have never seen anyone " shape" a golf course like Bubba with Tatersalad Golf Construction.  
3.  If the wrong member doesn't like a a bunker or a green it can cost one an entire 18 hole project across town.  

For the majority of the golf courses in America it is a smoke and mirrors business of building new cart paths and kissing some club champions butt while a signature contractor gets well.  Remember the contractor is there everyday and will most likely form a tighter relationship with the supt/ member committee etc than the archie so he will be right and the archie will be blamed when a problem arises.  IMHO the R/R/R business can go thru a metro area like a fire.  All because golfers in power at a club are gullible and don't know what they don't know about this business.  Hopefully the present climate will ease some of this but in the last few years clubs have been way oversold on needed work.  And in the future (for most of the courses) the architect will not matter.  The supt. will not want him there and will feel he knows enough to tell the contractor what he wants and needs.  And you know what?  50% of the time he is right.  It's the other 50% that intrigues me.  

[Pete Garvey]

Ron Prichard did an excellent job here at Idle Hour!  I highly recommend him for any classic restoration.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I have seen Ron Prichard and Silva's work. I think both meet the Doak test as put forth here. In fact I love their work on courses I play.  I think Ron Forse can too. I would like to think Jim Urbina would but I am not familiar with his solo projects. Gil Hanse did such a poor job at MPCC that I cannot in good faith say anything without an explanation as to how he could butcher a project that badly. We all know Nuzzo will do the work the correct way to get it right. Mike Young can do anything he desires well. There are many others who can do great work in this area. many of the gentlemen who contribute on here would likely do great.

[Frank M]

Not sure anymore.

[Chris Hans]

We hired Brian Silva when we did our Ross restoration at Vesper CC in 09.  We interviewed several architects and could not imagine someone doing a better job.  It's a top 100 now, guess that says enough.  Of course the conditioning went from a 3 to a 9.5 out of 10 with Chris Morris as the super there.  That helps too.

[Bruce Wellmon]

Kris Spence has done serveral courses here in the Carolinas quite nicely.
Forsyth, Cape Fear, Sedgefield, Myers Park, Carolina GC, CC of Spartanburg, Mimosa, Gaston CC.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Restore an old course, it would be easier working to an earlier plan and just banning all new distance enhancing equipment, in fact sod the lot and have a Hickory only course based upon a pre WW1 design of Walking and Thinking Golf.

Now that course would be cheap to build and maintain, yet offer far more fun and enjoyment as one would need to develop real golfing skills that many today seem to have forgotten or just not been taught. Then of course being a links course we would have the bounce, to add that little extra spice, not forgetting the weather input. Hell guys just think of all that fun at such a low cost.

Think we would all be laughing all the way to and from the course, with money left over for a few beers.

You guys go built the impossible dream, but remember that within your restoration allow for more land for the yearly lengthening of the courses due to your technology preference over skill, all for the sake of improving ones score.

So no disrespect to today’s designers, it’s just that we have the designs already on file and the local equipment manufactures for our Hickory – just think, courses with a real connection to Nature and the Natural with just a little helping hand from Man.

Eureka, Guys, EUREKA, that is Mr Tom Eureka according to Archimedes, but plain Eureka to me

Melvyn   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()