So What are some architectural features that proved to be unmaintainable?

[Jeff Goldman]

Further to Pat's post about maintenance issues affecting architecture, can folks come up with some examples of specific architectural features that proved to be unmaintainable, and so had to be changed or abandoned?  I recall pieces of one of the Doctor's courses in California washed out to sea (as did the couple holes of the Dye nee' Trump course out there), among others, but what about some specific design features that just didn't work in the environment?  I don't know any specific examples, but I would think that there may be examples of flashed bunkers on a windy site or greens where grass couldn't live.  An explanation of why the feature did not work would be most helpful.  Anybody?

Jeff Goldman

[THuckaby2]

Jeff:

You might be alluding to this anyway, but we did bat about on the thread about Pasatiempo how the original bunkers on 16 and 18 proved to be unmaintainable, and thus evolved to how they are today.  As for WHY this occurs, well... it would seem to me sand moves downhill over time, so can't be kept in such perfect wispy fingers as those bunkers are.. but that's just my silly layman's guess.

Another example out here might be #18 at Half Moon Bay - Old... there was a finger of the green that jutted out damn near over the cliff edge, and as the years went on required more and more support... When the hotel got put in and the green was re-done, they just gave up on it which is a shame.  I'd say the examples of this type of erosion taking over greens and tees and fairways near the sea is very common, but that's not really what you're after here, right?

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

Jeff-
From another layman, I'd say that steepness has a lot to with unmaintainable. As per Huck's i.e. of the bunker in the baranca on 18 at Pasatiempo. And yours with Dye nee' Trump.

Thinking back to the 03' GCA outing here in the land of, @ Black Mesa, I remember how some looked out over the lower, less dramatic terrain, and wondered what C&C could do with a site like that. Ya see, Baxter had choosen some of the most dramatic parts of the parcel.  (mostly on the higher parts of the parcel)

After seeing these recent pictures of Happy canyon, And having toured that lower less dramatic section of the Black Mesa site I must admit that if it ever rained two feet of rain in as many weeks, the lower site's soil would be some many miles down stream.

[Sean_A]

I think Tralee had a green close to the sea that wouldn't take.  A par 5 I believe, one of the best holes on the course.  I'm not sure if they ever got the original back in play.

Ciao

Sean

[TEPaul]

Good examples of architectural features that were fairly unmaintainable were the massive sand faces of the original fronting bunkers of PVGC's #2, #10 and #18 greens. In the case of #2 the bunker face collapsed taking a part of the front of the green down with it.

[Mike_Young]

Jeff,
How are you?
I would take the liberty of calling rock or timber walls an architectural feature.  The trimming of these walls vs. the cutting of a sloped lake bank is much more labor intensive.  Another feature that IMHO can be unmaintainable is extreme sloping on USGA greens.  In my part of the world they seemd to become hydrophobic easily and create problems.  
Are these thhe type of things you are talking about?
Keep Chicago straight.
Mike

[Tom_Doak]

The oceanside holes at Olympic Club have failed to last twice -- first when built in 1927, then when rebuilt in the 1990's.

[TEPaul]

Can anyone cite some examples of natural features on a golf that proved to be unmaintainable?

[A_Clay_Man]

Tom, I don't know if this qualifies, but the eighth green at Pebble seems to becoming more and more unstable, sliding ever so slowly.

How about the unmaintainability of clay ridden soils? Poppy and Spyglass Hills, being examples.

When I toured that lower section of black mesa, Pat and I came across the beginings of a trickle of erosion, in the silty sand. It was occurring near the end of an imagined landing area. In my amateurish manner I envisioned a feature that was designed to evolve naturally (gets wider and steeper) causing the hole to change slowly overtime, and IMO for the better. In other words using the expected rath of mother nature ,to do the work of the D-whatevers.

Since that area has been untouched, forever, and most of the features of the entire site were formed by rushing waters, it brought safety concerns, directly to mind.  Not a problem for me, since I value a certain element, and level, of risk, should always be part of the sport.

[wsmorrison]

The sandy bank fronting the 5th green at Philadelphia Country Club looked wonderful, a miniature version of the bank in front of the 14th at Pine Valley.  Flooding continually caused erosion of the bank and started to undermine the green forcing the construction of a wooden bulkhead.  

I am not sure if a natural stream was converted into the pond in front of the green causing the problems; I suspect that the pond is man-made.  The preliminary 1925 plan for PCC shows a pond but that same stream was dammed further up to create the pond in front of the tee on 17 that is also on the plan.

[Jeff Goldman]

Thanks for the replies, ideas (obviously) I had not thought of!  I thought a potential problem with USGA greens was that it was hard to make them slope because of how they were constructed.  It is interesting that very sloped USGA greens may not drain well (Mike, doing fine in a frozen Chicago, hope you are well).  

Will Pete Dye's railroad ties require work at some point?

Has anyone seen bunkers with walls (because of steepness or other reasons) that may fail or cave with repeated entry and exit?  

Tom P., there has been some minor scuttlebut on this site about how weather patterns at Sand Hills may cause the site to change much more quickly than other parts of the country.

Jeff

[Tags:]

Tags: