Del Paso CC-Fowler? Soon to be redone?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Forrest Richardson,

I never said that TOC was originally 22 holes.
I don't know how you leaped to that conclusion.
I said that it had many configurations and that one of them was 22 holes.

When a membership has enjoyed a golf course, a slowly evolving golf course, for 80 + years, I don't know how you justify a RADICal alteration as being true to the spirit of Fowler's work.

"Restore what ? To when ? To what level are valid questions.
I don't know, with any club, if there is an absolute answer, but, there may be a prudent answer.
The club could attempt to determine the answers to your questions through extensive research, and a decision borne of practical applications with respect to the information revealed through that process.

It is a grey area, but that doesn't mean that clarity is impossible.  I agree 100 % with Merion's decision to return the course to the historical date associated with Jones's win.
I've proposed that GCGC do the same with 1936, the year the USGA held the Amateur there, and a year with abundant photographic records.

When is the last time you saw a golden age golf course lose 14 of its holes, while at the same time paying homage to the original architects style.  Wouldn't the ultimate homage be a restoration to the course on the day the architect unveiled it?

I like filet too  

[Forrest Richardson]

I am a distant bystander. But from what I know there are not 14 of Fowler's holes there that are being lost. As I said very early on, this seems a bunch of second guessing. I'd leave it to the experts who've researched and been on site. I.E., the professionals.

And, you're right: Grey areas abound!

[Paul_Daley]

Fascinating thread, lots of combustion fodder - gotta love GCA. The real issue for me is the continuing nonsense of golf architectural cliches. There are some phrases/catchcry's that should be discarded at once:

"I like to work with the land"

"The course will be playable by all"

"It will be a fair test of golf"

"IN THE SPIRIT OF ..."

The last one really makes me pewk!

The only time it seems to work is in "The Spirit of St Andrews" but that was different, and not quite worded IN THE SPIRIT OF.

 

[A_Clay_Man]

Forrest- Maybe you were too young when you left Burbank, but I found,(sadly, first hand) that the word 'professional' in California, is a four letter word.

Recently, I've seen and heard little defference (actual disdain) towards GC archies. Why is that?

[T_MacWood]

"Restore what? To when? To what level?"

Forrest
All good questions. When given a project that involves an older course...how much time and effort do you spend researching the architectural history of that golf course and its original architect (or architects)?

[Forrest Richardson]

Paul — I disagree with you nearly 100%. The clauses you cite are very worthwhile when you look beyond the contrary viewpoint. I would agree, some of these have been said and not meant. Even misused. But they are honestly correct when used by well-meaning golf course architects. You are a "glass-half-empty" poster this morning. I learned a long while ago that some phrases and words — even though overused — DO have meaningful and wonderful definitions. "BandAid", for example, is often used as a way to say something is not fixed well at all — "That bunker work is nothing more that a BandAid Phil..." However, a "BandAid" is a remarkable device. It does exactly what it is supposed to do with extreme reliability. "BandAid" is a good word mostly. Just ask any 8-year-old. Adults make it a trashy word by using it to mean "something not done right." How awful.

Adam — When will New Mexico be up for statehood again? I'm wondering as Arizona might make a run for your territory.


Tom — Even in the most casual instances — let's say an inquiry about a course needing to make a change with one feature — I will find out who did the original work, who may have made changes and what alterations have taken place over time. If the project flourished into a major undertaking of any sort we would continue that research and use the collected information along with all of the other project information. I am sorry not to give you an exact hourly number. You might use this as a gauge: At a 9-hole course in Central America we were asked to provide some advance planning on adding another 9-holes and "fixing" problems with the existing course (the club had lost some property and there are many maintenance issues.) So, we set out to see who designed it and this involved calls to historians, writers and an architect in Europe. This will lead us to finding out about an architect's style and work. We also secured some photos and discovered that the "original" course was built in 1934 a few miles away. The course we are now dealing with appears to have been laid out by the club pro in the 1950s — a suspicion we had from the beginning. This does not mean that we abandon the notion of any careful rehabilitation and improvement plan. (Although many on GCA would immediately throw under the bus a course not designed by one of the classic favorites mentioned here!) In this case it means we can momentarily stop researching and focus on getting things straight in terms of the course and what it needs now — in 2004. I'd say in the Central American case we spent two full days digging up stuff. And another 1/2 day walking the course with old members. I would also note that there will be nothing wrong with creating some new holes "in the spirit of the old, original course" should we move forward.

[T_MacWood]

Who was the architect of the course in Central America and what did you learn about his style and work?

Do you consider two days digging up info a lot of time?

[Forrest Richardson]

The original architect appears to be a well-known Englishman. The club pro is an unknown, now long-gone chap. Two days of time (combined among staff) was quite a bit of time to spend for a site visit and some meetings. If we move forward I suspect we will spend more time looking into the original NLE site and what was there. In terms of style I will need more in-depth study time. All we know now is a brief amount of who did the work and about what it looked like when it was abandoned and closed.

Two days may well be several weeks or more on a larger project involving an existing course. It could easily involve travel to see courses designed by the same architect...etc.

[T_MacWood]

Forrest
Who is the well-known Englishman?

What are some of his courses that you plan on visiting? What other research will you typically conduct and how much time do you devote to the research process?

[Forrest Richardson]

I'm not at liberty to divulge specific information. The club is underway with tough decisions and has asked that there be no disclosure at this time.

A percentage might be a good answer for the second part of your question. I'd estimate in this situation that about 10% of the design and up-front time will be spent seeking information and inspiration from the past. I don't think there is any standard amount of time or percentage. This is consitent with all golf projects: Each is simply unique. Truly.

[T_MacWood]

Forrest
You plan on spending 10% of your time researching this architect and drawing inspiration from his work...in redmodeling a golf course that was built in 1950 by another man (evidently) a few miles away?

An interesting idea, but is this example similar to Del Paso....I don't think so?

What are some of the other projects you have been involved with where research really had an impact on the final result...something more like the Del Paso situation?

[Forrest Richardson]

10% of up front/design time. Not 10% of all time. Your questioning seems odd, Tom. I'm not sure if I justifying something for you, helping you with a project, or providing some degree of detail that is being used to write a book.

As I've said about Del Paso: I'm a distant bystander, but from what I can discern from my casual vantage point there is probably not a lot of Fowler left to "restore". I'm thinking that the best bet is to see what might be brought back and allow the professional prfocess to continue. It would be wonderful if, as Adam said, Fowler's original work could be truly restored.

I believe this is how we got on the subject of the project with the nine hole addition. You might keep in mind that a majority of my work is not working with existing courses, but rather creating new courses. However, in the past few years we have become more involved and, I believe better, at working with existing courses on renovation, betterment, resolving troublesome conditions and remodeling. (There are a bunch of other "r" words available, too.)

Truly I am not "the" expert in this area. Some of the architects and consultants who frequent this site are better bets. I am, however, always armed with opinions.