[Pete Lavallee]

 
 
 City Council refuses to buy Torrey project sight unseen
 

Action on rebuilding North Course greens shelved indefinitely on motion by Zucchet
By Tod Leonard
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
January 12, 2005

The San Diego City Council made it clear yesterday to caretakers of the Torrey Pines North Course regarding any potential renovation: no drawings, no dice.

 With several of its members expressing concern over a lack of tangible plans for a proposed $3 million redesign of the North, the council unanimously voted to support a motion by councilman Michael Zucchet to shelve the work indefinitely.

The potential six-month effort by architect Rees Jones to redesign the course's bunkers and greens and level the tees was supposed to begin on Feb. 1 after the Buick Invitational.

To get the project back on track in the future, Zucchet asked for stronger evidence that replacing the greens was the best way to solve maintenance issues, while also calling for any architectural drawings of a redesign to be made available for public review and input.

Zucchet, a men's club member who has been playing the North Course since childhood, was the leader of the opposition effort.

"I'm optimistic, especially when I listen to my colleagues share the same feelings I have about the users of the golf course," Zucchet said after the four-hour hearing on Torrey Pines. "There's still some wiggle room, but I think the message was clear from the City Council as to what maintenance should – and more importantly – should not look like."

The City Council did vote to go forward with several other projects at Torrey Pines. It approved spending $400,000 to make improvements to the South Course for the 2008 U.S. Open; it approved a nine-hole rate for the South Course ($25 weekdays/$30 weekends); and it voted to allow the city manager's office to enter into negotiations with the Century Club in a joint effort to build a new clubhouse by 2007.

The most volatile issue, however, was the renovation of the North Course.

The city's Park and Recreation staff argued that the 30-year-old greens need to be replaced because of poor drainage. Interim city golf manager Ted Horton advised replacing all the greens in line with U.S. Golf Association specifications, while acknowledging that an alternate course of action could be deeper and more frequent aeration.

"They will crash on you at some point," Horton said of the possible outcome of taking the latter step.

That warning, however, was not enough to overcome the council's uneasiness about not having specific plans to judge.

"I am struck by the fact that we were asked to approve these changes before there was a design," said councilman Brian Maienschein. "Why do you need an architect like Rees Jones to do maintenance work? I played baseball, and when they talked about maintaining the field, they weren't moving the bases 80 or 100 feet.

"It's clear to me from the testimony and from e-mails that people feel the South Course has become extremely difficult for the average player, and that should not be repeated on the North. We need to be very cautious about spending $3 million when the vast majority don't want the project."

Park and Recreation Director Ellen Oppenheim said during the hearing she could not produce detailed architectural plans because the work had not been approved by the council. After Zucchet asked for more specific drawings as part of his motion, Deputy City Manager Bruce Herring said he would work with an architect to produce plans.

"We'll get some drawings and elevations so that everybody knows what the design is and have an input into it," Herring said. "Then we'll modify it and bring it back here (to the City Council)."

Herring said he wasn't sure if the architect would be Jones.

"I think there's good reason to use Rees Jones, but he may not want to do it," Herring said. "It was our intent to do both courses with the same architect – the Rees Jones panache and all that stuff."

A $950,000 renovation of the North Course's greens was approved in 2001 by the City Council, but the work was delayed when the the Friends of Torrey Pines group raised $3.4 million to renovate the South Course for the successful 2008 U.S. Open bid.

Since then, Horton said the greens were not aerated with the same regularity because staff believed it was only a matter of time before they were replaced.

Now, the aeration will be more aggressive to break up the compacted soil.

Last week the city hired Mark Woodward, the president of the Golf Course Superintendents of America, to be its new city golf manager, and Zucchet said he looked forward to working with Woodward on how best to maintain the North's greens. Woodward begins work on Feb. 15.

On the clubhouse issue, the council approved entering into negotiations with the Century Club to team up in building the clubhouse and a Century Club office on the south end of the current driving range. The go-ahead will allow the city manager to explore design options and get cost estimates, and the City Council would need to approve the final plans.

[Brent Hutto]

Park and Recreation Director Ellen Oppenheim said during the hearing she could not produce detailed architectural plans because the work had not been approved by the council. After Zucchet asked for more specific drawings as part of his motion, Deputy City Manager Bruce Herring said he would work with an architect to produce plans.

"We'll get some drawings and elevations so that everybody knows what the design is and have an input into it," Herring said. "Then we'll modify it and bring it back here (to the City Council)."

Herring said he wasn't sure if the architect would be Jones.

"I think there's good reason to use Rees Jones, but he may not want to do it," Herring said. "It was our intent to do both courses with the same architect – the Rees Jones panache and all that stuff."

I love the part about Rees' "panache and all that stuff". What a dumbass comment.

[EDIT] Added the final word "comment".

[Dan Kelly]

Which is the more dangerous overseer of a golf course:

1. A greens committee.

2. A city council.

[Rob_Waldron]

Just another example of why the "Best Golf Courses" are controlled by a limited number of powerful individuals. What credentials do any of the council members have to compare with those of Ted Horton??? Do any of them realize the improvements that have been made in green construction over the past thirty years.....obviously not!

This reminds me of the Board of Directors at your typical Country Club. Decisions are made by a large group of people with little or no expertise on the topic which they are asked to make a decision.

I hear the same conditioning complaints at my club in the off season. My response is "What do you expect from 40 year old push up greens"? Well constructed greens can provide superior drainage resulting in improved conditions more often.

My guess is that few council members play golf and even fewer understand the conditioning and cost savings benefits derived from green renovation. Throughout the golf community Torrey Pines serves as the symbol of golf in the San Diego area. Both courses play an enormous amount of rounds. The courses are source of pride to the community, as well as providing residents with a very affordable high level golf experience. Non residents subsidize the low resident fees by paying extravagent fees.

I believe the question is: If the North Course greens are not renovated, and conditions deteriorate will residents and overcharged non residents still flock to the course???

Only time will tell!

Sorry Ted, once again you are forced to deal with idiots!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pete,

Are you saying that you prefer courses to be designed at one's desk, or in the field ?

[Jeff Goldman]

How many great classic courses have rebuilt their greens to USGA specs?  Have/should Cypress Point, Crystal Downs, TOC?

[Rob_Waldron]

Jeff

You validate my point. Yet another attorney who knows greens better than an agronomist! The attorneys, school teachers, accountants, and insurance salesmen who position themselves on the BOD at most CC's always know what is best for the golf course. Why bother listening to low lifes such as the superintendent or an agronomy consultant when such sophisticated brain power is so readily available?

[SL_Solow]

Rob, I think you are over reacting.   There is a fair bit of controversy among superintendents and architects over the superiority of the various methods of green construction.  I confess that I am a lawyer and have only worked on a greens committee for about 15 years but I have tried to make up for my professional deficiency by reading, learning from my course super, talking to other respected supers and speaking to architects.  Many architects have suggested that a push up medium is more suitable to building interesting greens contours.  Supers argue over the superiority of USGA vs. California method greens.  Others tend to augment the greens mix with additional organics.  At our course, built in 1921, we have a variety of growing mediums due to the rebuilding of several holes over the years due to redesigns.  The maintenance of the older push up greens which are largely Washinton Bent and Poa is no more difficult than the USGA greens with Penncross or some USGA greens with newer hybrids.  The ability to maintain  push up greens depends in large measure on the composition of the soil and the programs used in maintenance.  Maybe the Torrey Pines greens need to be replaced; I'm inclined to trust an experienced superintendent if he says so.  But in this case, where massive changes which go well beyond rebuilding greens are being put forth in the name of maintenace and conditioning, I might be inclined to ask some difficult questions and I would not accept the premise that switching from push up to USGA greens is always an improvement.

[Jeff Goldman]

Plus, I never claimed to know anything (outside of a bit of tax law), and the proof of that is easily established.    I just asked a question.  In any event, it does sound a bit radical to favor rebuilding basically every non-USGA green to USGA specs without considering the possible loss of historic designs and considering other maintenance efforts (I know they can laser them, but many may not).  Mackenzie, Tillinghast etc. only made so many greens, and they aren't making any more.  
(Do Sand Hills and/or the courses at Bandon Dunes have USGA greens?).  

Jeff

[George Pazin]

(Do Sand Hills and/or the courses at Bandon Dunes have USGA greens?).  

Jeff

I'm reasonably certain Pac Dunes does not, and I do not think Sand Hills does either. No idea on Bandon.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Rob,

I think Shelly (Solow) hit the point that this article failed to mention that others did, that the proposed changes are not simply converting the greens to USGA greens, but that an entire South-course-like renovation are the actual plans (lengthening, toughening, etc.).  This is what the locals don't want, another monster/hard South course.

I will back up for Rees for a second, in that he re-did the Pinehurst #2 greens to USGA specs, and supposedly close to exactly as they were (size, slopes, location, etc.) before the conversion.  I think.  But that's not the plans for Torrey-North.

[Pete Lavallee]

Gentlemen,

The main thrust of this argument has been whether there is truely a need to "fix" the greens or the powers that be are looking to adopt the brand name of Rees Jones to further their specific causes, i.e., more $$$ for green fees, more visitors to the Lodge, greater possibility to lure other USGA championships with two superior courses modified by the Open Doctor himself. The original argument was that the green complexs at both courses needed to be redone "because all the nutrients were exhausted". The tune suddenly changed to a drainage problem, because as a maintanence situation all "unknowledgeable citizens" would have no say in the decision making process.

My point is simple; fix the South Course first. We paid $3.2 MM for a redesign of 18 greens tees and bunkers. The course is still a mess, with greens that are virtually unputtable for the 51 weeks of the year that the PGA isn't here (slow with little to no grass). We also now have to pony up $400 K to redesign the par 5 6th and 18th, so they can play as par 4's during the Open; shouldn't this have been incorporarted into the original resign? You'll notice the article indicated that the North's greens were not maintained properly for the last 3 years because they thought they would get redone. Well without proper aeration for the last three years how can you judge the green's ability to drain with the resultant compaction that takes place? The North posesses a fantastic set of greens which should be preserved as a historic legacy to both the Bells, Bill Sr. and Jr. They are the fathers of So. Cal public golf and I am convinced that Rees would be hard pressed to come up with 18 better green complexs than are present now. If the drainage really does need to be fixed, laser the contours and rebuild them to USGA specs.; why pay an additional fee to have Rees perform this mundane task? I know supers love USGA greens but Jeff brings up a valid point that most of the course we love are not constructed in this fashion and yet there is no outcry to replace them.

[Brian_Gracely]

How many great classic courses have rebuilt their greens to USGA specs?  Have/should Cypress Point, Crystal Downs, TOC?

Jeff,

Outside of TOC, which has drainage characteristics that most US courses would kill for, how many of those beloved classic courses get the number of rounds that Torrey Pines does each year?  

I can appreciate your argument, but is it really apples to apples?

[Jeff Goldman]

Brian,

Your point is certainly good, though I was questioning what seemed like a per se rule on reconstructing greens that are not USGA spec.  On Golfobserver or Geoff Shackelford's website, he states or quotes someone saying that the South course redesign made a mess, but that it was done for understandable reasons -- to get a US Open.

Scott, I thought it was the Nicklaus organization that rebuilt the Pinehurst #2 greens.  I think Jim Lipe posted on it after somebody claimed that they screwed it up by making the greens are more crowned that they were before the rebuild.

Jeff

[George Pazin]

I think Rustic also does not have USGA greens - how does its play rate compare to Torrey?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Scott, I thought it was the Nicklaus organization that rebuilt the Pinehurst #2 greens.  I think Jim Lipe posted on it after somebody claimed that they screwed it up by making the greens are more crowned that they were before the rebuild.

Jeff

No, it was Rees who did the work.  Maybe they are more crowned that before the work, but perhaps not.  I think the complaint today is that the green speeds today are too high for the severity of #2's greens.  #2's greens are Penn G-2 (a heat-resistant type of Bent) and can be made fast.  I don't know if they were still Bermuda immediately before, but they are too fast.

I think it's been documented that the greens are more crowned today than when Ross passed away due to years of top-dressing.

[Rob_Waldron]

To all the attorney posters, I apologize...nothing personal. My point is really the politics of how decisions are made. I have worked with Ted Horton and think the world of his opinions regarding turf.

Unfortunately it is apparent that Ted's recommendations mean nothing to the Town Council.

The Town Council has proven its inability to manage the facility. That is the reason Ted was retained. I wonder why one would retain an expert if they are not willing to implement his recommendations.

[George Pazin]

To all the attorney posters, I apologize...nothing personal. My point is really the politics of how decisions are made. I have worked with Ted Horton and think the world of his opinions regarding turf.

Unfortunately it is apparent that Ted's recommendations mean nothing to the Town Council.

The Town Council has proven its inability to manage the facility. That is the reason Ted was retained. I wonder why one would retain an expert if they are not willing to implement his recommendations.

First of all, NEVER apologize for insulting attorneys. It is your duty as a human being to insult attorneys at all possible opportunities.

Now, as to the rest of your points:

Thanks for mentioning that you have worked with Ted. It is always difficult for folks to comment on situations when they lack the basic trust that is formulated with a personal relationship. I understand that you may place a great deal of value in his opinion, but you should also understand that each of us has his own way of doing things, and that does not necessarily mean he places much stock in someone else's opinion, particularly when he doesn't know said individual. Just because the council chose a different method does not necessarily mean that they ignored his opinion. Similarly, not all expert opinions are automatically implemented. There are (usually) many different ways to solve a problem, particularly when dealing with an entity such as a municipal budget that is under outside constraints. Asking such an entity to simply place faith in one man's opinion is usually asking too much.

Pete's points seem pretty basic and well thought out to me, as an independent observer on the other side of the country. In particular, highlighting the fact that the greens hadn't been aerated in anticipation of future work, yet are being evaluated for drainage, seems particularly poignant.

Sounds to me like you have a lot of different forces at work under this proposal - I would be skeptical of any easy answer, particularly ones that involve just throwing money at the problem.

[Steve Lang]

 

Hard to believe that drainage is such a problem in SanDiego.. of course deluges notwithstanding

Rainfall per http://www.sdcwa.org/manage/sources-rainfall.phtml
Climatic conditions within the (SD) Water Authority's service area are characteristically Mediterranean along the coast, with mild temperatures year round. Inland areas are both hotter in summer and colder in winter, with summer temperatures often exceeding 90 degrees and winter temperatures occasionally dipping to below freezing. More than 80 per-cent of the region's rainfall occurs in the period between December through March. Average annual rainfall is approximately 9.9 inches per year on the coast and in excess of 40 inches per year in the inland mountains.

The fact that the city Council wants to see some plans before giving carte blanche to the "name" gca is prudent gatekeeping for a public body..  it should be real interesting when they get some plans.. then there'll really be some fireworks from all the armchair gca's.. i hope Zucchet can bring order to it all in the end..

perhaps they could get P Mucci to reconcile with iron hand??  

[Don_Mahaffey]

Steve,
One of the largest misconceptions from the lay golfer is that golf green drainage is just there to move water from spot to the next and because an area has low rainfall adequate drainage is not required. There is much more to the equation, primarily water quality. If you have an alkaline water high in harmful salts (like in the San Diego area) and the salts are not carried through the greens rootmix they will build up in the upper rootzone. As the salts build, pore space becomes clogged and the drainage gets much worse over time. Before long the top few inches of the soil holds all the water and the only way to grow grass is to keep the salts diluted by overwatering. That's what Mr. Horton means by the greens crashing over time. Adequate drainage combined with good irrigation management assures a rootzone mostly free of harmful salts and adequate pore space that roots can flourish in providing the plant with some resistance to stress. Bad drainage has a snowball effect that only gets worse over time.

I'm guessing that if the South course was in great shape then the redo of the North's greens would have been a go. But, how can you blame the citizens of any area for balking at spending more money when it appears the dollars already spent haven’t delivered as promised.

[Steve Lang]

 

Don, Thanks for the info.. I assume you're referring to calcium and magnesium salts?  

Does the SD North Water Recalmation Plant provide irrigation water for the golf courses?

[Lynn_Shackelford]

Don would you concur that the rain of last week probably flushed the greens clear of salt on the North Course, or any course in Southern California?  This is why I don't fret much over salt build-up.  Doesn't it  mostly occur as a result of poor "venting" practices?

I think this is a big win for the people and muni golfers.

The losers here are the elite (is it called Century Club?) who desire higher fees, new clubhouse with offices, USGA and Rees.  Though I doubt he loses any sleep over this one.  Especially since the Tar Heels appear to have survived their humiliation from lowly Santa Clara.

[Don_Mahaffey]

 Steve,
Mg and Ca salts can be a problem, depending on the form they take, but Na would be the real culprit as it will kill the plant if the concentration is to high. I don't know if Torry uses reclaimed water, but if it does you can bet the Na content is high enough to be a major concern on poa greens.

Lynn,
Yep, even an old push up green will be flushed after a rainy season like your experiencing. Of course, after March it may only rain .5 inches until next winter. It only takes a few dry years for the greens to fail if the salts aren't managed well.
Venting gets air into the rootzone which helps the roots, but only moving water through the profile will manage salt build up. I don't know of any supts. who don't monitor the saturation of harmful salts in their greens where the water quality is poor. I'm not saying the greens at Torry North need to be rebuilt as I don't know the whole story, but it would not be wise, IMO, to simply dismiss the concerns that Horton stated. Old pushed up greens which are irrigated with poor quality water, on a high traffic course with a 12 month season, in an region that is usually very arid, and have poa annua turf, will eventually fail unless managed masterfully.

[DMoriarty]

Rob Waldron,  

Another attorney here, chiming in on something about which I know nothing . . .  

The regular golfers-- San Diego residents-- stopped the redo, the Council was merely representing them.   It is my understanding that most of the regular players detest what Rees and Co. did to the South Course, especially what they did to the greens.   While these regulars may not know anything about maintenance, they surely are qualified to comment on the character of the old Bell greens compared to the new Rees greens.    

Look at it from a playability perspective, rather than a maintenance perspective.  From a player's perspective, who better to choose between 'healthy' USGA spec Rees Jones greens and the old 'unhealthy' Bell greens.  

Had the golfers been given the option of healthy greens with strong character, perhaps they would not have opposed the project.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

New greens rarely perform well, taking 2-3 years to reach previously perceived levels of play.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()