Craig,

Our invitation will be mailed the same time as yours....never.

The author of this article writes:

"The enhancement, including rebuilding of greens, tees and bunkers, will adhere to Flynn's 1922 vision."

What is this person thinking?  He contradicts himself in the very next sentence:

"Much like the work Hills did at Belle Haven, the job at Manor entails building a new course but following the same routing."

This author doesn't get the difference between restoration and redesign at all.  In my opinion, an ill-informed membership is easily conned.  Craig fought the valiant fight for the Flynn design but the odds were overwhelmingly against him.

Craig,

While the proof will be in the pudding/tasting, it seems that another golf course, by an outstanding architect, will be modernized.

I don't know anything about the golf course other then some pictures I saw, but what drove the members to seek an outsider to "modernize" the golf course ?

Did anyone at the club have the slightest understanding of Flynn's work ?

What are the goals of this project ?

Pat,
The Flynn connection to Manor never resonated with the membership. There wasn't much attention paid to him beyond printing his name on the 75th anniversary bag tag. Well before Manor signed with Hills, I had done a lot of research on Flynn's work at Manor and even with the complete set of drawings provided by Wayne Morrison (and a fine presentation to the membership by Wayne and Tom) couldn't generate any interest in restoring his design or in classic architecture generally.

I attribute that mostly to the near absence of classic-era courses in the DC area and the tradition associated with them. In the 50s and 60s several disappeared - Indian Spring (Ross/Flynn), Beaver Dam (Flynn), Bannockburn (Ross), Woodmont (Flynn). The courses that replaced them as well as the new public and private ones were typically modern. None of the remaining classic-era courses that have had work done on them were "restored."

Competition for members was an important factor to Manor and most members ultimately felt that having Hills name associated with the club would make it more attractive than restoring a classic. Pointing out all the successful restorations in Philadelphia made no difference. And strangely, a large price tag implied to some that the result would be more attractive. Architects who said that even though Manor had $X to spend, a great result could be had for X/2, were suspect.

A true restoration would have been difficult. Flynn's extraordinary plan for the front nine was never built. Although fairways were cleared on the wooded site, his plan was never completed (possibly because it cut across some potential real estate lots). Instead, Harry Collis designed a course over the same fairway cuts. His design lasted for a few years until the greens committee lengthened it in 1938, altering many of his holes. Restoring Flynn's design, although certainly possible, was too intimidating for the membership to consider. One plan on the table was to renovate the 1938 design in a way that incorporated Flynn's design ideas from other similar courses and his drawings. That is the tack that Hills has said he would follow, although having seen some of the work, I have my doubts.

Flynn's back 9 was mostly intact with 7 original greens and most of the original routing. Restoration back to Flynn's plans would have been easy and inexpensive. The back nine site though was far less dramatic and interesting than the front. The ground is mostly flat and the desire for drama and good visuals made some  aspects of Hills' plan attractive to the membership.

I wish the club luck. They are aiming for a summer 2005 opening. The weather hasn't cooperated so far but maybe we'll have an early, warm spring.

Gents: Since when did Arthur Hills' name become a drawing card for anything? I've played a few Hills' courses I didn't mind, but I don't really think he is in the first tier of architects -- the ones that actually can draw members by the use of his name. I mean he's ain't Jack Nicklaus or Arnold Palmer.
In fact, I'd bet most golfers have never heard of Arthur Hills.
Interesting that this course might have fit Ian Andrew's idea of protecting a historically relevent course. Also interesting that, as a member of the ASGCA, Hills had no problem being paid to plow it under. But then again, Hills has a reputation for tinkering with classic works....

Well that must be the only state in the union -- aside from Ohio I suppose. Arthur Hills is HUGE in Ohio.

Rob,
I'd add Washington G&CC to your short list of classic courses in the area.

You are correct on the extent of construction at Manor. When I saw the course in early December, 1 and 9 greens were unifinished and the back 9 had hardly been started. I heard they might sod rather than seed to keep on schedule. It's hard to imagine how the course I saw could open any time this summer.

The club did consider proposals to restore much of Flynn's design rather than modernize the existing layout. But knowing that Hills had worked at Chevy Chase and Belle Haven, and anticipating Rees Jones' major overhaul at Lakewood, the committee chose Hills.

Wayne,
I don't know if we can identifiy the "lack of repsect" for classic architecture to locals or specific ciities as much as we can economics.

I love the building, as well as golf, architecture of Philadelphia but it happens to be one of the cities that has excellent architecture from which to restore.  Some of these other cities have a much weaker older architecture and decide to replace it, not through lack of respect but through economic evaluation.  I hear all the time how much it cost to wire these old buildings for hi-tech vs. cost of new building.  I think the same goes for golf architecture.
I consider myself to have much respect for the classics but ,IMHO, the top 100 classics make up a little more than 1/2 percent of the courses in America.  And many of these should be carefully reviewed and  sympathetically nurtured but these old guys also had some courses that IMHO could be improved upon.  Many areas of the country do not have land that is as golf friendly as Philly and other areas.  I have not seen the course in question but I have seen some of Art Hills restoration work.  He just did Columbus CC in Columbus , Georgia and I think he did a good job.  
But the numbers speak for themselves....of the 5000 older courses in this country that could be preserved or restored....only about 200 are worth it...the rest can be improved....perhaps that is what the membership thought.
And by the way...I do appreciate the work you and TP are doing in trying to preserve the history of Flynn.

Wayne,
The increase in size of the federal government during the 1930s was socially transformative in the DC area. This 1920s photo of the original Manor CC clubhouse shows that the club was probably as "traditional" in concept and origin as the old clubs in the Philadelphia and NY areas. If we can ever get together around a VCR, I'll show you the film taken at  Manor in the 20s - it's a terrific snapshot of CC life in that era. Manor's hiring of Flynn during the time he was doing some of his best work shows that the club was at the forefront of gca in the DC area.



The influx of workers to DC beginning in the 1930s put tremendous pressure on close-in clubs to either liquidate or move to the country. Manor was already situated on a rural site and kept the integrity of its course well into the 1970s - although lack of maintenance, particularly tree trimming as Rob Waldron pointed out - led it to the situation it now is dealing with. Other great classic courses were lost - particularly Ross's Indian Spring and Flynn's Beaver Dam. Even Congressional and Bethesda nearly disappeared.

If I may ask this question to the group:

-Where does the architectural appreciation come from in a club, and how does one stimulate it among the membership?  

The same process does not work nearly as well at a place like Rolling Green.  Too few care to learn anything.  Too many committee persons don't bother to put in an effort to study and carefully consider things outside their own game or close circle of friends.  Yet some good things are happening there but at a painfully slow pace.  Having a consulting architect has helped lately but there has been a history of cutting corners and avoiding expense that ends up costing a lot more in the long term.  In my mind, the club would be better served if they had the architect on site more.  But the membership interests are too diverse and the common ground is too narrow; an artifact of the make-up of the membership.

Wayne, at Rolling Green, what steps have the management taken to promote Flynn as an architect, this includes your clubhouse manager, head professional, and superintendent?  

Has it been a unified effort?  

Have your golf and greens committees taken an interest in Flynn?  

What if you took them around to other Flynn clubs, to educate them on his design practices, and how it best tests their golf games?  
In my limited experience with Flynn, I have seen that he tests a golfer's full array of shots.  

I would also like to hear from Mr. Paul about his steps in working with the staff to educate them.  

Doug,
Your question about "where does the architectural appreciation come from in a club, and how does one stimulate it among the membership" is a very complicated one to answer.  It surely varies from club to club but one thing I can tell you for sure is that if your approach is to convince the membership as a whole that their course needs to be "restored" because it was designed by some famous architect, you're fighting an uphill battle and probably wasting your time.  That is not the way to go if you want to get anywhere with your project.  You don't have the time or the energy to do the necessary education about what is the best way to go.  Frankly, the membership doesn't have the time either to learn and most don't care.  They just want to come to their club and play golf on a nice well conditioned golf course.  

I believe there is a process that needs to be followed for restoration work and though there are different avenues one can take in this process, if followed, it has a great chance of success.  I wish I could list it out for you in simple fashion but it's not that simple to explain.  What I will say though is if you think about it, very few clubs start out wanting to "restore" their golf course because of the perception of going backward, not forward.  One of the keys in the process is how you change that perception with the right individuals.  If you can do that, then you are on your way to potential success.

Hope that helps answer at least part of your question.
Mark

Other great classic courses were lost - particularly Ross's Indian Spring and Flynn's Beaver Dam. Even Congressional and Bethesda nearly disappeared.

Craig,
Is the Indian Springs out Laytonsville Road not then the original course?  Where was the Ross course?
Also, is it true Woodmont is to be plowed under and developed?
Andy