I have been close to this project from the first day, so I feel particularly qualified to address some of the issues raised here.
In the first place, the decision to hire Kyle was made after careful consideration of the resumes of several very talented and accomplished architects, and was taken in part because the committee was convinced that he was the guy who most clearly understood that the club was committed to the idea that we wanted to preserve the true spirit of Fowler's design.
Once we identified Kyle's firm as the one we wanted, they (Kyle and his assistant, Mark Thawley) spent hours combing through our archives to gain as thorough and complete an understanding as they could of our history and traditions. They also spent a considerable amount of time and effort researching the work of Herbert Fowler, and were soon able to bring a great deal of new information about him and his work back to a group of people who already thought they were pretty Fowler-knowledgeable. We now know that we had only scratched the surface.
So that I don't put everyone reading this to sleep, I'll try to wrap this up by saying that our needs (in addition to preserving the character of our course) were many. We are dealing with 1) a piece of property that has been cobbled together over a long period of time, meaning that a significant percentage of it is lying unused, 2) a wholly inadequate practice facility that must be enlarged and improved, 3) inadequate parking for our members and their guests that must be expanded and improved, 4) a 90-year-old mat of common bermuda on clay and hardpan that is unacceptable as a playing surface in this day and age, 5) urban encroachment, 6) future water issues, and more, all of which is positively and pro-actively addressed in Phillips' plan for our course.
I believe that we chose the right architect, and that his design is well-conceived and in the best interest of our club's future.