A Flynn restoration - summer 2005

[Craig Disher]

This from the latest issue of GolfStyles:

Arthur Hills never intended on changing William Flynn's original design when he was hired to restore Manor Country Club in Rockville, MD. In his own words, Hills wanted to "re-introduce various strategic design elements to enhance the course appearance, drama and risk-reward strategies."

This process began when Manor closed its course last July to have Hills rework the layout. The job should be completed sometime this summer. The enhancement, including rebuilding of greens, tees and bunkers, will adhere to Flynn's 1922 vision.

Much like the work Hills did at Belle Haven, the job at Manor entails building a new course but following the same routing. The new layout has crisper lines, more contrast in the greens complexes and bunkners that define and guard landing areas both in the fairways and greens.

"The new steep-faced bunkers are dramatic," says general manager Bill Hughes. "They enhance the risk-reward aspect of the original layout and will force players to make decisions."

Other modifications will not be as noticeable such as improvements to the drainage system and the redirection of sunlight as it affects the growth of turf. Subtle changes in elevation throughout the course will improve the framing of certain holes. In addition, the course has been stretched some 200 yards and will measure 6,700 yards from the championship tees.

Wayne and Tom - I hope you are some of the first to play when the course opens.

[wsmorrison]

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.

[TEPaul]

Craig:

I would like to see it when it opens again just to see what happened. I sort of recall a number of those we spoke to were basically interested in the Flynn name primarily to market the golf club. You were the one trying to defend the golf course itself.

[Patrick_Mucci]

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 ?

[Mark_Fine]

Pat,
Hills name is bigger than Flynn's name in that area.  In a nutshell, that is the bottomline.  Drew Rogers did the work for Art.  He's a very nice guy and we've met and talked on numerous occasions.  He called me about coming to Lehigh to spend a day with John Chassard and I to learn about Flynn and discuss his philosophies.  Unfortunately that never happened and as you well know, you can't learn everything about an architect in just one day anyway.  

John and I saw the course, actually with Craig Disher.  We also saw the Flynn drawings.  There was much work to be done to "restore" that golf course.  I'm not so sure it was one of Flynn's best anyway but it still deserved a long hard look.  That takes a lot of time and effort and some architects don't have that time (or interest).  Some also have a very different intrepretation of what "restoration" means.  Expense is another issue but I'm not even going to go there.

At some point I'll get down there to see what they built.  I hope the members are happy.  If not, it could be a future "restoration" project  
Mark

[Craig Disher]

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.

[Mark_Fine]

Pat,
As Craig implied, once a club gets its mind made up it is very hard to change gears.  It can happen but it is very hard work and requires lots of education, trust me on that one  
Mark

[Robert Thompson]

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....

[DTaylor18]

In the Maryland area, Hills has a big name.  

[Robert Thompson]

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

[Rob_Waldron]

If anyone actually thought they could pull off a legitimate golf course restoration in the Washington DC area they were really kidding themselves. With the exception of maybe Columbia CC and The Members Club at Four Streams the term "tradition" with respect to golf is non existent.

I have spend most of the last 20 years in the DC area, many of which serving in the Board of Directors of the Washington Metropolitan Golf Association, I have all but given up on the concept of our clubs having any sort of golf tradition.

I was fortunate enough to grow up the Philadelphia area where I learned the true meaning of the traditions of golf while playing and caddieing at the numerous truly great course and clubs. Needless to say, the move to DC was quite a culture shock. The only thing that counts in DC is $$$$$ and politics.

Competition amongs the clubs in Philadelphia encompasses tradition, course design, playing conditions...and of course the food. In DC the only source of competition seems to be which club can charge the most for initiation fees.

Most DC area club members could not tell the design differences between  Donald Ross and Betsy Ross.

I was pleased to see the membership of Manor decide to attempt to improve their course which had deteriorated by permitting grossly overgrown trees. Yes it is unfortunate that the club could not find a way to approve a true restoration but anything will be better than what they had.

BTW it is my understanding that initial stages of shaping on the back nine only began this fall. The greens on #1 and #9 have yet to be seeded. The indications I have received from the members is that the full 18 might have a "soft" opening late fall 2005, with a full opening not expected until spring 2006.

[Craig Disher]

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.

[wsmorrison]

Do you think it might be the more transient nature of the DC population that creates an environment where a lack of regard for classic golf architecture is allowed to flourish?

Here in Philadelphia, many generations remain local residents and members of the clubs their ancestors belonged to.  Could it be that this lineage fosters a respect for the past?  It might also be Quaker cheapness too  

This is true in building architecture as well in the Philadelphia area.  There are a relatively large number of late 17th and early 18th century homes and buildings in Philadelphia and the suburbs.  They just don't seem to be torn down for more modern buildings in the same proportion as NYC for intstance.  Then again, the population didn't explode like it did in NYC.  In fact, there is a steady population decrease in Philadelphia, maybe not the metropolitan region though.

What other areas around the country do you feel have such a high regard for their golf courses and maintain them so close to original form (from an architectural sense, not tree proliferation)?  While Pine Valley and Merion evolved over a number of years (8 and 22 respectively), except for tee lengthening not much has changed after a pretty well-defined date.  

[Mike_Young]

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.

[wsmorrison]

Mike,

Nice to hear from you.  Hope to see you again this year, either up here or down there.

I viewed several courses in the DC area, some of which had Hills "restorations" although in used in the loosest terms.  Art Hills restoration work at Burning Tree provokes a number of questions.  

The work at Manor was presented to the membership as sympathetic to Flynn but this is not the case.  I have had some correspondence with Drew Rogers and it seems evident that they are maintaining the routing but it will be a vastly different golf course.  I don't think the members care but they may be a bit misinformed.  They are not using the original green plans as only the outline plans exist, no internal plans have been found.  Too bad, as Craig knows better than anyone, the original Flynn plans for the golf course are very interesting.  Collis's work and subsequent work strayed further and further from the Flynn design intent.  It would've been difficult though not impossible to utilize them more than they did.  

I think the club may end up being happy with the new course, but it is not in Flynn's style and remains to be seen how much it harkens to a classic style, how long it will take to complete and how much it will ultimately cost.  From what I've seen in photographs, it looks modern.  Manor may not have cared for the Flynn connection, but I for one would rather be part of a select number of classic Flynns than a much greater number of Hills.  Manor was simply following the lead of other clubs in the area, wrong or right.

[Craig Disher]

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.

[Mike_Young]

Wayne,
Hope you have been doing well.
I see and respect your points on the Manor.  It is just a hhardsell to memberships.
Take care,
Mike

[Doug Braunsdorf]

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?  

[wsmorrison]

It was an impossible sell at Manor.  Craig's hard work hopefully was not undone by our talk to the 20 or so members that showed up.  I don't think so.  It sure seemed they had their minds already made up.

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

When it comes down to it, the architectural appreciation can only exist as a result of the architecture itself.  It may be subliminal to many or taken for granted.  If it is a great design, the membership will appreciate it on some level.  Those that have a greater interest in architecture will appreciate it more and on more levels.  Does that mean it won't get changed?  Nope, there are too many examples of that.  But clearly, the appreciation must come from within the body of the membership.  

Tom Paul helped focus the appreciation at Gulph Mills, but he was working within an intelligent and like-minded group of people; very much a group with common interests and common love for the club and course.  He is always talking to the membership and asking a lot of the members for their thoughts.  Tom works with the professional staff and architect to educate and answer questions.  Access to information and presentation are very important.

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.

[Doug Braunsdorf]

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.  

[wsmorrison]

This is the land of Flynn.  There are quite a large number of Flynn courses around Philadelphia, so of course his recognition is very high around here.  Given that RGGC is among the very best Flynn courses in the region, the membership is suitably proud of the Flynn name and the connection between the other Flynn's in the area.

I can't tell you what the membership knows about the other Flynn courses in the area.  I suspect that they, like many golfers, don't look too carefully into design practices and shot testing.  

Try getting any of them to partake in the National Flynn Invitational.  

[Mark_Fine]

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

[Doug Braunsdorf]

Do you think it might be the more transient nature of the DC population that creates an environment where a lack of regard for classic golf architecture is allowed to flourish?

Wayne-

  That's an interesting point you make.  My personal feeling, impression if you will, of the DC area from when I lived there, is everybody has moved there from somewhere else--and maybe they stay.  Roots do not run deep there, like they do, say, in Philadelphia.  Or New Jersey  
What this has to do with the price of tea in China is that if people grow up in a certain place, at a certain club, they may attach emotional ties to a certain course or place, and would want it the way they remember--not any other way.  

[Andy Hughes]

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

[Craig Disher]

Andy,
The Layhill Rd course was designed and built in the 1950s by William and David Gordon after the original Indian Spring site was finally claimed by the state for part of I495. The original Ross course sat on the property SE of the intersectioin of Colesville Road and University Blvd, about where Montgomery Blair HS is now. The clubhouse is still standing, a short iron from I495.

The Ross course was mostly lost in 1941 after the original owner sold the club to two local real estate entrepreneurs. They quickly built housing over several holes and asked Flynn to design an 18-hole course on the remaining property. That course (which most confuse with Ross's original) existed until the club moved to Layhill Rd.

I'm not aware of Woodmont's plans to sell but I have heard rumors that they are considering selling the club (the land value must be staggering) and moving farther out.