[RJ_Daley]

Which fantasyland new golf course can present the most extravagant "water feature"?  Be it an imitated ancient babbling brook, or a waterfall that the golfer can walk behind and seek a last cooling "spritzer" upon exiting the last green?  Perhaps the next extravaganza will provide a gondola ride with a singing Venitian to take your bag and you back to the clubhouse.  Or, maybe rather than golf carts, you will be propelled down a ribbon of water course that runs parallel to each fairway from 1rst tee to 18th green, in a mini raft, like at Disneyworld.  Thus, no more unsightly cart paths, just a ribbon of exotic waterway...

Can anyone answer this question?  When Ben Crenshaw and Bill Coore were first brought to the Sand Hills property, did they ever even think to route any holes adjacent or utilizing the Dismal River.  Can anyone deny the raw beauty of that babbling brook that is found behind the cabins.  There you have a truly enchanting watercourse feature, naturally occuring, yet never even allowed to be insight of the amazing golf course that was sited there.  The only benefit the golfer gets from that lovely natural water feature is the lullaby of the babbling brook outside ones cabin room after a fine meal and evening at the clubhouse.  What were Ben and Bill thinking, not using that totally natural feature of the Dismal River in their golf course design !

Somewhat in a similar concept, the projected design plan of the Prairie Club, just north of Sand Hills, has one of the most beautiful natural water features one can imagine in the Snake River Canyon with capstone rock towering above.  While that design takes advantage of views and a few tee shots over ravines leading into the main canyon, the water feature is minimally utilized rather than "featured" as part of the golf  course design.  Hanses design never disturbs the natural setting of the river.  The golf course  plays in a manner where the golfer will never get to play any shots within 100 yards of the bank of the river nor less than 100+ foot in elevation from the actual water.

Is it merely ironic that when nature gives you breathtaking water features, they are not used, and when nature yields none, fantasy water features are created?  Isn't this mentality assbackwards?  

I'll concede that in desert environs, and places where recylcling of water to feed the course is the only option, water needs to be somehow used, and justified in the incorporation of the overall golf course design.

Of course it was completely responsible and respectful of the real mother nature by Hanse and C&C in their designs to not use or ancillarily use nature.  But, isn't it somewhat pitiful and philistine to create waterworld theme parks where none could otherwise exist?

[A_Clay_Man]

Messrs Mayor, I don't know how this fits into your diatribe, but.. On my recent trip, a couple of holes really stood out because of their meandering reparians. They were utilized to great strategic effect, throughout the specific hole, as well as providing an aesthetic appeal. Maybe it's the 13th hole at Augusta syndrome, but I was inspired nonetheless.

As for some high desert environs, I could take you about an hour up the divide, after a rain or a snow, and the number of naturally existing waterfalls would be uncountable. Point being, that rapidly moving water is not unnatural in the desert, just infrequent. I suppose that's a function of the hydrophobicity of the sand clay mix.

[Tony_Chapman]

RJ - I understand what you mean. It appears from pictures and such that Mr. Hanse and Mr. Shackelford (BTW did anyone here they are staying on-site in a converted one room school house the summer in Valentine!!!) use the Snake River pretty well. I mean are you really going to put the golf course way down there at the bottom of the river.

I do hear Jack plans to get a hole next to the river at DRC, but half of the earth he is moving for the course is for that hole from what I heard. I don't know if it will be a natural way of using the Dismal or not?

[Tom_Doak]

RJ:  You certainly couldn't have put any holes down next to the river at The Prairie Club, unless you wanted to hike up 200 feet to get to the next tee.

But even if the elevation change wasn't there, an architect probably wouldn't be allowed to build greens and tees very close to a beautiful natural river.  In most locales, the only way to build a hole like the 13th at Augusta is to create the stream yourself, so that runoff is not an issue.  This is a big part of the concept behind Shadow Creek, where streams are used to excellent effect on several holes.

The other part of the phenomenon is just wanting what you don't have.  Developers in Palm Springs want water features because it helps cool down the environment, and their customers want that.  In much the same vein, our client at Stonewall asked us to plant some trees for shade in the summer ... and on a hot summer day in Philadelphia, I have to admit the shade is most welcome.

[cary lichtenstein]

Good point regard Sand Hills:

When I was there, I could not understand why they left the river area out of their routing, especially since it had not only the river but the trees as well.

I thought that would have been a nice change of pace, especially if they could have found a part where the crossing is minimial, and theycould have used a single file walking bridge.

My only negative on Sand Hills, if there is one, and don't yell at me for this comment, was the sameness feeling to the majority of the tee shots.

Don't misunderstand what I am saying, each hole was excellent, but overall, I was left with a "sameness feeling."

Perhaps Tom Doak is correct, but it would be nice to hear from someone who knows actually knows what went on and if they ever considered the Dismal River part of the routing.

[Tom_Doak]

Cary:

Coore and Crenshaw did not seriously consider putting any holes at Sand Hills along the Dismal River.  They liked the site they used too much, and it would have made the course unwalkable to try to include the land down by the river, too ... and if you hadn't noticed, it's pretty steep along the river.

[A_Clay_Man]

The sameness Cary speaks of is a tell for Naturally inspired golf. Nature doesn't create variety on the scale that a D-9 can. It does so subtlely, ergo, a degree of sameness.

[cary lichtenstein]

Tom:

I did notice the steepness by the river, but I also thought the river was wonderful site for some holes.

I also understand the walking issue, but I would sacrifice that with a cart shuttle system for the 3-6 holes I would have put there.

I have discussed the walk v. cart golf before, and I know I am in the minority on this site, but I just think if it leads to spectacular golf holes, eye candy, then it is worth it.

Just as you are now doing a waterfall, whatever the justification, the same can be said for using a cart for a few holes, the justification being the beauty and drama of using a part of the land that nature was so kind to have created.

If you look at Frank Lloyd Wright's house, "Falling River", how great is that?

Adam:

Actually, nature sometimes does create that variety. It did so down by the river. Look at the courses in Kohler, sometimes you are blessed by the variety. That variety was my complaint with the routing at The Preserve.

By the way, what a D-9?

Cary

[Mike_Sweeney]

Tom:

I also understand the walking issue, but I would sacrifice that with a cart shuttle system for the 3-6 holes I would have put there.

 

Cary,

Besides my sadness for forcing a cart on the golfer under your gameplan at Sand Hills, it also should be recognized that that the bridges alone would have probably cost more than the construction cost of the entire golf course. I am sure Dick Youngscap was called crazy for even building Sand Hills, but the bridges would have also blown out his budget.

[David Sneddon]

By the way, what a D-9?

Cary

A D-9 is one of the large bulldozers, made by Caterpillar.

[cary lichtenstein]

Mike :

You are correct, the bridges would have blown the budget, never thought of that!

Cary

[A_Clay_Man]

Actually, nature sometimes does create that variety. It did so down by the river. Look at the courses in Kohler, sometimes you are blessed by the variety. That variety was my complaint with the routing at The Preserve.

Cary- Yes there are some sites that can deliver variety on a major scale. As for Kohler, I thought the setting was natural but clearly the golf was constructed, and as such, has the ability to go from a man made cape type hole, directly into a natural rise and fall hole such as "Sand Pit" (Original hole #'s were 5 and 6) Then again on the Valley nine where #11 is a transition to get over to those magnificiant holes 12, 13, 14, and 15. Then 16 transistions us back so we can finish along the mighty river.

If you had been to Desert Forest you'd have seen variety on a smaller scale. Since the terrain is gently rolling and the construction budget was 210k, how much variety can a designer create without destroying the subtlety?

I believe this is an example of fitting the course onto the land, versus forcing it. So many modern designs are forced from ACAD to ground, with  i'm sure, plenty of mis-communication in the middle. Is it any wonder some would prefer the forced versions, since that's what they are used to, and it makes them go "Wow"?

[RJ_Daley]

Cary, I hope I don't mislead you in thinking that I would ever have encouraged the siting of any of the Sand Hills Golf Club holes within sight of the river.  I am only calling attention to the irony of the fact that a section of the property includes the beautiful Dismal River which has a varying degree of slope leading from the sand dunes down to it.  Some of it is deep like a gorge, and some of it is sloped enough where I think a hole or two could have gone down near there and still have not been much more of a hike than a few of the green to next tee treks that are already on the course.  But, the Sand Hills theme is the only primary theme for THE SAND HILLS GOLF COURSE, in my view.  

What I am saying is that so many obligatory water features might lead a big idea, big concept, big developer (read Trumpster or his ilk) to actually "expect" his idea for a course on such a piece of land to feature an extravagant water feature, at whatever cost it takes to pound it out or make it work, just because there is a river that runs through it. Thus directing an architect willing to do it, to wrongly(IMHO) use that natural water feature.  It is like not seeing the awesome raw beauty of the sand dunes for the shiny object dangling in the periphery of the vision because it is marketable to those others who have picked up on this goofy water feature expectation, obligatory and manufactured on too many high profile courses these days.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()