Dave Moriarty,
What does "pushing the envelope" mean in terms of golf course architecture ?
Surely you have some idea of what this means. . . .
Generally, I'd say 'pushing the envelope' in terms of golf course design means challenging and sometimes rejecting generally accepted contemporary conventions. Designing outside the box, if you will.
A few examples of pushing the limit?
-- Building greens which do
[NOT] conform with USGA specifications for green design and construction. Building California greens or even native soil greens, where conditions allow for such greens.
-- Accepting quirks of native terrain when much of the rest of the industry is working the native ground extensively to hammer it into some preconceived notion of a good golf hole.
-- Building low profile features when most of the industry is building high profile features.
-- Bucking the trend of narrower and longer and trying wider and shorter.
-- Rejecting framing when the rest of the industry is framing away.
-- Returning to a style of architecture that has long been abandoned.
How many developers want to roll the dice with "pushing the envelope" ?
Not nearly enough. But fortunately a few do, and you've named some of them.
Developers typically hire an architect because they want their product, a recognizable product, borne of the architect's style.
Worrying about what developers "typically" do is not really pushing the envelope is it. Did Mr. Youngscap do what developers "typically" do? Did Mr. Kaiser? My impression is that these guys were willing to take a chance on a guys that were far from in the mainstream. Who was Kidd before Bandon? For that matter, Doak may have been known here before Pacific, but he was far from the "typical" choice.
It is not typical to build an inaccessible resort in the middle of nowhere without a pool or even a sunny climate, ban the use of carts, and hope that people will show up for the golf experience alone.
It is not typical to reject the notion that there is a direct correlation between money spent and the quality of the product produced.
Take Mr. Hansen or Mr. Bakst, for other examples. Either one of them could have played it safe, picking up an industry magazine and going with the league leaders when it comes to return on investment for private clubs. But they had a vision which went beyond the "typical" so they went with designers who they thought would give them something unique and special. Something with "character," (Tom Doak's word from the one word thread.)
Sure the architect's "style" is important. But so is his vision and creativity. Great courses are far more than style.