Sneak a Peek at Rustic Canyon

[Scott_Burroughs]

These images are all available on Gil Hanse's web site, but I thought I'd make them readily available here.  I don't know if it's my influence or not, but there recently was placed an aerial photo of Hanse's Tallgrass from MapQuest/GlobXplorer on his web site.  Here's his web site: http://www.hansegolfdesign.com/index.htm

and here's a sneak peek at Rustic Canyon, with some photos being of the same hole:

[THuckaby2]

Ok, great, more pics - thanks, Scott.

BUT WHEN CAN WE PLAY IT?  Looks playable NOW from these photos...

There are very few courses for me that merit immediate, jump in the car and drive 350 miles status.  This is one.  

TH

[Don_Mahaffey]

Geoff,
If you get a chance can you give a turfhead like me a breakdown on what type of grasses you used and why?
Thanks

[Matt_Ward]

Can someone post what the total yardage will be for Rustic Canyon from various tee box locations? Par will be what?

Can also someone also list the hole-by-hole lengths from the championship markers?

Thanks so much ...

P.S. Two last questions -- how far miles / drive time from LAX?
When is course planning to open?

Appreciate the info.

[Jeff_Lewis]

Is this the next great architect folks? Impressive stuff. If one were building a course and couldn't get Crenshaw/Coore, he would have to be the guy to hire.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Rustic is about 5-10 minutes farther than Lost Canyons.

It might open in May, but is still up in the air.

[THuckaby2]

Matt:  as a former SoCal resident and pretty frequent visitor, I can give you the answer to one of your questions:

It's about 50 miles from LAX to Rustic Canyon.  In the middle of the night assuming no strange occurrences, you can cover that in an hour or less.

Any other time of day, you are fighting some of the worst traffic on this earth.  It could take 4 hours if it's particularly bad.

But I'd guess 1-2 hours ought to get you there.  It all depends on the traffic.  Welcome to California.

TH

[Robert "Cliff" Stanfield]

He's got a course open with nice bunkers etc near Tuscaloosa.  Did any of you guys from UCLA stop by there when UA played yall in football?

I drove by the course during construction and went on site.  I think you cant go wrong with a game there and Limestone Springs near Birmingham.  Ignore the RTJ trail unless you are willing a trip to Auburn at Grand National.

What other courses are in the area, if a week trip was planned?

[Todd_Eckenrode]

Geoff/Gil-  That looks fantastic, really.  Looking forward to coming out and seeing it again soon.

[RJ_Daley]

Looking at the first picture, I'm trying to make out if that is netting over the seed bed, or slurry from hydroseeding.  Can you tell me please.  Othe pictures show some very nice turf establishment in just 6 months.  Somebody has an artful eye in planting native in just the right places within and around bunkers to give it that, ah... well... 'rustic look'.

I can't wait to see it next month.

[Gil Hanse]

Matt,
      The yardages are as follows, tips - 7014, back - 6593, middle - 6033, forward - 5382, based on field measurements, the course will be rated and officially measured in late April.  The hole by hole yardages are:
1- 542                  10-564
2- 468                  11-434
3- 338                  12-356
4- 170                  13-578
5- 550                  14-473
6- 226                  15-152
7- 359                  16-468
8- 131                  17-188
9- 571                  18-446
These are all approximate, but give you a general feel for how the holes are set up.  This is our first 7000+ yard course and our first at par 72, it was all Geoff Shackelford's influence on us!

[Gil Hanse]

Don,
     The grasses were arrived at in consultation with Dave Wilber and the owners project manager who is a former superintendent.  Based on the course being sand based, and subject to coastal influences, including plenty of wind, the selections were as follows:
    Greens and approaches - bentgrass SR 1120, 1121, and L-93.
    Fairways and tees - perennial rye.
    Roughs - rye and fine fescue.
     The course is primarily fairway, with a small band of rough to act as a transition to the native grasses, where the rough is irrigated the rye will take off, where it is not the fescues have been doing well.
Todd,   Thanks, it was great to see you out on site during construction, we owe you a trip to Barona.

[Geoff Shackelford]

Gil,

So those are the yardages eh? Good to know, people have been asking! I guess I had my binoculars set on meters the whole time instead of yards, I always thought we were at 6600 yards.

Thanks for all the nice comments, hopefully the course comes across better in person. Matt Ward, Tom H was close, the course is 50 minutes from LAX morning and midday, the really bad drive time is afternoon and evening.  It's ten minutes northwest of Lost Canyons.

RJ, that's morning dew over the entire course in the first picture. And snow on the mountains in the distance! We get excited here about snow. Opening is still slated for the last week of April, though in the wee hours of the day I have inaugurated more than half the holes with some lovely toe-hook shots and flubbed wedge shots...trying to figure out which native areas are going to get the most traffic!
Geoff

[Matt_Ward]

Gil / Geoff:

Just a couple of quick questions ... why just one par-3 over 200 yards?

Why the configuration of five par-3's and five par-5's? From my experience courses that usually add additional five and three par holes have a distinct possibility that one or two within each classification will be weak. Did you want that configuration going in or was it because the land dictated that choice?

How different is the land from that of Lost Canyons? I remember how LC is extremely hilly and there are tight landing areas to hit from the tips. The pictures of Rustic Canyon, though, look awesome.

On the big par-4's coming down the stretch (i.e. #14, #16 and #18) do they each play in a different direction to offset any particular wind on a given day? Is there room for elasticity with the tees -- Pete Dye has done this (i.e. Ocean Course, Whistling Straits, etc) and I'm just curious if that is something you might have considered?

If you had to venture a guess on the CR and Slope from the tips and middle tees what you say? Total acreage of the site?Are there any plans for housing or other development immediately adjacent to the site?

I'm looking forward to seeing it when I get to LA sometime late spring.

Thanks and congratulations on your efforts.

matt

[brad_miller]

Guess who is the Golf Digest quy?  
Gil your back, has the last year past that quickly? The pics sure look good, looks like there are clearly preferred angles to attack these greens. Congrads to ALL!!!
Gil, serious question, which may be more appropriate for later, but did "you all" do anything different with the green contours and/or location of bunkers (particuarly around greens) given that this will be a public golf course?

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

Geoff/Gil
The course looks intruiging - it doesn't look quite like anything I've seen before. From the first photo the course looks to be routed through a steep relatively narrow valley - does the entire course weave its way through the canyon? The first photo has a little Riviera-esque down in a canyon - does the canyon effect effect the wind? It also appears that you integrated the natural vegetation into the design - what are some of the natural features that you've incorporated into the design? I like the fact that you went with five par-3's, I think when you have an interesting site maximizing the number of one shot holes is definitely the way to go. I hope someday to get to play it.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Geoff/Gil, If these guys were to see the real pictures!

Actually, I was quite surprized at that yardage to Gil.

Matt, the reason is that RC does not have anymore long par 3's is that it didn't need them. The balance they have there is perfect. Maybe not in long driver sense, but in common sense yes!:)

Don't let him fool you. I saw Geoff out there, cold out of the box hitting shots around the greens that would make Paul Runyan green with envy.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward,

I'm curious, why the question, and what is the relevance of not having but one par 3 over 200 yards.

All too often many of today's courses have similar par 3's ranging from 200 to 240.  Where is the balance in that configuration ?  Wouldn't you rather have four or five par threes that call for different irons, rather than 2 irons or three woods ?  Diversity would seem to be a virtue, not a handicap.
Where have I gone wrong ?

It would seem to me that the art of designing and building good medium and short par 3's has been lost, and that building mundane, long par 3's is en vogue.

[SPDB]

Pat/Matt - the same thing struck me. I think only one par 3 over 200 is all that's needed. I agree that far too often today designers are willing to dump yardage into multiple 230+ par 3s. More balance is needed.

The finest example I know of is Camargo -
by memory:

130
170
190
220

that, in my mind, is far more interesting than a couple of really ball busting par 3s. Don't get me wrong, I think 200+ par 3s are a musts, but one per round is test enough.

I guess we shouldn't fault Matt for taking this view though, from what I hear he is a LONG hitter. The consummate competitor, he is probably just trying to get an edge on his opponent.  

[Don_Mahaffey]

Gil,
Thanks for the info on the grasses. I thought it was rye and fescue in the photos, but they can be deceiving. I will be interested to see how the fescue/native areas hold up over time. I've seen it done a few times where they looked great for the first couple of years, but became very labor intensive due to weed invasion over time. I think one of the keys is irrigation management and accepting that they may get a little ugly during droughty periods. Sounds like you've got the A team involved and with the "natural" emphasis, I'm sure a little brown grass will probably not only be okay, but be welcomed. The place looks great and I look forward to seeing it this summer.

[Gil Hanse]

     I think that Geoff is wearing his SoCal Tourist Board hat when he says it was dew on the photograph, it was definitely a hard frost that was covering the ground that morning!
     Matt,
       The routing just evolved into having 5 par 3's and 5 par 5 holes, we really felt that it was the best use of the site, as opposed to having any pre-conceived notions coming into the design.  I know that Geoff, Jim, and I have always been in favor of having an opening par 5, and the routing was able to accomodate that.  However, the other holes just fell into place, and through topography, orientation, and design, they all play differently.  The same can be said for the reason we only have one par 3 over 200 yards, the natural tee and green locations worked against having longer holes.
     The long par 4's on the back play in the same general direction, with the tee shot on 14 being the difference.  However, 16 plays dramatically downhill (this will be a real crowd favorite because we were able to achieve some elevation ).  While 18 plays gently downhill to a green that runs away from the line of play, in fact the 18th green was one of several greens where we built the green as it lay.
       There will never be any housing on the course, as it sits on county owned land (the owner of the course is leasing the ground).  There is an existing community on the border of the course, but only the 4th hole and 5th tee come anywhere near it.  The county land is some 7000 acres, and they gave us roughly 300 acres to choose from.

Brad,
     We really did not do anything different to the greens or the green side bunkering.  I think that we have a very interesting set of greens, some which lay on the ground, others that are built up, and some that resemble a lap pool!
When you see the 10th green we can let you in on the joke.  We always try no matter what kind of design it is to use short grass as a hazard, and we were able to do that at RC.  The easy looking path to the hole is very often fraught with subtle dangers that will not break the spirit of the average golfer, however, they will serve to be-devil the better player.  I think that having Geoff involved in finding a lot of these subtleties before we got started added tremendously to our ability to preserve them and use them.
I am getting into Tommy Paul range, I had better go.

[Yancey_Beamer]

Geoff and Gil,
I'm also glad to see the balance in the par 3's.
As I read George Crump wanted a driver hole,a brassie hole ,a mid iron hole and a mashie hole to balance his one shot holes.The PV yardages are actually #3,169-181,#5,221-232,#10,137-146,and #14,168-184. The final result may have varied a bit but the excellence of the plan is well known.
Yancey

[Dan Kelly]

Time to show my ignorance:

A number of you seem very excited by what you see in these pictures.

Maybe it's my computer screen, which is small.

Maybe it's my eyes, which are imperfect.

Maybe it's my perceptiveness, which is limited.

But while I can say, with confidence, that this
looks to be a cool spot, like so many spots
I've seen pictured in the dry Southwest,
I couldn't say with any confidence that
this looks like a GOLF COURSE to be excited about.

Don't hear me saying something
I'm not saying. I'm not saying that it looks
like a golf course NOT to be excited about.
And I'm not saying that you shouldn't be
excited about it! I'm sure you're right to be
excited. I'm sure it'll be very good.

But I'm wondering -- and in the interest
of my continuing education, I'll ask:
What EXACTLY is it that you see
IN THESE PICTURES that excites you
about Rustic Canyon as a golf course?

Please be as specific as possible.

(Now I, for my part, look at those yardages
and think: That looks great! Several short
par 4s. Several manly par-4s. Par 3s of
every length. Bunch of par-5s. Cool!)

[Don_Mahaffey]

Dan,
Take a look at the 4th photo, the large one with the bunkers on the right and behind the green. Look at the bunker edges on the ones in the right foreground. I love that type of edging, wild, thick, ever changing, natural looking. Take a look at the bunkers in the background, look at how they transition into the native/natural area. Take a look at the 2nd and 3rd photos, either transition areas or bunkers. But look how they fit the land, I doubt any dirt was moved to create that feature, my guess is it was just "fixed up" a bit. Look at how the greens to the left of the photos are at "natural grade" no mounding or pushed up areas.

I agree that it may be hard to find something exciting in them if your not into minimalism, but to me it looks great and reminds me of what I've seen at Apache Stronghold.
(Now go to Tommy's thread about the new Fazio course and tell me which course you would rather play if you could only play one.)

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Dan, That's a fair question, so I'll answer it.

For one, this golf course is one that embodies the natural tendenecies of the site. There was so little earthmoving that went on. A real testament to the people who had the vision to design and construct it. Why is this good? You could attack this in many different ways.

A while back there were some who just didn't get the point of the "Natural" thing. Many just plainly missed the point, but in all truth lets take Pine Valley for example. Pine Valley is rugged terrain that features a golf course that is literally built out of the natural features that existed there with MINIMAL movement. Now there may have been features that NEEDED some movement out of this, but not many. Ultimately the golf holes are all products of their surroundings. There is no massive earthmovement to erase what was there and create what couldn't have possibly been before.

Existing sandy waste areas are utilized, and, (Now pay attention to this word, because I learned it from the guy who built this place) "REFINED" to areas that are now made playable for golf. All of this naturalness ties into the target, and that target is the finsihing spot on a golf hole--the Green.

This is where the art of Golf Architecture gets amazingly interesting from a building perspecitive. This is the spot where people like yourself SHOULD come to appreciate even more the effort it takes to build courses such as Rustic Canyon. It all fits so perfect, so beautifully, emphasizing the natural featues and look of the site--which make no mistake about it can never be confused with the wilds of Minnesota. That is what makes Golf Architecture in any region so interesting. If the designer has made an attempt to embody these principles, this is where the greatness comes from. Taking what is given for golf and REFINING it.

Tom Doak has accomplished it at Pacific Dunes (And many others where he has placed his touch) and Gil Hanse and Company have brilliantly done the same at Rustic Canyon.

Don't get me start talking about Coore & Crenshaw or Mike DeVries, I may not stop!

As you may know, I have seen Rustic Canyon since it was nothing more then exactly that. It was nothing more then weeds for people who don't understand how powerful this land really is for building a golf course. Much more suitable then the land that was utilized for the nearby Lost Canyons, or anyother in the area. Rustic Canyon is a return to Architectural common sense in its most minimilist form. Something that hasn't been seen in this area for almost 75 years.

I can hardly wait for the future.

Hope this helps.