To Design a Golf Course at The Home of Golf….

[Simon Holt]

While it is not my favourite course in the world I did have a fun time playing there.  Great for a matchplay battle opposed to putting in a medal score.

I think they did a fantastic job with a completely featureless piece of land.  I was at University when they started the build and I couldn't even visualise what they would do with the land.  I am not a big fan of the courses at the Bay (albeit I believe they have improved significantly since I played them years ago) but I see the Castle course as a much better version of what they achieved there.

As for the 'was it the right site' question.  Come on guys.  The land may have been totally transformed but 99% of the travelling golfers who will pay the big bucks to play our courses want one thing above any other.  Views.  We as a group of people who look at every little bump and hollow are in the minority.  The views there are fantastic, the landforms they have created are pretty good on the whole, and while it is not my first choice I can see why people would want to go and play.  The land next to the Eden would not offer anywhere near the vistas the Castle course site does.  People pay money for views (Kingsbarns and Castle Stuart), then Links Trust know this, no surprise they built there at all.

It also went up the Golf World ranking ladder quite significantly....for what that is worth.  On the whole I get the impression that the town folk dont really care for it but the majority of visitors quite enjoy it.

[Robin_Hiseman]

Adam has identified what is the only possible alternative site in St. Andrews with a link to the coastline.  It is narrow and sandwiched between the main road into town and the upper reaches of the estuary.  It is also very close to the end of the runway at Leuchars.  Not exactly a rivetting prospect.  Kinkell Braes was the only rational choice for the development of a course of the scale and stature required.  It is as close to the town as it is possible to get and offers a completely different perspective of the burgh to all the other courses.  If the Links Trust didn't develop that site then I'm sure somebody else would have.  

Perhaps the only other alternative would have been to cut up the Balgove and Strathtyrum (and maybe the far end of the Eden, plus a bit of new land) to make what would be a 5th course.  However, this would leave the Links Trust devoid of any beginner/novice golfing provision, which I suspect the provision of is part of their statute.

I've no doubt that the Castle was styled to outkingsbarns Kingsbarns.  Stylistically, it is clearly of the same genre, along with the two St. Andrews Bay courses.  Who knows what a 'natural' course on that site should look like.  There is no natural ground left anywhere near the town for reference.  Agricultural land cannot be considered such.

A far as I'm aware, the decision on the allocation of the site was made long before the selection process, though DMK did lobby (succesfully) for some additional land to create Green 16 and Tee 17 (which we didn't have to work with when preparing the design competition).  It isn't often in my experience that one has the chance to help a client select a site, though I did have that fortune with my current project near Madrid and it has helped us to settle on an absolutely magnificent piece of golf suited terrain.  I think it's natural for the most part, but who can tell!

Melvyn, I agree entirely with you about the need for a course to have a spirit or soul, but I believe you can create that.  You just have to be very good at the task.  I agree though, there are far too many 'soulless' golf courses, which often times are also those that have cost the most to create...

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think the location for the "7th" course was fantastic. When you look at those contrasting before and after pictures with the toon in the background very few could not be impressed with the sculpting and end product. This side was pretty bland before and its positives were; the proximity to St Andrews, the view of the town, the oceanfront and scraggy coastline. I think a very good golf course was produced, perhaps like Kingsbarns the greens themselves are a bit too much but I expect the severitys can be ironed to make this into a greater course. It might not have the greatest of soils but time will improve that. When you look at how bad courses 5 and 6 are the R & A invested wisely in the right strength of landscape. Sometimes its not all about the soil.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Adrian

I was under the impression that you were a golf course designer not sculpture. The end product of The Castle Course is one of total rape of the landscape, of totally disregarding what was there in the first place.

From my understand of your designs that is not what I thought you were about. I seem to have believed that you wanted your courses to have a spirit about them. Sorry I seem to have totally misjudge your design intentions.


On another matter based upon the main reason for the building of 7th St Andrews Course


So what SHOULD be the Green Fees for  the Castle Course

a)   Paid to Play (for those with houses within the St Andrews post codes)
b)   Free for those living in St Andrews Post Codes
c)   As new course so cheap rate £35 per round £50 Day Ticket
d)   £65 per round £100 Day Ticket
e)   £84 per round
f)   £120 per round

I like the first two but can’t see the Trust going for that, more the pity.

Melvyn 

[Ross Tuddenham]

As I have only walked on a small area of the course and seen pictures of the holes I cannot comment on how the course plays. I will however say that the look is not natural and it is the sort of course that makes me feel embarrassed for golf.   It feels like golf has totally ruined a landscape very close to a pretty town.

I attended a function at a venue in the middle of the castle course with many non golfers and the opinion seemed to be that of shock from them.  They did not seem to understand how a course could get planning permission when it totally ruined the look of the area. Whatever us golfers think about the beauty of golf courses the fact is they ruin the look of the property they are built on for all non golfers,  in this case to a very extreme and obvious extent.

These opinions do not impact on the quality of the architecture but does it start to validate some of Melvyn's concerns that the castle course has not maintained the soul of golf that St Andrews nurtures.  Or will the look become accepted just like the original courses now are?

[Adrian_Stiff]

Melvyn- I dont think the land had any redeeming golf features before. The architect harnessed the views and the shoreline. I expect most architects would have engaged these views to a maximum in their schemes. I suspect (he may want to comment) that Tom Doak would have loved this job albeit he would have had to have made the course rather than work with what he had, despite the bad soil I would imagine he would see great positives in the town view and the coastal view.

The problem you have when you speak of only using land 'fit for purpose' is that there is not any left, or if there is it is in a remote location (Askernish) and with respect to Askernish a complete financial waste of time. Askernish lovely as it is, is just not getting enough play. Hardly anywhere in the UK needs golf courses now but the big towns needed them until recently and golf courses must be fairly close to population in order to work financially, you dont often get land on great soils, heaths or links around Manchester, Bristol, Birmingham so we have to work with the cards we are dealt, that involves clays and hilly sites where perhaps to make a golf course interesting we need water and greens guarded by.

I am not really in a position to comment on the green fee price.

[David_Tepper]

"They did not seem to understand how a course could get planning permission when it totally ruined the look of the area."  

Ross Tuddenham -

When the Eiffel Tower was first built, many Parisians thought it was an appalling monstrosity. Now it is the symbol of Paris, if not for the whole of France.

Human nature (with a few exceptions ) is resistant to change in the short run but remarkably accepting of it in the long term.

DT

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Good point, but St Andrews already has its symbol in the Old Course.  Which again raises the question of whether trying to copy it would ever be a good idea for whatever designer was chosen.  And whether the ET really is a monstrosity?

No doubt, designing a new course near TOC was the toughest gig in the biz!  And no doubt, Melvyn personifies the "resistance to change" part inherent in all of us!

BTW, I wonder if TOC was always as pure as we might believe?  Did they ever set out to lose money for the good of the locals?  They certainly embraced the moneymaking ideas of hosting the Open and raising fees to outsiders when it became really trendy about 1980 to play those courses by Americans.

[Richard Choi]

There is a very indepth story on how this course was built written by Scott Gummer - "The Seventh at St. Andrews: How Scotsman David McLay Kidd and His Ragtag Band Built the First New Course on Golf's Holy Soil in Nearly a Century [7TH AT ST ANDREWS] "

It is a fascinating story...

[Eric Smith]

Adam has identified what is the only possible alternative site in St. Andrews with a link to the coastline.  It is narrow and sandwiched between the main road into town and the upper reaches of the estuary.  It is also very close to the end of the runway at Leuchars.  Not exactly a rivetting prospect.  Kinkell Braes was the only rational choice for the development of a course of the scale and stature required.  It is as close to the town as it is possible to get and offers a completely different perspective of the burgh to all the other courses.  If the Links Trust didn't develop that site then I'm sure somebody else would have.  

Perhaps the only other alternative would have been to cut up the Balgove and Strathtyrum (and maybe the far end of the Eden, plus a bit of new land) to make what would be a 5th course.  However, this would leave the Links Trust devoid of any beginner/novice golfing provision, which I suspect the provision of is part of their statute.

I've no doubt that the Castle was styled to outkingsbarns Kingsbarns.  Stylistically, it is clearly of the same genre, along with the two St. Andrews Bay courses.  Who knows what a 'natural' course on that site should look like.  There is no natural ground left anywhere near the town for reference.  Agricultural land cannot be considered such.

A far as I'm aware, the decision on the allocation of the site was made long before the selection process, though DMK did lobby (succesfully) for some additional land to create Green 16 and Tee 17 (which we didn't have to work with when preparing the design competition).  It isn't often in my experience that one has the chance to help a client select a site, though I did have that fortune with my current project near Madrid and it has helped us to settle on an absolutely magnificent piece of golf suited terrain.  I think it's natural for the most part, but who can tell!

Melvyn, I agree entirely with you about the need for a course to have a spirit or soul, but I believe you can create that.  You just have to be very good at the task.  I agree though, there are far too many 'soulless' golf courses, which often times are also those that have cost the most to create...

Nice post Robin.  Your perspective as a participant in the design competition for the 7th course helps us, in my opinion, to better understand the nature of why the golf course was created to be as 'visual' as it appears to be. eg "I've no doubt that the Castle was styled to outkingsbarns Kingsbarns"

Curious, would you say that your firm's design was influenced (directly or indirectly) by Kingsbarns as well?

[Ally Mcintosh]

Adam has identified what is the only possible alternative site in St. Andrews with a link to the coastline.  It is narrow and sandwiched between the main road into town and the upper reaches of the estuary.  It is also very close to the end of the runway at Leuchars.  Not exactly a rivetting prospect.  Kinkell Braes was the only rational choice for the development of a course of the scale and stature required.  It is as close to the town as it is possible to get and offers a completely different perspective of the burgh to all the other courses.  If the Links Trust didn't develop that site then I'm sure somebody else would have.  

Perhaps the only other alternative would have been to cut up the Balgove and Strathtyrum (and maybe the far end of the Eden, plus a bit of new land) to make what would be a 5th course.  However, this would leave the Links Trust devoid of any beginner/novice golfing provision, which I suspect the provision of is part of their statute.

I've no doubt that the Castle was styled to outkingsbarns Kingsbarns.  Stylistically, it is clearly of the same genre, along with the two St. Andrews Bay courses.  Who knows what a 'natural' course on that site should look like.  There is no natural ground left anywhere near the town for reference.  Agricultural land cannot be considered such.

A far as I'm aware, the decision on the allocation of the site was made long before the selection process, though DMK did lobby (succesfully) for some additional land to create Green 16 and Tee 17 (which we didn't have to work with when preparing the design competition).  It isn't often in my experience that one has the chance to help a client select a site, though I did have that fortune with my current project near Madrid and it has helped us to settle on an absolutely magnificent piece of golf suited terrain.  I think it's natural for the most part, but who can tell!

Melvyn, I agree entirely with you about the need for a course to have a spirit or soul, but I believe you can create that.  You just have to be very good at the task.  I agree though, there are far too many 'soulless' golf courses, which often times are also those that have cost the most to create...

Nice post Robin.  Your perspective as a participant in the design competition for the 7th course helps us, in my opinion, to better understand the nature of why the golf course was created to be as 'visual' as it appears to be. eg "I've no doubt that the Castle was styled to outkingsbarns Kingsbarns"

Curious, would you say that your firm's design was influenced (directly or indirectly) by Kingsbarns as well?

Same shaper as well... Trying a new style at Kingsbarns... then Kingsbarns on steroids at The Castle course

[Gary Slatter]

David,

Good point, but St Andrews already has its symbol in the Old Course.  Which again raises the question of whether trying to copy it would ever be a good idea for whatever designer was chosen.  And whether the ET really is a monstrosity?

No doubt, designing a new course near TOC was the toughest gig in the biz!  And no doubt, Melvyn personifies the "resistance to change" part inherent in all of us!

BTW, I wonder if TOC was always as pure as we might believe?  Did they ever set out to lose money for the good of the locals?  They certainly embraced the moneymaking ideas of hosting the Open and raising fees to outsiders when it became really trendy about 1980 to play those courses by Americans.

Jeff, the OPEN is run by the R&A (private club), completely separate from the LINKS TRUST (charity) who operate the courses, on behalf of the town. 

[Brian Phillips]

There is a very indepth story on how this course was built written by Scott Gummer - "The Seventh at St. Andrews: How Scotsman David McLay Kidd and His Ragtag Band Built the First New Course on Golf's Holy Soil in Nearly a Century [7TH AT ST ANDREWS] "

It is a fascinating story...

Richard,

Please, please do NOT believe everything in that book....it is just as you say ..."a fascinating story", a lot of truth in there but also a fair amount of storytelling.

[Niall C]

Interesting thread. Firstly on the question of location, I have to ask, is it actually in St Andrews ? I suspect not. Certainly its labelled St Andrews in the same way as the Fairmont courses and the Dukes Courses are so if you take that as your parameters for St Andrews boundary, rather than whats on the map then there are a lot more options, not all of which have an ocean, sorry seaview.

Seaviews aside, the proper comparisons for this course are probably not with the old ones within the town but with the newer ones such as Kingsbarns and the Fairmont courses. I've not played the Castle although I have walked part of it and it looks to me that there is more of a drop from the top of the course to the bottom than the others and therefore was perhaps a more difficult site. I would also suggest that they pushed the envelope more at the Castle and are perhaps having to make a few nips and tucks accordingly. It certainly doesn't look like a course that the pro's would accept for a comp but I guess thats part of its appeal. 

Niall

ps. as part of the spending review the Government has decided to close the military airbase at Kinloss and apparently Leuchars was under consideration. As drastic as that would have been for the local economy I can't help thinking that there's a great opportunity for a golf development under that airfield and one that even Melvyn would approve of.

[RSLivingston_III]

What would the land have looked like pre-farming? Soft rolling dunes?

[Adam Lawrence]

What would the land have looked like pre-farming? Soft rolling dunes?

How can anyone tell? That land will have been farmed a thousand years, maybe much more.

[RSLivingston_III]

What would the land have looked like pre-farming? Soft rolling dunes?

How can anyone tell? That land will have been farmed a thousand years, maybe much more.

Is there other land nearby that appears to not ever been farmed?

Nevermind. Just used Google earth and everything appears to have been used, even up and down the coast.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Two aerial photos of the site pre construction  followed by a print of an 17 or 18th Century
 Picture of St Andrews but closer to the town than the current course.

The edge of the land where the course has been constructed picks up and rises in height well above the sea level








Melvyn

[Rob Peterson]

It feels like golf has totally ruined a landscape very close to a pretty town.

I have no idea what this land looked like before the course was built, but I can't imagine how a course like that would ruin the landscape for anyone who wasn't a minimalist golf design fan (i.e. a big time golf fan).  I can definitely see why the Whistling Straits-haters would object to this course as it reminded me more of Whistling Straits than just about any course I've played.  It is clearly sculpted and I'll post some additional pics in a bit for everyone's viewing pleasure, but I had a blast playing it...despite the fact that it was the coldest and windiest weather in which I've ever played.

If I remember correctly there are a bunch of trailer homes on the cliffs on the way to the course.  In my opinion those trailers ruin the landscape more than any golf course ever would.  I can't figure out why people would be so shocked at a golf course in the landscape near St Andrews.

[Rob Peterson]

Here are some pictures taken in May 2009.  























That is a very heavy bench that stood no chance against the wind!

[Michael Dugger]

Melvyn,

Provided you are in charge of Links Trust, what would you have proposed been done regarding the construction of a 7th course?

Where would you have had it built?

Who would you have preferred design it?

I've noticed you are awfully good at pointing out when something is bad, or those things you don't like, but rarely have I witnessed you come up with better solutions to said problems...

[Melvyn Morrow]

Michael

Pay me the correct Fees and I will come up with sites and the information you require in GB, but lets see the colour of your money first.

Melvyn

[Anthony Gray]

    I would imagine The Castle Course was the most anticipated course in some time,so it would difficult to design something at "The Home of Golf" that would measure up to the hype.I think the over the top greens were a result of people saying Pac Dunes greens were better than the Bandon Dunes greens because they had more movement.In the book DREAM GOLF DMK hints that idea.

   Anthony

[Adrian_Stiff]

Looks to me as if the hairy stuff in the middle of the fairways and the wild greens need corecting, the stuff in the fairways woud be fairly easy.....those are very nice pictures but the slopes on the greens do look to much. People I know who have played it love the basic layout and the views but say the greens are over the top, it looks unplayable in the wind perhaps.

[Michael Dugger]

Michael

Pay me the correct Fees and I will come up with sites and the information you require in GB, but lets see the colour of your money first.

Melvyn

I pay you nothing good sir!  Here I am, engaging in dialogue with you, asking you a legitimate question, and you come back with the aforementioned retort?

Seriously....this is what "frank commentary" is all about....tell us what Links Trust SHOULD HAVE DONE....

If the site they choose...if the architect they choose.....did not succeed, how would you have done it differently???

It seems to me you prefer to live in a time warp vacuum.  The facts of the matter is someone (Links Trust) deemed another course needed built.

Now let's pretend the entire project is in your hands, Melvyn, what are YOU going to do differently???