Grand Designs

[Niall C]

There's a TV programme in the UK called Grand Designs where each programme is about a a different person or a couple who are building there own home, usually adopting innovative design techniques. The ones I really love or the ones where an old building is being converted or refurbished. Rather than taking a building and renewing it and hiding all the old bits, or at the opposite end, trying to have new elements appear old, the thing to do seems to be to show what has been done. In this way where new stone has been put in a wall, it stands out beside the old, where the building was say an old industrial building, retain something in the structure to show its previous use. That way the building almost tells its own story. It certainly makes a more interesting building IMHO.

This approach to treating old buildings came to mind when I was playing Elgin GC a little while ago. Elgin dates back to the 1920's and has had a couple of redesigns as well as the usual tinkering. As you walk along you see old bunkers, tee pads here and there and in places that doesn't make sense on todays course. Often the bunkers are different shapes and styles, and even some of the bunkers still in use are of different styles. Its almost as if you could see how the course evolved. The Old Course at Moray was similar. Disused bunkers half way down the fairway on a par 3 ? Why, I don't know, but fascinating to think about the history of the course.

In the act of returning old courses back to their "original" appearance/design, are we not losing something ? Are we not in danger of wiping out a whole load of history which made the course more interesting ? Would it not be more honest to retain what was there rather than wiping out previous redesigns to deny their existence ?

Niall

[Tom_Doak]

Niall:

Interesting.  Usually, clubs want a big-dollar renovation look to result in a very "clean" product ... same with most homeowners, I think.

However, for our renovation of North Shore Country Club, I just did something similar to what you suggest.  We have re-routed four holes, and the new 18th hole starts on the old second green and plays up and over a hill and down to the old first tee.  There were two bunkers at the old second green, and I left them ... one to the side of the new tee, and one right at the foot of the back tee (on a 600-yard par five).  It is a bit of a joke, because the back tee players should not top their tee shot on a 600-yard par five; but mostly, I left it because I didn't think it was worth $2500 to remove the sand and sod it over.

[Jamie Barber]

I guess TOC has elements of this; especially for the reverse routing which is rarely played.

[Bill_McBride]

One of the things I really liked about the Craighead course at Crail was how Gil Hanse incorporated old existing stone walls into the design.  One of them becomes the front of a higher terrace you have to play up onto.  You have to make a decision about whether you can carry the wall or not.   It's really cool, new course with historic elements.

[V. Kmetz]

Niall,

Great insight there about the experience of classic architecture, Golf or otherwise.

I contemplate many of these historic footprints - "disused" bunkers, earthen berms that protect nothing, tee plazas that are nearly dissolved and grown over greens that are in a meadow off to the right - with great environmental interest when I visit courses that possess them. I think similarly of existing, but nearly derelict features of the course as it is played today...a homely little "yellow" tee that I've never seen employed, a remote or alternate section of tee box that is never used, an old green site of a former routing being used a turf-nursery-cum-perfect short game area...

There's too many courses to list that have one or some more of these features (many sod-scapes at WF, Apawamis is a museum of such features, despite the many shovels) but another thing about them is that in some rare instances, the features gives a little information or colors the view as to how a shot might be played or at the very least what the demands were thought to be when the feature was active.

Of course such secondary pleasures are rare, the mere beholding you describe is its own cognitive reverie.

Great post.

cheers

vk

[Niall C]

....bloody hell, I've just noticed I've turned into a Senior Member, time to worry I think !

Tom,

I wonder if you are more likely to work on larger projects with bigger budgets that allow for a total clean slate. I also wonder if in recent past there has been more emphasis by clients on the aesthetics which maybe lead to the clean slate approach. Maybe in todays more cost conscious environment clubs will be happy to let bunkers grow over naturally rather than obliterating there existence, I certainly hope so. As you say, two and a half grand to fill in a bunker, why bother.

Bill

Interesting that you mention Craighead, that is a course which I don't think has been touched much if at all since it was built. I think the issue for Gil Hanse there was not so much incorporating the wall into the design but designing round it, the thing is huge. From memory I don't think he had a choice. Either way he certainly made a good job of it.

VK

Yes, these old defunct features tend to be in out of the way places, which probably tells you something about my golf as seem to find them on a regular basis 

Niall

[Mark Pearce]

Niall,

My understanding is that a lot of work was done to Craighead a couple of years after it opened.  A lot of gorse was removed, rough was shortened and fairways widened.  I dread to think how difficult it was before, since even now I'd be delighted to play to handicap (and SSS is 74) on a still day.  On a windy day it's not uncommon for CSS to go out to 77!

[Sean Walsh]

Niall,

You need to get hold of the first episode of the Australian Grand Designs series. It is the perfect example of your original post.  Renewing the building but retaining its character superbly.  It doesn't hurt that it is also a very interesting story in itself. 

[Tags:]

Tags: