[Tom Yost]

Here is Todd Leonard's follow up article from today's Union Tribune:

“And the other thing is that the character is not being brought out right. The character of the canyons and the beauty of that place has not been pulled into the golf course. It's been separated. The canyons are on one of side of the golf course and then there's been no integration, so the character that we bring out will try to enhance the natural beauty that's already there."

Could this be a nod to the miss that is generally attributed to Bell's original layout?   I kind of like the idea of taking the fairways to the edge of the barrancas while maintaining width to steer clear if so desired.  Right now trees and rough separate the fairways from the natural areas.

How exactly does one make it harder for the pros while keeping it playable for the regular folks? 

Isn't a lot of the difficulty of the South mainly due to the length (men's regular tees @ 6800) and the fact they maintain it with the us open narrow fairway widths and high rough?

[Pete Lavallee]

Tom,

That's a great question. The assumption is that Willam Francis Bell was not allowed to go near the canyons; they are part of the Torrey Pines State Preserve. Interestingly there was a new tee installed on the par 4 13th at the North Course about 10 years ago. The park commision decided that the tee was technically in the Preserve and it was not used for over 5 years! It is used now, just for the Farmers and the City AM. So what makes everybody think that whoever does this redesign will be given carte blanche to incorporate canyon areas of the Preserve into the new layout? Also the creeping nature of the Kikuyu grasss means that it will be tough to maintain natural sandy areas; will the whole golf course be regrassed to prevent Kikuyu from creeping into these sandy areas?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for incorporating carries across the canyons; these provide a thrill to every class of golfer to successfully nnegociate the carry. However in the South redesign the greens were only moved closer to the canyon, such that a miss to the side or back of the green is a shot irrevocably lost; not thrilling but penal to say the least. There was a new tee installed on the par 3 16th of the South that calls for a complete carry of the canyon and putts the treacherous front left bunker more in play; that tee is never used for everyday play!

Another great example is the short par 3 3rd on the North. We are made to off from 110 yards from the blue tees, across a hill slope of Kikuyu, with the canyon to the left of the green. You have to really yank one to end up in it. There are however "tournament tees" well left of the main tee that causes the golfer to fully carry the canyon; the hole palys anywhere from 180 to 140 from there. Those tess are NEVER used! What a waste. If the City is really interested in incorporating the canyons into the North there are several places where it could be done now at absolutely no cost! So why aren' they doing it?

[RJ_Daley]

Well, reading the link provided by Pete, the part that seems to jump out at me is this sort of confidence:

Mickelson said he wants to have more "rustic areas ... a rough canyon look, if you will.

"I'm going to make the hard holes harder, but I'm going to make the easy holes easier. I want guys having fun on some of these holes. The second hole is going to be moved up and shorter, little examples. We pretty much have it mapped out how we want to make it.”

Then, reading on at Mr Marney's reactions, gives my the impression that there is some skullduggery going on behind the scenes.  Mickelson seems to think he has it locked up with those sort of statements.  Marney has proper questions... something has to give.  And, the way so much behind the scenes municipal activity goes on, along with some big money interests (PGA, Farmers, etc.), it would be wise for Mr. Marney to watch his behind.  That is very unfortunate, but all too common, I'm afraid. 

Another thing about this notion of widening and bringing the barranca and canyons into play, with more shots taking on the biteoffs, carries, and bringing FWs closer to the edge, has to be the consideration to both safety of golfers getting too close, and crumbling or stabilizing those edges when the typical muni player gets foolish with their carts, etc.  How many 20 handicaps are going to stray downwards into those barranca edges looking for lost balls.  Sure, there may be signage saying "verboten" and enviro area-keep outs, but we all know the mentality of the occasional rec golfer, who don't need no stinking rules... 

Pete, do you foresee a committee of 'real people-resident-users' being asked to review any of this?  Could we nominate you? 

[Alex Miller]

The canyon is only steep enough to be a cause for concern on 7 in my estimation. Most of the rough areas that are canyon adjacent currently give way to brush before any sort of drop.

I think play would speed up overall if the rough is more out of play. The rough at Torrey is, and will continue to be the main reason for slow play/lost balls.

[Pete Lavallee]

Pete, do you foresee a committee of 'real people-resident-users' being asked to review any of this?  Could we nominate you? 

In short, no!

The City reinstituted the Golf Advisory Panel, whose job is to provide suggestions and a direction for the Cities four municipal courses, Torrey North and South, Balboa and Mission Bay. The Golf Advisory Panel has open hearing to solicit opinions from the general public but are in no way compelled to act on them. They meet later in a closed door session before providing their recomendations to the City. The Panel is made up of some City Golf personel, representatives from the Century Club (the non-profit who run the Farmers), a representative of the Torrey Pines Lodge and Torrey Pines Hilton (who get a block of prime tee times for their guests each day) along with one from the Torrey Pines Men's ansd Women's Club's (who are now forced to play their tournaments at other courses like Riverwalk and Encinitas Ranch). Sadly no one from Balboa was invited and when our Men's Club Presindent asked if he could sit in was flat out told no thank you. So from the makeup of the Panel you can see it's all about the money; how much they make and who gets to keep it!

The City was locked into a 5 Year Plan which set the rates at various courses including the progression of $69 to $235 at the South from 2006 to 2011. Unfortunately the Plan didn't have any wiggle room and when play started to slow in the recent economic downturn all the other golf course in the area started to offer discounts and the City courses couldn't and therefore lost even more play.  

[Joe Perches]

All these changes make the course harder, but actually give it a lot more width.

Isn't the average time to play a round long enough already?

[Alex Miller]

All these changes make the course harder, but actually give it a lot more width.

Isn't the average time to play a round long enough already?

Joe, see what I wrote above. Less rough=faster play. It's much easier/faster to drop a ball than it is to look around in Torrey Pines rough for it.

[Howard Riefs]

Official.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/dec/10/mickelson-set-do-torrey-north-renovation/

*    Includes 18 new greens, renovated bunkers and tees, full cart paths, improved irrigation practices, and possibly some new tees for   
      tournament play
*    Cost estimate for the project is close to $7 million, with all of the money coming from the golf enterprise fund
*    Work would begin soon after the PGA Tour’s Farmers Insurance Open is completed in early 2015
*    Full course would be unavailable to play for several months while the work is done
*    Mickelson is waiving his personal fee for the work, though his design team will be paid
*    Mickelson and his team have developed schematics for the design and will show them to the public ...in a meeting from 6:30 p.m.
      to 8:30 p.m. on Dec.[/li][/list] 18 at The Lodge at Torrey Pines
 

[C. Squier]

Good.  I'd rather play Phil's work at Whisper Rock than what is currently at Torrey any day of the week.  I believe he is sincere when he says he wants to do it for the good of the area.

[Pete Lavallee]

$7,000,000.00, for a redesign of 18 greens and bunkers? Please, someone help me out, how can this be possible? Rustic Canyon was built for $1,500,00.00. Will this be 4 times better than Rustic? Even the Rees redo on the South was $2,800,00.00. Forget the fact that all we really need is a bunker renovation. The greens on the North course are a treasure and should not be blown up! It's all down to the City wanting more than the $100.00 they get from tourists to play there now. Sometimes you just want to scream.

[Tom_Doak]

$7,000,000.00, for a redesign of 18 greens and bunkers? Please, someone help me out, how can this be possible? Rustic Canyon was built for $1,500,00.00. Will this be 4 times better than Rustic? Even the Rees redo on the South was $2,800,00.00. Forget the fact that all we really need is a bunker renovation. The greens on the North course are a treasure and should not be blown up! It's all down to the City wanting more than the $100.00 they get from tourists to play there now. Sometimes you just want to scream.

Well, it's city-owned, so they will have to pay prevailing union wage rates for every part of the construction work.  That will double the cost right there.  And it's California, so you can double it again.  And they are probably spending more just on the irrigation system than for everything at Rustic Canyon put together, in the name of greater "efficiency".

[Pete Lavallee]

Tom, Thanks for the help. The North Course had a complete irrigation redo not less than 10 years ago; adding reclaimed water for irrrigating fairways and tees. They use potable water for the greens. During that project is was clear that the site is basically red clay capped by a 6" layer of top soil. So any major earthmoving will be a difficult. Indeed no fairway contouring was changed in the South Course redo. I suspect that by moving all 18 greens  you will probably have to completely redo irrigation as to accomadate that. Phil has been quoted as waiving HIS design fee, however his firm will be paid. Shouldn't most of the work on the ground be done by his firm, eliminating involvement by the City?

[Ulrich Mayring]

I thought he works with Gary Stephenson? So that would settle the architect question.

Ulrich

[Pete Lavallee]

The article clearly states that Mark Mangus is head of the design team, we also get valuable input from golf instructor Rick Smith

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

I think we might be pleasantly surprised by the final product here given Phil's recent quotes/thoughts on course design.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pete,

Remind me, the next time a relative needs neuro-surgery, to call Phil Mickelson to perform the procedure.

At the least, you'd think they'd contract with a credentialed architect.

I don't get it, and, I like Phil Mickelson.

[Mike_Young]

Golf cannot continue to do what we did last time again:  $7 million
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Albert Einstein

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

The main cause of such a high cost is because all construction projects on or involving San Diego city land or services is required to use union labor.   

[Josh Tarble]

Besides the price, this seems like it could be a good plan all around.

Phil gets a high-profile redesign, when he discusses the designs on tour, seems like he could have some solid ideas.  I gotta imagine he will have a lot of short grass recovery areas.
and
The public will surely flock to a Phil Mickelson design.  As long as they do as they should and keep the price low.

[Lester George]

Phil doesn't do anything for free.  Just let Gary Stephenson do the work.  Phil can do the photo op and the sound bites as needed.

Lester 

[Jeff Blume]

A blue star for Pat and Lester!  As Mr. von Hagge used to say, "Would you let the opera singer design the opera house?".  Let Gary do the work since he is the one trained to accomplish the task, and Phil can do what he is best at (hitting the first shot and smiling for the camera).

I went to the old Buick Open a few years back, and for what it is worth I think the North course is one hell of an opportunity.  Great setting on the cliffs and plenty of terrain change.  Although not as long, it could be every bit as good as the South course (which is also well done in my opinion).

[Jud_T]

I'm not sure why you need to pay up for Phil's name.  I know he's from the area and all, but it's not like they need to drum up business.  Why not just get the best guy for the job?

[Pete Lavallee]

Jud,

The San Diego local golfers vehemently opposed a redesign proposed two years ago by Rees Jones. They stopped that one in its tracks. The course is full from dawn to dusk, so they are not trying to drum up more play. Right now they get $50 form locals and $100 from out of towners to play the North on the weekends. It's all about getting more $$$ from the tourists; even if they bump the locals off the tee sheet. This is not a municipal complex but rather a Resort run by the City.

[John Crowley]

Pete L,
We don't know each other, but we could meet for a game at Torrey. I will be booking games for Dec. 26 and 27.
Send me a PM if you are interested.
John

[Howard Riefs]

Sounds ominous:  "Concerns about Torrey Pines North"

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/may/05/torrey-pines-north-course-renovation-mickelson/

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2015/5/5/concerns-about-torrey-pines-north.html

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()