[Niall C]

If you owned 150 plus acres of gently rolling countryside with a reasonably porous soil and no really onerous constraints, and you wanted to build a golf course, what would your brief to the architect be ? For starters, here’s mine;

-   Lay of the land type course with minimal earth shifting with focus on creating features ie. greens, tees, bunkers.
-   One tee box per hole to be used by golfers of all abilities and standard.
-   18 holes would be nice but not essential, number of holes to be determined by the site.
-   Blindness acceptable where required but shouldn’t be overdone.
-   Minimal walking between green and next tee.
-   Par 72, 4 x par 3’s, 4 x par 5’s etc would be acceptable provided it could be justified (NB – because it is “standard” or “everyone else does it” is not a valid reason) in terms of producing the best course on the particular piece of land, otherwise it should be avoided.
-   Fun, interesting and challenging for all levels (NB – even “rabbits” enjoy a challenge)
-   Hazards – with the above in mind, cross hazards with a lengthy carry should be avoided, particularly where the produce a forced lay-up. Diagonal or flanking hazards preferred.

Now before some of you eejits jump in and tell me that the above spec wouldn’t be commercially viable just let me say I disagree, but more than that that is not the point of the thread. I’m looking to find out what others are actually looking for in a course. So what would your brief be ?

Niall

[Adrian_Stiff]

Niall - If I was your architect I could quite happily work to that brief and I have walked away from many.

[Ben Stephens]

Niall,




What would be the hypothetic budget for this course be? architects can see whether you the 'hypothetical client' is being serious or not.


The budget (probably one of the most important aspect of any brief) can reflect on the quality of the course the same as buildings.




Cheers
Ben

[Niall C]

Niall - If I was your architect I could quite happily work to that brief and I have walked away from many.

And I'd be very happy to have you as the architect. Tell me this though, when you designed the Players course, how much of the design was dictated by commercial concerns and how much by what you wanted to do ?

Niall

[Niall C]

Ben

I could say that funding is in place and sufficient to fulfil the brief but that's not really the question. The question is what would you design if you were designing a course on the site as described ?

Niall

edit; I should have said what would you design for yourself

[Ally Mcintosh]

The really big question mark is what shape the land parcel is and how unusable some of the land is. In the end, that variable will have a big impact on what is built.


But generally speaking, you are giving a brief that most UK architects have been used to dealing with on a regular basis (at least while non-trophy new courses were getting built around 1975 - 2005). Only unusual part of the brief is the one tee-box per hole.

[Thomas Dai]

Reversible course with easy walking, no forced carries and short green-tee walks to be grazed by sheep.
Atb

[Tim Martin]

Only unusual part of the brief is the one tee-box per hole.

Assuming the course is designed for all levels of ability including both men and women how does one tee box mete out a compelling game for all?

[Don Mahaffey]

A real life brief from Al Stanger, owner and visionary behind Wolf Point.


Mike Nuzzo, "Al, what are you looking for?"



Al, "I don't want to be hunting for balls. I want it difficult and I'd like an home course advantage"


About a month later...


Mike and I, "Al, we can show you what we have in mind"


Al, "I don't need to see the plans, make it outrageous. If I don't like it I'll bulldoze it and start over"






Probably not many briefs like that.

[Tom_Doak]

Generally when I ask a client what they want, I mostly pay attention to the first two or three things they say - after that, if you give them long enough, they will say all the trite things everyone else says!


When I asked Brooks Koepka how our course should be different, the first thing he said was “If you just don’t make all the par threes 200 yards plus, you’ll be a hero.”


When I asked Zac Blair, his first desire was to have a very walkable course, which I think was partly because he’d been trying to route it himself and that’s what he was unhappy with.  Anyway, every modification we made to my first routing was to make it tighter and more walkable.

[Niall C]

Only unusual part of the brief is the one tee-box per hole.

Assuming the course is designed for all levels of ability including both men and women how does one tee box mete out a compelling game for all?

Tim

Why can't it be compelling for all ? Different standards of players don't necessarily need to be challenged by the same things or the same hazards. Think of the 14th TOC or MacKenzies Lido hole.

Anyway, should I assume in your brief you would have multiple tee-boxes ? What else would be in the brief ?

Niall

[Niall C]

Reversible course with easy walking, no forced carries and short green-tee walks to be grazed by sheep.
Atb

David

Presumably it would be reversible to provide variety ?

Why sheep and not goats ?

Niall

[Adam Lawrence]

Only unusual part of the brief is the one tee-box per hole.

Assuming the course is designed for all levels of ability including both men and women how does one tee box mete out a compelling game for all?

Sure it can. It just isn't the same par for everyone.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Niall - If I was your architect I could quite happily work to that brief and I have walked away from many.

And I'd be very happy to have you as the architect. Tell me this though, when you designed the Players course, how much of the design was dictated by commercial concerns and how much by what you wanted to do ?

Niall

I have designed 20 courses, counting 36s and pretty much always I ask their budget and design to that. Most people just trust, so I have always reasonably done what I want to do, I have only ever lost four jobs to another architect but I am very much on budget side of doing things so I get loads of work if I want it, I don't skimp on greens though. I reckon I can move soil cheap because I don't do things like the PRO golfer names that move mountains of material because it is the 16th and it needs to be 450 yards and 375 is too short, I very much design to the land and I never joined the European Architects Ass because back in 1989 I wanted to design and build which did not fit in with their manifesto. Plus I also thought they were really crap (back in those days).
Commercial thinking is important if it needs to make money or break even, there are not groups of gentleman anymore that start a golf club, it is individuals that think they can work financially. There may be an odd person that wants a trophy of course but he is not going to have me as his archie.
I would never advocate building a 9 hole course, not enough want to play 9 holes twice, they always struggle financially and the income is 50% and the costs are probably 75%+...you can't buy half a tractor sort of thing.
In the UK I would not bother with fairway irrigation anymore, it is rarely needed but a main down the side of the fairway with valves to attach 100 yards apart may be a cheap option.
Obviously if you can get inert material involved into building the course then it can be built very cheap and in some/many cases I can build the course for a minus figure.
Returning nines is a good idea commercially, it means more people can play, it means you can feed people after nine with the same staff.
Closeby practice range to the clubhouse.
A clubhouse that is in harmony with the course, ie overlooks the final green, The members stay longer than a house with no view.
The course needs to be decent to a level it can stage a county championship, condition needs to be good, dry soil is much better, location to houses is good, location to a motorway junction is good. Course at 7000 yards from the back tees is important. Course needs to play at 5750 yards but the golfer thinks he is playing 6750. Course needs a fun element. Course needs variety.

[Tom_Doak]

I have designed 20 courses, counting 36s and pretty much always I ask their budget and design to that.

I had to learn not to ask about the budget, and instead let the client bring it up when they wanted to.  That was the result of a conversation with my client at Cape Kidnappers, who told me if I wanted to have clients that wanted the best possible course, worrying too much about the budget on their behalf made them think I was compromising the design somehow.


Since then, I've had a lot of clients who insist my proposed budget isn't big enough, because they heard that Jack Nicklaus spent $20 million doing a project down the road or whatever.


I suppose I should have just built the whole thing turn-key and retired on the profits.

[Peter Pallotta]

I'd say:
- I'd like to be able to maintain the course myself, by myself, with only one riding machine/mower and no shovels whatsoever.
- You're allowed one Par 5 for 'free', after that I don't want a second (or especially a third) unless it's a *great* Par 5.
- 18 holes please; I don't need to reinvent the wheel.
- I don't want quirk. I'm telling you that because if you're *thinking* quirk beforehand it's neither real quirk nor good quirk.
- Building this course is going to take you a while, and I'll be around -- so please keep the noise down to an absolute minimum; maybe no big dump trucks either in or out, or chainsaws, or the huge bulldozers. A bobcat is loud enough for me.
- I want to get out of my car and be on the first tee in 15 paces; don't have me walking 10 city blocks to get to the 'perfect' opening hole. I just want to play golf.
- I want a friend who drops by to play without me to be able find his way around with absolute ease the first time around, i.e. all the green-tee walks are all *right there* -- no mystery or 'journey' involved.
- I don't need blindness either. There's a *lot* of latitude between "the course is all there right in front of you" and "blindness" -- please use it to avoid blindness.
- I said I don't want a shovel, but if you need some bunkers put them in, a few -- but they *all* have to be deep, round, pots with sod faces with surrounds that feed into them -- in most cases a full shot penalty. (Don't worry, it won't kill me or make me cry).
- Oh, and you know what else won't kill me? Canted fairways and sidehill lies, and maybe a couple of those reverse camber doglegs, so I feel like a pro.
-Other than that, do whatever the hell you want -- but please, don't treat me like a fool who won't know any better or as your personal piggy bank, and don't see this design as you're golden chance to "experiment with ideas you've always wanted to try" or to "relax and have fun" after stressful assignments with Big Shot Developers. Build a good golf course like good golf courses have been built for 100 years.

[Tim Martin]

Only unusual part of the brief is the one tee-box per hole.

Assuming the course is designed for all levels of ability including both men and women how does one tee box mete out a compelling game for all?

Sure it can. It just isn't the same par for everyone.

Adam-That didn’t enter into my thinking when I posed the question and can’t argue with your reply. Provided that par could be adjusted(from 4 to 5 in most cases) it could work.

[Ben Stephens]

Ben

I could say that funding is in place and sufficient to fulfil the brief but that's not really the question. The question is what would you design if you were designing a course on the site as described ?

Niall

edit; I should have said what would you design for yourself

Niall,


Cost is a factor on how much you can do with the site and knowing it makes you aware of the limitations on what you can do or not do plus what shapers can be used as they vary in prices plus the cost of materials - how far you can go with the green in terms of shaping size and irrigation like wise for bunkers, fairway, tees, clubhouse etc. it does have influence on the design in my view. A £500k course is different to a £10 million course


Cheers
Ben

[Ben Stephens]

To answer your question my brief would be something like this




£500k budget on a existing arable land 150 acres.


18 holes - that can be done in different layouts whether holes reverse or bisect the land. Which gives options of not just one 18 hole course but different variants of 18 holes so that one day you play one version and the next a different version.


3 of the holes which can play in 3 different configurations to be floodlit and played during night time especially in the winter to increase the commercial footprint. This would enable for quick nine holes


Part of the course to be used as a floodlit driving range at nighttime as well with driving range pods that can be moveable with floodlit and trackman facilities

Putting green like Himalayas for all to use.


More focus on the greens in terms of design, quality and shaping at the beginning. The arable land to be stripped for fairway, tee areas and parts the rest to remain arable land and sheeps to graze it. Minimal shaping.


Have a masterplan for course improvements over a 10 year period where the finances become available. So tees, bunkers green extension  are added so it is continually improved over time when the finances allow for it. I prefer the sustainable business model approach
 
A bit of quirkiness but not over the top with hazards which fit into the lie of the land and in varying sizes.


Carbon zero construction and use of eco friendly materials


Leave a bit of the land for growing food and tree near clubhouse location so that it can be used for food provision reduces cost of buying outside.


Solar panels to charge up buggies and green keeping machines.


Reservoir for sustainable water use meaning no need to use the water mains.


Clubhouse to start off as a shed type building and a Passivehaus type clubhouse to be built in phases when the finances allow for this.




Cheers
Ben

[Sean_A]

interesting greens

short walk from car park to 19th hole

~5000-6000 yards

boozer loops

wouldn't mind two starting points from the house which are at least 12 & 6 hole loops, but 13 & 5 and 14 & 14 are fine

very limited looking for balls

don't mind more than four short holes and less than one 3-shotter

easy maintenance

minimal, but efficiently placed hazards

try to use less than 100 acres

Ciao

[Duncan Cheslett]

interesting greens

short walk from car park to 19th hole

~5000-6000 yards

boozer loops

wouldn't mind two starting points from the house which are at least 12 & 6 hole loops, but 13 & 5 and 14 & 14 are fine

very limited looking for balls

don't mind more than four short holes and less than one 3-shotter

easy maintenance

minimal, but efficiently placed hazards

try to use less than 100 acres

Ciao

Sounds like my kinda course! 👍

[Ira Fishman]

interesting greens

short walk from car park to 19th hole

~5000-6000 yards

boozer loops

wouldn't mind two starting points from the house which are at least 12 & 6 hole loops, but 13 & 5 and 14 & 14 are fine

very limited looking for balls

don't mind more than four short holes and less than one 3-shotter

easy maintenance

minimal, but efficiently placed hazards

try to use less than 100 acres

Ciao

But for some heather, you just said build me Woking. Couldn't agree more.


Ira

[Adrian_Stiff]

I have designed 20 courses, counting 36s and pretty much always I ask their budget and design to that.

I had to learn not to ask about the budget, and instead let the client bring it up when they wanted to.  That was the result of a conversation with my client at Cape Kidnappers, who told me if I wanted to have clients that wanted the best possible course, worrying too much about the budget on their behalf made them think I was compromising the design somehow.


Since then, I've had a lot of clients who insist my proposed budget isn't big enough, because they heard that Jack Nicklaus spent $20 million doing a project down the road or whatever.


I suppose I should have just built the whole thing turn-key and retired on the profits.

I think a lot of money could be made just DESIGN & SHAPE. It also seems good value to the client I think. As an architect you get that design over to the client....can't say I have ever had much interest in watching the drainage go in.

[Thomas Dai]

Reversible course with easy walking, no forced carries and short green-tee walks to be grazed by sheep.
Atb

David
Presumably it would be reversible to provide variety ?
Why sheep and not goats ?
Niall

Reversible for play variety with a hopefully some 2-for-1 savings in terms of some construction/maintenance cost/price aspects.
Sheep grazing generally should keep things short but if brush and scrub should arise then goat use on a controlled basis would be fine. Goats could maybe help with initial clearance work if needed.
An add-on, clubhouse to be informal, small in size with drinks and snacks.
Omitted to mention earlier but nice thread Niall, thanks for raising it.
Atb

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()