Champion Hills Nears Debut

The 9th hole and clubhouse beyond - at Champion Hills Country Club

My latest new design, Champion Hills is nearing its debut.

Located in Victor, New York – just east of the city of Rochester - Champion Hills Country Club is the areas first “Cottage Style” layout.  The final hole was seeded approximately a month ago, and is coming in nicely. Work continues on the building out of the residential area as well as tuning up the golf course. A grand opening will occur early next spring. This is the first new course opening for me since the highly acclaimed Lazy Swan Golf and Country Club opened in Saugerties, New York in 2008. Champion Hills is significant for me not only because it is opening at a time when few new courses are built, but also due to its unique concept. It is also the second golf course I have completed with Scott  Hall, my shaper from Empire Links Golf Construction.

 The "Cottage Style Course" - is a term I coined while working out the design concept.  The ‘Cottage Style’ refers to a nine-hole course that is less than 3,000 yards and has a non-traditional total par. However, more importantly, the course is designed to "reflect a quality and craftsmanship in its detailing of features, equal or exceeding the top-level courses”. It is a style of course directly contrasting the absurd modern architecture of 7,500 yards or more, ‘McMonster’ courses. These long, process designed courses are excruciatingly boring and offer little interest to the large masses of common golfers. By contrast, a cottage style course is infused with strategies that require careful thinking and an honest evaluation of ones own shot making abilities. When possible, alternative routes to the hole are also provided. They are also designed to address the modern lifestyle of today’s golfers.

One of the unique beauties of the 'Cottage Style', is the desirability of the course for all age groups and skill levels. The length alone insures that the holes are playable – and ultimately “parable” - for most golfers. However, the holes do provide challenges that will assist in the development of a wide repertoire of shots if the course is to be mastered on a regular basis. One can also expect to find many of the hazards found on regulation courses. Both sand bunkers and water features are typically present and the courses require tactical decisions by players if they are to successfully negotiate the golf holes. However, the courses do eliminate forced carries of any significant length and offer multiple tee boxes for varying skill levels.

The ‘Cottage Style’ is also deliberately designed to be family friendly, where one can imagine a grandfather playing with his son and grandson. In addition, better golfers will find these courses as a quick and useful tune-up for their games when they are short on time. The typical length of time to play a cottage style course is 90 minutes or less. And players will find that despite the reduced length of the course, they are required to hit every club in their bag.

I will be introducing several of the holes at Champion Hills as well as discussing my clients goals and objectives and how those were specifically addressed throughout the design and construction of the golf course.

Space Matters

For the past week I have been working on a routing for a new golf course. Nine of the holes are set. So I have been working out the final nine holes and amenities, such as the practice facility, parking and clubhouse circulation. It became apparent that we will need some more land – not a lot - but certainly more. I have tried over 50 – 75 routings and variations. This isn’t uncommon for me even when land is plentiful. But it is more difficult to make a course of distinction without sufficient land. It leads to the question, “How much land is needed for an 18 hole golf course?” That’s a question not always easy to answer. So much depends on what one is trying to achieve, as well as parcel configuration, topography, environmental issues (such as wetlands), existing vegetation, etc. In 1926, this is what the great Golf Architect Donald J. Ross had to say:

“Don’t make that most regrettable of mistakes, the selection of too small a tract. Don’t try to save money in that way. One hundred ten acres will do, but it’s bad to limit it to even that. One-hundred twenty five is a fair size, but one-hundred fifty is better. It is not necessary to use all the ground available for golf. By using less, the upkeep is kept down, a big item in this day of high prices. Under certain favorable conditions, a small piece of property, fortunately shaped, might work out admirably. Other times it would make a most unsatisfactory and decidedly uninteresting course.”

Keep in mind that he was working back in the day where a course of 6,500 yards was plenty for a championship course. (A length that is still plenty for the 95% of all golfers, but certainly too short for Men’s championships.) So to a certain extent, what your goals are will determine the amount of land you will need. At any rate, at the end of my week of routings, I decided to take in this past weeks PGA Tournament that was held at Atunyote, the Tom Fazio design at the Turning Stone Resort in Verona, NY. Saturday was a beautiful fall day and it was a pleasure to soak it in. I’m not here to critique the design, which by the way is very beautiful and very “Fazio”. I have played it before and it is a fun track, very playable even for a 9 handicap hacker like myself. But what struck me most about my visit in the midst of routing a course with limited land, is the expanse of the golf course proper. I literally could fit a very nice 9 holes on three of the holes out there. Give me the 12th, 18th and 9th holes, and I would have plenty to work with. This is mainly because the goal of the resort was to host a PGA Tour event, and they host their Turning Stone Resort Championship in fine fashion. The planning included space for bleachers, corporate tents, paved cart paths throughout, “spectator mounding”, etc. It’s a completely different design criteria.

So there is no definitive amount of land needed for 18 holes. Donald Ross’ answer is still a good one. But if we are to grow the game of golf, we need to create interesting courses nearer to urban populations where we can expose the game to the maximum number of people who have never tried it. This means designing courses on smaller pieces of land and will require more creativity from the architect. Certainly, it is a greater test of ones ability to design a fine shorter course with limited land than a longer course on an expansive remote piece of property. I think as an industry we should be headed into smaller urban parcels where potential players are abundant, even if the land is limited. Players will eventually travel to play golf in remote areas but we need to let “interesting golf” - and not necessarily "long golf" - get them hooked first.

Good Shapers Song

Bulldozers and Dirt - DBT

"Green green grass under my feet,
but all I can think about's the dirt underneath,
Bulldozers and dirt, bulldozers and dirt,
behind the trailer my dessert,
Them red clay piles are heaven on earth
I get my rocks off bulldozers and dirt".

Drive-by Truckers

How I Got Started in Golf Architecture - Part Three

"Sight is faculty; Seeing is an art."

George Perkins Marsh

My growing passion for golf and the golf course landscape eventually led to me leaving my Landscape Architecture firm and entering graduate school to focus solely on golf course design. It was not an easy decision. Not only did I enjoy the people I was working with, but I had built up a fairly impressive portfolio of work. A portfolio that would now be useless when seeking to obtain golf course design commissions. But before I made the final commitment I needed to get over one last hurdle. I was still finding that the design of golf courses was lacking in both creativity and foundational design. The question I needed to resolve was this; is it the process itself or is it just the people designing golf courses? In other words, was the design of golf courses simply too limiting, or were the designers themselves lacking in creativity? The person responsible for helping me think through this process was Bob Reimann. Bob was a brilliant and creative Landscape Architect and long time design instructor (and former Dean of Landscape Architecture) at the State University of New York at Syracuse. When I discussed some of these issues with him, his answer was “all the more reason to follow your passion.” If it wasn’t to be extremely challenging to me as a designer, then what was the point? He also pointed out that sometimes subtlety in design can make a huge difference, but it isn’t always obvious to the casual observer. Eventually I came to realize that strong conceptualization could lead to both bold and subtle forms. And that some things only the designer recognizes. And that’s OK.




So I left my firm and entered graduate school. I already knew that a great golf course must be both strategically sound and aesthetically appealing. So I set out to further study this. First, I did the obvious and began studying the classic American courses. I then traveled to Scotland and Ireland to study some of the links courses. I wasn’t, (and I’m still not), interested in becoming a golf course historian. I made no intention to “memorize holes” or golf course routings, though I sketched every course I visited. My purpose in traveling and studying the classic courses had two purposes. First, to simply experience the origins of the great game of golf. And then secondly, to see how the architects of old interpreted the original links in a new landscape. My goal was never to capture something that I eventually could cut and paste into my future designs. At the same time I was continuing to pursue a broader interest in studying the forms and features of the natural landscape. With Bob Reimann’s guidance, I spent a semester conducting “A Study of Natural Compositions in the Adirondack Park”. In a nutshell, my goal was to observe nature, and then through photography and sketching, try to figure out why certain landscapes are more attractive than others. It also involved analyzing the processes of nature, such as the movement of water, its “sequence”, and erosion. You see, I believe what the great Landscape Architect Olmsted did, that nature has a restorative power – and not just for intellectuals but for the common man. And I knew I wanted to infuse my golf course design work with a sense of this. I began training myself not to just look at golf courses and nature, but to “see”. As George Perkins Marsh wrote in Man and Nature – “To the natural philosopher, the descriptive poet, the painter, and the sculptor, as well as the common observer, the power most important to cultivate, and at the same time hardest to acquire, is that of seeing what is before him. Sight is faculty; seeing is an art.”

When I left graduate school I felt confident I was ready to get started. I obtained my License in Landscape Architecture and in 1996 simply “Hung my Shingle”. The rest - as they say - is history.

How I Got Started in Golf Architecture - Part Two

   

"It's alright, it's alright, it's alright, - she moves in mysterious ways" U2

It was 1987 when I began working at Environmental Design and Research, a large Syracuse based Landscape Architecture firm. I knew if I wanted to practice Landscape Architecture (including Golf Design) that I would need to eventually obtain my professional license. This would require me to apprentice three years under a licensed Landscape Architect, and then take and pass a rigorous week long national exam. This is similar to architecture or civil engineering. So even though I hadn’t yet decided to specialize in golf course design, I knew that either way I would need a license and this position would fulfill part of that requirement.

My role initial role at EDR was that of a typical “green” intern, starting with the most menial tasks, such as drafting and assisting partners with their projects. I eventually became more involved in design and project management. David Crandall was the founder of the company and the lead designer at the firm. He was a great person to work for and an outstanding designer. I came to the firm with strong conceptualization skills and a love of design in general. But Dave really influenced me a lot. He taught me to trust my intuition and helped me translate my ideas into quick sketches. His encouragement was critical to my development as a designer. We worked on a broad range of projects, residential design, streetscapes, community planning, urban design, and athletic facilities. I learned that the design process is similar to each project and that managing projects and budgets are important aspects of the profession. But we also were getting golf design projects – or pieces of them - and I was able to do routings and preliminary design work. It was during this time that I recognized a higher level of interest and spent much time outside of work researching golf course design.

During the same years I was working at EDR, I was invited by the State University of New York at Syracuse, to teach design in the Department of Landscape Architecture as a visiting instructor. My design work at EDR was beginning to gain attention and the department felt I would be able to bring my knowledge of design to the classroom. At the time, I was the youngest instructor in the department. I gave lectures and was responsible for daily interaction and instruction for 1/3 of the design studio. I also began to look more closely at Golf Course Design and considered going back to obtain my Master’s Degree in Landscape Architecture. I also briefly considered pursuing a career in teaching Landscape Architecture.

While all of this was going on, I traveled with my wife and some folks from my church to Honduras in 1992. We were there to see what life was like in Central America and we were led through various villages and barrios by one of my best friends. It was truly an eye and heart opening experience. While I was there, my wife and I struck up a conversation with a retired Latin American History professor from Columbia University. He was living in Rochester, NY – just a short drive away from us in Syracuse. He invited me to join him later on that same year to travel to Nicaragua. He was planning a trip and needed someone to design and build a children’s playground in the Village of Chacra Saca. I decided it was something I would like to do. So later that same year, I traveled to Nicaragua with a small group of high school students, an electrician (to electrify their well) and a Vietnam Veteran and his son. We built the only playground we saw in the country. Some may have wondered, why we were building a playground for the children, when there were so many other pressing issues. Most of the residents did not have electricity and most of the homes were made from random pieces of wood and had dirt floors. But all of the villagers were very grateful. They loved to see the joy the children had when they played on the playground. For a moment, the children lost themselves in a world that took them somewhere else. Isn’t that what recreation is meant to do?

I mention this story because it was an amazing trip and we had long conversations into the night. The poverty was unbelievable, but the spirit of the people amazing. I thought a long time afterwards about recreation, and its value to both children and adults. It seems a very odd place to come from, but after the dust settled from those trips, I decided to take a chance and pursue a career specializing in Golf Course Architecture. I had finally recognized (and accepted) the value that recreation has for any civilized society, and the wonderful opportunity this country affords to pursue ones own dreams.

How I Got Started in Golf Architecture - Part One

A question I am often asked is just how I got started in golf design. I will try to trace it as best as I can, but it’s not really such a linear progression. I first found out about Landscape Architecture as a profession when I was a junior in high school back in Connecticut. I spoke with a Landscape Architect and she told me about the various things that Landscape Architects do. She mentioned that most Landscape Architects eventually specialize in one aspect of the field. She mentioned Golf Course Design as one of several niches within recreation specialization. And while I thought that this was interesting, I was equally intrigued by all facets of Landscape Architecture, including urban planning, residential design, park design, garden design, historical preservation, ecological restoration, etc. She then described the process of obtaining a degree in Landscape Architecture from an accredited university and then obtaining a license in Landscape Architecture in order to practice in the majority of states with licensing laws. I decided this was a great field and ended up getting an Associates Degree from the State University of New York at Cobleskill. There I took courses in Turfgrass Management and Landscape Development. Bob Emmons, who has since retired, was the turf guy. (Little did I know at the time my good friend and fellow DJ, Frank Rossi, would eventually end up being the “turf guy” at Cornell!) Anyhow, we ended up building two greens and learned how to operate golf course maintenance equipment.


Following graduation from Cobleskill, I worked on the maintenance crew at the Shennecossett Golf Course in Groton, Connecticut. (This was back when it was still a Donald Ross course, before they ruined it – but that story is coming in another blog!) Anyway, I wondered who this Donald Ross guy was that designed it. At the time, I was involved in all of the operations of maintenance, including cutting greens, raking all 100 bunkers, cutting cups, etc. I also did some construction of tees, drainage, and helped with minor irrigation repair. I loved it. So much so, I took a year and a half off before going to Syracuse to get my degree in Landscape Architecture. Once I got to Syracuse, I became fascinated with all aspects of Landscape Architecture. I was interested in Golf Course Architecture, but was by no means “focused” on it. I did look into the field of Golf Course Design – but to be perfectly honest, I found it to be awfully shallow compared with other aspects of Landscape Architecture. The only interesting book I found was an old one – “The Links” by Robert Hunter. (Still one of my favorites) This was during the mid-80’s. I wasn’t sure, but it seemed no contemporary golf course architect had anything worthwhile to say. Yet contrasting this were the other aspects of Landscape Architecture. There was plenty to say. From Jens Jensen, to Thomas Church, Lawrence Halprin, Ian McHarg, John Simonds, Dan Kiley, and others. There was also this “kid” – an undergraduate from Yale that I was reading about - who had recently won a design competition for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington DC. Her name was Maya Lin, and she had just blown away a field of national and international Architects and Landscape Architects by winning the competition. Her “original” thought process had led to an “original” design that is as moving and awesome and popular a piece of memorial architecture as exists anywhere in the world. I found that inspirational. Here, there were all of these ideas and original thoughts in many aspects of Landscape Architecture, and then there was Golf Design – with nothing to say, dead, completely void of any new design concepts. And worse yet, golf course design was being practiced by an old boy network – that looked like a “fraternity of designers and professional golfers”, who not only didn’t have any new ideas, but hadn’t even bothered to study the old ones! So I pursued what seemed far more interesting to me at the time, and took a job in a Landscape Architecture firm in Syracuse.

Why "Scratching the Surface"?

“NO ASPECT OF THE PAST, HOWEVER GRAND IT MAY APPEAR, IS TO BE REGARDED AS SUPERIOR TO THE PRESENT MOMENT”

 emerson

A few have asked about the title of my blog, "Scratching the Surface". Scratching the surface is what we do when we create a golf course. In one way or another, we scratch at the surface of the earth. Sometimes we need to scratch more than others. The second meaning has more to do with the purpose of this blog. The art of golf course architecture is in its infancy. And in my opinion, lagging behind other allied arts (including other niches within Landscape Architecture) in the development of ideas and contemporary theory. There are many reasons for this. Many involved in design are not qualified or formally trained. And the majority of today's golf architects are focused on (or hiding behind) the past and "classical design". They offer nothing new. Ideas are inbred and stale. Honestly, when was the last time you heard an architect say anything interesting about their work? Templates and berms are two words for "I have nothing new to offer". Fresh ideas are hard to find and discussions about design are overly simplistic. The profession is starved for new ideas and plagiarism is rampant. To be certain, the history of golf design is important and foundational to developing an understanding of the profession. And I love the old classic courses and confess to being a Ross-head myself. But it is all Golf Course History 101. It's freshman year of design at college. It's time to move beyond and offer true and original interpretations of what a golf course can be. And that doesn't mean abandoning all of the wonderful characteristics of great historical design anymore than one would in building architecture (or as my nephew Ryan says, "real architecture"). Scale, proportion, balance, juxtaposition, etc. are all important. But great architecture is not just about recreating the past. It also involves being here now. And in that way, we are just beginning to "Scratch the Surface".