And a living lesson about builders and architects
This Sunday afternoon we played a round of golf at one of the courses in the region. The course is easily better than most in Scandinavia and Germany. Much of this is due to the pretty piece of raw, open, rolling land it is built upon. The architect had ample of this land to route the course over. The routing is good, but the course only decent. It could have been so much better. Many opportunities to achieve excellence economically were squandered.
The developers had a 500 horsepower car in the raw land, and because there was virtually no direction from the well known design company (the builders were left on their own) only 100 horsepower was utilized. Had all 500 horsepower been maximized, this would have been a very special golf experience. But it is still enjoyable, and a nice nature walk.
The developers used two different builders. One for the front-9, another for the back-9, and the contrast between the two are noticeable, if not stark. The builders interpreted the architect’s plans wholly differently. That’s not surprising. We’re all human and shaped by our experiences. No two people will interpret plans identically. Only the architect knows exactly what he wants, and without leadership from him, the developer won’t be able to maximize the horsepower of his architect’s dreams (plans), the site or budget. What will result is a product different from what the architect envisioned, regardless of how “detailed” his plans may be.
This course can serve as a laboratory for developers to learn from. The Lessons: Though a known architect was selected, the end product clearly illustrates the influence of the builder and the great cost (lost opportunities and refinement) that comes with a lack of direction from the architect during construction…Especially in places like continental Europe.
Tony Ristola
agolfarchitect.com
+1 (909) 581 0080
Tony Ristola
- www.tonyristola.com
- A rarity in golf course architecture: Working with the builders, crafting the details of my designs in the field on a daily basis.
Associated Blogs
Blog Archive
Short Project History; The Good and Bad
This blog reveals a snippet of the daily challenge of building a special golf course. The only value in something like this for future investors and golf architecture aficionados is to tell the truth; warts and all.
Before arriving at Sand Valley the project was being constructed according to the "detailed plans" of another golf architect using a "golf course construction company" that had built a number of courses. They broke ground in June 2006. After 10-months the builder had proceeded to rape 14-holes and was fired.
I have been brought in to fix the problem, using locals to build the course. In the process all plans except the general routing scheme have been abandoned. The current course is being designed in the field, seizing every opportunity to improve the course as we go. That's the value of time. You can see the project from all angles, in all conditions, you have time to think about the problems and come up with the best solutions, and then refine them with the guys doing the building... in real-time. This is how many of the great courses were constructed. It only makes sense. More time, more input, more communication produces the best possible result.
That's why Sand Valley, though it had a rough start (using the "Typical Method") should have a fantastic finish.
Before arriving at Sand Valley the project was being constructed according to the "detailed plans" of another golf architect using a "golf course construction company" that had built a number of courses. They broke ground in June 2006. After 10-months the builder had proceeded to rape 14-holes and was fired.
I have been brought in to fix the problem, using locals to build the course. In the process all plans except the general routing scheme have been abandoned. The current course is being designed in the field, seizing every opportunity to improve the course as we go. That's the value of time. You can see the project from all angles, in all conditions, you have time to think about the problems and come up with the best solutions, and then refine them with the guys doing the building... in real-time. This is how many of the great courses were constructed. It only makes sense. More time, more input, more communication produces the best possible result.
That's why Sand Valley, though it had a rough start (using the "Typical Method") should have a fantastic finish.
