Breaking Ground

Thankfully the heat and stress of a long, difficult summer has come to an end. This will allow us to shift our focus away from routine maintenance and move on to projects that improve the condition, appearance, and playability of the golf course. Before this season started the Grounds Committee discussed a number of issues throughout the course that they would like to see addressed. High on the list was the bunkers around the fourth green. While everyone agreed that this was perhaps the greatest opportunity to make a significant improvement, it was unlikely that we be able to fund such a project so we chose to examine smaller projects that would be less expensive but would still have a significant impact on the course. The Course Improvement Tournament in July raised far more money than we had anticipated which meant that we might be able to return to our original goal of correcting the problems on four after all. After purchasing much needed sand for the bunkers on holes one and two, I started investigating the possibility of using the remaining funds to rebuild one or both of the bunkers around the green.
I generally use two main resources when developing a plan for this type of project. First, I use aerial photographs from 1934 to examine how the course was initially built so that I can determine how the original architect intended the holes to be played. Last year this was the key reason we decided to remove the bunkers from the seventh hole, as they were not part of the original design. The second resource I use is the Master Improvement Plan Report developed by Ken Dye. The recommendations in this report reveal opportunities to accentuate the original features while updating the course to account for modern technology. This will be the key reference used for the renovation project this fall.
Due to financial constraints, we will not be able to consult with the architect directly, nor will we be able to implement all of his suggestions. Therefore the finished product will reflect his recommendations but may not be a direct interpretation of his design. One of Mr. Dye’s guiding principals is that “deficiencies of a hole that is too short or lacking in challenge can be corrected by deepening the bunkers”. In the report he also compares the design of this green to work completed by A.W. Tillinghast at Winged Foot where flashed sand faces are used to add visual interest to the golf holes. Therefore, consistent with the recommendations outlined in the plan we will be raising the greenside face of the left bunker to improve visibility from the fairway, as well as lowering the floor slightly to add challenge to recovery from approach shots that fall short of the putting surface.
In addition to the aesthetic upgrades we will be addressing the drainage issues that have caused the deterioration of the existing bunkers. For a number of reasons the existing drain that connects the two bunkers and moves water to the woods right of the fifth tee is not effective. First the pipe does not extend the full length of the bunkers. Second, the stone trench was covered with a fabric that prevents the water from entering the pipe. After we determine the final depth of the bunker we will install new drains that cover the full extent of the bunkers as well as the faces. This should eliminate any contamination of the sand by native soil, which occurs as a result of pooling and washouts caused by heavy rainfall. These pipes will empty into a series of catch basins that will also collect surface water from the area between the fairway and green surrounds. Due to the size of our staff and available equipment, the scale of the project will be much smaller than what is outlined in the master plan and the finished product may not be as dramatic as the architect had intended. Instead, we will provide a modern interpretation of the original design that will resolve the drainage issues, enhance the challenge and visual appeal of the hole, and provide a foundation for further improvements in this area.