POLLOK GOLF CLUB GOLF COURSE REVIEW DOCUMENT 2011-05-31

POLLOK GOLF CLUB GOLF COURSE REVIEW DOCUMENT 2011-05-31..one of the objectives in placing hazards is to give players as much pleasurable excitement as possible.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920) ISO 9001 FS 543419

SAC Consulting has been involved in golf course architecture for over 20 years and within that time has provided golf course design services and consultancy to clients throughout the UK and Europe. Malcolm Clapperton holds an MSc in Golf Course Architecture and is a founder member of the Scottish Association of Golf Course Architects. Over the last decade he has been involved in all aspects of the design, construction and management of golf courses with recent consultancies across Scotland including: Baberton GC re-design of 18 greens (USGA spec), tees and bunkers Broadlees GC 9-hole extension, practice facilities and clubhouse Braid Hills Golf Centre extension and short hole golf course Glenbervie GC rebunkering, pond design and watercourse treatments Pollok GC re-design of 17 th hole Whitekirk GC 18 hole extension and re-design As well as being a member of ScotAGCA we are also a member of Constructionline and are ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 accredited. ISO 9001 FS 543419 Since 1989 SAC Golf Course Design consultancies include: Augsburg Brunnthal Kitzingen Strathmore Kings Acre Broadlees Climpy Craibstone Charlton House Forester Park Whitekirk Hillend Polensa (Majorca) Peterculter Guggneberg Hermitage Insch Cumbernauld Kippie Lodge Kemnay 9 hole design and build 9 hole design and build 12 hole design and build 18 and 9 hole, driving range design and supervision 18 hole driving range and club facility design 9 hole and driving range design and EIA 18 hole golf club and adventure park design 18 hole design and supervision 18 hole design and supervision 18 hole design course redesign and 18 hole extension 18 hole design 18 hold design 18 hole supervision 18 hole and driving range design 12 hole design and supervision 12 hole design and supervision 9 hole golf course and golf academy design 9 hole design and supervision 9 hole extension design and build

Lochmaban Lumphanan Newburgh Rosehearty Barassie Brackenrigg Golf Course Glenbervie GC Fraserburgh Garmouth & Kingston Inverallochy Baberton GC Nairn Nairn Dunbar Newmachar Drainage Harburn Thornton (Fife) Glenbervie GC Mortonhall GC Pollok GC Broadlees Golf Centre 9 hole design and supervision 9 hole design and supervision 9 hole design and supervision 9 hole design and supervision 9 hole supervision 9 hole design Re-bunkering design 5 hole extension design and supervision 3 hole design course and sea wall improvements 18 hole redesign and supervision (USGA) drainage improvements drainage improvements design drainage design and installation fairway drainage design design and construction of pond and drainage systems fairway drainage design redesign of 17 th Hole 9 hole extension We also have extensive experience in providing turf management advice our client list includes: St. Andrews Links Trust Cruden Bay Golf Club Dunbar Golf Club Rangers FC Edinburgh City Council Glasgow City Council Turnhouse Golf club Elie Golf Club Watson Construction Group Meldrum House Golf club Mel Flanagan S.R.U. Murrayfield

WHY HAVE A GOLF COURSE POLICY DOCUMENT? The key asset of any golf club is the golf course itself, so it is vital that course conditions are optimised to assist golf clubs to retain and attract both members and visitors. In addition to quality playing conditions and sustainable turf management, other key issues should also be considered : nature conservation and enhancement landscape and cultural heritage climate change water resource management pollution prevention SCOTTISH GOLF UNION SAC Consulting were appointed by Pollok Golf Club to review the golf course with a view to working with the management and committee to produce a long-term development plan for the golf course. A hole by hole review of the golf course has been undertaken and the subsequent proposals for the restoration, renovation and rejuvenation of Pollok Golf Club have been borne out of a desire to return Pollok to a course in keeping with Dr Alistair Mackenzie s principles of golf course architecture. 1. Aims and Objectives of Golf Course Review: Forward Planning Budget Staff Resources Consistency Efficiency Committee Changes Staff Changes Less meetings for course management and alterations Heritage & Restoration Preserve the character and history of the golf course Course Review Character Restoration to Mackenzie principles Presentation Visually stunning and high quality playing surfaces Course Length Blue Tee Course to offer championship play to top amateurs and professionals

2. Detailed audit and review of golf course features: Hole by Hole design, maintenance and environmental considerations Tees Design tees, fairways/rough, bunkers, greens Maintenance effectiveness, efficiency, course presentation Environment habitat and woodland management Surface Consistency Sward density Smoothness Uniformity Maintenance Slopes Landscape Integration Area Views (line of play) Sight lines Dog legs Fairway/Roughs/Woodland Shaping Landing areas Definition Surface Quality Drainage Density of Grass cover Rough Height of cut (semi) Identify areas of wild rough Woodland Planting Thinning out of plantation Bunkers Shape & Form Size Visibility Style Severity Sand consistency Location

Greens Size Gradients Shape & Configuration Aspect, Drainage, Air Flow Surrounds & Landscape Integration Maintenance SUMMARY OF OBJECTIVES Golfer has a variety of ways to get the ball from tee to green Move hazards into positions where they impact on the line of play Greater definition through better hazard placement and fairway shaping More variety in Par 3 hole length Character preserved and enhanced Wherever possible course features designed and altered for playability and efficient maintenance

HOLE 1 ASHTREE PAR 4 383 YDS hazards should be placed with an object, and none should be made which has not some influence on the line of play to the hole Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

1. HOLE 1 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 1.1 GENERAL Hole 1 is a short straight Par 4 and a good opener to get golfers away and into their round. 1.2 TEES Teeing ground is ideally located, right in front of clubhouse windows, and with the small tee to the right removed and an extension front and back to the main tee this area would become an excellent platform from which to start one s round. 1.3 FAIRWAY The fairway is well-defined with mature trees lining each side of the fairway. The subtle narrowing of the fairway as it approaches the green gives the hole a good look. With the removal of the bunker front right a new approach hazard should be placed at 25yds short of the green surface. 1.4 BUNKERS Greenside bunkers poorly shaped and positioned. The bunker front right is hidden behind the tree with both restricting access around the 1 st green and to the 2 nd tee. The bunker should be removed and the area shaped to tie naturally into the green surrounds. Where the bunker is removed the area should be reshaped with a subtle hollow. The left greenside bunker is poorly shaped and overly large. Two or even three smaller hazards would better integrate into the green complex. 1.5 GREEN Opportunity to integrate the back of the green into surrounds and possibly extend the green surface back left to offer a new pin position.

1383yds PAR 4 HOLE 1 PROPOSED LAYOUT

HOLE 2 LODGE PAR 4 330YDS..You can no more eliminate luck in golf than cricket, and in neither case is it possible to punish every bad shot. If you succeeded you would only make both games uninteresting.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

2. HOLE 2 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 2.1 GENERAL Hole 2 is a short par 4 playing downhill and slightly left to right. Large copse of trees framing right edge of fairway in line from the tee to the green 2.2 TEES Little scope to change due to constrained location but a further ten yards could be added to provide a new championship tee. 2.3 FAIRWAY Landing areas well defined and good flowing shape to the fairway 2.4 BUNKERS The left fairway bunker is not visible from the tee and unnecessarily large. Right greenside bunker out of play due to large tree and removal may see the back right bunker busier due to right side appearing more open and hence safe side for golfer to play at. 2.5 GREEN The green is a traditional size and shape although not inherently Mackenzie as fairly uninteresting for a short par 4 hole. Some re-grading work to smooth out slopes between green and surrounds would help maintenance and improve consistency of lie.

2 330yds PAR 4 HOLE 2 PROPOSED LAYOUT

HOLE 3 COWGLEN PAR 4 373YDS..a bunker eating into a green is by far the most equitable way of giving a golfer full advantage for accurate play.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

3. HOLE 3 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 3.1 GENERAL Hole 3 is a medium length par 4 that doglegs left to right around a mature copse of trees. 3.2 TEES Medal should be enlarged sufficiently to allow for daily play. This could be achieved by slightly reducing its height whilst increasing its area with the material excavated. Reduced height would lead to softer banks and easier maintenance. There is also an opportunity for a new championship tee to be constructed adding as much as 65yds to the hole length if desired. 3.3 FAIRWAY Exaggerating existing curves would help to define landing areas further. 3.4 BUNKERS The fairway bunker on left side should be removed as it is not visible from the tee, is a poor shape, is poorly orientated, doesn t impact the line of play and is excessively large. A tighter greenside bunker setup would enhance the strategic element of the hole alongside the removal of the fairway bunker. 3.5 GREEN Front left bunker could be wrapped further along the front of the green to provide better integration into the green complex and influence the line of play. This will leave the golfer who plays safe left from the tee with a far more intimidating approach.

HOLE 4 TABLE PAR 4 378YDS..narrow fairways bordered by long grass make bad golfers.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

4. HOLE 4 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 GENERAL Hole 4 is a dogleg par 4 playing right to left to an elevated green that is well guarded by four bunkers 4.2 TEES Tee is a good size although the construction and finish could have been better to provide an immaculate uniform surface. There is an opportunity to create a championship tee back left. The yellow tee could be returned to its original position which would offer a more visible line down the fairway to the green without sacrificing a great deal of length. 4.3 FAIRWAY Fairway lacks definition especially with the green not being visible from the back tee. Moving the fairway further right and introducing a right hand fairway hazard to mark the turning point in the dogleg. 4.4 BUNKERS Left fairway bunker moved forward 20yds and new trap on right would give the golfer a decision to make on the tee as to how he plays the hole and increased visibility will allow a better judgement of the risks of that decision. 4.5 GREEN A traditional green shape in a natural elevated location. Some minor re-grading of transition areas between green and surrounds would allow better surface drainage and easier maintenance.

HOLE 5 HIPPENSTANES PAR 4 372YDS..It is an interesting fact that few hazards are of any interest which are out of what is known among medical men as the direct field of vision.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

5. HOLE 5 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 GENERAL Hole 5 is a straightaway par 4 with a well bunkered fairway. 5.2 TEES Tee would benefit from reconstruction to make one level area and minimise slopes. This would increase teeing area and improve maintenance. 5.3 FAIRWAY Fairway shaping is good and defines landing areas well. There is an opportunity to create an interesting feature by opening up the drain and creating an open ditch running along the right hand side of the fairway. 5.4 BUNKERS The fairway bunkers should be moved more into the line of play to influence shot selection and strategy. Existing approach bunkers should be retained and greenside bunkers could be brought further round to wrap the front of the green. 5.5 GREEN Greenside hazards could be integrated better into green to allow easier maintenance and improve visuals at green entrance

HOLE 6 DAMSHOT PAR 3 173YDS.. a hazard placed in the exact position a player would naturally go is frequently the most interesting situation, as then a special effort is needed to get over or avoid it.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

6. HOLE 6 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 GENERAL Well featured medium length par 3 6.2 TEES Restricted location prevents much alteration. Moving the medal tee to the lower level of the teeing area would shorten the hole without compromising any of the shot values to the green. This would also introduce a greater variety of length to Pollok s Par 3s. Trees should be managed to maintain and improve light conditions and air movement around the teeing area as much as possible. 6.3 FAIRWAY Nicely sized approach area for golfing looking to run the ball into the green. Rough left could be grown up to create a striking visual that would be complimented by the opening up of the ditch. Potential to become a signature hole. 6.4 BUNKERS Greenside bunkers could be reshaped to remove sharp edges and left hand bunkers brought slightly more into play by minor repositioning. 6.5 GREEN Extra area of green at front right may allow a future pin position

HOLE 7 LAWBUSH PAR 5 502YDS.. the course should be so interesting that even the plus man is constantly stimulated to improve his game in attempting shots he has hitherto been unable to play.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

7. HOLE 7 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 7.1 GENERAL Hole 7 is a medium/short par 5 playing uphill and doglegs slightly right to left. Plays more like a tough long par 4. 7.2 TEES Teeing area is a good size for par 5 hole and there is further opportunity to construct a championship tee at the rear to add extra length, up to 50yards if required. 7.3 FAIRWAY Wide fairway with good flowing shape that falls left to right against the dogleg. Ditch could be opened up at the start of the fairway to improve the visuals and add definition. 7.4 BUNKERS The existing fairway bunker configuration is poor and slightly penal as it is out of the direct line of play and will punish shots drifting against the dogleg that are already heading to a tough position. Fairway approach bunkers should be reconfigured to define more accurately the layup landing area. 7.5 GREEN Opportunity to push green back and create wetland feature feeding out of the copse of mature trees back right of the green. This would not only adding visually to the hole setting but also practically deal with some localised water issues. Opportunity to create a challenging and exciting looking par 5 without excessive length.

HOLE 8 WARREN PAR 4 386YDS..the course should have beautiful surroundings, and all the artificial features should have so natural an appearance that a stranger is unable to distinguish them from nature itself.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

8. HOLE 8 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 8.1 GENERAL Shortish par 4 played as right to left dogleg framed by mature woodland. 8.2 TEES Tee orientation does not point directly down the hole and should be rectified by mowing or minor rebuilding. New back tee (adding 20yds to the hole) could be created in small copse of trees to rear of existing medal tee with removal of around 5 small trees. 8.3 FAIRWAY Left hand side of fairway could be brought in from tree line as there are several areas where you can be on fairway but have no direct line to the green which will help cut down the mowing burden. 8.4 BUNKERS Closest fairway bunker should be moved forward to create a cluster of bunkers on right hand side that the golfer should risk running close to in order to get the best line to the green. 8.5 GREEN Approach left bunker is out of play and should be brought into line of play by moving it right. Visually this will create a little dead ground between the hazard and the green surface and create further distinction between the lines of play from either side of the fairway.

HOLE 9 HALFWAY PAR 4 428YDS..no hazard is unfair wherever it is placed.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

9. HOLE 9 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 9.1 GENERAL Straightaway par 4 played from an elevated tee position. 9.2 TEES Traditional platform tees and adequate size for long par 4. 9.3 FAIRWAY Wide and flat fairway lacks definition and not helped by hazards set do far from the line of play. 9.4 BUNKERS Fairway traps should be moved into the line of play to create clear strategy for the tee shot. Greenside hazards should integrate better into the green shape which will better protect and exaggerate different levels of pin position. 9.5 GREEN Good opportunity to enlarge the green back right to allow more pin space, larger target and a good pin position back right that will dictate to a good player he must find the fairway left or risk having to shape with a fade his second to get close.

HOLE 10 SUNK FENCE PAR 4 394YDS It is an important thing in golf to make holes look much more difficult than they are.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

10. HOLE 10 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 10.1 GENERAL Good looking straight par 4 well shaped and well defined hazards. One of the few holes where all the fairway hazards impact on the line of play. 10.2 TEES Tees could be merged into one much larger platform to ease maintenance and maintain a traditional start point for the hole. 10.3 FAIRWAY Good shape and landing areas well defined. 10.4 BUNKERS Some minor improvements could be made to remove straight edges and in general bunkers across the golf course could be made more into landforms so they stand out visually. 10.5 GREEN Nice natural green site protected by the ditch and bunkers. Little opportunity and little need for alteration as it is a constrained and busy site.

HOLE 11 CROOKSTON PAR 4 387YDS..it is a common error to cut the rough in straight lines.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

11. HOLE 11 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 11.1 GENERAL Hole 11 is a subtle dogleg right to left played to an elevated green. Fairway bordered by mature trees on left. 11.2 TEES Little scope for alteration as surrounded by other golf course features. New championship tee could be created which would increase the hole length by 45yards. 11.3 FAIRWAY The fairway narrows nicely toward the green and is shaped well around the woodland. 11.4 BUNKERS Fairway bunkers could have more impact if brought further into line of play. Right greenside bunker should move slightly left so it is not so directly behind the protecting tree. 11.5 GREEN Green is well framed by tree and bunkers. The opportunity exists to extend the green to the left which would create a further interesting pin position to be considered when placing one s tee shot.

HOLE 12 CORKERHILL PAR 3 167YDS..hummocks and hollows should be made of all sorts of different shapes and sizes.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

12. HOLE 12 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 12.1 GENERAL Downhill medium length par 3 played to a green that has surrounds which fall sharply away. 12.2 TEES Existing tees are small and should be enlarged to help spread wear and tear. A diagonal tee along the back fence would provide such extra space and a variety of playing angles without altering the length of the hole significantly. 12.3 FAIRWAY N/A 12.4 BUNKERS Transition between bunkers and green surface could be smoother to ease maintenance and playability. 12.5 GREEN Green shape is subtle and pins can be well defined by their placement close to either hazard.

HOLE 13 HAGGS VIEW PAR 4 355YDS..an ideal golf hole should provide an infinite variety of shots according to the various positions of the tee, the situation of the flag, the direction and strength of the wind etc.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

13. HOLE 13 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 13.1 GENERAL Hole 13 is a short par 4 dogleg that plays sharply right to left. Has the potential to be a great short par 4 but let down by poor bunkering, green size and green orientation. 13.2 TEES Teeing area was reconstructed recently and adequate size for par 4. 13.3 FAIRWAY Good shape that narrows toward the green turning sharply around the corner defined by a single bunker and treeline. 13.4 BUNKERS Fairway bunkers should be moved forward and into line of play for low handicap player. Greenside bunkers need urgent attention in terms of their shape and level and how that impacts on the performance of the green surface. 13.5 GREEN The poorest green on the golf course. Sharp slopes both sides and narrow shape leaves little strategy for pin positions and the surface in a poor condition. Green could be extended and reshaped to wrap the right hand hazard to add strategy and extra space to pin placements.

HOLE 14 RHANNAN PAR 4 400YDS..The chief object of every golf architect or greenkeeper worth his salt is to imitate the beauties of nature so closely as to make his work indistinguishable from nature itself.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

14. HOLE 14 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 14.1 GENERAL Hole 14 is a medium length par 4 around the river running right to left. Good looking hole but could be stunning of views of river could be opened up. 14.2 TEES Teeing area should be enlarged and scope to push tee further to right but would require sacrifice of temporary 13 th green. 14.3 FAIRWAY Fairway could be moved slightly right and narrowed in areas that are not defined as landing zones. 14.4 BUNKERS Fairway hazards should be moved forward to define turn in fairway and approach bunkers reshaped to improve and toughen up the look of the green entrance without increasing the playing difficulty. 14.5 GREEN The green should be extended back close to the ditch to increase length and interest.

HOLE 15 BRIDGE PAR 5 493YDS..when the elements obey the fundamental laws of balance, of harmony, and fine proportion they give rise to what we call beauty.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

15. HOLE 15 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 15.1 GENERAL Hole 15 is medium length par 5 playing uphill bounded by trees on right and river left. 15.2 TEES Tees would benefit from one long tee on one level surface for maintenance. Opportunity to the existing tee back and construct a new championship tee which would lengthen the hole by up to 50 yards 15.3 FAIRWAY Slopes right to left but lacks defining feature for tee shot. 15.4 BUNKERS Approach bunkers reshaped to define landing zone for 3-shot golfer and tighten up green for 2-shot player. 15.5 GREEN Bunkers could be integrated better into putting surface with smoother slopes and this could apply to the surrounds in general.

HOLE 16 DOWGATE PAR 4 329YDS..a good golf hole is like good music or good anything else; it is not necessarily a course which appeals the first time one plays over it, but one which grows on the player the more frequently he visits it.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

16. HOLE 16 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 16.1 GENERAL Hole 16 is an uphill short par 4 framed nicely by mature trees as it approaches the green. 16.2 TEES Teeing area could be enlarged slightly to provide more area and a new championship tee left of existing may providing an extra interesting teeing angle. 16.3 FAIRWAY Slight safety concern with the 4 th green and 5 th tee but in general the fairway flows well up to the green. 16.4 BUNKERS Additional hazards on the right side would help define the turning fairway and perhaps further protect the 4 th green 5 th tee. These should replace the existing bunker which is poorly orientated. 16.5 GREEN 16 th green is one of the best green sites on the golf course. Left hand slope from bunker could be softened to allow easier maintenance.

HOLE 17 AVENUE PAR 3 172YDS..people get more pleasure in doing a hole which looks almost impossible, and yet is not so difficult as it appears.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

17. HOLE 17 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 17.1 GENERAL New Design 17.2 TEES Has a large teeing platform so wear and tear should be easily spread day to day. 17.3 FAIRWAY Area to right of tee could be left to grow up further with wispy rough to add visually. Area short of approach bunker is slightly shallow in soil cover due to rock exposed during construction. Heavy topdressing with imported sand/soil may improve this if winter green is deemed a necessity. Roughs framing the fairway should be grown in to add enhanced definition. 17.4 BUNKERS Front approach bunker could allow for the sand higher up the face to increase visibility form the tee. 17.5 GREEN A large putting surface with slopes defining the pin areas and promoting good surface drainage.

HOLE 17 PROPOSED LAYOUT 17175yds PAR 3 HOLE 17 PROPOSED LAYOUT

HOLE 18 HOME PAR 4 396YDS..The course should be equally good during winter and summer, the texture of the greens and fairways should be perfect, and the approaches should have the same consistency as the greens.. Dr. A MacKenzie Golf Course Architecture (1920)

18. HOLE 18 ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 18.1 GENERAL The finishing hole is a medium length uphill par 4. 18.2 TEES Back tee is a bad design and should be merged within one long teeing area to serve the hole. 18.3 FAIRWAY Flowing shape looks interesting and fits well between the trees. Little feature to tee shot and a fairway bunker to the left would complete the visuals with the greenside bunker being front right. 18.4 BUNKERS Greenside bunkers could be tidied up by minor reshaping to get rid of straight edges and any sharp slopes. 18.5 GREEN There is little scope for movement and already contains some very nice subtle contouring. Minor alterations could transform this hole from slightly bland into strong finishing hole.