Golf course architecture might be an art, but frequently, the architects wind up having to be pragmatists. So it was 20 years ago in New Orleans, when Iowa native and Atlanta-based golf course designer Denis Griffiths pitched an unconventional idea to rehabilitate the eyesore into which historic Audubon Park Golf Course had devolved. During an era when equipment technology was exploding and golf course developers were chasing more and more length, Griffiths lobbied for Audubon Park to embrace a short course: an 18-hole design with 12 par-3s to fit inside the park’s tight boundaries. Just as importantly, Griffiths sought a course that felt like it belonged in its location — as Griffiths puts it, a course that was “sympathetic to its surroundings.” There was resistance, but slowly, that resistance gave way to reason. After a lot of teeth-gnashing, Griffiths’ new design opened in 2002 and has since become the object of widespread acclaim: an affordable, well maintained short course in an urban setting — and a model for cities reconsidering their municipal golf programs.
. . .
LYING FOUR: Take me back to the time before your renovation at Audubon Park. What did the golf course look like back then?
DENIS GRIFFITHS: Probably the best terminology that I could come up with be that it was a worn out municipal golf course that had lacked any attention for years, as far as maintenance and upkeep. There was lack of grass and turf. It was dangerous to play; it was a war zone out there. The fourth hole had two oaks that you had to play over or under off the tee. They were probably 170 yards out, and they totally blocked the hole. So people would play into the fifth fairway to go around them. Fortunately, that’s what drove the decision for Audubon to do something — it had become a detraction from the rest of their facilities. And in a time when golf was booming, they were struggling for play and really were an eyesore for the zoo and the surrounding park. So it was badly in need of a facelift. That’s how they initially approached it: they had an expert with feasibility studies help them determine, especially with that location, that there was a market. But on 81 acres, how did they come back and get the market that had gone other places because Audubon was such a poor experience? They wanted the experience to be memorable, and they thought that they would do it with a landscape component — a golf course that literally played through gardens. We had to be very careful at our presentation how we addressed that, but it was an interesting concept.
LYING FOUR: The design itself is probably still a little revolutionary, but at least in today’s world, you wouldn’t get laughed out of the room. But back in 2002 — when everybody was building for more and more distance — an 18-hole, 4,200-yard design was really revolutionary. How did you settle on that design?
DENIS GRIFFITHS: It wasn’t a comfortable presentation. At that juncture — I say “at that juncture,” but shoot, probably for my lifetime in the business — if somebody isn’t looking for a less-than-regulation golf course, it’s a very difficult sell. When we initially addressed the property and started looking at the limitations — the 81 acres, the mandate to keep all the healthy oak trees, the jogging path surrounding the perimeter, and safety issues — it was very apparent that a regulation-length golf course would not fit on their property. It just wouldn’t fit. Using safety as our No. 1 driver in the redesign — and losing yardage as a result — we just advocated that it had to be less than regulation length. Back in 1974, we were doing the first golf course at Kiawah Island; Gary Player was part of our team at that point. It’s now called Cougar Point; Gary has remodeled it once or twice. Our client was Charles Fraser at Hilton Head Plantation, and their golf director was adamant that we go to Kiawah and do a short golf course, for lots of good reasons: for resort play, time to play, getting more people around, and it would cost less to construct and maintain. So we did considerable research back in the early 1970s, and traveled to several places to look at what they’d done. Back then, the terminology was “executive.” So we came up with a design, and we were halfway through construction when the marketing team came back and said, “We can’t sell it.” And during construction, we actually got it back to a par-69, par-70 — and obviously, Kiawah went on to have a pretty good history. That was really our first dabbling in less-than-regulation and what the potential ramifications were. Through the years, we had done par-3s — we’d done a facility here in Atlanta that was a short regulation course, but they were more interested in having a good par-3 and a range with it, and they saw success. So for us, going that direction was easy. For the client and the club members, it was very painful. We were pretty confident that when we started talking about time of play, difficulty, their market, and what they were trying to achieve — three and a half hours in a park facility — it was a perfect fit, because there were no facilities like that in the area. When you included the landscaping and park component, it really dug more into that acreage — a lot of people playing that golf course for the park experience only play a couple of times a year. So it became a good fit for the Audubon Institute very quickly; not so much for the Audubon club members. And that has historically been the issue for shorter golf courses: there is this perception that it is a lesser experience. And it’s been really exciting through the years to see Audubon receive its acclaim being less than a par 72. We were doing a project in Colorado at the same time called the Homestead, where we’d previously completed 27 holes in 1995, and the Homestead wanted an alternative experience to complement the existing Fox Hollow Golf Course. So in 2000, we were actually doing two shorter golf courses: Audubon, and Homestead’s par-65, 5,048 yards, which has been extremely successful — they’ve played 40,000 round per year since the day they opened, through the downturn, and still do. One of the curious parts is that Homestead and Fox Hollow aren’t a mile and a half apart, but the Homestead — the short course — started digging into some of their play at the regulation course, which they never anticipated. As we talk about this type of golf course, I truly believe it is maybe not the answer, but it’s certainly an opportunity to a lot of the challenges that we see in golf: quicker to play, friendly to more players, less costly to build and take care of. There’s lots of answers there. But we still struggle with the connotations and perceptions that come with less than par-70 golf courses.
LYING FOUR: Do you sense that the pendulum is starting to swing on that, though?
DENIS GRIFFITHS: I think so. You still don’t see a whole lot of ink on it at standalone facilities. You see a couple of par-3s adjacent to larger golf complexes, and we’ve always felt that was a good solution, because this is an alternative.
LYING FOUR: One of the things I love most about Audubon Park is how perfectly it captures the spirit of that neighborhood. Is that something you can plan for, or does it have to come together on its own?
DENIS GRIFFITHS: It’s usually out of your hands. The fit at Audubon was so compact — the walking path is so integral to the golf course — that we could see it from Day 1. You’re out there on the golf course, and everybody — whether they want to be or not — are intermingled. And it’s neat when you’re out there and there’s a lady pushing her stroller, and three guys go jogging by. It’s a great feeling.
LYING FOUR: So how’d you get into golf course design?
DENIS GRIFFITHS: Graduated as a landscape architect back a few years ago — 1970. When I got out of school, it was the job available in Atlanta. There weren’t many. I had no idea that it would be golf course architecture, but being from Iowa, I pretty much knew that it wouldn’t be in Iowa. So I moved to Atlanta and went to work for the firm of Davis Kirby and Player. Ron Kirby was a Robert Trent Jones alumnus, and Arthur Davis was a University of Georgia boy who worked for Willard Byrd; and obviously, Gary Player. Been there ever since.
LYING FOUR: What are the most notable ways in which the business has changed since you got into it?
DENIS GRIFFITHS: The way you phrased that is interesting, because you said “the business.” I’ve always said that I have the best job in the world. In 1970, having one of the neatest jobs you could ever have — working in nature and building something for recreation, and in the sport that probably has the most integrity of any sport — it was pretty doggone special. But there wasn’t much noise, if you may, about golf course architecture. Golf courses were being built; the Tour, obviously, was growing, and there were some classic names still in the game. We got through the Seventies and early Eighties, watching the economy drive golf course development in the U.S., watching a growth of golf development and opportunities in golf design and golf construction that we may never see again. Golf architects were put on a pretty incredible pedestal — maybe more so than their projects. That’s kind of the American way, in a lot of ways. I don’t know if it’s good or bad that we were part of that movement. Hopefully now we’re seeing more of a transition back to why we’re here: the value and sense of how special a lot of these projects are. We certainly hear to the contrary from some. But what a neat way to create a facility that is sustainable and provides a way of protecting that land for a long time, and provides a venue to get out and enjoy the game, the property, and nature.
LYING FOUR: And at Audubon, the way it all comes together feels almost like something you’d see in Scotland, where the golf course is truly woven into the city. I don’t know that I’ve seen it done anywhere in the States as well as it’s done at Audubon.
DENIS GRIFFITHS: And we were fortunate to start with that, but you’re right. That ambiance can be seen in many places where there are older facilities that have the location and the tight-knit surroundings — especially if you have a park and zoo nearby, and streetcars going by. It’s a pretty special spot.
LYING FOUR: Obviously, at a course like Audubon Park, some of your design principles are dictated: you had finite boundaries and a finite amount of ground to work with. But if you have a site where those limits don’t exist, what sorts of principles are you trying to adhere to when you create a new design?
DENIS GRIFFITHS: At the end of the day, you’re trying to create a memorable experience. There are many ways that we get there, but historically, we’ve tried to do that with the variety of holes. I’ve always said that if you can have the player look back and remember each golf hole, and what the opportunity and challenge meant, then you’ve done what you set out to do. That’s pretty hard to do. Even if they remember four or five of them, that’s an accomplishment. The other principles that I’ve tried to pursue are surprise, being challenged by the unexpected, unexpected rewards — not feeling like you’re beaten up — and being memorable. Memorable has so much to do with the site and surroundings, and how the golf course is intertwined with them. Audubon is a perfect example: we don’t have any oceans or mountains, but there are a lot of aspects — even though they’re manmade — that are special. If we can get half those elements in that experience, then we’ve achieved what we hoped to achieve. You talked about maybe what some of the transitions in our philosophies were, and certainly, the adventure part of it — and probably moving challenge down the list — adventure has grown since the mid-1990s, and challenge certainly has moved down the list quite a ways. There’s a better understanding of who we’re trying to challenge, and that most players don’t need significant challenges because of the difficulty of the game. Those that have mastered the game, if there is such a thing — it’s pretty hard for us to challenge them day in and day out. So we try to respect the majority of golfers on the golf course.
LYING FOUR: I’m glad you mentioned variety, because one of my favorite parts of Audubon Park is how varied the par-3s are. One is under a hundred yards, another is over 200 yards; and then you’ve got everything in between. On some them, you can be aggressive; on others, getting aggressive can hurt you. There’s a lot of variety baked into them.
DENIS GRIFFITHS: The par-3s are the main context of the golf course, because of its distance. We literally set up a matrix, and we said, “OK, if we can, we need to try to get to 12 different lengths of par-3s.” It’s pretty hard to get more than a 10-yard differential, but I think we mostly did that. The other thing that we try to do in all our designs is focus on direction of play — making sure that, hopefully, we visit each direction of play and get into the 45-degree quadrants rather than the 90-degree quadrants. Then there was the visual aspect of each of the holes: that it was different. We tried to do a considerable amount with perception, more so for the average player — because on par-3s, they tend to dial in on distance more than what they’re looking at. That’s why maybe a third of those par-3s have bunkers that, for most, are out of play; on several of those holes, you stand on the tee and the bunker looks like it’s fronting the green, but actually if you hit the ball a hundred yards and carry the bunker, you’ve got another 40 or 50 yards where you can roll it on. But I’m glad you said that, because strategy and variety were probably the most difficult aspects that we dealt with at Audubon.
LYING FOUR: It’s such a good example of what golf development should look like this century.
DENIS GRIFFITHS: This one is near and dear to our hearts. I’ve used this when we’ve pursued work quite a few times. If you haven’t been there, most people still grab at, “Well, it isn’t a par-72!”
LYING FOUR: But that’s so important, especially for municipalities. I have to believe that if municipal golf is going to continue being a thing over the next 50 years, more and more municipal golf courses are going to have to look more like Audubon Park. There was a period of time where municipalities tried to compete with 7,200-yard, par-72 golf courses, and for a variety of reasons, it didn’t work. You’ve gotta be unique. And that’s what I love about Audubon: it’s unique.
DENIS GRIFFITHS: Hopefully they keep up their initial mandate of maintenance and quality, because that’s their key to survival. They’ve got the bones of the golf course they need. A few tweaks here and there — and that’s the nature of the evolution of golf courses — and they’ve got a good direction to go. There are a lot of facilities that can’t say that.
. . .
You might also enjoy reading…