News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Patrick_Mucci

Are they used as substitute features when creativity is absent ?

How many great, totally man made water features are there ?

Jim Nugent

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #1 on: May 28, 2006, 08:33:02 AM »
Isn't the pond at ANGC 16 man-made?  Also the pond at 11 there?

While I don't consider 17 at TPC Sawgrass a great hole, many do, and I'm pretty sure the pond there is man-made.

How is an artificial water hazard different from most sand traps?  

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #2 on: May 28, 2006, 09:00:43 AM »
Patrick....on one side of the scale I feel their use defines great creativity combined with strategy.....while on the other side of the scale they are just the opposite......it really comes down to the skill level of the designer....and they are a great way to measure these skills.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2006, 09:05:13 AM by paul cowley »
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #3 on: May 28, 2006, 09:09:59 AM »
Patrick
The answer to your question is yes, they are crutch.

Eck,

Of course the ABSOLUTE answer is yes. Why would any designer think about provision of irrigation water when none exists on a property? Why would an architect provide a man made water feature even when the client stipulates a desire for one?

A crutch indeed.

Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Andy Troeger

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #4 on: May 28, 2006, 09:11:49 AM »
To me the "artificial" word is very important. I think that if you can tell the water feature is artificial and looks completely out of place, then it likely is a crutch.

If you cannot tell whether its natural or not, even if it is artificial, then I'd say its not. So I'd have to agree with Paul in that it depends on how well the architect is able to meld the feature in with the surrounds.

Obviously the strategy of it is important too, I'm kind of taking that as a given :)

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2006, 09:24:39 AM »
None...

The aquafer was realatively easy to drill a well into without exhorbatant depth. Same is true at the Mines. That doesn't make having a well feasable on every property.

And it doesn't address client desires either.

Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #6 on: May 28, 2006, 09:27:03 AM »
.....and when used to good effect they are a creative design tool that allows one to make up for a sites deficiencies.

...but this is can be taken to the extreme....adding ponds and waterfalls to St Andrews would be a good example of this.

....but then again, if we added a small pond and burn leading out from the Valley of Sin to toughen up 18........
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2006, 09:38:40 AM »
This "natural" water feature and bridge were put in so golfers would have a nice place to take photos  ;D



Here is the finishing hole at The European Club which most here know is a great golf course just south of Dublin, Ireland.  Some may find this feature suspect (I was a bit shocked) but the design overall is very solid.




Like any design feature, if incorporated tastefully and properly and NOT over used, water features have a place in golf.  Most purists will not go out of there way to build them, but water features can be incorporated into good design.  
« Last Edit: May 28, 2006, 09:39:54 AM by Mark_Fine »

TEPaul

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2006, 09:46:25 AM »
I remember an article in the Wall Street Journal (of all places) at least 25-30 years ago about golf architecture and featuring numerous quotes from Jack Nicklaus about how water features used on golf course projects enhance the look and value of residential development, they provide a good deal of the necessary fill for the basic shaping of the golf course and they provide the necessary water for the on-going irrigation of the golf course----sort of a win/win/win situation as outlined by that WSJ article.

25-30 years ago was in the middle of the Great American Modern Age of golf course architecture.  ;)
« Last Edit: May 28, 2006, 09:47:24 AM by TEPaul »

Ken Fry

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2006, 09:49:47 AM »
Nothing raises residential property value like a tasteful fountain....

Ken

Jim Nugent

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #10 on: May 28, 2006, 10:09:12 AM »

Jim Nugent
You've got be kidding me!!

A bunker is equivalent to a lake?? Do you normally play your ball out of the lake?? How many artifical lakes do you find on old links courses??

Patrick
The answer to your question is yes, they are crutch.

Eckstein -- my point is that nearly all bunkers are man-made.  They are artificial.  So if man-made water hazards are a crutch, why aren't man-made bunkers a crutch too?

I personally don't see why a man-made water hazard must be a crutch.  The question is, how does it work on that hole?  Suppose there was no Rae's Creek.  If they added a creek like that, shaped like that, with those contours, would it be a crutch?  

Which reminds me.  In those pictures we saw of early ANGC a month or so ago, there was no pond on 15.  It is man-made.  So we now have three holes at ANGC with artificial water hazards.  Do you think those hazards are a crutch?  From what you said before, the answer must be yes.  

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #11 on: May 28, 2006, 10:16:27 AM »
Even most courses with good wells need one lake of 3-5 acre size to store the irrigation water.  If you were designing a links course, then you could put it off the course somewhere, or on other styles, certainly one pond is not too many for most of us.

No one has mentioned drainage, but the reason so many florida courses have so much water is that they need drainage outlets and fill to raise fairways.  Since water flows downhill, on flat ground you need to provide a short run to a pond, plus raise the fw.  Ponds accomplish that.

Sometimes, ponds are required for flood detention as part of the development (doubling as a premium lot amenity) and/or environmentall filter.

So, to answer Pat's question, which is a nice conversation starter, they are sometimes a site required necessity.  Calling them a crutch ignores the basic reality of modern design and isn't really fair.  I  am sure that virtually every pond you see on a golf course fits one of those descriptions.  At least, in my work, I rarely recall adding more than the irrigation/fill source/drainage outlet/detention/filter ponds than is absolutely necessary, and I am pretty sure other gca are mostly the same way.  

In fact, I recall Old Tom Morris wrote the same thing in his memoirs...... ;)
« Last Edit: May 28, 2006, 10:17:26 AM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

TEPaul

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #12 on: May 28, 2006, 10:32:58 AM »
PaulC:

Is there any military or other interesting historical man-made water feature you're aware of that we can use to good and interesting effect on a golf course?

How about a really good copy of a Roman Aqueduct? If I can figure out how to use one on a golf hole will you build it?

How about a really cool old stone wishing well hazard feature on a a par 5 right at the "go/no go" zone?

Recently I've been reading the evolution of the Rules of Golf and I notice that there was once relief (with the awarding of a stroke to your opponent) for a ball in "watery filth".

I think we should recreate some really good "watery filth", don't you? It could be as easy as simply opening up parts of the club's septic system onto a few strategic parts of the golf course.

And I'm dying to do some really natural looking "Scholar's Holes" and "Soldier's Lines" on a golf course but first we need to figure out what the f... they were since to date apparently no historian can be sure.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2006, 10:34:33 AM by TEPaul »

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2006, 10:43:32 AM »
To follow up on Jeff's point on ponds being used for drainage as well as irrigation storage, Jerry Pate's design team has created a chain of lakes throughout Pensacola CC's new course -- it's a new course partially on the old routing for all intents and purposes -- to enhance the drainage which was terrible in the past.  The course was quite flat, only a few feet above the level of the nearby bay.  

Almost all the soil on site was excavated and turned, to get the sand on top and the accumulated muck underneath.  In addition, the lakes were dug out and that soil used to build up the fairways, which are now capped with the sand from underneath.  We have a new irrigation system.  The routing has been changed for the best, I think, with some strong new holes and there are now four good short par 4s where we had three in the past.  

Without the artificial lakes, this project would not work.  The lakes are being made as natural as possible, with sodded banks smoothly entering the water, no rip rap etc to break the lines, and no waterfalls except maybe the aerator sprayers.

Can't wait.  We open late fall.  I'm hoping to be able to invite GCAers for an early spring outing.

redanman

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2006, 10:50:45 AM »
Which is worse

A pond clearly in view

An affectatious area of very long dense grass similarly placed to said pond

What is nice on most links where one wanders off into the waist-high fescue, not being watered artificially one readily finds ones ball.  The pond?  You know that you're in.  Faux "links" wiht watered dense kne high grass ... hmmm

Water a crutch?  How about trees creating three dimensional obstacles?

Is the defining quality of the quality a hazard:
Does it foster slow play?

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2006, 11:04:14 AM »
TomP.....g :) :)d p ;)st!....you are a visionary and I look forward to combining talents someday soon!

....and to partially answer your question, yes, I have successfully incorporated moats [both dry and water filled] as part of the strategies for the first, second and eighteenth holes at the Patriot.......with the eighteenth being by far the most dramatic as your final approach shots must clear a 20 yd sunken moat that sits at the base of a 40' high rampart where the green is nestled in amongst the ruins of what once were barracks......they just had the Open qualifier there, not sure how the course survived the assault.
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2006, 11:09:19 AM »
Glad Mark posted The European Club's odd, but interesting, 18th.

The Burn at Carnoustie is an example of an artificial water hazard which works to make the golfer think beyond the tradfitional.

Crutch? I suppose it can be argued that a great many water hazards are forced or done without much thought. But, that hardly makes the entire pot of water hazards — past and future — worthless. In fact, the very question should motivate us to make them better and more fun.

The crux of the water hazard (one with realy depth and water) is the "watery grave" psychology. It is the fear of the deep that strikes terror in the mind of the golfer, making him/her play farther away that if just sand or broken ground. Only the daring and bold will play near water. This makes water a terrific hazard when used appropriately and with thought.
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #17 on: May 28, 2006, 12:26:26 PM »
There are ponds and artificial water hazards, and then there are gaudy 'disneyland' designs that go way beyond the need to impound some water for irrigation, obtain fill to shape features, get some drainage outlets, and provide interesting strategic features.

ANGC needed the water ponds for most of the above reasons.  Yet, they didn't stick water world features to make attractive spray fountains, endless horizon pools and water falls, etc.  

Ponds are a necessity and can be a designers friend if done tastefully.  Then, the question is what do you have to do to maintain them without them becoming a fetid rotting scum hole.  That is where water movement and circulation and algae supressant additives come into play and can lead to spray fountains, etc.  It is a fine line of design from waterworld to lovely setting.
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2006, 12:31:13 PM »
From a maintenance point of view the posiative side of water is you don't have to mow it and you can't stimp it. I personally feel if it isn't there naturally then don'r work against nature. However, for some strange reason many golfers seem to love the stuff.

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #19 on: May 28, 2006, 12:43:49 PM »
The Burn at Carnoustie is an example of an artificial water hazard which works to make the golfer think beyond the tradfitional.

Yes, those Scots planned and dug that trench of a burn because they thought it was going to look good and fearful....They even painstakingly took out the proper permitting with city hall and all of the local environmental agencies when they did it.....

Sometimes a sewer is just that, a sewer.......

RT

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #20 on: May 28, 2006, 12:50:52 PM »
Forrest,

Are you talking about the burn on 17,18 at Carnoustie Championship Course being man-made?

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #21 on: May 28, 2006, 01:21:43 PM »
Yes, The Barry Burn. It also comes into play at the 10th.
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Tommy_Naccarato

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #22 on: May 28, 2006, 01:26:56 PM »
Forrest,
I can see that the drug problem has reached epidemic levels in Phoenix.

Just say NO!

(Please, if you could, show us your evidence that it is entirely artificial so I can eat crow, which isn't on my diet plan. My bet is that I will be eating steak at the Omaha Steak House on my next visit!)

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #23 on: May 28, 2006, 01:32:15 PM »
If you think the current alignment of Barry Burn is the pure work of nature, then it confirms any mental diagnosis henceforth given.

Braid certainly was among those responsibel for significant altering of the great "sewer", but I will venture to say that he was not alone. Oakmont's ditches — another example — are no more "natural" than Carnoustie's great burn. Both examples were manipulations to benefit golf and make the play more interesting.

The alternative to a creative alignment of Barry Burn would be to pipe it and allow the holes to rely on other — or no — hazards.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2006, 01:33:29 PM by Forrest Richardson »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Ryan Farrow

Re:Are artificial water features an architectural crutch ?
« Reply #24 on: May 28, 2006, 01:55:12 PM »
If you have visited Oakmont lately you can see how much the ditches have come alive. They really fit the course well. But I couldn't imagine the same when all those trees were around.