[Jaeger Kovich]

Played my first landfill course today and was pleasantly surprised over the quality of turf conditions, the imagination and creativity of the shaping, the attention to the routing (remember it was all flat at once), and overall experience which leads me to believe that landfills will definitely have their place in the future of golf.

[archie_struthers]

 

not real fascinated with landfill architecture, much more fun to look at old quarries or pits to build in or around...piling up or on tends to create artiificial shapes , almost without exception ...think Loxahatchee  ... the costs , as discussed , are astronomical to build , and typically are the bastion of public funded enterprises , run by politicos , not paying their fair share of taxes and putting real citizens businesses in danger , as they have no need to make a profit ..  

most of the architecture tends on landfills isn't real exciting for reasons stated by Mssrs. Doak et al   

[Tom_Doak]

Paul C:

Lido was not "all fill" ... it was a flat site, but there was no garbage underneath, and Raynor (on Macdonald's behalf) created some big pond areas where he wanted to, primarily on the Channel hole.  To me that's different from a "landfill" where most of it is 30-50 feet in the air on top of a pile.

As suggested above, if you could get the landfill operator to PLACE the material as you wanted for years in advance, you could build something terrific ... but that's not usually when they call a golf course architect.

Tell you what, I'll refer all of our landfill calls to you if you refer all your seaside calls to us ... you will probably get more work that way than I do, but I don't mind.

[TEPaul]

Macdonald stated that part of the 115 acres used for The Lido course was initially underwater. He stated that "groins" were built and that 2,000,000 cubic yards of sand was pumped onto the site (dredged from existing channels). On top of that were laid 15"x 30" blocks of meadow bog on top of which was placed more meadow bog muck and top soil. All of this was formed into any particular shapes and formations for holes and fairways, greens and such he felt like conceiving of. He also stated that he initially refused to get involved but was convinced to do it when he was told this was his opportunity to create anything he wanted or had wanted to do (but couldn't previously) with no limitations (apparently due to no pre-existing land formation limitations of obstacles)----a blank canvas opportunity, as it were.

I guess what Macdonald did with The Lido could be looked at almost as the opposite of an existing landfill since it appears Macdonald took so much of his fill (sand) from what was preconstruction underwater. It was quite the massive dredge and sluice operation as a first step, in other words.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Peter,
I don't mean to divert your thread, but I disagree with this statement: ...."the thrifty old Scots a couple of hundred years ago didn't choose linksland because it was great for golf, they chose it because it wasn't much good for anything else, and certainly not for anything of importance, like growing food for example"....

They chose linksland because it was great land for golf, there is no historical precedent or comparison.

[TEPaul]

And I disagree with you Jim Kennedy as I believe most of the best history of golf does. I think PeterP is exactly right about some of the original links sites basically being available to the original golfers (and other recreators) pretty much by default for a number of interesting but somewhat interrelated reasons that involved such things as natural soils unconducive to farming and such!

[Jim_Kennedy]

TEPaul,

Because the land wasn't much good for anything else but grazing it made great land for golf. If not for this ideal situation the game would probably have never evolved. You surely weren't going to play 'golf' on any healthy, verdant areas, were you?

[Jud_T]

not unless you wanted to grow a bunch of tree lined corridors, put up several dozen corporate hospitalitty tents, park about 5000 cars, put up TV towers, and host a bunch of boring grinders...that or you went to the university of illinois 

[Ian Larson]

While I was working for Eric Bergstol at Empire Golf we were finishing up Hollow Brook in Westchester and he sent me down to Bayonne to work with the one shaper on site with excavating methane and drainage lines as well as rough grading dredge as it came in from the harbor. We were the only 2 golf guys on site as a huge capping operation had been underway for several years at that point. Eric had been working with Cherokee, the capping contractor, for those several years overlooking how the garbage was brought in and dumped. He basically rough shaped Bayonne initially with the garbage and capped that shape with how he routed the course.

Two funny stories from Bayonne...

I thought I was going to get some cement shoes and taken for a dip in the harbor one day when the other shaper and I couldn't keep up with grading dredge and coordinating where demolition debris was being brought in and dumped by a carting company. I called off any more demolition debris to be hauled in for a day and an hour later ( no kidding ), a jaguar with what looked like the cast of The Sopranos showed up and expressed their displeasure in delaying their carting business....

As I was excavating methane lines and methane wells I had hit a spike of garbage with the excavator ( happens often ), so I jumped out to go down into the line and carefully shovel back some dredge over the garbage. As I was shoveling I noticed a New York Post with a picture of the NewYork Rangers celebrating with the Stanley Cup. It was from like 1975 when they won it all and it was in perfect condition. Still have it to this day, might try out Ebay...

[TEPaul]

Ian:

A bunch of guys who looked like the cast of Soprano in a JAGUAR?!? It's a good thing Tony didn't see that or he probably woulda had 'em all whacked right there in your landfill. Those guys aren't supposed to drive cars like that that call attention to the occupants----the best they should hope to drive is like a Lincoln SUV somewhat like Tony's but a Ford Explorer would probably be safer.

[Jud_T]

don't underestimate the "bulletproof glass" option on the jag!

[Peter Pallotta]

Jim K -

What I meant is that I believe much of what we love about the game of golf (the playing of it, and its great courses) developed out of that original choice, not that it was the basis for that choice.  What architects like CBM at the National in the 1910s and Tom D at Old Macdonald in the 2010s (and dozens of others of the years) try to capture is the ethos and spirit of great golf course architecture; but I don't believe the earliest Scots already had, pre-existing in the minds, a conscious idea/ideal about that ethos and spirit. In other words, I believe our awareness of and appreciation for the greatness of linksland as a field of play developed because the thrifty Scots made that choice, not that it was somehow pre-determined or a matter of pre-destination.  I just can't convince myself that those who first played and/or worked on the Prestwicks and Old Courses of the world allowed themselves to be that precious about the game, i.e. I can't believe they would've insisted that a game of all things needed to be played on a specific kind of land.  Instead, they picked the linksland because it was available to them, and then over the years made the very best out of it and slowy came to understand and appreciate its value.  

Peter

PS - Ian L, thanks much for that post.

[Jim_Kennedy]

PP,
That's where I disagree, I don't think they chose the linksland because it was available, they chose it because it suited the pursuit they just dreamed up, i.e., smacking a rock with a stick. How you going to find a small rock in tall grass? Golf may never have been 'invented' if it wasn't for the linksland.

[Jud_T]

I'm firmly with PP on this one...

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jud,
Good for you, it's nice to be with someone.

The precursor to golf was played in town squares or in the streets or on the ice in the winter. It's been surmised that the game was played by seafarers when they got off the ships in the seaports of Scotland, perhaps ST. Andrews, on the same linksland we're talking about.

So I'm saying this, the land suited the game, it wasn't just 'available' to them. You could not play golf on anything other than linkslands, streets, town squares, or ice covered rivers because there was no way to maintain verdant land.

[Steve Lang]

  Ian, 

One of my old profs at UC , Riley Kinman, actually buried stuff and dug it up later to establish decay rates in landfills.. if there's no moisture let in, bio growth/degradation doesn't occur.. 25+ year old hot dogs & papers not unusual in "modern" landfills since groundwater protection designs went into effect post summer of 1976..

beware of links looking target golf

[Michael Huber]

Bayonne and Whistling Straits are probably the two most well known dumpy sites turned golf courses in the States.  The intent for both of these courses was to recreate a links course from dead sites.  Why do you think the architects/developers decided to imitate a links course instead of a parkland course? 

[Tom_Doak]

A.  Because you can't plant trees on top of a landfill.  The root growth might eventually compromise the liner for the landfill, so it's verboten.

Nearly all modern "links" courses have taken that style because courses are built on barren sites, and developers do not have the patience to wait for trees to mature.

[TEPaul]

"A.  Because you can't plant trees on top of a landfill.  The root growth might eventually compromise the liner for the landfill, so it's verboten."

TomD:

Very good point. That is something I've never heard before and I doubt it ever would've occured to me! I bet it's the same for most on here and elsewhere. What do you suppose would happen (from some regulatory agency) if one of these landfill course owners or operators tried to plant lots of trees anyway?

[paul cowley]

A.  Because you can't plant trees on top of a landfill.  The root growth might eventually compromise the liner for the landfill, so it's verboten.

Nearly all modern "links" courses have taken that style because courses are built on barren sites, and developers do not have the patience to wait for trees to mature.

Not to be a contrarian....but if I am ever lucky enough to be able to build on a landfill, and I feel the site needs a tree or two....then I would plant them in a fill area that would be deeper than the root zone depth of whatever I was planting.

My basic requirements for a landfill site would be approximately 120 acres of land with slopes of 5% or less, to which I would budget 4 to 5' of additional fill for features and shaping in these areas....and then budget an additional 2' over the balance of the land that would be needed to hold the course together....probably a minimum of 20 to 40 acres.

If the existing site's slopes were greater, or didn't contain this acreage...then I would have to budget more fill to create enough flat areas for golf.

Id even use moored together and anchored garbage barges for island greens or island areas...especially if they were needed to make the routing something really special!

[Ian Larson]

I could swear Santa Clara Golf and Tennis has trees all over it...

[Kalen Braley]

I could swear Santa Clara Golf and Tennis has trees all over it...

So does the old Tony Lema course.....Monarch Bay. (Although I haven't played it post-renovation, so maybe they are gone now!)

[paul cowley]

Btw....the soil calcs for my previous post would be approximately 750,000 cu yds of fill to create a minimalist blank canvas.

I'm beginning to think that everything is a relatively blank canvas.

[Steve Lang]

 

Landfills for inerts like construction debris (concrete, rubble etc.) are certainly different animals than those for municipal solid waste and hazardous wastes..  

The Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) (P.L. 89-272, 79 Stat. 992) became law on October 20, 1965. In its original form, it was a broad attempt to address the solid waste problems confronting the nation through a series of research projects, investigations, experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies. The decade following its passage revealed that the SWDA was not sufficiently structured to resolve the growing mountain of waste disposal issues facing the country. As a result, significant amendments were made to the act with the passage of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), which became law on October 21, 1976. The SWDA as amended in 1976 is more commonly known as the RCRA and since then referred to as Subtitle D of RCRA  

RCRA Section 4001 of Subtitle D outlines primary goals of the Act, which are:
- Promote environmentally sound disposal methods
- Maximize the reuse of recoverable resources
- Foster resource conservation

Subtitle D Regulates:
- Garbage also known as municipal solid waste (e.g., milk cartons and coffee grounds)
- Refuse (e.g., metal scrap, wall board, and empty containers)
- Sludges from waste treatment plants, water supply treatment plants, or pollution control facilities (e.g., scrubber slags)
- Nonhazardous industrial wastes (e.g.,manufacturing process wastewaters and nonwastewater sludges and solids)
- Other discarded materials, including solid, semisolid, liquid, or contained gaseous materials resulting from industrial and commercial activities, (e.g., mining waste, oil and gas waste, construction and demolition debris, medical waste, agricultural waste, household hazardous waste,* and Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Waste).

There were a lot of folks who stopped their landfilling operations in the summer/fall of 1976 so they wouldn't be subject to the new Subtitle D requriements, including closure plans and 30 year post closure plans

If landfill closure plans or post-closure plans are violated, fines can be up to $27,500 per day per violation.  30-yr Post closure plans and what happens in year 31iare addressed in the following referenced doc if anyone want some further reading.

http://www.gfredlee.com/Landfills/LFoverviewMSW.pdf

[Michael Huber]

A.  Because you can't plant trees on top of a landfill.  The root growth might eventually compromise the liner for the landfill, so it's verboten.

Nearly all modern "links" courses have taken that style because courses are built on barren sites, and developers do not have the patience to wait for trees to mature.

Tom,

Thanks for nothing.  I was going to prepare a diatribe about how the oft maligned "Joe Sixpack Golfer" really deep downinside prefer the links feel over trees and target golf and such.  I had it all planned out and ready to make a point that our collective attitude on GCA does not give enough credit to the tastes of the average golfer.  Instead, you bring up some legitimate points about the why trees won't even grow on landfills.   Now I have no point to my qusetion.  What a bummer.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()