[Niall C]

ah but Jim, you have to remember that Mark's course in the UK and over here "amateurs" have always been keenly involved in golf course architecture.

Niall

[Kalen Braley]

The tech industry has been getting outsourced for 15 years now, but few people have issues with that.

Ever wonder why those apps crash so much,  or those PCs fall apart after 2 years... 

[Jim_Kennedy]

Kalen,
Don't feel slighted, there was an incredibly long list of occupations to draw from.   

Niall,
We gave that up long ago in favor of celebrity participation. 

[Tim Nugent]

True, and by bestowing ROYAL statue to courses, did that begin the era.  Could be the first Signature courses

[Adrian_Stiff]

Whilst this is hypothetical I would imagine the club would ask for invitations if it was more serious. I have done this sort of work for several clubs already but more local. Fees would be more or less depending on how much new construction would be required, this sort of work typically does rake in millions in the UK. I should probably add that my re-route involves just 2 new greens athough there is another that would be better moved and 4 new tees and the course could fairly easiy be played whilst the construction is underway which is very important. I would say my fee would be about £10,000 that would involve a few days on site and would include the construction drawings. What would other architects charge?

[Carl Rogers]

In the world of buildings, a lot of EVERBODY'S think they are an architect, part of the reason why the clubhouse is such a neglected building type.  The freebie sketch .............

Among the many issues that the course in question raises, the question I would ask what range of possibilities are on the table... to name one the location of the clubhouse and the relationship to the practice range???

[Tim Nugent]

Adrain, I just completed a report for a course that is having a boundary road widen to 4 lanes.  The impact was 4 new greens, 2 shifted fairways, 1 new tee tee complex and 2 additional tees and an 1,800 lf water course (open channel crossing 5 holes) to convey the storm water.  The cost to prepare the report was around $10k, the arch. est was just shy of $1m. If the work was done in-house, a design/build fee of around $75k would be in order.  If plans/specs/bid package & con. mgmt for an outside contractor, probably closer to $100k.

[Ben Stephens]

Dear All,

As Mark says that this is a 'hypothetical' exercise - I am disappointed that people are more interested in trying to get the job where there isnt any! as there is a recession and many golf clubs are struggling financially. I would say get back to the point and challenge yourself on this interesting exercise. Do some quick sketches and we could have a GCA critique of each person's idea. This for me is like going back to university on my architecture course as each student comes up with a different design idea which makes the exercise/study more interesting.

I have done two more layouts - the first is a tweak of the current layout after discussions with James Boon which moves a number of fairways as we have moved 7,8 and 9 away from the road which has a knock on effect on other holes meaning a number of fairways have moved towards East. We have relocated the 1st tee and 18th greens to eliminate the crossover issue. This change would involve a major tree cutting/planting program which could be very disruptive to everyday play on the course.



My criticism is that this layout is trying to keep the current course with short cut tweaking which could not really improve the course and also makes playing corridors narower!

I would try and 18 holes in play - changing the layout at times until the final 18 is produced - ie temporary greens over a short period of time. The second will follow.......

Cheers
Ben

[Ben Stephens]

Also 10 fairways are proposed to be modified - £££££££££££££££££

[Ben Stephens]

Here is the second option - Mike Clayton's work at Royal Queensland comes to mind - a complete renovation taking the course and club into the 21st century creating a new course as Marks layout plans shows that the club has evolved over time as the game of golf has evolved. Golfers are hitting the ball further and more wayward and we live in a Health and Safety bureaucratic world with a number of new laws that makes golf clubs more liable to damages etc etc.



This new layout has additional land and holes 7,8 and 9 are removed with a new driving range and practice facility across the road. Some of the land is given back to farming to allow for a better layout - I would recommend 2 loops of 9 as it is better commercially and for the senior golfers who only want to play 9 holes at a time.

The playing corridors are more spaced out and the holes go in many different directions (the advantage of having more land) rather than trying to squeeze everything in!

There is less tree removal as in the previous option but there is more land and the new holes can be built without disrupting the current course and 18 holes is kept in play at all times which keeps the club going.

I enjoy drawing many different layouts as it gives you more possibilities the crunch time is going on the site and finding the best locations for holes and greens etc.

The cheapest option of all is to put a high level fence in the areas where the ball is more likely to go on the road.

Cheers
Ben

[Ben Stephens]

Tom, As it is an imaginary exercise, just to give fun to those of us like me who haven't a clue what real golf course architecture involves, I don't think we'll do you out of your fees. But, as Adrian says, there will be a lot of this sort of work around in the UK. I'm sure a lot of it will be carried out 'in house' and that much of it will be very average - quite possibly the course is already no more than average - but there will be clubs which recognise the vision that professional architects can bring to problem solving.

I have a parallel for you. In the current economic climate few people are moving out of our densely populated suburb, preferring to extend their house. Some are doing it themselves, some get in builders who simply add bits onto the house. We got in an architect. We had some ideas of what we wanted, but he talked to us about our lifestyle, how we used the house (we both work from home), and so on. He went away and came back with the most imaginative way of extending and we now have a number of really interesting and successful rooms that we could never have dreamed of. Yes, he cost money, but the ingenuity of his design meant that the finished project was no dearer than if we had not used him. 

Many of the better clubs/courses around here retain an architect on a consultative basis. Any major alteration work of this kind is going to be put out to tender. Wilmslow takes professional advice on all matters of greenkeeping and there is a winter programme in train at the moment including tree and undergrowth removal. It's not being done in a haphazard fashion. The consultant has drawn up the scheme for tree removal very precisely - some of it to to allow for my slice! As the average age of that wood is considerable it is clear that many of these trees will come to the end of their lives at the same time. A programme of appropriate regeneration is under way.

Mark - I am currently working a a number of projects similar to your story above - this is one of the perks of being an architect! Thanks for the great advert - If anyone on GCA need an RIBA qualified/ARB registered architect to design an extension for their house or golf clubhouse let me know

Cheers
Ben

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,

I think your comment about the client making all the money in this "crowdsourcing" technique is myopic...isn't the ultimate theme of capitalism for the seller to provide either: the same quality for less money, or improved quality for the same cost...as the current status quo?

The ultimate winners on the selling side are those that convince the market to pay more for the same quality...while the winners on the buy side are the ones that recognize earliest where to get improved quality for lower cost...

Jim:

First of all, I don't think I believe in the unregulated free market quite as much as some here do.  In the true free market, the big guy has a clear green light to squash the little guy.  That isn't working out so well for Americans these days.

Second, I understand that some people may think I'm trying to protect my own turf with my comments, but the point was really to protect the business as a whole.  I've already done better under the current system than I would ever have imagined.  But, will the next generation of guys have the opportunity to make a decent living if a lot of the work is siphoned off by people who are not well trained or prepared?  It's already going to be hard enough for that next generation, because of the excesses of the last ten years.

Last but not least, there is one more potential outcome of capitalism you didn't mention:  for the seller to charge more, yet save the client money in the end by being more efficient with his work, and return a better product in the end, too.  That's the outcome I've always aimed at.  You can do it if you control the means of production, which in this business is the shaping.  [A true capitalist would recognize this as -- "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."  I think that's why so many of my best clients have been entrepreneurs.]


Tim:

I only meant that everyone has to get their first project on their own somewhere, and not all of us were born into the business.  There have been some pretty good architects who started from the ground up, instead of the famous family tree ... Pete Dye, for one.  Most of those who succeeded had been around golf for a long time, and had some exposure to a design project somewhere along the way.  And of course, the buyer should always beware.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()