Client’s Intent

[Ira Fishman]

Do architects and superintendents have their own defined process for discovering what their clients (developers and green committees) really want? Asking about courses they like or dislike? Talking about another art form? Asking them to draw a hole?


In a career of client service, I have found that divining what client really wants is far from a straightforward exercise.


Ira

[Tom_Doak]

My first question to anyone who calls about a potential project is always, "Why did you call us?"  The answer speaks volumes to their understanding of how we work and what their expectations are.


Consulting work is more straightforward, in that all clubs have factions with different interests, so no matter what the caller might tell you, it's not the full story.  With a single client for a new project, though, the things they say first are almost always the most important.  Some are worried about whether the project is viable, and others cut straight to whether it will be a top 100 course!



I have never asked any client to draw a golf hole, or about their interests in art.  But it does help to play golf with them or talk to them about their golf.  On one of my early projects I built a lot of fairly long par-4 holes that my senior client could not reach in two shots from the middle tees . . . he added several extra tees after I was done 

[Ira Fishman]

Have you ever had a client try to build in an incentive/penalty into your fee? More money if the course does reach a certain ranking for example.


Ira

[Kalen Braley]

Tom,

I'm curious what are some of the more interesting and/or cringe worthy responses you've got over the years...names omitted of course.

P.S.  If a GCA sponsored group ever actually bought an old rundown course, as we've been teased so many times.... would you give it a face-lift on the house?

[JMEvensky]

Have you ever had a client try to build in an incentive/penalty into your fee? More money if the course does reach a certain ranking for example.


Ira

Thanks for asking--I've always wondered that myself. Pure speculation, but I'd guess a magazine ranking was an implied incentive to hire Nicklaus Design.

[Tom_Doak]

Have you ever had a client try to build in an incentive/penalty into your fee?

Yes.


In fact our current project in Houston has a bonus attached if we get the course reopened by November 1.  That's the deadline for hosting the Houston Open in 2020, and it's also the point where the client would have to compensate the city for lost revenue.  It was a risk to agree to it since we are at the mercy of the weather, but it was acway to beidge the gap between my quoted design fee and what the client wanted to pay.


Only once have I tied a bonus to a ranking - I'm not a fan of that approach, as I don't think the rankings are all on the level, and there's not much mor room in the top 100 for new courses.  But it worked out quite well the one time I did!

[Ira Fishman]

Tom,


Thanks. For you and other architects: does showing client plans/routing/topos vary from client to client? When I practiced law, some clients wanted to review every draft of something and others had the approach that they were paying for our expertise so did not need to review drafts or perhaps only the final draft.


Ira

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,


Thanks. For you and other architects: does showing client plans/routing/topos vary from client to client? When I practiced law, some clients wanted to review every draft of something and others had the approach that they were paying for our expertise so did not need to review drafts or perhaps only the final draft.

I am very careful about when I show a client my plan.  I will always look for feedback at some point but usually not until I have it mostly figured out.  I rarely show them alternative routings as I don't think they are able to visualize the completed holes; if they have feedback I agree with, I will modify part of the routing to address it.

[Ira Fishman]

If you feel “stuck” about an aspect of a project, would you reach out to an architect you respect or a former associate for ideas?


Ira

[Tom_Doak]

If you feel “stuck” about an aspect of a project, would you reach out to an architect you respect or a former associate for ideas?

I did reach out to Mr. Dye once or twice when I was building High Pointe.  Since then, though, there's been no need to look outside.  Most of my projects are staffed to the gills with talented people who can figure out anything I'm having trouble with.


In Houston this spring, the team has included Don Mahaffey as contractor, Mike Nuzzo as project manager/lead associate, plus Eric Iverson and Brian Schneider and Brian Slawnik and Blake Conant tag-teaming the shaping work.


In Ireland this past month, I've got Eric Iverson running the show, Gordon Irvine helping out on the agronomy, George Helly fresh from Tara Iti as the greenkeeper, and Clyde Johnson and Angela Moser helping with the shaping.


So, that's five or six people involved in each, who could probably do a fair job of designing the course on their own . . . except that they have all learned that courses turn out better when you've got a half-dozen other talented people on site to lean on.

[Ira Fishman]

It is interesting that staffing a project has an element of putting together a Jazz Ensemble where the players may change from project depending on schedules and nature of the project. I am more used to services provided by consulting firms, law firms, accounting firms, and public affairs firms where the staffing may vary, but they generally use employees only.


Ira

[Thomas Dai]

I raised a thread about the hardest and most time consuming aspects of being an architects recently. Some thought provoking responses.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,67141.msg1604727.html#msg1604727

Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ira,


Late to the party, but here is a slightly redacted "Designer Brief" from a current targeted (not full blow out) renovation project.  (An odd name, considering most of us gca types might be called "tighty whiteys"...…. )


It pays to make sure you and the client are on the same page, especially municipal work where they have to justify their expenses (whereas private owners may only need to justify to members or themselves)  First, it minimizes a bunch of misunderstandings and potential re-works at our expense.  Second, if they approve everything as you go, there is less chance of you being blamed for something that goes wrong.  Step by step owner approval is probably the standard in any design endeavor.


I post this because it answers your question better for most of the less exiting real world projects that many of us undertake.  We don't often have the luxury of designing a top 100 course, etc., so Tom's answer is not quite as relevant as I suspect you were looking for.


The design process is similar to the scientific process - Identify problems, test possible alternate theories/solutions, pick best and refine, etc.  In golf, we often have to add "prioritize" to the problems and solutions.


 A.              Basic Construction Priorities 
·        Install New 18 Hole Irrigation System, including:
o   Use North and South Pump stations as they have recently been refurbished
o   Include new and larger pump station in Middle section to increase crossover capacity
§  Expand coverage:
·        Generally, 4 rows, no part circles, except along existing residences.
·        Row of outside perimeter heads around greens to cover walk ups better. (i.e., 60-70 feet from green edge throwing back in towards green.
·        Part to Part coverage at greens desired
·        To scoured areas:
o   Remove trees for sunlight
o   Expand to part path, using full circle sprinklers, no more than 50% of diameter from path
o   Add topsoil to scoured areas, must find reasonable source.
§  No preference for either Rainbird or Toro.
·        Reduce flooding impacts
o   Section C (holes 12-16) get the worst problems -Initial solution is new configuration to 13 & 14 / Elevate 15 fairway
o   Section B has flow across holes 9 and 18
o   Raise Greens above specified flood levels (in approximate order, 10, 3, 6, 7 and 5)
·        Improve Surface Drainage Everywhere (subject to budget limitations)
o   Uplands (holes 1, 2, parts of 3, 4, 17, 18 Tee) by adding basins in low spots, minimal re-grading to reduce cost.
o   Lower Areas –
§  Regrade to raise fairways to consistent flood protection – 13-14, 9, 18, 15, 
§  Re-grade as required to minimum 3% grades to enhance every day drainage.
·        Reduce Sand Bunkers
o   Reduce from 44,000 S.F. to as low as 22,000 S.F, focused on removing those that flood constantly.
o   Add bunker liner (type TBD, but Better Billy Bunker is first choice) to remaining bunkers.
o   Probably use buff colored, reasonable cost sand as it was used before.
·        Greens
o   Raise greens as required for flood protection
o   Eliminate drainage problems at many collars (via new drain tile and/or lowering built up lip)
o   Noted problems on Greens 16 (back left) 14 (back right) 15 (front) 9 (front right) 18 (front right) and 3 (front)
·        Tees
o   Increase Size on Par 3 Tees
o   Add forward tees to shorten course
o   Laser Level and add sand cap to tees to improve turf conditions
·        Keep parts of course open for revenue generation:
o   Require Contractor to work from North to South to keep course open as long as possible.
o   In house crew:
§  May renovate range tee prior to construction so it will be open during construction for cash flow. (working with gca)
§  Is willing to contribute some labor to Contractor to reduce cost.


 
 

[Ira Fishman]

Jeff,


Many thanks.  It actually is quite similar to when we undertake a major IT development project for ourselves.  We write down all the "business rules" and then have the Department(s) sign off on them. 


My question is whether the client gave you the specs from the get-go or you drafted them after interactions with the client?  If it was after the interactions, how do you structure those to elicit what the client wants so that you can draft the specs.


Ira

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ira,


It depends on their sophistication, but the client generally has an idea of their budget and priorities, but in the initial site walk, we have input and those do change.  In this case, based on all I know from the interview/selection process, I drafted a document for them to look at and review.  Come to think of it, it's usually the consultants responsibility and the owner only reviews.


The above was the design program.  Once approved, we take it, present some preliminary concepts, along with a broad budget.  They review, sign off on a practical program considering needs and budget.


Then, we do prelim construction documents (design development) further refining the scope of work, specs, etc.  Typically, those can be over budget as well, and we set a plan to refine them further when we develop the final bid package.


To me, "specifications" are the tech documents we give contractors to govern the actual contract and work.


Of course, as the typical golf course architect, we reserve the right to make reasonable changes right up until the moment the grass seed is dropped.

[Ira Fishman]

Have any of the golf course architects spent time with building architects to compare notes on your experiences working with clients on vision and planning? If so, what insights did you gain?  It would be particularly interesting to learn how approaches to a design competition might vary where the building architect might have more leeway in design concepts.


Ira

[Jeff_Brauer]

I've spent some time.  They often start the design program based initially on allocating X Square Footage per function desired.  Then, they do bubble diagrams showing how the spaces might relate functionally.  (like and form of design, relationships and circulation rule)  Then, they usually have to cut everything back about 10-20% when the cost estimate comes in.


I have noticed architects have added "design programming" as a separate service.  Ditto on space planning and utilization services.  I think the idea is if you add names and services, you can keep your fee up.  Great idea!


On a recent project, a business consultant advised the Owner he needed a banquet space and recommended it in the old pro shop location.  The clubhouse architect and I looked at each other and wondered why he had put it as far away from the kitchen as possible, necessitating a warming area.  It eventually got changed by the architect to keep (and slightly expand) the dining room in place, adjacent to the kitchen.  A literal example of too many cooks spoiling the broth.


I guess my point is, even people with lots of theories aren't really designers.  That said, I know a lot of chefs who think architects don't really understand what they need in a kitchen, and lots of owners who think chefs (and the architects who follow their recommendations) have spent way too much space/$$$ on kitchens that are used for big events only a few times a year.


Lots of give and take in any type of design, again suggesting that a multi step process is needed.  And, that the public persona of the "Master Designer" is largely a crock...….a marketing crock at that!