[Mark_Fine]

When working on renovation projects, I spend most of my time on GCA education.  Those projects where the decision makers are open minded and willing to at least listen are the ones that usually turn out the most successful.  In no particular order here are a few of the challenges:


- Trees - It is very hard to get some to understand why you would ever want to take down a perfectly healthy tree let alone a half dead one.
- Bunkers - Most only care about the playability and consistency of the bunkers.  Explaining why what is there might not be ideal or why some should be removed or some should be added or altered is a whole different matter. 
- Green shrinkage - Few golfers even realize their greens might have shrunk or understand why bringing them back out to their original edges can make such a huge difference.
- Mowing lines:
   - Fairway width - Wider is perceived by most (especially better golfers) as easier.  It takes time to get them to see this is not always the case.
     - Approaches - Many courses have approaches that are all but useless for the ground game because they have gotten so narrow. 
     - Fairway bunkers - Bunkers that flank fairways that are completely surrounded by rough are really “rough bunkers”.  This is a pet peeve of mine that takes some explaining as to why the grassing lines should be altered.   
- Drainage - Not always a cheap to do but the results can be priceless
- Cart paths - The trend is to do more but generally the less the better and only in high traffic or wet areas that are difficult to dry out
- Why anything needs to be done to the course in the first place - Sometimes doing nothing or very little is the right answer but all courses should at least have a game plan as generally the golf course is the property’s greatest asset and it should be treated as such. 


Doing some form of restoration presents a whole new set of challenges in addition to the above. 

[Lou_Duran]

Mark,


Are there ways economically that the drainage of a heavily sculptured course (lot of earth moved, many mounds and valleys) on flat land can be altered to do away with over 100 catch basins, most in the immediate way of play and many in landing areas of the fairways and greens?  I'd think that re-contouring the course and excavating for pipes and tile would be prohibitive.

[Mark_Fine]

Lou,
Catch basins that are in play especially in the middle of fairways and around greens are also a pet peeve of mine. To me I think it’s just poor or lazy design.I will forgive one or two but generally they can be avoided with good design and shaping.   

[Tom_Doak]

Mark,


Are there ways economically that the drainage of a heavily sculptured course (lot of earth moved, many mounds and valleys) on flat land can be altered to do away with over 100 catch basins, most in the immediate way of play and many in landing areas of the fairways and greens?  I'd think that re-contouring the course and excavating for pipes and tile would be prohibitive.

That would be pretty expensive to fix, because it's usually done where the drainage has too far to go with not enough fall to get it there via surface drainage.  We got rid of a lot of catch basins at Memorial Park, but it was not an inexpensive project, and hardly any of those were in the fairways proper.

[Mark_Fine]

I have posted this comment before, but if you ever walked around an old classic design during a heavy rain storm and watched it drain (or maybe what is more practical for most) watched an older course drain during a tournament rain delay, you can learn a lot about how the classic architects moved water without using catch basins.  Granted they usually had more choice sites to pick from but still, they were masters at moving or containing water where they wanted.  I would have to check but we used very few catch basins at Bethlehem and Brookside and we had to do a lot of drainage work as over the years both courses have become large catch basins themselves for all the runoff from the local community.  Out at our project at Champaign, the challenge was not only moving the water that drained on the course from the surrounding community, but containing it where we wanted because we were limited in how quickly we were allowed to move it back off the course and into the local drainage system.  The project I worked on with Greg Martin at The Preserve at Oak Meadows in Chicago was literally all about managing water!  Too much detail to discuss here but anyone familiar with the project knows what I am talking about.


Bunkers remain the biggest reason most courses take up a renovation or restoration project of some kind.  It is usually because the golfers playing there find them "inconsistent".  Trees are usually the most challenging or controversial aspect of courses to address but I have found once golfers understand more about the trees on their course (the pros and cons), most come around. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mark,


I would wager that most old courses have had a lot of drainage added.  As a kid, I remember so many courses with long damp swales, and back then it was just accepted that a course took a few years, or more, to grow in.  No one accepts that now, it needs to be dry from day one.  Water goes from sheet flow to concentrated flow, i.e., gullies (as you know) in from 90 to no more than 250 feet, depending on grade and soil.  While it seems excessive to put a catch basin even every 250 feet, sometimes it must be done.  Sodding or netting the swales can help the initial erosion and reduce the need for pipes primarily for the initial grow in.


As to whether you can move water with more grading and fewer catch basins, I have said this before, but.....


In bridge engineering, there is a general rule that the cost of the spans ought to be nearly equal to the cost of the piers.  When I grade and drain golf courses, I kind of check to see if the drainage schedule estimate is similar to the grading estimate.  If you imagine a flat site, its nearly impossible to drain with only earthmoving.  For 2%, even a 50 yard wide fw would need to be elevated on one side by a 3 feet, and would block water uphill.  Even if not, raising that fw an average of 1.5 feet probably costs more than balancing cut and fill at 1.5 ft up and down, and adding pipe.  And, I spend a lot of time trying to figure out the lowest cost way of doing it. 

[Mark_Fine]

Jeff,
Some do, some don't, and some need to add it.  One of the biggest reasons is as I said - all the new development around these older courses has turned many of them into catch basins so they are dealing with much more runoff than when they were first built.  We do find a lot of broken clay drainage tile on older courses that is no longer functioning.  At Suneagles for example there was quite a bit as I recall.  When I use basins, I do my best to at least move the water to out of play areas and place the basins there.  I was actually working on that today for Brookside on hole #12.  Water lays on the right side of the green and back down the right side of the hole.  We are grading out that area an placing a basin well into the rough which is a much better solution that something in play close to the green or the approach area where the water currently sits.  I am sure you would do the same thing but some don't. 

[mike_malone]

Mark,


 Do you that this education changes many perceptions?

[Mark_Fine]

Mike,
As you know you can't change everyone but YES - that is the satisfying part - seeing and helping people change their opinions of their golf course (for better or for worse) and broaden their understanding of GCA in general.  If a club or course is going to spend a lot of money on a renovation, it is important they know as much as they can about what they want to do and why. 

[Thomas Dai]

In years to come what’s been built over the last few decades will likely come under the renovation/restoration microscope. Record keeping has improved over the decades with websites like this helping. So whereas many a yee olde club didn’t keep records that well or they’ve been lost in things like Clubhouse etc fires, better data should be now available so more recent courses can be either renovated/restored or hopefully not be allowed to wither or change through neglect or poor management.
Atb

[Mark_Fine]

Thomas,
What you say is correct.  You can very accurately document a golf course these days which will take most of the guess work out of future restorations, etc.  Course will still change and evolve with evolve being the key word.  I wonder how many architects think the peak of their golf course was on opening day and it is only downhill after that?  Probably very few but then again who knows.  At least today, it is much easier to document changes and evolution. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()