[archie_struthers]

 


In my mind absolutely! However this certainly can impact some free form thinking and taking some risks. Typically costs are associated with same.


For designers out there , has this kept you from taking jobs?

[Tom_Doak]

Archie:


Why would it keep an architect from taking a job?


A maintenance budget should certainly be factored into the design of the course and especially into the grass choices, but you have to be careful because sometimes the parameters change, in either direction.


When I started High Pointe we had a price point in mind [$50] and a maintenance budget based on that price [$160k, I think, that was 32 years ago].  The superintendent and I recommended fescue fairways because at that budget level, they wouldn't be able to spray the bent grass enough to make it superior to fescue.  But then by opening day, with everyone telling them how good the course was, they decided to charge $80 and there were complaints that the grass wasn't up to the price point.


At Apache Stronghold, it was the other way around.  Our outside consultants assumed that the tribe would let them hire an A+ superintendent, and they specified a grassing scheme which needed a lot of care and attention.  But the client was never committed to that, and luring a top-line superintendent to the reservation was not going to happen, so they struggled trying to take care of the grasses they planted.

[Bruce Katona]

Archie:

Near and dear to your and my hearts...........unpaved cart path maintenance every time it rained.

[Tom Bacsanyi]

No. You should design for .5 to .75 times the expected maintenance budget.

[Adrian_Stiff]

In the real world of golf course design, it is probably the second most important thing to factor. The first thing would be to design so the build costs are within the constraints of payers pocket.


When I was asked to join the British Golf Course Architects Association,  the fact that they paid no regard to understanding the relative costs was one of my reasons for not joining. Its also the major reason why my projects have all been successful. yet the industry failure rate for the first owner is over 80%

[Mark_Fine]

My focus is on renovation/restoration work and maintenance budgets are always a factor.  If they can't maintain due to budget what you are planning to renovate or restore or don't have any interest in doing so in the future (the architect and the super need to be aligned), you are wasting everyone's time and money. 

[Thomas Dai]

Will be interesting to see what happens at courses in the UK, where maintenance crew sizes are traditionally not very large and equipment on the light side, to renovated/reinstated/restored opened-up sandy areas, crinkle-cut bunkers bunkers, and cleared-out brush/scrub/tree areas a few years down the line if maintenance crew sizes, equipment provision and budgets have not been adjusted accordingly. My suspicion is that sandy areas will have or be growing over, bunkers will have reverted to more straight-edge and brush/scrub/trees will have self-seeded and be growing again.
Whilst those undertaking the 3-R's work can recommend and advise on future manning, equipment and budget needs whether the powers that be within a club take that advise is entirely another thing, especially as those in power change over time. Hope I'm wrong.
atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

I'm not sure I ever know the budget, but I do tend to design towards what I know will be the expected practices. 


Some of those details are in how the bunkers are raked, and how their edges are to be maintained.  And that depends on the equipment.  Some may want to mow bunker banks and edges at speed, and most bunker bank mowers can now turn on their 10 wide blades, meaning bunker noses need to be at least 20 feet wide, or a bit more on slopes.  If they have a 10 foot wide mower that can back down slopes, and don't mind doing that in part or in whole, then a bunker nose 9 feet wide works okay, since they at least limit it to one back down per nose.  Most will accept a few exceptions to a rule.


In reality, even when designing a course where the proposed green fees are above $100, the super rarely says, "I don't mind a difficult to maintain area, so have at it."  Even those who tend to accept it, have found that their course, built in the go-go 90's or early 2000s, change their attitude a bit in the next big recession, where budgets are held or cut slightly.  And, I have seen older courses that went through WWII and the depression simplify things, and now that I have some courses that are up to 35 years old, I see most of those have softened bunkers and what not to reduce maintenance cost over time.  In short, it raises the interesting question (related to the "formula design" thread, or do I design what looks great new, or do I design to something that it will probably morph to for maintenance costs?


So basically, the comment about designing to 75-90% of the expected maintenance budget is probably right on.  And more than that, it's designing to existing equipment and mowing practices, unless I am 99% sure the facility will always remain a high end club.

[Matt Wharton]

When we were restoring and renovating Carolina Golf Club thirteen years ago the Board was quite surprised to learn we needed a significant increase to the maintenance budget going forward.  In 2007 prior to Phase IV the budget was about $550K.  Following the conclusion of the renovation work we nearly doubled the number of bunkers, many of them smaller and too small for routine machine raking.  We also increased our irrigation coverage and total acreage of maintained turf thus resulting in a need for more manpower and equipment.  IIRC we increased the budget to $750K and it has steadily increased over the past decade to our current level of $1.2M but those conversations for that additional $200K back in 2008 were interesting to say the least.

[Tom_Doak]

IIRC we increased the budget to $750K and it has steadily increased over the past decade to our current level of $1.2M but those conversations for that additional $200K back in 2008 were interesting to say the least.

The $200K in 2008 was a big deal but the $450K since was just expected?  And people wonder why golf is seen as a rich people's game!

[Jason Thurman]

The "you" part of the question is interesting.


Graham Marsh's first US design was Old Silo in Kentucky. I knew very little about architecture when I first played it, but I was still shocked that he incorporated 99 flash-faced white sand bunkers on a hilly, rural, clay-soiled site in one of the poorest areas of the country.


But the course got accolades, and probably boosted his resume to open up the door to designs like Prairie Club Pines.


It also closed within 15 years or so and gained a reputation for horrid bunker maintenance along the way. But should he have built something more sustainable? I'm not sure it would've worked out as well for him, as the architect.


Sweetens Cove is similar. Before it became a phenomenon, there were real questions about whether it would last. A more conservative design might've given it a fighting chance to survive on the typical rural 9 holer maintenance budget. But it also shuts down any chance of the course becoming what it became. I suspect aspirations for Old Silo might've been similar. It just didn't work out.

[Matt Wharton]

IIRC we increased the budget to $750K and it has steadily increased over the past decade to our current level of $1.2M but those conversations for that additional $200K back in 2008 were interesting to say the least.

The $200K in 2008 was a big deal but the $450K since was just expected?  And people wonder why golf is seen as a rich people's game!

To be honest the numbers are slightly skewed as we started leasing equipment then and after four years the club leaders decided to include the lease payments in the department's operating budget. When I do comparisons with other facilities I always check to see if they lease and if so, is that included within their operating budget or not. Seems to be about 50-50 on those facilities that account for lease payments in operating.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()