News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Aaron Katz

Re:Range architecture
« Reply #25 on: August 29, 2006, 11:41:57 AM »
Aaron Katz;

Are you any relation to Dr (Adolph Maximillian) Katz our GOLFCLUBATLAS.com in-house psychiatrist who in my opinion is a total off-the wall, good-for-nothing, wacko quack?

No.  That's not to say I'm not related to other off-the-wall, good-for-nothing, wacko quacks.  But none is a member of this board.

Steve Kline

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #26 on: August 29, 2006, 12:38:13 PM »
"Maybe you can comment further on "depth perception""

I don't like ranges that have too much rolling ground. I like to see where all my shots land on the range and have a feel for how far they are going. Not that I'm trying to pin down my distances, I just want to have an idea. A bad example of this is the new range at Pinehurst. The ground is very rolling (probably for drainage reasons) and you either can't see half the shots land or because of the rolling ground some things look much closer/farther than they are.

I should been more specific about "targets. " I don't need to see greens out there, but it is helpful to be able to see where the ball is landing relatively to the flag.

Aaron Katz

Re:Range architecture
« Reply #27 on: August 29, 2006, 01:24:42 PM »
"Maybe you can comment further on "depth perception""

I don't like ranges that have too much rolling ground. I like to see where all my shots land on the range and have a feel for how far they are going. Not that I'm trying to pin down my distances, I just want to have an idea. A bad example of this is the new range at Pinehurst. The ground is very rolling (probably for drainage reasons) and you either can't see half the shots land or because of the rolling ground some things look much closer/farther than they are.

I should been more specific about "targets. " I don't need to see greens out there, but it is helpful to be able to see where the ball is landing relatively to the flag.

I think a back to front sloping green that is either benched into a real or faux hillside, or that is defined by bunkers, is the best type of target for showing where your ball lands.  I agree with an earlier poster that it is silly to expect to hit your 7 iron at the range the same distance you hit your 7 iron on the course, but it is nice to know how much further you hit a draw with your 7 iron than you hit a fade with that same club.  For this reason, a well defined target is necessary.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #28 on: August 29, 2006, 02:06:58 PM »
On a slightly different (but not OT I think!) tack, how many clubs today are building areas either adjacent to or separate from the driving range dedicated to short game practice?

Columbia-Edgewater CC in Portland, Oregon, recently built a really nifty short game area plus an adjacent par-3 course.  The short game area has a very large - 20,000 square foot - horseshoe shaped green with a couple of good bunkers in the horseshoe and a couple more outside of the firing lines, and flat areas for pitch shots, etc, up to 80 yards.  With pins in the far corners, behind the bunkers, etc, six total, you can practice shots of almost infinite variety.  There are a number of plates in the ground that show distances to different points.

This area, and the very nice nine hole par 3 course, was designed by Bunny Mason, pro emeritus of CECC, and the designer of a number of Pacific NW courses including the Glaze Meadow course at Black Butte Resort near Bend. I'll see if I can find out what all this cost.  I know it was all built in house, and the work under Bunny's direction is first rate.

It's sort of amazing how little use the facility gets.  >:( ???  Of course it is probably 600 yards or more from the golf shop and main driving range.

Doug Ralston

Re:Range architecture
« Reply #29 on: August 29, 2006, 02:16:39 PM »
Mark;

Do you remove ALL the trees? Does it not make sense that, since many courses actually have trees as hazards, you practice range should incorporate those also?

That treeless golf is ugly is just a personal opinion, but surely they are worth something as people practice working their shots around/over them.

Doug

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #30 on: August 29, 2006, 02:23:16 PM »
Doug,
During clearing and grubbing (which is going on this week) we are leaving some trees for the time being.  We will see what we can work into the final design after the bulk of the clearing is completed.  

Bill,
We do have some room to include a limited short game practice area as well.  

Shivas,
Not sure I'm ready to propose putting slopes in the middle of the tee box for side hill lies.  I have this feeling if they did get incorporated, we'd be resurfacing and leveling the tee soon there after.  

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #31 on: August 29, 2006, 02:36:34 PM »
I think Metedeconk has one of the best ranges I've ever used. Huge, arcing tee area to maximize use of target greens.

You probably already know this, but make the teeing area as large as possible. Plan on how many tee rotations you have so the turf has time to grow back. Our range is too small, we just dont have the space, so we must re-seed with Rye as bluegrass does not have enough time to grow back. Therefore, we must re-sod the whole tee every two or three years.

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #32 on: August 29, 2006, 03:16:28 PM »
Bill V,
Are you talking about Belfair in Hilton Head?  If so, I just played the East course there two weeks ago.  Pleasant course, very well land scaped.  

Bill B,
The guy who built Metedeconk's range is doing the construction for our range.  I have seen it and yes they have two acres of teeing surface!!  We will build our tees as large as possible.  

Kai Hulkkonen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #33 on: August 29, 2006, 03:28:49 PM »
I'm working on a project where we are building a practice facility with DR (90m x 320m) including 8 target greens, grass tee and some covered bays with mats, green (2500 sqm), and 6-hole par 3 course that at times will double as "play it as you like" short game facility. We'll put irrigation in throughout, excluding non-target DR.

It costs the same as two generic par-5's.

Tim MacEachern

Re:Range architecture
« Reply #34 on: August 29, 2006, 08:11:22 PM »
This may seem strange, but how about considering a small kid's playground nearby so young parents can come out and hit some balls while their kids play?

Oh well, another off-the-wall suggestion.  Take it for what you will.  An alternative would be a small putting course (a large green with 9   to 18 holes) to accompany.  Once again, to allow the family to enjoy golf together.

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #35 on: September 12, 2006, 04:21:17 PM »
Progress from the scene in my earlier post.  It is a beautiful site for a practice area!


Aaron Katz

Re:Range architecture
« Reply #36 on: September 12, 2006, 05:33:43 PM »
I still must get you pictures of Red Tail -- unfortunately I haven't been out there for a month due to inclement weather on various weekend days.

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #37 on: September 12, 2006, 08:03:44 PM »
 8)

in one straight zone.. 0-120 yds out.. some markers at 10 yard intervals to calibrate /practice wedges would be nice
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

Kris Spence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #38 on: September 12, 2006, 09:01:01 PM »
Mark, we are designing two large scale practice areas in conjunction with larger projects that include a side fairway merging into the large practice fairway at an angle to allow for "fairway / uneven lies practice" play toward the larger fairway area and target greens.  The fairway area is similiar to any found on the course and allows members to drop a bag of balls in random locations with a variety of lies and angles to the target greens.  The short game area and putting greens are located on the away end of the fairway.  

I dont have photos to post but will try soon.  One of the facilities was just grassed and the other is set for construction this fall.

Kyle Harris

Re:Range architecture
« Reply #39 on: September 12, 2006, 09:07:44 PM »
Mark,

Some thoughts.

MAKE SURE the place is drained VERY well. Remember that someone on the staff has to pick balls and clean them every day so anything you can do make that process easier should be priority one. It is a practice facility first, and a course simulator second. A range that doesn't drain makes collecting the balls that much more difficult and nigh impossible in any sort of rain - this could force range closures. Also, make sure the range can easily be mowed at near fairway height for the majority of the area, as this helps removal of balls and also location.

Try to use a bunker sand that will compact very easily, again, this helps facilitate ball pick up. The bunkers should be flattish and as non-descript as possible, too.

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #40 on: September 12, 2006, 09:33:53 PM »
Aaron and Kris,
I'd love to see some photos.  You could email me them or post here.  

Steve,
I'll have to think about that idea.  It's not always that easy when the tees are quite big.

Kyle,
You make some good points that do need to be kept in mind.  Tees in particular need to drain well (the ones here will have sub surface drainage in them and be built with mix vs. something like screened topsoil).  Target greens, etc. will be designed so you can run a range picker right over them.  If they do allow us to put bunkers out there, we will probably recommend using crushed limestone to ease maintenance and picking balls.

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #41 on: September 13, 2006, 12:33:09 AM »
Mark:

I started one maybe two posts on the best driving ranges in probably the last year so you may want to search for those posts.

The main thing you need to understand are you building a practice area or driving range?  There is a difference.

As far as I can remember, Pine Valley, Friars Head and especially Kinloch received rave reviews about their respective practice areas.  World Woods also was discussed.

I am also in the camp that you really don't need bunkers on the range if its contoured correctly.  It's also is expensive to maintain, become unsightly and isn't efficient in picking up balls.

Some of the other ideas on the other posts which I thought was clever was the use of using different grasses so members who travel can try practice on other types of turf.  The other which is great if you have the space is the ability to hit North-South-East or West depending on the wind.

Hope that helps.


Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #42 on: September 13, 2006, 07:22:08 AM »
Joel,
Thanks for the thoughts.  I'll see if I can dig up those old threads.  Do you recall roughly when you posted them?

Here is a photo of a range you will recognize.  I wonder if the ball picker can run right through the bunkers as well?



We recommend crushed limestone if you do use bunkers which is low maintenance.  It just provides an aesthetic.

The project I've been discussing in this thread includes a short game area right next to the range.  Our objective is to allow golfers to practice most of the shots they will encounter on their golf course.  The different grasses idea is interesting as is the unlevel lies on the tee but I'm not sure that will fly on this job.  Just getting some of the basics approved and funded can be a challenge.  It is a more complicated process than most people realize.  
« Last Edit: September 13, 2006, 07:22:57 AM by Mark_Fine »

Scott Witter

Re:Range architecture
« Reply #43 on: September 13, 2006, 09:36:19 AM »
Kyle:

Your comment on drainage is a good one and not unlike most golf course design and construction... depending on the natural slope, site character, soils, climate and budget, drainage needs to be addressed in the most sensible manner that yields the best results based on the budget available and the design desired.  Our project is in the northeast US with an existing 12" depth of silty rich sandy loam underlaid with heavy clay soils and as such, along with what was very minimal existing slope, we shaped the site and installed a considerable amont of underdainage.

I am including a few more photos from recent progress.

First is a general shot indicating rough shaping with drainage inlets protected with silt fence and straw bales


This second photo shows the tee being prepared, drainage being installed across the front of the tee and irrigation installation across the range area.



This photo, though not too interesting to most is the delivery of the tee rootzone mix...a blend of 6-2-2, a specified sand, screened topsoil and an organic compost.



A photo of the tee surface being sodded.  We need to sod to ensure the tee will be ready for play early next spring.  Even with the sod, the superintendent will need to be agresive with management (aerify, topdress) very often to ensure the sods "marries" with the rootzone.



Finally, a photo of sod being installed around some of the target greens and final seed bed preparation elsewhere.


Mike Hoak

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #44 on: September 13, 2006, 01:53:18 PM »
In my opinion, Berkeley Hall in Hilton Head (another Fazio complex) should be the gold standard for all golf practice facilities.  I felt like I had entered Shangri-La when I went there.  The staff claimed that some of the PGA players drive out there to practice during the week of the Heritage.

Joel_Stewart

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:Range architecture
« Reply #45 on: September 13, 2006, 08:02:56 PM »
Thats a fairly recent picture of the O clubs range.  Its hard to see but I'm the one driving the range picker :)

This range should be one of the best considering the room we have but is now just a grass field.  I know they have plans to modernize it but its down on the list.

The other posts are fairly recent, 1 about 2 months ago and the other maybe a year ago.