Best courses have received architects personal attention

[Scott Macpherson]

Tom,

So in regards to Mr Dye, can we conclude that he needs to be on-site to achieve his optimal results? (Does this say something about his on-site team???)

scott

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,

Does this say something about his on-site team???

scott

I don't think Pete ever relied on anybody for any design contributions ... he handled all the design decisions.  But he was around as much as he was just because he liked it that way.

[Brian Phillips]

Not really asking just implying that you would know more than anyone else on here how much time Pete Dye would have spent on TPC Sawgrass, the original that is.

[Tony_Muldoon]

He was not always on site and the more we learn about his courses the disappointing ones were often not a full contract to design and supervise.  Certainly after WW! He seems to have travelled a lot Mon-Fri and was home for the weekend at a time when there were no planes. Often seeing more than one course a week.  His batting averages were extremely high.


Swinley seems to have been a learning opportunity for him and soon after ‘Colt’ effectively became a firm.

He must have been a phenomenal judge of character and a superb diplomat, has anyone ever read a bad word about him?

[Tom_Doak]

Brian:

I think Pete spent a lot of time on the original TPC.  For that matter, he's spent more time REVISING the TPC than most architects ever spend on one of their new courses.

[Lester George]

Military answer:

"Time on Target is a Force Multiplier"

Lester

[Tony Ristola]

Military answer:

"Time on Target is a Force Multiplier"

Lester

A few military principles you could add:

The Principle of The Mass; Concentrate your forces; focusing everything on that one target.
The Principle of Maneuver; Move quickly and be flexible.
From Clausewtiz: First contact with the enemy will change your plans.

Brian,
In most cases speed kills... and modern construction being fast... most architects don't keep up, that's why a lot of work in Europe sucks, even though the properties in central Europe are usually pretty good. Of course Europe isn't alone in this boat... it's an international norm. But it is acute in Europe because builders don't know golf and nobody is there to train them. It's a crap shoot, and unfortunately crap usually wins the day.

It all comes down to one thing in this business: Time; the most valuable asset an architect can bring to his work. Somebody has to lead from day 1... because the builder isn't waiting, once the ceremonial shovel of dirt is done, they're looking at the bottom line.

.

[Brian Phillips]

Tony,

If I know that and you know that and nearly everyone on here knows that then why do they still get work in Europe...? 

Design and Build in my opinion is the best way to go for a client.  The problem we have in the industry is this misnomer that Design and Build is bad because most Designers do not have the a) the knowledge on how to run a job  b) do not have the guts or the entrepreneurship to dare to build something themselves c) don't like the responsibility or lost sleep with running a Design and Build team.

I have just spent a fair amount of time creating a Grading Plan for our 18 hole project in Kingennie for our client to use to create a 3D digital "Fly over" of the whole course.  It is not often we produce these plans as we do everything in the ground.  One thing it has confirmed to me is that designing on paper is nothing compared to doing it with a shaper and construction manager you can trust.  A combination of both is probably a very good way of designing but I don't care how accurate you get the thing down on paper it just is not the same as doing on the ground.

The paper drawings are important tools but the time I have just used to create the Grading Plan would have been more useful on site with the guys unless like in this case it is to be used to create a marketing tool for the project or is needed for the authorities.

One last thing I would say and that is you need a GREAT deal of trust between yourself and the client to work as a Design and Build team as you are the sole company in charge of the project and it could be very easy to rip off the client if you wanted to.  My question to all doubters is why would you do this as you are relying on all of your projects to be your reference point.  One thing we are very proud of and that is there is NOT one client that has any complaints about our work or our ethics, NOT one.  They complain that we are slow now and then but never about our quality of work!

[Tom_Doak]

Brian:

That conflict you mentioned in your last paragraph is the reason I don't advertise what we do as "design / build".

Generally, we only "design and shape".  That gives us the control of the shaping part, but by doing the shaping for a fee, we have no incentive to run up the cost of anything.  Design / build (for a fixed fee) is a more risky proposition ... one day something out of your control will cause you to lose a lot of money.  [Although, the only project of mine that went way over budget had to do with a shady local contractor.]

If you stick to "design and shape" then you can recommend the owner get a project manager of his own to watch over his interests ... and the project manager will probably be better compensated than if you had to find $ for him out of your design/build budget.

[Jud_T]

TomD,

You clearly are a morning person...you're always posting at 6 AM! 

[Scott Macpherson]

Tom,

Even with your 'D&S' contracts, I was under the impression that you Project Managed these jobs? Is that true? If so, does that not mean you take some responsibility for the work of the subbies?

scott
 

[Tom_Doak]

Jud:

That's 6 am central time, 7 eastern.  And lately I've been on Eastern time or on European time, so I'm up early.  When I come back from China the schedule is a little different.

[Tom_Doak]

Scott:

We are rarely, officially the project manager.  We try to get our clients to hire their own.  But my lead associate on the job is effectively a co-project manager, setting the schedule for construction and shaping and keeping the p.m. informed of where we'll be going next and when holes will be ready to irrigate or finish.

We just don't want to commit to having the same guy on site every day, which a project manager needs to be.  My guys will go home for a week or ten days every month.  Plus, we don't want to be responsible for the non-golf stuff like pump station delivery and electric hookup and maintenance building set-up and all that.  Sometimes the golf course superintendent comes on early in the process to handle these aspects, sometimes it's a separate project manager.

[Lester George]

Tony,

von Moltke said it beter, "No battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy!"

Lester

[Brian Phillips]

Plus, we don't want to be responsible for the non-golf stuff like pump station delivery and electric hookup and maintenance building set-up and all that.

Tom,

That is one area where the client never ever understands (no matter how many times I bring it up in site meetings) the importance of getting this sorted out in time.  They always seem to leave to the last minute and we are normally on the seat of out pants waiting to seed the greens while the client gets their finger out with getting the electricity on!

I think I am going to go more and more over to Design and Shape as I am a little fed up with having to look after everything from muckshift to blasting.  It also puts our insurance up a ton!