Architects and Construction Companies

[Adam_F_Collins]

I'm wondering about the relationship between architects and construction companies.

How are construction companies generally chosen? Do most architects tend to work with many? Or do they prefer to work with a few based on geographic region? How specialized does a construction company need to be? What are some of the best names in golf course construction?

Do we know much about the relationship between architects and builders of the past? Did any architects favor builders that became notable in some way?

Weitz Golf International has done/is doing work for Doak, Nicklaus, Palmer, Rees Jones, Cupp, Norman and more. They have some interesting construction photos at their site.

http://www.weitzgolf.com

[TEPaul]

In the Philly area Gil Hanse has done a lot of work with Pennick, Arimour from Ambler Pa. They did Applebrook and some of the restoration work on my course, Gulph Mills G.C. But Gil does a lot of his own basic feature shaping.

[jg7236]

Weitz??

[Larry_Rodgers]

"Weitz ?"
Actually I for one am excited about the management a firm like Weitz brings to the golf construction industry. They bring great project management policies which has been missing from most of the big name companies. This is not meant as a "slap" on the old guard firms, just a wake-up call that "Wallstreet" is looking for accountability.

 

[Tony_Muldoon]

In Europe the leading constrcution company doing this are http://www.southerngolf.co.uk/.   They've done the Marquess at Woburn, Kingsbarns etc.

These companies really know whats going on, all the issues affecting what's comming next and who has the power in golf today.  I would think if you could get someone to talk they could be a fascinating interview subject.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I agree with Larry in a way. However, the traditional big boys are getting more sophisticated all the time. I recall LUI spending about $1 MIl on PM software (albeit, after getting into design build and more structures) and just heard Wadsworth talking about implementing systemwide accounting and reporting software.

One way to combat the high cost of golf courses - which must be dicounted for the operator to make money in most cases - is to speed things up!  I think golf can do this using the technology available to designers and contractors.

As to the original question, I am trying to limit my bids to contractors who are certified members of the Golf Course Builders Association of America.  They do some financial and client checks before re-upping the certification every few years so I am as sure as I can be the contractor will finish the project, although you can never be 100% sure.

Some GCA's have their own shaping companies, but use either golf course or other large contractors to do other work, like earthmoving and irrigation.  Others have a select bid list of five or so contractors who have successfully bid their work. Still others will use about anyone, with the results (IMHO) that you would expect, but possibly saving a few dollars for the client.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

I am not going to name companies here because I do not think this forum should be used to promote architects or contractors, certainly I am in the minority in that opinion judging from the reaction to architects who rarely post here unless they are announcing an article about one of their courses in one of the major golf publications that then turns into a lovefest on here.

Having said all of that, I tend to disagree with Jeff on a couple of points.  #1, his last statemnt just hiring anyone and saving a couple of bucks probably won't happen.  just hiring anyone will cost you a lot more in the end including cost you more money.  #2 I do not put much stock in certification through the GCBAA.  I benefit from the information they put out, but the absolute worst experience I ever had was with a certified builder, and I am sure they will say I was the problem, but those sonofabitches will never ever see another one of my projects, and in my view they aren't qualified to maintain my yard.  On the other hand I have had a great professional relationship with 2 builders in the northeast, neither of whom are certified, other than the fact that I certify them and that certification means more to my clients than the GCBAA certification.  The key elements with these two builders are that the owners work in the field with the crews, and that the same foremen, shapers, and laborers have been with them for several years, so there is a consistancy in quality and knowledge.  I am the one that should be growing and venturing into new ways to creatively design my courses, I need consistency and quality in the implementation of my ideals and it helps to work with a contractor that is small and stablized by having foremen who have been with the company for several years, and an owner that actually comes onto the jobsite and works.

The technology that these big contractors promote is suspect as well.  I have had two jobs that were big residential golf communities and 2 of the big contractors were hired to coordinate all of the dirt work for the total project, and they brought with them the highly sophisticated cut/fill software with beautifully computer colored cut/fill maps, and very precise earthwork calculations, and the GPS on the dozers for all their roughgrading, and in the end the dirt calcualtions were not even close!!!  One project the major issue was how to get rid of 150,000 CY of excess topsoil.  the client, the contractor, a developer all worked on options and solutions, well by the time they came up with a plan to dispose of the topsoil, lo and behold, before the job was finished we ran out of topsoil!  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kelly,

I don't disagree that you can have bad experiences with certified builders.  Call me and I will discuss some really bad horror stories.......  And, like you, I usually add a few non-certified builders to my list, if they have consistently provided good work on similar scale projects in the past.  In the end, I think we are all most comfortable working with shapers and foreman we have had success with in the past.  The flip side is, working with new shapers, etc. can help you expand your design horizon more than working with the same old crew.

While I try not to let any old Tom, Dick or Harry bid my projects, and was trying to make the same point as you about the value of using quality contractors, I do know some golf course architects who do let (or aren't strong enough to prevent) generally unqualified or minimally qualified non golf course bidders to bid their projects, with poor results.  It does happen!

[Tom_Doak]

I'm not really thrilled when contractors advertise that they are building one of my courses, because in many cases, I am providing the personnel that are shaping those courses, and somehow they consistently forget to mention that.

We have done things every which way ... from using the big contractors to keeping the shaping and subbing out clearing and earthmoving and irrigation.  If I look at the results, they are not particularly better with one arrangement than with another ... some of our best courses were done with contractors, some without.  Some of our least fun experiences were with contractors, although I will admit that most (not all) of our poorest finish work was done without contractors.

The one thing I do insist on is that we get competitive bids from three or more contractors if we're going to a golf course builder ... our worst experience was when the owner let the work to a company without any sort of price check, and the work wound up costing much more than our original estimates, because there was no way to control them.

Power politics are part of the equation as well ... contractors used to go over my head and tell my clients that I was wrong about something, but now they're more interested in staying on good terms with the architect.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Tom,

I am surprised you say that the worst finish work on your courses was without contractors, I thought you took your own guys from job to job to do the finish work.  Are you including your guys under the term contractors?

Jeff,

I can think of only one instance where I had to let contractors with whom I have not worked with before bid a job.  I like to stick with the companies that have owners who get in the field and work.  that is my ideal bid situation, maybe 3 contractors.  One policy  have always stuck with is no contractor is allowed to bid on my projects if they dabble in design.  

[Mike Nuzzo]

Kelly & Tom,
How much information do you provide on your bid forms.  Do you give quantities based on you experience?  Or do you use unit pricing?
Sometimes earth work calculations work - if that is what you wanted.

Jeff,
Do you find that contractors add a bit more when bidding municipal work to account for all the red tape?

Baxter's pre-qualification is based on quantity and quality of prior work experience.  When the quantities are detailed enough to get a high degree of confidence in their bid price, it's been my experience that our field adjustments have been so minor, as compared to their other experiences, that change orders weren't needed.

[RJ_Daley]

Larry says:

Actually I for one am excited about the management a firm like Weitz brings to the golf construction industry. They bring great project management policies which has been missing from most of the big name companies. This is not meant as a "slap" on the old guard firms, just a wake-up call that "Wallstreet" is looking for accountability.

Larry, by "Wallstreet" are you speaking generically of all forms of lenders, rain makers, private fund placement facilitators, etc.?  I guess I can understand that marketing pronouncements on construction company websites, that they are the most technologically advanced, expeditious, and efficient movers of earth can stimulate the lenders.  But, moving the money, or placing the money fast doesn't exactly get you more quality golf design, nor given the price of golf at facilities built by these "efficient movers of dirt", cheaper golf comparative to smaller design build teams, I don't think - but I may be wrong.

And Jeff B. talks about the management techniques and technology that "really speeds up a project".

Once again, has this speeding up of a project demonstrably yielded better design, or more affordable golf?

KBM seems to delve more into these questions citing experiences of technology not necessarily translating into economy, quality, etc.

From past postings, although not frequently offered, Tony Ristola in Europe has offered interesting discussions on quality, economy, and process in his approach to project management; and that he follows a set of management principles in tune with the Deming Process, that he feels are superior management principles to many architects and GC builders or large company scale models.

I guess I just get suspicious of robust websites proclaiming modern techniques and computerized "AI" project management
that will "speed" along a process to yield a golf course that is superior - when in my mind what is inherently better in result occurs when time and craftsmanship are the hallmark of quality built in.

[Mike_Young]

I too have had my worst problem with a "certified" builder but that is not indicative of all.  I have also been where the builder tries to circumvent the architect and go the the owner making statements such as "when we work for "signature architect" we do it this way.  I try to stay with regional builders and have no problem finding them.  It seems to me that most cost in the golf business these days are increased due to the management layers of people trying to CYA themselves.  Thus many clients feel much more protected paying for the higher profile companies.
For me I try to keep the shaping and finishing myself and bid out the rest.  And is is humorous how many construcution companies that used to say they could not produce a specific line item for a specific amount will now do it for that amount or less.
The cost of construction using quality contractors today is  less than just a few years ago IMHO.
Mike