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.


Mike_Cirba

What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« on: March 04, 2009, 10:21:26 PM »
How detailed are they?

Do they normally simply take the shape of changes drawn to an existing course atop a Topo with some additional textual description of the changes?

Do they get into cost estimation?

Do they normally get into optional changes, like Plan A, Plan B, and/or Plan C?

Do they get down to micro-level changes, such as green-recontouring?

How "to scale" are most of them?

How much time and effort does it normally take an architectural firm to come up with one?   Do they normally do surveying and measuring of the property?

Are they sometimes done as "free consulting"?   By that, I mean do clients sometimes require Archies to come up with a Master Plan in the bidding process, only to sometimes select someone else, even if that plan is closely followed?

Any and all info and opinions are s most welcomed

Kyle Harris

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2009, 11:01:02 PM »
Mike,

A Master Plan is, at its most fundamental, the final plan/diagram of a series of projects designed to alter the golf course. Every one I've seen or with which I have worked has simply between the ultimate document that the renovation/restoration project was looking to achieve.

Everything else rolls down into the actual design changes and then all the Project Management things. Now, we're not necessarily talking Gantt Chart, here but simply something that all invested parties use as the baseline for their activity.

Say I am Superintendent at Golf Club A and my membership has decided their golf course should be renovated/restored. At this point, the determination to bring in an outside consultant is made, or to keep the changes in-house. Whatever research and materials available are done at this point and then the necessary changes are listed and designed. The Master Plan is the result of all that. As Superintendent, it is probably then my job to manage the budget and carry out the projects of whatever time-frame is specified for the project. Some of the smaller projects may be done in house, and some of the larger projects outsources to a construction company.

A 5-year plan may include:
Plans to rebuild/regrade/expand tees and greens
Tree removal
Fairway expansion
Reconstruction of greens
Reconstruction of bunkers
A visual diagram of all the changes with before/after notes
Architect/Consultants intent with the feature

Costs are probably most likely to be bid based on outsourcing the individual contractors or based on what the Superintendent feels the labor/materials costs would be in-house. Every course I've been on has included this in the Capital Projects line-item of the budget and we track hours on capital projects differently from standard maintenance.

Timelines are also usually set by the Superintendent and club depending on how much interference the club will tolerate. I've seen Master Plans take 10 years to implement!
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 11:08:39 PM by Kyle Harris »

JSlonis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2009, 11:04:53 PM »
How detailed are they? From my experience...VERY

Do they normally simply take the shape of changes drawn to an existing course atop a Topo with some additional textual description of the changes?  YES

Do they get into cost estimation?  YES

Do they normally get into optional changes, like Plan A, Plan B, and/or Plan C?  YES

Do they get down to micro-level changes, such as green-recontouring?  YES

How "to scale" are most of them?

How much time and effort does it normally take an architectural firm to come up with one?   Do they normally do surveying and measuring of the property?

Are they sometimes done as "free consulting"?   By that, I mean do clients sometimes require Archies to come up with a Master Plan in the bidding process, only to sometimes select someone else, even if that plan is closely followed?

Any and all info and opinions are s most welcomed

Mike,

I've answered some questions above based on the successful maser plan that was implemented at Tavistock a couple of years ago.

Hopefully Jim Nagle will chime in here and answer a few of your questions.

For the Tavistock Master Plan, I can say it was very detailed, and very well done.  The entire process took a couple years before we even presented anything to the membership.  When we had our final plans completed, we had a presentaton for the general membership.  At that meeting we had our Green Chairman, our GC Supt, Dave Oatis from the USGA, and Jim Nagle & Ron Forse.  The plan passed membership approval with over an 80% yes vote.

One of the great benefits for the membership during our course closing time was the excellent reciprocal play program that was set up with about 70 some other GAP clubs.  This reciprocal arrangement is quite unique to the GAP area, there have been several clubs in recent years go through restorations and it was pretty normal to have a reciprocal arrangement set up..  In fact, the MET Golf Section had us come up to one of their sectional meetings and do a presentation on the program that we implemented.  Apparently, the reciprocal program was something foreign to MET clubs.  They were surprised at the large scale and goodwill of the Phildelphia area clubs.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 11:12:32 PM by JSlonis »

Kyle Harris

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2009, 11:11:30 PM »
How detailed are they? From my experience...VERY

Do they normally simply take the shape of changes drawn to an existing course atop a Topo with some additional textual description of the changes?  YES

Do they get into cost estimation?  YES

Do they normally get into optional changes, like Plan A, Plan B, and/or Plan C?  YES

Do they get down to micro-level changes, such as green-recontouring?  YES

How "to scale" are most of them?

How much time and effort does it normally take an architectural firm to come up with one?   Do they normally do surveying and measuring of the property?

Are they sometimes done as "free consulting"?   By that, I mean do clients sometimes require Archies to come up with a Master Plan in the bidding process, only to sometimes select someone else, even if that plan is closely followed?

Any and all info and opinions are s most welcomed

Mike,

I've answered some questions above based on the successful maser plan that was implemented at Tavistock a couple of years ago.

Hopefully Jim Nagle will chime in here and answer a few of your questions.

For the Tavistock Master Plan, I can say it was very detailed, and very well done.  The entire process took a couple years before we even presented anything to the membership.  When we had our final plans completed, we had a presentaton for the general membership.  At that meeting we had our Green Chairman, our GC Supt, Dave Oatis from the USGA, and Jim Nagle & Ron Forse.  The plan passed membership approval with over an 80% yes vote.

Jamie,

Who did your work at Tavistock? Was the majority of the plan outsourced? How was the cost calculated? 

I feel it is important to distinguish between implementation of the plan and the actual plan.

JSlonis

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2009, 11:16:26 PM »
How detailed are they? From my experience...VERY

Do they normally simply take the shape of changes drawn to an existing course atop a Topo with some additional textual description of the changes?  YES

Do they get into cost estimation?  YES

Do they normally get into optional changes, like Plan A, Plan B, and/or Plan C?  YES

Do they get down to micro-level changes, such as green-recontouring?  YES

How "to scale" are most of them?

How much time and effort does it normally take an architectural firm to come up with one?   Do they normally do surveying and measuring of the property?

Are they sometimes done as "free consulting"?   By that, I mean do clients sometimes require Archies to come up with a Master Plan in the bidding process, only to sometimes select someone else, even if that plan is closely followed?

Any and all info and opinions are s most welcomed

Mike,

I've answered some questions above based on the successful maser plan that was implemented at Tavistock a couple of years ago.

Hopefully Jim Nagle will chime in here and answer a few of your questions.

For the Tavistock Master Plan, I can say it was very detailed, and very well done.  The entire process took a couple years before we even presented anything to the membership.  When we had our final plans completed, we had a presentaton for the general membership.  At that meeting we had our Green Chairman, our GC Supt, Dave Oatis from the USGA, and Jim Nagle & Ron Forse.  The plan passed membership approval with over an 80% yes vote.

Jamie,

Who did your work at Tavistock? Was the majority of the plan outsourced? How was the cost calculated? 

I feel it is important to distinguish between implementation of the plan and the actual plan.

Jim Nagle did the bulk of the architectural work and research for the plan.  Forse Design gave us a few Construction firms that they felt comfortable with and who they thought would do a good job.  Bids were then procured from those firms based upon the final master plan.  Frontier Construction did the work at our club.  They were a pleasure to work with and really did a great job.  We were able to finish the entire project on time and on budget.

On an additional note, this past year we approved at the Board level that Forse Design would be our club's consulting Golf Course Architecture Firm on an ongoing basis.  With a plan like this in place it will protect our course in the future from any wannabe GCA's who take over as Green Chairman.  All future golf course changes will be presented to or by Forse Design and then submitted for club approval.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 11:23:19 PM by JSlonis »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2009, 11:26:40 PM »
  This is from my first column in Golf Course News (now Golf Course Industry) many moons ago......

I would say Master Plans vary all over the place. I usually offer several levels because courses have several levels of interest.  The meetings and analysis are part of any plan, but I let clubs choose to stop at the diagram/plan phase, or go onto the phasing/cost estimate phase.  And, if desired, I can help with the presentation with 3D graphics, booklets, etc.

Details can vary a lot in a master plan from diagramatic to very scaled. On so many courses, the changes are so micro level that some kind of detail is necessary, but its hard to depict subtle green contours on any kind of plan. But, knowing that your green is "X" feet from tree roots or irrigation mains can make a big difference in design proposals, too.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What should you expect from an architect preparing your long term master plan?

You’ll receive a 5 - 10 page letter agreement from your architect, which details their services and your responsibilities as Owner.  The course may designate you as it’s key representative in working with the architect.  You’ll start the master plan process by obtaining information required for design, including:

•   A recent scale aerial photograph, topography map, and property lines, including locations of existing buildings, trees; and any rights-of-way, easements and encroachments; etc.
•   Utility Information, including available and planned utility lines both above and below grade. 
•   Environmental information if applicable, usually including, wetlands and floodplain information.
•   Testing, including soil tests for lakes, subsurface rock, etc., to know exactly what natural conditions you’ll face.

From there, the golf course architect will guide a sequential process, with input and approvals by you, your green committee, pro and general manager. 

Before any design begins, the Golf Course Architect will evaluate your site, goals, schedule, construction options, and budget.  He will appreciate knowing your financial situation, to avoid making design proposals beyond its ability to pay!  He will determine if any subconsultants like irrigation designers or environmental consultants, need to be added to the team.

Then, he will enter the Preliminary Planning Phase, where he prepares and presents for your review and approval:

•   Schematic Re-Routing Study(s) (if applicable) and upon approval of that,
•   Preliminary Feature Design Studies, illustrating proposed feature designs and configurations of tees, greens, fairways, lakes, hazards and proposed improvements to drainage, cart paths, grassing and landscaping.

The Golf Course Architect may also depict the Clubhouse, Maintenance and parking and entry areas, etc. but is usually not responsible for site planning or final design of these features. 

You’ll likely go through several plan revisions before the greens committee approves it.  Some greens committees have trouble reaching consensus, and it costs money to redraw plans, so most architects have limit on how many studies they’ll do before you a charging for “supplemental services.”

When all is agreed to, you’ll get an Illustrative Plan.  This is the beautiful colored plan that you often see in the clubhouse.  While someone is guaranteed to say, “They hung the master plan, because they couldn’t find the architect,” by this time, the plan should incorporate the features your club desired most!

Some clubs stop the process here, wanting only to get an idea of what might be “someday.”  But, any course serious about implementing improvements should go further, either plunging into a complete renovation, or setting the stage for long term improvements, by completing a full master plan, which should provide:

•   Written Descriptions of proposed changes, with their reasoning and benefits.  A well thought out master plan can help avoid “whimsical changes’ made by each new greens committee, which hurt the overall balance, design, and theme of the course.

•   A Phasing Plan.  Renovation programs range from one to ten years, depending on finances.   A plan details which and how much improvements should be undertaken.  This is usually driven by most pressing need, but can be dictated by construction efficiency. 

For example, many master plans call for new irrigation lakes.  It makes sense to use that fill to construct other planned nearby features.  I’ve seen clubs haul good dirt off the site, and then pay a premium the next year to haul in more dirt for fill. 

Most phasing plans will identify small projects the superintendent can do while waiting for “big projects” to be funded, like extend cart paths, plant trees, turf nurseries, landscape areas, or even provide “permanent” temporary greens for use when other greens are out of play.  You can fix pressing needs, knowing they will fit the final configuration of a particular hole. 

•   Cost Estimates.  Most – (not all - its best you know the history of the architect you retain) architects are adept at estimating construction cost by making area or volume estimates, and applying recent unit pricing from similar projects. 

Your scope of work, amount of in-house work vs. contracted work, and your phasing program largely determines your total costs.  Smaller projects cost more “per unit” than large ones.  And, while most superintendents are both eager to help and resourceful, but you’ll still have a golf course to maintain, so don’t over commit!  (If you know how to be in two places at once, please email me!)


•   A Club Presentation.  Actively ‘selling” is critical to the success of the program.  This requires effort from key club members.  The wildest rumors don’t start in Roswell, NM, but in grill rooms! 

Most golf course architects are accomplished at explaining the benefits of their proposals, and handling questions.  With Power Point, and AUTOCAD allowing 3-D presentations, many architects easily can convey the “new look”, which can be a valuable selling tool.  Combined with active “marketing” by the greens committee and board with the membership should allow the presentation to pass.

If so, then construction should begin in the very near future.  As superintendent, you’ll be even more involved at that point, being the clubs daily on site representative and working towards a high level of quality with both the architect and builder.  Not all superintendents get that opportunity, and it’s one you shouldn’t pass up.

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

James Bennett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2009, 12:15:31 AM »
I thought that what's normally involved in a "Master Plan" is that whoever is sponsoring the initiative at the Club discovers what a courageous decision it was to propose such an eminently sensible idea, and proceeds to acquire a 'flak' jacket and some 'protection' from those wishing to shower 'praise' on the idea.

 ::)

James B
Bob; its impossible to explain some of the clutter that gets recalled from the attic between my ears. .  (SL Solow)

Mike_Cirba

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #7 on: March 05, 2009, 06:47:28 AM »
Jamie/Kyle/Jeff,

Thanks fellows..this is exactly the type of thing I'm looking for. 

Would love to hear other's experiences, as well.


JNagle

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #8 on: March 05, 2009, 08:49:07 AM »
Mike,

I will use your outline to answer the specific questions.  Jamie and Jeff did a great job explaining things.  Since Jamie chimed in with Tavistock, we can focus on that project.  Most of our MP's are conducted in the same manner.

How detailed are they? 

We feel it is important to be as detailed as possible in the front end.  This will help offset any cost over-runs when establishing the budget and most often Club members want to know what they are getting (or more importantly, what is changing) prior construction.  Giving them something they did not expect or want can get tricky.  Our plans consist of an overall plan, a goal statement (established at the onset), an overall narrative of the changes, Budget #'s and if necessary, before and after images.  We present the plan as a power point going hole by hole.  If wanted, we will discuss history and show images of he architects other courses and images of potential finished features from other courses.  It is very hard for Club members to envision a two-dimensional plan as finished in the field.

Do they normally simply take the shape of changes drawn to an existing course atop a Topo with some additional textual description of the changes?

Yes.  In some instances we will work directly with an aerial photo (if topo is not available)

Do they get into cost estimation? This is a must!  We get very detailed in this regard and have rarely exceeded the budget. 

Do they normally get into optional changes, like Plan A, Plan B, and/or Plan C? 

If there is a controversial hole with multiple options for change, than yes.  We will present our best design as A, then follow with the others.  Most times optional changes are left for Short Game Areas and practice facilities.  Give them the ideal and then give them alternatives based on available funds.

Do they get down to micro-level changes, such as green-recontouring?

We tell Clubs, the plan includes EVERYTHING within the golf course proper.  Tees, greens, bunkers, mounds, trees, fairways, cart paths..........  If the subject of flower beds come up, we tell them to place the beds around the Clubhouse, the course is meant for golf!

How "to scale" are most of them?  As close as possible.  When working with aerial topography there is a certain amount of deviation that is allowed.  This has never been a problem.  Besides we are working with soil for the most part, so adjustments are easy.  It's not like working with a hard surface or a building.

How much time and effort does it normally take an architectural firm to come up with one?   Do they normally do surveying and measuring of the property? 

We work with all types of projects.  Some are accelerated and must be completed in 3-6 months.  The average project takes at least one year to complete.  There are many people involved from the Club's standpoint and Architects usually (the next few years may be an exception) have multiple projects.  We will slow down our MP planning during the late Summer and Fall due to construction.  Surveying in it's true sense is completed by someone else.  Our surveying would be walking the course, playing the course (and sometimes we do not play - that is a whole other issue), putting the greens, walking/talking with the Supt., studying other similar courses, studying the Club's history, photo and plan research........

As for playing or not playing.  Yes, you may get a different respect for a course by playing, but, we are able to get a better grasp of the big picture walking the course.  Playing, you put blinders on.  Walking allows you to take more in and see multiple influences.  Much of the feedback we get comes from members of varying ability levels.

Are they sometimes done as "free consulting"?   By that, I mean do clients sometimes require Archies to come up with a Master Plan in the bidding process, only to sometimes select someone else, even if that plan is closely followed?

This has rarely happened with us.  In fact, maybe less than three times in the 11 years I have been with Ron.  Even in one particular case the architect's were paid a fee.  Nothing is free!

Any and all info and opinions are s most welcomed

As in golf there is nothing that is standard.  Every Club is different.  Our Master Plans follow a template, but that template changes with the needs and wants of a specific Club.
It's not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or the doer of deeds could have done better.  The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; .....  "The Critic"

Roger Wolfe

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #9 on: March 05, 2009, 10:56:36 AM »
How detailed are they?

Do they normally simply take the shape of changes drawn to an existing course atop a Topo with some additional textual description of the changes?

Do they get into cost estimation?

Do they normally get into optional changes, like Plan A, Plan B, and/or Plan C?

Do they get down to micro-level changes, such as green-recontouring?

How "to scale" are most of them?

How much time and effort does it normally take an architectural firm to come up with one?   Do they normally do surveying and measuring of the property?

Are they sometimes done as "free consulting"?   By that, I mean do clients sometimes require Archies to come up with a Master Plan in the bidding process, only to sometimes select someone else, even if that plan is closely followed?

Any and all info and opinions are s most welcomed

You can take a look at our web page under club info and capital doc and see several documents that were essential to achieving our renovation and implenting the "Master Plan."  The last doc was especially crucial in achieving member "buy in."  It was also our #1 membership marketing piece for several years.  www.carolinagolfclub.org

Mike_Cirba

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2009, 11:26:15 AM »
As a first step, would the initiation of the "Master Planning process" itself be a discrete contracted service between club/course and architect, irrespective if a spadeful of dirt were ever turned?

Kyle Harris

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #11 on: March 05, 2009, 11:39:36 AM »
As a first step, would the initiation of the "Master Planning process" itself be a discrete contracted service between club/course and architect, irrespective if a spadeful of dirt were ever turned?

Yes.

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #12 on: March 05, 2009, 12:01:19 PM »
 I saw Kelly Blake Moran's Master Plan for Old York Rd. It was amazingly detailed. I believe more detailed than the membership could deal with. I loved it.

   I have seen Lehigh's of several years ago and it was concise. It dealt mostly with summaries of what should be done. It was probably much easier for the members.
   
   I have seen Huntingdon Valley's of several years ago. It was fairly detailed and very discursive.


    I still love Gil Hanse's that was done for Rolling Green as the best from a "presentation" perspective. It began with summary discussions about general aspects of the course such as trees, fairways, etc. Then it had specific discussions of each hole. It ended with marvelous drawings of each hole and notes about the specific things to do.

   Rolling Green then had a recent "updated" plan done by Forse/Nagle that
   was very professional and less accessible to member understanding but wonderfully detailed for implementation by the super.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2009, 04:31:59 PM by mike_malone »
AKA Mayday

Mike_Cirba

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2009, 04:29:56 PM »
Jim/Roger/Mike,

Thank you all for the very good information.   It's very helpful.

TEPaul

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #14 on: March 05, 2009, 05:12:23 PM »
Mike:

If you want to see one I'll show you the one we used for GMGC. It took us about a dozen meetings over something more than a year, actually close to two to finalize it and get it passed through the club. But a master plan can be tailored to what a course or project is basically looking to do. If you're thinking about Cobbs Creek that one might be a bit different. With Gil he can do hole by holes on grid paper that show recommended changes over the present hole situation with very understandable notes of recommended changes on the side and even a separate text explanation if need be.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2009, 05:16:37 PM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2009, 09:26:25 PM »
Mike Cirba,

What's a key question and something you must never forget is:

What's the club's reason/motivation for the Master Plan ? ;D

paul cowley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2009, 10:03:41 PM »
I pretty much use a different method than it seems many of those here do.

I will walk the site and get my ideas and suggestions.....and then schedule a member meeting.

At the meeting, I allow up to 100 people to shoot arrows at me.

I'm OK with body contact unless someone hits me in the eye, and then I'm out of there.....not to come back.

Yeah....thats pretty much how I do it.
paul cowley...golf course architect/asgca

TEPaul

Re: What's normally involved in a "Master Plan"?
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2009, 12:15:45 AM »
I'm OK with body contact unless someone hits me in the eye, and then I'm out of there.....not to come back.

Yeah....thats pretty much how I do it."


Paul:

Yeah, I know, getting hit in the eye is a bummer and I know you're outta there with that but you may not know I stick in there after you're gone and pretty much make sure that membership to the last man or woman regrets hitting you in the eye. Those people just have to learn who's the boss and who really knows architecture. After all the dust settled on one of those jobs I told that membership that the price just doubled for hitting you in the eye. That might have been one of the jobs we didn't get but on the other hand maybe we did. ;)
« Last Edit: March 06, 2009, 12:17:20 AM by TEPaul »