Hey, maybe I should have said...WIE CREATES AFFORDABLE GOLF!  then I would have some real intelligent replies uh?

Okay Paul,

For you, me and the other challenged individuals, even though I really only expected the architect's to comment anyway...

We have been talking about the affordable slant to golf development right, you with me... and the importance to get sandy sites with wonderful topo right, still with me...good, but even if you are one of the blessed architects with this program, the elaborate irrigation systems I have read about and heard about for some time now are expensive, right?  Hell, just a basic double row with say 800 heads stand-alone controllers 16' deep well wet, 20" intake line, pump station to push approx 1200 gpm will costs you $750,000 in the ground.

However, it seems at least, that the current systems going in on the newer courses in sand are much more involved and extensive in coverage, slick computers, the bells and whistles etc.,  So I am asking, are these systems not EXPENSIVE...in the neighborhood of around 1mill -1.5 mill?  and if so, how is that affordable when I know there are many other components required to complete these projects?

Or, maybe I am drinking, how did you know Paul and this is only done on these high profile jobs?

What would be the construction cost for a course like Garden City if it was built today.  Forgetting land costs.  Also, would you need all the irrigation systems for a course like this?

Tom:

Thanks and I half expected you would be the first to comment since it was your past comments I was thinking of in regards to affordable.

Without going into my definition of affordable, it is not really needed since your number of 2.5M and my thoughts match...I consider that quite affordable if it in fact applies to some of your recent projects and for the moment I assume it does.  But I have to ask, aside from the say 1.3M in irrigation, you mean to say that you are completing projects such as your recent ones in the east and west for only an additional 1-1.2M??  This covers; prep work, shaping, some earth moving (but of course minimal) materials, drainage, seeding, O&P, mobilization, insurances etc., you know...?

Crap, I gotta find me a nice plot of sand somewhere

What would be the construction cost for a course like Garden City if it was built today.  Forgetting land costs.  Also, would you need all the irrigation systems for a course like this?

Steve,

The need for irrigation isn't necessarily a factor of design style. Its a function of how long an owner is willing to have his course at less than its best.  The old rule of a course taking ten years to mature is now taboo.  It needs to be nearly perfect at opening.  If you want it to grow in, you need to have irrigation.  Roughs, fairways, whatever.

My gripe on irrigation is the trend towards being able to water every sq. in. every night, and i believe that drives costs up.  If we could keep coverage everywhere, but go back to every other night watering capacity, I believe we could save lots on irrigation.  Pump stations might be 1800 GPM instead of 3600 GPM, and pipe sizes would return to 12" max, rather than 16" pipes coming out of the pump station, etc.  I figure the control sophistication ought to stay, since labor will do nothing but go up.

Rant over. Point inelegantly made. Go about your business......

Scott,

You are right in that only a few costs go down in sand, and we can't ignore the permit and land costs, etc. that make up so much of a golf course budget.  Drainage might not even to down, since you might add catch basins to minimize the tendency of sand to erode. If not catch basins, then certainly lots of erosion netting.

I feel your pain.  Not even my new course named Sand Creek Station has sand soils......

Frank:

I believe Tom meant that the irrigation was included in the 2.5M, but if not, that would explain a lot.

Jeff:

I never considered that the land costs or permitting were in the budgets that Tom is speaking of and for me my original post and reference was essentially tied to construction dollars only.  Your point is still well taken BTW and many forget or conveniently overlook those costs and many others, when they talk about "budgets" to build a course.

As I understood Tom's numbers, the irrigation was added on top of the 2.5. I could be wrong....

The price of irrigation materials has gone up 30 percent in just the last year. Mostly due to the increase in oil prices, isn't it.?

My gripe on irrigation is the trend towards being able to water every sq. in. every night, and i believe that drives costs up.  If we could keep coverage everywhere, but go back to every other night watering capacity, I believe we could save lots on irrigation.  Pump stations might be 1800 GPM instead of 3600 GPM, and pipe sizes would return to 12" max, rather than 16" pipes coming out of the pump station, etc.  I figure the control sophistication ought to stay, since labor will do nothing but go up.

Jeff,

I believe your logic about irrigation systems is slightly flawed.  What you propose would not provide enough water to the turf quick enough.  The irrigation system should be designed for the worst case scenario for weather and be able to cover the whole golf course in around 6 hours.  To do that, the pump station must be at least 2500 gpm and 16 inch piping for the main lines.  By designing the system this way with larger pump station and piping the water can be applied deeply and infrequently.  With the system you shared, the water would have to be applied daily and shallow to cover the whole golf course in one night.  But, you could apply the water on part of the golf course deeply one night and another part of the golf course the next night.  That may lead to inconsistencies in conditions.

The one area the golf course should not skimp is the irrigation system.  Design the system for the worst case of weather for the area you are in.  The idea is to apply enough water for the turf for the next few days, deeply and infrequently.

Troy

Troy,

I would love to know the background that spawns your answer.

While I can agree with your premise, I think lesser systems (not coverage but GPM) would encourage deeper, infrequent watering, because the super would HAVE to only water part of the course.  What I have found is that those 2500 (and higher) GPM systems allow the super to use it every night for overwatering, rather than save it up for deep, infrequent watering.  There are as many consequences to overwatering (disease, environmental criticisms, and even poa invasion at a quicker rate) as there are to underwatering, although I can't recall a case of direct turf death from overwatering.....

With a lesser system, why can't we, as Forrest suggests, go back to a 1960's watering schedule of watering deeply every other night to half the course each?  Even every other night is not exactly "infrequent." I know committed supers who water every fourth night with no ill effects.  And for most courses, (up to 99.5%) and golfers, a bit of difference from one fw to the next would not be noticeable.

I specifically disagree with designing for the "worst case scenario" of a 100 degree day in six hours. If (depending on climate, as I am thinking about the midwest, not the desert) you have a few days a year where it could take up to 10-12 hours to water the course, you would lose some play, but the initial cost would be far less.  If you saved $250K in pump station and pipe costs, and were paying $20K annually in interest on that, and were getting an average of $50 per player then you would have to lose 4000 rounds, or twenty full days (or more likely 40 half days) of play to break even.   In most areas, there just aren't that many days of weather causing above the normal need for irrigation.

That is how I justify using less than the top of the line systems you propose. Somehow, as Forrest notes, we made it through until the 1990's without watering courses in six hours every night, and I propose that we could do that again.

Again, please realize that my ideas are for affordable courses, not Trump type extravaganzas where the owner would never settle for less than the best.  It is also where climate and soils allow. However, this is an affordable golf thread.  One way to make courses more affordable is for supers, gca's, and irrigation designers to tell the owner that there are possible consequences (and work arounds) to not having an overkill irrigation system, (and in the supers case, to please not fire him for a drought) but that if he/she is willing to live with those, then we don't need to spend hundreds of thousands to cover the behind of either the irrigation designer or super.

Troy,

There is nothing wrong with your logic.  That sounds like a perfect system, and some owners would demand nothing less.

Its just that my age might be showing, and Forrest and I can recall some pretty nice golf courses that didn't have that many bells and whistles to get it absolutely perfect.  Also, I am pretty sure that 50-80% of supers aren't as lucky as Scott with the perfect system.

But looked at another, less costly way, in an area like Philly, where by law they limit water to 17Mil gallons a year, does it make sense to design an irrigation system of 2500GPM (150,000  GPH and 600,000 Gals in your 4 hour water window and 1,200,000 in a more standard 8 hour window) meaning you can deliver almost 10% of your annual water allotment in a night?

When I started designign golf courses, irrigation took 20-25% of the budget. It now takes 33-40%.  When we need to cut costs to create affordable golf, we need to look at the big ticket items and none is bigger than irrigation, leading to my thoughts.

Troy — "Turf is best watered starting at daybreak"...

I am not sure you can state that unconditionally. It depends more on climate, ground and air temperature, humidity, turf needs and a host of other factors.

One needs to keep in mind that artificial irrigation is a supplement to natural precipitation...and nature knows no such thing as a set schedule.

There are certain areas in the world where it is not possible to water the course wall to wall due to environmental restrictions i.e. just tees and greens. Due to this the cost of construction is much lower. I suspect we will start to see a total ban on irrigation in some places soon if this is not already the case.