GolfClubAtlas.com > Golf Course Architecture

Building From the Low Point Upward (DMK Interview)?

<< < (2/2)

Jeff_Brauer:
Erik,  Not much to add to the construction comments, other than yes, it depends on a few things and the site, but generally a good idea.  The general rule is, once water is in a pipe, it should stay in a pipe until it finds its natural outlet.

Sometimes the design sort of has to work its way up from the low, at least the drainage design.  Wild Wing Avocet Course was one such project.  Only 3 feet of fall across the entire project, so I found the low point (in front of 5 tee) used that to set the lake elevations.  Each of 5-6 lakes is at the same elevation connected by big, deep pipes to function as one drain outlet.  On the first two courses by Willard Byrd, he chose to add 4 feet to all fw to drain those holes locally, and invested 400K of dirt to do it.  By a combo of lowering the drain outlets, we probably only "wasted" 200K of earth.


There are other examples, of course.  That said, on a gently rolling site,  there can be 2-4 major watersheds, and an outlet and plenty of fall in each, then design is easier, but you may still need to build each up from the bottom.

Erik J. Barzeski:
Thank you for the replies. They’ve been helpful. Now that I read them, they seem like a “duh” type of thing that I probably could have figured out, but having read it now from several of you now I know why and can have certainty about it.

Thank you.

Ronald Montesano:
Nothing really to do with this, but add this to the golf course construction boner category: there is a local nine-hole that developed a a huge, central pond for irrigation, then placed the pump house at the high end of the pond. It's a big elevation change.


One would want the pump house at the low end, correct? Is relocating a pump house an easy task, just costly?

Tom_Doak:

--- Quote from: Ronald Montesano on December 06, 2020, 02:02:26 PM ---Nothing really to do with this, but add this to the golf course construction boner category: there is a local nine-hole that developed a a huge, central pond for irrigation, then placed the pump house at the high end of the pond. It's a big elevation change.


One would want the pump house at the low end, correct? Is relocating a pump house an easy task, just costly?

--- End quote ---


How did they make the water in the pond not lay flat?  ;)


The key metric is not the elevation of the pump house but the elevation of the intake line that sucks the water out of the pond.  If you don't get the intake to the deepest part of the pond, some amount of the water in it is useless.  But if you build the pump house at the high end with a deep intake, that's okay . . . it really depends on the shape of the bottom of the lake.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page