Re design VS Alt pin locations - Downriver

Eric whippet Brown · #1 February 12th, 2010, 03:07 PM

I'm curious if our course would benefit from a total redesign or if we can make it better with alt pins? I started on this course when it was 21 holes my very 1st tourney was the DRO and that was a long time ago. So I was thinking that this course has been establised for 10 yrs and I would think that a redesign is not the best idea for us. We have players from the coast that have been playing in the DRO for many years and I would assume that they would like alts vs a whole redesign. It would be quicker and easier to just slap in some alt anchors and more the direction that downriver needs. We have a new course coming up at peoples park that we could have a better design for various shot selections. I think we would have a better chance to capture more discgolfers interest if we just did a slight change by adding alts rather than trying to get them to like a redesign, which we know would get a lot of negative feedback. So what I'm saying is we add alt pin locations and fix what holes we need to accommodate the parks dept guidelines. Let me know what you think.

Parks · #2 February 13th, 2010, 12:42 AM

I'm cool with whatever, and trust your judgment on whether C-Re's layout is worth doing or not.

If you wanna do alt pins/slight redesign to fit Parks Dept. requirements, then hit me up because I have some good ideas.

catalystdg · #3 February 13th, 2010, 12:42 PM

i'm fine with whatever but i really don't think alts would work beacause there are a few holes we have to scratch altogether( being that there can be no possibility that a shot could go over the banks) and in my opinion the the course wasn't very good to start with.

Eric whippet Brown · #4 February 13th, 2010, 06:43 PM

I know that we have to move a cpl holes away from the rivers banks, but that shouldn't be hard to figure out. 10's basket I know is to close to the waters edge but we have old 8's fairway to use and there could be a nice hole there? A lil thinking and we can get this done easily before DRO and that way we could have alts in play by then.

catalystdg · #5 February 13th, 2010, 06:47 PM

i think either way it should be done easily by dro
but hole 2,3 need changed and old 10,11 and old 18 all have to be comletely removed

Sean Johnson · #6 February 14th, 2010, 10:34 AM

I'm all about squeezing as much variety out of our courses as possible. For me, I would take the current layout with alt pins (and maybe a few alt teepads?) over a new layout with only one pin placement per hole. Also, I'm sure that there is a finite amount of money and resources for this project. If we went with alt pins, would that free up more resources for People's Park or other projects?

catalystdg · #7 February 14th, 2010, 11:36 AM

the new layout has alt pins for all 18 holes so there is alot less work and alot more variety with the new layout. plus the club has voted and approved the new layout allready so if it doesn't happen it just shows the complete lack of integrity of the board and the fact that they don't really care what the club members want ( the club has voted for a complete redesign several times over the last year) this is the reason i am no longer a club member

Eric whippet Brown · #8 February 14th, 2010, 07:07 PM

I think the redesign was a good idea last year when we didn't have peoples park. That's why I'm for alt pins at downriver and spend more time desiging and planning on peoples park. Now that we have peoples park we have a fresh pc of land to work with and would make more sense to just tweak downriver. We could save money by putting in alts and new tee signs. I can understand people wanting to vote for a new course and how it came to pass without any one playing on it is what I don't understand, we do have buckets we could set up and try playing the proposed course. I think there would have to be a lot of trimming in order for the layout to be fun to play. With my alt pins I can have them made in a week and put in the ground in a day and yes we will put the anchors in without filling them up with concrete like some of the anchors at HB, that was part and still is a problem there.

Parks · #9 February 15th, 2010, 01:02 PM

Wait, you're not supposed to fill the hole where the pole goes with concrete? That's weird.

SDGA · #10 February 15th, 2010, 01:39 PM

The SDGA has given the current Facilities Coordinator Eric Brown our complete confidence concerning changes to the Downriver Disc Golf Course. We are sure that Eric will use his best judgement in these matters.

The establishment of the People's Park Disc Golf Course at this time has a higher priority as opposed to the Downriver upgrade. When the People's Park Course is finished we will be able to talk with the Parks Department concerning Camp Sekani. Both People's Park and Camp Sekani are projects that the Parks Dept. approached us about.

catalystdg · #11 February 15th, 2010, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDGA

The SDGA has given the current Facilities Coordinator Eric Brown our complete confidence concerning changes to the Downriver Disc Golf Course. We are sure that Eric will use his best judgement in these matters.

The establishment of the People's Park Disc Golf Course at this time has a higher priority as opposed to the Downriver upgrade. When the People's Park Course is finished we will be able to talk with the Parks Department concerning Camp Sekani. Both People's Park and Camp Sekani are projects that the Parks Dept. approached us about.

thats great but he shouldn't be able to override what the club already voted and approved
the club voted and approved the new layout (giving me final say on the design, and voted downriver as our number one priority) just my oppinion but the board should not be able to go above the club and override club desisions.

Eric whippet Brown · #12 February 16th, 2010, 07:53 AM

Well let's revote? I have talked with a lot of golfers about alts and there more for alts than a redesign. I just think that with the redesign job that was offered that we would be where were at with highbridge, and that's me coming in and cleaning up the mess from the gung ho work parties that can slash and clear trails for fairways and then just leave it up to others like me to fix? Its funny how a cpl golfers can design the alts at highbridge yet I never seen them again to help what was done down there, we still have 8 anchors in the ground across the street that need pulled and I can only imagine how long it would have taken to clean up all the lil 3-4 inch stubs of brush and trees that got cut and left in all the fairways. A good example would be new 13 at hb, wow let's cut a path because we have a chainsaw, I seen who and what was done on that hole and look where it is today, a shit load of stubs in the fairway that I will be cutting for weeks. So a redesign in my eyes is a lot more work than a design on a pc of paper, I think I can get a good work crew that will finish whatever we start and not just cut and run like the work parties at highbridge. I do want to thank workers at highbridge for making the alts happen but there has to be a plan for people to follow and steps to take to make the work parites more functional.

catalystdg · #13 February 16th, 2010, 08:16 AM

there was a plan for both highbridge and downriver both were given to the club and posted on the forum. you are the new facilities coordinator so organizing the work parties is your job. it just so happened that you got voted in in the middle of both projects. the problems with the work at highbridge was discussed and what we need to do in the future was adressed so bringing it up again and again is pretty lame.

Parks · #14 February 16th, 2010, 02:36 PM

Might be better for everyone to keep the more acerbic stuff to PM's.

Wobbly Bob · #15 February 17th, 2010, 08:20 AM

catalystdg · #16 February 17th, 2010, 02:06 PM

i didn't think anything said on here was harsh in any way but if i offended anyone i'm sorry i was just trying to state my case. i think this should be brought up at the next club meeting and voted on, then we can move foreward either with installing the new design or submitting the alt pins to the parks for approval.

prospect · #17 February 18th, 2010, 04:33 AM

I am not a member of the SDGA, but there definitely needs to be some direction implemented here. However, direction (or criticism) from former club members is not helpful. Since Eric is Facilities Coordinator, and has been elected as such, he should have support from the club to do what needs to be done. As far as Downriver is concerned, I say comply with Parks Dept requests to have holes moved away from the river, and re-design those holes only. Put in alts for the rest, and start building the Inland Empire of Disc Golf at Sekani and People's Park.

Stimpi · #18 February 18th, 2010, 10:53 AM

The club is spread pretty thin, with several major projects in the works, and other potential projects in line. The overall club energy seems to be directed towards the new course projects (People's and Sekani), and less toward correcting faults in the current courses.
Personally, I'm all for MORE golf, more courses, BUT... I'd like to see Spokane have at least one nice, "finished" course. Meaning a course that a traveler could drive up to the #1 tee and proceed to play the course without having to wander around, guessing at the next target or tee location.
I like the alternates at High Bridge, and it is just a work party or two from being two complete, fun, layouts. Let's finish it.
Downriver is a beautiful location and was one of the toughest courses in the state, but it wasn't very cooperative to play. It's still a great place to play, and whatever layout gets completed will be fun. I'm leaning toward completing/ adjusting the current layout, with alternates if possible, and moving on to other parks. The Downriver ball Golf Course is the oldest in the city, not the toughest, or longest, but still a fun, playable course. Let's step in line with a cohesive, completely playable, course, famous for it's history and beauty, not it's difficulty.

friable7 · #19 February 19th, 2010, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stimpi

The club is spread pretty thin, with several major projects in the works, and other potential projects in line. The overall club energy seems to be directed towards the new course projects (People's and Sekani), and less toward correcting faults in the current courses.
Personally, I'm all for MORE golf, more courses, BUT... I'd like to see Spokane have at least one nice, "finished" course. Meaning a course that a traveler could drive up to the #1 tee and proceed to play the course without having to wander around, guessing at the next target or tee location.
I like the alternates at High Bridge, and it is just a work party or two from being two complete, fun, layouts. Let's finish it.
Downriver is a beautiful location and was one of the toughest courses in the state, but it wasn't very cooperative to play. It's still a great place to play, and whatever layout gets completed will be fun. I'm leaning toward completing/ adjusting the current layout, with alternates if possible, and moving on to other parks. The Downriver ball Golf Course is the oldest in the city, not the toughest, or longest, but still a fun, playable course. Let's step in line with a cohesive, completely playable, course, famous for it's history and beauty, not it's difficulty.

Excellent points, Steve. For Downriver: addressing the initial issues with certain holes, creating alternates where they will not recreate the same types of issues and getting up signage makes sense to me given the "growth spurt" we are having. Who would have thunk even a year ago we would have such opportunities!

catalystdg · #20 February 20th, 2010, 10:39 AM

spent some time playing both layouts a downriver this morning and came up with what i see as the pros and cons to both layouts ( not sure what eric has planned for the changes) old layout with alts, pros are that it has been around for years, some very memorable holes, it is tried and true and people keep playing it and it will take 50-100 bucks less to finish, cons are that it is fairly easy with only a few chalanging holes and no accuracy really needed and some of the best ( my opinion) holes 2,3,8,15 and toughest holes 9(old 11) have to be removed. the new layout pros it is a very chalanging course but with out adding to much distance ( overall a shorter course) releaves the most eroded and damaged parts of the course and lets the player appretiate the beauty of the area, the cons are it will take time to get used to it will take alot of work ( witch i have offered to do through my company) and it will cost a little more (again 50-100 bucks). again i am fine with either way as long as it is a decision made by the club members and not by the board.