Register free!
Search
 
     

Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-31-2011, 06:41 PM
jlcrox2 jlcrox2 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lawrenceburg, KY
Posts: 67
Pondless from this summer

Here is a pondless completed over the summer. Let me know what you think.
Attached Images
     
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-31-2011, 09:55 PM
tadpole's Avatar
tadpole tadpole is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,183
Looks nice. Maybe a little LESS rock and a higher water flow rate.

I would also try to lower the bridge or pour ramps. That step up could prove to be a liability.
__________________
"Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects." - Will Rogers
Ripples
Aquatic Habitats
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-04-2012, 04:48 PM
jlcrox2 jlcrox2 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lawrenceburg, KY
Posts: 67
Thanks for the feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-05-2012, 08:52 AM
Muthscapes Muthscapes is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Frankenmuth, MI
Posts: 8
I really like the use of the wood in the water feature. Along with the bridge it starts to "soften" the look of the rocks. I would put some marginal plants along the stream edges. This will allow the stream to transition into the landscape seamlessly.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-05-2012, 12:04 PM
Lite4's Avatar
Lite4 Lite4 is online now
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,968
It looks nice, but there is a few too many small rocks for what I like to see in waterfeatures. A couple things I see right off the bat is the bridge is sitting high (already mentioned) and the whole stream and water course seems to be sitting only slightly lower than the surrounding ground and the rocks have been piled up to hold in the edges. Next one you do, try digging your stream deaper and only use primarily larger boulder worked into the edges and sticking up only a couple inches above the surrounding stream bank. This will allow you to use less small filler rock and you can plant some perrenials and marginal plants right down to the water which looks more natural. Might push a bit more water volume too, that's a pretty wide stream. I would target about 90-130gpm on a stream that size.

Overall not bad a water feature though. I like the creativity with the logs and bridge, (your thinking out of the Aquascape box). Best advice is to go down to a local creek or stream and study how the rocks and plants flow with the stream and how the ground is swaled out for the stream area. The Lord is by far the best landscaper ever!
__________________


Tim Ryan
Lite4 Outdoor Lighting
www.lite-4.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-05-2012, 03:30 PM
jlcrox2 jlcrox2 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lawrenceburg, KY
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly Prof. Lighting View Post
It looks nice, but there is a few too many small rocks for what I like to see in waterfeatures. A couple things I see right off the bat is the bridge is sitting high (already mentioned) and the whole stream and water course seems to be sitting only slightly lower than the surrounding ground and the rocks have been piled up to hold in the edges. Next one you do, try digging your stream deaper and only use primarily larger boulder worked into the edges and sticking up only a couple inches above the surrounding stream bank. This will allow you to use less small filler rock and you can plant some perrenials and marginal plants right down to the water which looks more natural. Might push a bit more water volume too, that's a pretty wide stream. I would target about 90-130gpm on a stream that size.

Overall not bad a water feature though. I like the creativity with the logs and bridge, (your thinking out of the Aquascape box). Best advice is to go down to a local creek or stream and study how the rocks and plants flow with the stream and how the ground is swaled out for the stream area. The Lord is by far the best landscaper ever!
You hit the nail on the head. The extra rocks are keeping the edges up. Let me explain my issue and feel free to correct me if need be. This water feature (in accordance with the design) was built backwards. By this I mean it was completely against the natural grade. So I had to build up the top of the stream quite a bit. The extra rocks are to help with any erosion or settling in the future. I couldn't raise the grade anymore around the stream b/c of a patio and a deck that aren't pictured, but are at each end of the path. This is also the reason I had to put steps up to the bridge. So what do you guys if you have to build up hill?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-05-2012, 04:46 PM
tadpole's Avatar
tadpole tadpole is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlcrox2 View Post
So what do you guys if you have to build up hill?
I wouldn't.

Building a water feature against the natural grade of the land is always going to look 'funky'. Your posted photo looks OK probably because we can't see the surrounding landscape and how it all comes together.
__________________
"Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects." - Will Rogers
Ripples
Aquatic Habitats
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-05-2012, 06:19 PM
Lite4's Avatar
Lite4 Lite4 is online now
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,968
The style and shape of a water feature should always be dictated by the surrounding grade and landscape. Perhaps a very large boulder with two or three 2" cores poring water out in a pondless scenario would work also. It would definitely also give you more noise, which is really what people want. You are going to do well though, your build fundamentals seem sound and you are willing to learn from others which is a big plus for you. Keep experimenting and constantly trying to make them look more natural. You will do fine.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-06-2012, 06:44 PM
jlcrox2 jlcrox2 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lawrenceburg, KY
Posts: 67
Thanks guys. Definitely here to learn, as I think we all should be.Everyone thinks differently and all have differing ideas. It makes us all better to listen to the input of other pros.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:28 AM.

Page generated in 0.07686 seconds with 10 queries