Pondless from this summer

Discussion in 'Water Features' started by jlcrox2, Dec 31, 2011.

  1. jlcrox2

    jlcrox2 LawnSite Member
    Posts: 67

    Here is a pondless completed over the summer. Let me know what you think.

    1.jpg

    2.jpg

    3.jpg
     
  2. tadpole

    tadpole LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,216

    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.
     
  3. jlcrox2

    jlcrox2 LawnSite Member
    Posts: 67

    Thanks for the feedback.
     
  4. Muthscapes

    Muthscapes LawnSite Member
    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.
     
  5. Lite4

    Lite4 LawnSite Gold Member
    Posts: 3,112

    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!
     
  6. jlcrox2

    jlcrox2 LawnSite Member
    Posts: 67

    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?
     
  7. tadpole

    tadpole LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,216

    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.
     
  8. Lite4

    Lite4 LawnSite Gold Member
    Posts: 3,112

    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
     
  9. jlcrox2

    jlcrox2 LawnSite Member
    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.
     

Share This Page