Hi Joe and all,
I agree on the raised tracks issue. But also suggest its
a matter of "horses for course,s".
I also looked at the ditch digging idea,s and wrote them
off very quickly.
But no two landscapes are identicle, so maybe there are reasons
to dig ditches for some
layouts. I suggest much more convenient to achieve the eyelevel
view by building up, not digging down. Also the drainage
problems are eliminated.
Reviewing my landscape and options
gave me no choice but to build
a totally elevated track. By careful measurements I found I could
have two steaming areas at 36" high at the side of the house,
with 18'" high "scenic runs" across the
front of the house, (and not to imposing) without adding or
disturbing to much landscape.
Some guys may want waist high tracks for total length. I
have seen several
well landscaped waisthigh tracks
also. Including one track that goes from
knee high to an unreachable 14' . high . But sometimes to keep the
rest of the family happy, the track should not
be too intrusive. Also suggest easier for guests to step over
a low track, than risk falling into a ditch?.
I suggest the bottom line is to have a track immediately
at hand 24 hours a
day, which suits the owners pre-requisites, and can still be
comfortably utilised
and enjoyed by friends and associates.
Tony D.
At 03:48 PM 2/27/18 -0500, Jim Curry wrote:
>Joe:
>
>My layout is elevated all the way around. With an undulating yard I vary
>from 6" to 44" off the ground with the main steaming area 24"-30" up. No
>site work necessary!
>
>Jim
>
