# foco play park?



## Dave Frank (Oct 14, 2003)

I think the project lost its steam when Glade Park reservoir looked imminent and that the Poudre won't have any water in town in the near future.... DAM!...


----------



## JJH (Oct 14, 2003)

So I just recently took over as the lead on this project from Matt Evans who formerly owned the Mountain Shop. I met with the City Parks departmant last week and got briefed on what the current status is, the previous money raised (which is all still there), the players involved, and the complexity of it, EPA, Recreationalist vs Environmentalists, location challenges, flow issues....etc... I also got two huge boxes full of plans, and files. 

In a nut shell, Dave is kind of right. The project is waiting to get some direction based on NISP. The outcome will have a direct result on instream flows through town, which will have a direct result on what type adn where the features are built.. The project is certainly not dead, but 2009 is not a reality. I will work to make it happen in 2010. 

Stay tuned...


----------



## smauk2 (Jun 24, 2009)

Oh man what I would do for a playpark in foco.. you dont wanna know


----------



## Scottsfire (Aug 8, 2008)

*Petition numbers speak VOLUMES to politicians*

Simply............you guys need to demonstrate to the city just how popular those elected officials would be by putting in a kayak play park.
Step one: petitions, demonstrate the "strength in numbers" especially if those are VOTERS!
Pardon the pun but this would speak VOLUMES to the people that make decisions.
Scotty V.


----------



## jeffy (Sep 17, 2004)

JJ. I'd love to help. Send me a PM on what I can do to help.


----------



## LiquidGuy87 (Aug 22, 2006)

*I'm In...*

I'd love to be part of the effort. Send me a PM as well, and I'll get to work!


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

im in...drop me an email of what i could do...how real is 2010 really...2011 or 12 might be more realistic...but lets get the wheels turning...


----------



## jmetten (Apr 23, 2008)

JJ is there any data you could submit to the Army Corps for the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement dealing with the Play park? As the park would have great economic, recreational, and even environmental (fish habitat) benefits, this would be an important thing to include. Maybe a comparison study of a play park with a similar flow regime (Pre & post glade) and similar user base. I am willing to help with this, send me an email: [email protected]


----------



## JJH (Oct 14, 2003)

Sweet.
Looks like we have a nice little steering committee forming. Evan and I have been formulating some good plans lately to use the internets to really push this through. He is going to setup a google groups account or something for this.
I am out of town this week and Evan next week, so how about everyone pull together some data or ideas, jot them down and in late August early September we can have a meeting, sort through the gigantic piles of files I have and figure out how we are going to make this happen.

I will get around to PM everyone later in the week. I got some drinking and bbqs to attend to today.

Thanks


----------



## johng (Apr 25, 2005)

Hi JJ - 

Great to hear you're on this. I think Mandy's already talked to Evan (and Matt) about some of her efforts. Too many details for a MtBuzz post but worth coordinating. There's at least one strong alternative that deserves very serious consideration.

johng


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

*glad i stirred this up*

yoiu guys are exactly the people i wanted to hear from...i know nothing of polotics or zoning which makes me an honest person...JJ i hope you know how to play the game and if not maybe we can hire some one who can...there isnt a lack of support for the project just a whole city of dissapointment...lets turn this around...i want to be part of this project...get excited!!!!


----------



## duncleston (Jul 31, 2007)

JJ--

keep me in the loop (or in my case the flatspin). As a non-playboater I'd be more interested in gates than a playpark, but I'd love to help out.

Duncan


----------



## Buckrodgers (Feb 28, 2007)

*I'll Help*

likewise, anything I can do to help I will--let me know. We need to be pushing the economic benefits of bringing boater-tourists to foco, and keeping our local boater's $$ here. This angle seems to have worked well in other boating towns with the folks who tend to see in dollar signs.


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

The irony is that if Fort Collins had put in a play park years ago it might be the final nail in the coffin for Glade Park. The economic and recreational benefits of existing playparks that have been built have been substantial.


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

jj i learned tonight who you are...it seems to me that you are the right man for the job...it also seems that having me try to help you would actually have a negative affect...i want to help, but im no good at pollotics and i might be a bit harsh to gain votes....but i am good for my phisical presence...i work for a living and have a build to prove it...if the most help i could be is beng a strong guy, i would love it...i really want to be part of this...lets throw some weight around and make ths happen...possitivity is whats gonna push this one through


----------



## FatmanZ (Sep 15, 2004)

This past weekend I spent some time at the Buena Vista playpark, first time hitting a park in about 4 years. I was reminded of the benefits a playpark offers, for beginners and experienced alike. 

The BV park/development is now into their 2nd GOCO grant (Great Outdoors Colorado). I would think FoCo could surely qualify for a GoCo grant or two to help pay for the park. 

And considering the city is pushing to redevelop the North College area, with several projects soon to be underway, I would think the playpark project would make a lot of sense to many running the city. 

Please keep the locals updated as to how we can help. 

Cheers!


----------



## mandyk (Aug 18, 2004)

*Play wave proposal for LaPorte*

Hi Folks,

Just a quick update on my recent activities related to kayak play park possibilities.

I have taken a slightly different tack and put together a 4-page conceptual proposal for two, connected infrastructure projects that would benefit LaPorte - firstly, a combination kayak play park (probably one or two waves with eddies, pools etc.) designed to enhance fish habitat, and secondly, a "business loop" for the Poudre River/Pleasant Valley Trail to connect the park (and the school) with LaPorte's business district.

The advantage of the LaPorte location is that Lion's Park already has the trail, parking, toilets/changing rooms, picnic tables, BBQs and a shelter, and this stretch of river (with about 9' drop) was rebuilt around 1976, so its not natural at all. And it is further upstream and doesn't require Fort Collins City involvement.

I've just begun sharing this idea with LaPorte locals, and my conceptual proposal has been very favorably received by LAPAC (LaPorte Area Planning Advisory Committee), some local land owners, various residents, and the district's County Commissioner Steve Johnson. I haven't spoken to the local business owners yet, but I've been amazed at the enthusiasm of the responses so far.

I am currently garnering ideas about the next steps and best ways to proceed. No matter what, it will be critical to let our local representatives (especially at the county level) that we are excited about this idea and want them to support it in every way they can.

Board of County Commissioners - [email protected]
Kathay Rennels, District #1 - 498-7001
Steve Johnson, District #2 - 498-7002
Tom Donnelly, District #3 - 498-7003

Cheers all, Mandy


----------



## jeffy (Sep 17, 2004)

mandyk said:


> Hi Folks,
> 
> Just a quick update on my recent activities related to kayak play park possibilities.
> 
> ...


Interesting... I had thought Lions park was a good place for it as well. I do think that the City of Fort Collins could benefit largely from a project in town, and effort should be made for them to be on board. But honestly, I just want a hole to surf in closer than Lyons...


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

both would be cool too...look at buenavista and salida...its way more beginner friendly in buena vista without all the people on the deck watching a beginner get worked...could we get riverside food and margaritas too like in salida???one step at a time...


----------



## leif (Jul 11, 2009)

This could be quite awesome. Is there any kind of petition that I could sign, or do I have to go to the trouble of actually writing a letter to the bocc to show my support?
-leif


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

hows the laport idea coming along...need any help???how is this gonna be financed...goco...


----------



## SuperCriticalFlow (Jul 31, 2006)

JJH said:


> Sweet.
> Looks like we have a nice little steering committee forming. Evan and I have been formulating some good plans lately to use the internets to really push this through. He is going to setup a google groups account or something for this.
> I am out of town this week and Evan next week, so how about everyone pull together some data or ideas, jot them down and in late August early September we can have a meeting, sort through the gigantic piles of files I have and figure out how we are going to make this happen.
> 
> ...


I wanted to see if a google group was started and how I can get on it. I would like to get to know more history and how I can contribute.


----------



## mandyk (Aug 18, 2004)

*Can we develop meaningful community support for a play wave in LaPorte?*

I sent this email to Frenchy who said he might be able to help if he has time, or if someone else could ...?

I have floated a conceptual proposal for a play wave (or two), enhanced fish habitat and a business loop to the bike trail through LaPorte. I have shown it to one of our county commissioners, who thought it looked like a good idea. Matt has shared with me some of the potential obstacles and costs of this idea, and I am looking for novel ways to push it forward, i.e. something different than raising lots of money and paying privately for all the work.

I was wondering if someone could code up a webpage where people could demonstrate their support of one or more aspects of the proposal in a couple of ways.

What I had in mind was a page with:
1. A brief description of the two parts of the proposal (play wave/bike path), so people know more about what we have in mind.
2. A list of contact emails for county commissioners and people in the Departments of Open Space and Transportation ( i.e. choose by clicking or enter which ever is appropriate to the comments being made). 
3. Then possibly text boxes with pre-drafted text that could be edited by individuals -
a. One for expressing support for a play wave with enhanced fish habitat, the LaPorte Business Loop Trail, or both. This is to show them how "wanted" the projects are.
b. And a place to indicate how the sender might be willing to support one, either or both projects. That is, what they might be willing to contribute to make it happen (and somewhere I'd like to make some suggestions to trigger ideas around this - e.g. money, rocks or other materials, expertise in design, expertise in surveying or permit application, time gathering signatures of support (if needed), communicating with media, negotiating with land owners, etc.) The intent of this would be to show how the community supports the project in a way that could meaningfully reduce the costs to the county should they take on the project.
4. One of those security thingos to confirm real person emails
5. A way of collecting copies of all these correspondences so that we have them on file.

We could use my mandyk.com site to post the page. What do you think? I'd love to post the link on mountain buzz, and publicise it in other ways to show the county commissioners just how much support there would be for such a project, and then have them undertake it with community support.


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

ill be there for you for signatures...im probly the wrong person to write your proposal but ill put my time in anyway i can...just tell me what and when you want to do something and ill be there...i want to do my part as does everyone else who has replied...this could be awesome...


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

just bringging this thread back to the surface...any news on the foco or laport play waves


----------



## mandyk (Aug 18, 2004)

Nothing yet - Steve Johnson, County commissioner forwarded my proposal to some departments within the County and I have heard nothing - been too busy to follow up - must do that.


----------



## mandyk (Aug 18, 2004)

Just an update on the possibility of a play wave in LaPorte. Yesterday I met with Gary Buffingtom from Larimer County Parks and Rec. He was enthusiastic about the idea, especially if we can demonstrate community support. I don't want to hit the kayaking community until the timing is right. He wants to take it to several relevant committees, and like the idea of combining it with fishing enhancements (such as pools and access - possibly even disabled access via a ramp).

It would be idea if we could find people willing to donate their services - design, construction, materials, etc. and have the County take care of the administrative aspects.

I think we have a really good shot at making a go of this.
Mandy


----------



## mrekid (May 13, 2004)

Given the resistance we have encountered from the City of Fort Collins for the past 12-plus years now, I think looking to Laporte is a good idea. When contrasted with the current proposed play park location in Fort Collins, a Laporte play park would likely offer an increased bed slope and discharge to facilitate a more successful design. As you are probably well-aware, the current proposed Fort Collins location is downstream of College Avenue and immediately downstream of a flood energy dissipation structure built approximately ten years ago that eats up the elevation head in that section of channel. As a result, a play feature with adequate velocity would be difficult to create downstream of College Avenue whereas it would be much easier to attain in Laporte. Also of note, due to the over-allocation of water from the Poudre River, the discharge of the Poudre River at College Avenue is a fraction of the flow in the Poudre Canyon. In Laporte, there is one less irrigation canal diverting water. This would mean higher flows at Laporte, which equates to a longer season and higher peaks. Finally, we could possibly pool the talents of the local boating community to pull the project off at a greatly reduced price. If the Town of Laporte is willing to let individuals donate expertise, then I would be more than willing to give hydraulic advice, as well as my experience with 404 permitting.


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

i want to be there..keep us posted..let us know what we can do


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

mrekid said:


> immediately downstream of a flood energy dissipation structure built approximately ten years ago
> 
> wo that dam is only about 10years old...i dont see how that is a flood control dam...my dog plays in that drainage a couple times a week...im gonna walk that ditch on tuesday with the pup and see what kind of flood control that thing actually does...the mouth of that ditch seems too small to do any flood control especially when ive seen that dam totally submersed...ill look but my suspicions are that "flood control"is bullshit for an irrigation ditch...dont know yet...tell you guys what i find...ill try not to tresspass but i make no promises...if that ditch is flood controll like they say then why is there water flowing through it 2/3 of the year...even this year...
> 
> i dont want to miss quote you...you sound very knowledgable about this... im just not satisfied with the idea of that dam being "flood control"


----------



## mrekid (May 13, 2004)

I am referring to the downstream riverwide pile of grouted riprap immediately below the concrete flume/irrigation structure. This structure stands ten feet tall and was built to reduce downstream flooding damages. These were built seperatley. The upper struture has been there a long time, much longer than I have lived in town. The second downstream structure is effectivley an energy dissapation structure. It drops water to a lower elevation in a short run, reducing its elevation head, while not significantly increasing the velocity head in the long term. The grouted riprap structure was built by Anderson Cunsulting engineers roughly 10 years ago, I dont know the exact date but after Matt first introduced the idea of a whitewater park in the area. In my opinion the existence of this structure really limits the quality of the feature that can be built below college ave.


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

i was under the impression that that pile of rock was the available hieght for a park...it was my impression that that thing would be coming down with the contruction of a play park...now im confused...if that pile is a permanant structure than why would we even talk about a park there...that thing sucks up all the available drop???are you sure that structure is flood control???


----------



## mrekid (May 13, 2004)

First, because the structure is composed of grouted riprap and was designed and constructed at a significant cost to the city, I would be surprised if they are interested in its removal. You are correct that without its removal it will be very hard to achieve a successful park design. I know that any preliminary design would of course remove the drop but the city has not approved a design that I am aware of. Second, let me clarify so we are all on the same page. I said in a previous message "As you are probably well-aware, the current proposed Fort Collins location is downstream of College Avenue and immediately downstream of a flood energy dissipation structure built approximately ten years ago that eats up the elevation head in that section of channel." This is technically a drop structure regulating channel incision. I referred to it as a flood energy dissipation structure because significant channel incision and bank erosion are occurring in this reach only at high flows. Higher flows have higher energetics and this structure reduces the energy state of the flow. Stream Power is a function of discharge, as discharge increases so does stream power. This increase in power equates to an increase in the erosive capacity of the channel. Because this structure lowers the energy of the flow at the downstream end versus the upstream end due to internal and external losses, the energy slope is decreased. This decrease in energy slope is also reflected in the product of stream power function, reducing the erosive capacity of the flow. Therefore this structure acts to reduce the energy of high flows in the channel, protecting the upstream structure from headcutting, while reducing the the erosive capacity of the flow downstream. 

Are we good now?


----------



## NoCo (Jul 21, 2009)

whoa...spoken like a civil engineer...so in english...you basicaly saying...your sure that that is a permanant structure and there is no way that dam thing is coming down...that sucks...that seems like the only good drop in the city...


----------



## the_dude (May 31, 2006)

let's get out of the weeds boys. i suggest you take a look at the current state of affairs with the city's budget and realize that this isn't gonna happen w/ any sort of city participation in cost for a LONG time.


----------



## mrekid (May 13, 2004)

I wouldn't say it is a permanent structure, just one that will cost a lot of money to remove. According to a friend who spoke with the city manger, whose desk this project is currently on, they estimate a cost of 200k+ to pull off proposed project. We raised 60k a few years ago so we have a budget shortfall of 140K. This is why I like the idea of Laporte. I think a park in Laporte could be built at a fraction of the cost of a Fort Collins park. Obviously I don't know this for a fact, but if Laporte is really interested in a park, they could employ a more grass roots initiative and look to the local paddling community for expertise and manpower, reducing the cost of the park dramatically.


----------



## Randaddy (Jun 8, 2007)

mrekid said:


> I wouldn't say it is a permanent structure, just one that will cost a lot of money to remove. According to a friend who spoke with the city manger, whose desk this project is currently on, they estimate a cost of 200k+ to pull off proposed project. We raised 60k a few years ago so we have a budget shortfall of 140K. This is why I like the idea of Laporte. I think a park in Laporte could be built at a fraction of the cost of a Fort Collins park. Obviously I don't know this for a fact, but if Laporte is really interested in a park, they could employ a more grass roots initiative and look to the local paddling community for expertise and manpower, reducing the cost of the park dramatically.


There won't be a play park if Glade is built. It will take too much of the high flow upstream, even of LaPorte. Why don't you give that $60k to Save the Poudre to hire experts that can challenge the project? If we defeat the dam, then we might consider a park...


----------



## mrekid (May 13, 2004)

Randaddy said:


> There won't be a play park if Glade is built. It will take too much of the high flow upstream, even of LaPorte. Why don't you give that $60k to Save the Poudre to hire experts that can challenge the project? If we defeat the dam, then we might consider a park...


I disagree that there wont be a playpark if glade is built. I am not for NISP but it is out of my hands as to whether it will be built or not. The current proposal is to only clip high flows from the river during the peak season. There are several downstream water rights that must be filled, whether glade is built or not. However, the money is currently in the hands of the City of Fort Collins and even if it were accessible, it was raised specifically for the construction of a park. To do anything else with it would be unethical.


----------

