# Longmont Whitewater Park



## JHimick (May 12, 2006)

The City of Longmont has restarted the design phase of the Pavlakis District Park Master Plan in downtown Longmont. The site has been identified to include a proposed whitewater park on the St. Vrain river. On Thursday February 21st a public meeting will be held to gather input for appropriate site amenities. If you have an interest in expanding the river amenities show up and make your voice heard. Here is more information: St Vrain Phase 11, Disposition of Open Space, PWNR, Longmont, Colorado


----------



## dogalot (Jul 6, 2005)

Seems like there is only enough water in the Vrain through Longmont to support boating for about 2 months of each year.


----------



## mrekid (May 13, 2004)

What do you mean restarted? Why did the process stop last year?


----------



## LongmontRafter (Jun 12, 2008)

"Related engineering issues were investigated and now are understood as to their impact on the project site"...all it says regarding the delay

Hopefully the RICD would allow for longer than a 2 month boating season...probably not this year tho


----------



## Pizzle (Jun 26, 2007)

What should really happen is a rehabilitation of the park in Denver. Imagine a park like Reno, with cartwheeling and looping potential 12 months of the year in CO. 

And why is it that the leading company behind WW parks in the US is based out of Boulder, but all the front range parks are so junky? If there was a decent park, I might even think about buying a playboat.


----------



## Dave Frank (Oct 14, 2003)

Pizzle said:


> What should really happen is a rehabilitation of the park in Denver. Imagine a park like Reno, with cartwheeling and looping potential 12 months of the year in CO.
> 
> And why is it that the leading company behind WW parks in the US is based out of Boulder, but all the front range parks are so junky? If there was a decent park, I might even think about buying a playboat.



Agreed, but totally unrelated.

That's great that Longmont wants to do this.

Not sure where the RICD water would come from, but the St. Vrain trickles through there except at peak flow as well as bigger years.


----------



## erdvm1 (Oct 17, 2003)

Pizzle said:


> What should really happen is a rehabilitation of the park in Denver. Imagine a park like Reno, with cartwheeling and looping potential 12 months of the year in CO.
> 
> And why is it that the leading company behind WW parks in the US is based out of Boulder, but all the front range parks are so junky? If there was a decent park, I might even think about buying a playboat.


You'd really go play boating October through late march????
I want some of the drugs your on.
Seriously, this is a great potential for more whitewater options. Thanks for letting us know.
Will my voice really matter or will it boil down to the powers that be recognizing the potential financial impact to the community. They should take a lesson from Lyons and Golden (along with others) and take note of the financial gain. Not just through visitors but bringing in new residents. 

I potentially could create a PP presentation if that would help. Or more realistically I could chat with someone that may live in schlongmont that could go and present a PP presentation.
Let me
Know


----------



## erdvm1 (Oct 17, 2003)

Should say "you're on"

Not your on

Hate autocorrect

And I would like some of the drugs you're on.


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

I think there is a plan already to redo Confluence, something about a signature wave /feature on the left channel by REI.They are going to redesign the stretch by Gates that has a couple spots at higher flows.They already did work around 8 th to 13 th /Zuni some new drops that look lame but I 've not seen them with much water.Leigh Gulch has 3 pairs of drops with good access and semi new large parking picnic area.Littleton could make one of them or one pair into one good hole, just widen the fourth one.

The main problem with Front Range parks is no water.Union and the waves between Confluence and Coors Field are great with good flows, albeit skanky water.People used to like Golden but it seems to need tweaking.Boulder could be better the best spots are not in the playpark.Lyons is decent at good flows.Never done Pueblo doesn't 't seem to be praised or criticized much. Loveland could possibly make one.

Is the Longmont park below the confluences with Lefthand, Boulder, and So. Boulder?not that they carry much water either.All for more urban parks but without water it is semi pointless.


----------



## Pizzle (Jun 26, 2007)

Good to here about Confluence, it would seem to be in the best interests of Denver for an improvement. And I take back the comment on no good parks. The one by Dumont is pretty sweet when there is water.


----------



## Pizzle (Jun 26, 2007)

Grrr iphone


----------



## FrankC (Jul 8, 2008)

Somebody should put in one of those recirculating concrete artificial WW parks like they have in S. Carolina and Maryland. Denver would be the perfect spot for one those because we have plenty of boaters but no water 10 months of the year. They built one of these in Deep Creek, MD in a place surounded by year round whitewater but we don't have on in CO? Doesn't make too much sense to me.


----------



## Pizzle (Jun 26, 2007)

An Olympic quality training center would be nice, but I could probably count all the slalom boaters in CO on one hand. We are a special interest group as white water boaters, and it would probably be best not to draw that kind of attention to ourselves with the use of tax payer dollars. Besides, where would all the people in t-shirts go swimming during the summer?


----------



## Juan De Confluence (Apr 22, 2005)

*Confluence Park Master Plan*

Hola,

Confluence Park is indeed slated for a rebuild in the next couple of years.
there are lots of info and pics here:
Confluence Park 

Here is a mockup:









This deisgn includes replacing the diversion dam structure on the river left side with a series of wave features that would only run at higher water, and improving and lengthening the low flow channel on the right.

There are many other projects on the drawing board for the urban river. Probably the most significant from a boaters perspective is the replacement of the large drop at Florida ave with a series of drop structures. For an overview of all the planning that has taken place check out these "vision Plans" The Greenway Foundation :: RVIP-South Platte Master Plan 

Also just for reference, you can cartwheel in Confluence year round. even below 100cfs. You have to know how to work an eddy line and have a quick roll, but almost all of the drops give up a few different moves. Loops not so much...enjoy

Juan


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

I should say that I have no idea what the status of the Confluence plan is.My friend and infrequent Buzz member Paddilyfluids. is an architect and attends meetings of urban planning /greenway foundation (?).These ideas get kicked around.Getting through all.the redtape and funding is a different story.Down at Confluence Kayaks they have a pamphlet with illustrations of the proposed faux canyon by Gates.I think the new drops by Zuni are the first phase of that project.I don 't think they are necessarily designed for boating, sure don 't look like it

Paddilyfluids is all about developing lower Clear Creek.There are a number of drops in an industrial corridor and Clear has the most reliable flows of all Front Range creeks.C L P if it is considered a 'Front Range ' river is another one that has had talk of a Fort Collins park for oh..ten years or so.
.

I 'm going on a trip next month and will.be checking out Dayton,Ohio, and Columbus, Georgia, playparks,both slated to open. "spring of 2013 " does anyone know the status of these projects.It looks like Columbus /Phenix City wad already pretty good.In researching got this trip I see that they are trying to build a whitewater park in NW Arkansas


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

I guess we were writing at the same time Juan  are they going to redo DeadDog /Waterworks?That drop is really fun at super high flows.



I think the proposed Nw Arkansas park is like the one in Maryland.


----------



## paulk (Apr 24, 2006)

Fort Collins should have a park, yes. Also just throwing it out there I would also be willing to dive an extra 30 min toward chatfield to avoid getting hepatitis at confluence if the park was closer to the foothills. Meh not going to happen but it would be cool.


----------



## cayo 2 (Apr 20, 2007)

-yeah Paul Liegh Gulch is only a couple miles south of Union but way cleaner .The C-470 put in drop could possibly be made into multiple drops like Jon said they are doing to Florida...the big glassy slow wave right below Chatfield dam could be constricted /funnelized....


----------



## LongmontRafter (Jun 12, 2008)

> Somebody should put in one of those recirculating concrete artificial WW parks like they have in S. Carolina and Maryland. Denver would be the perfect spot for one those because we have plenty of boaters but no water 10 months of the year. They built one of these in Deep Creek, MD in a place surounded by year round whitewater but we don't have on in CO? Doesn't make too much sense to me.


I saw one of these posted in another thread...great idea for Colorado (and Longmont)!


----------



## Anchorless (Aug 3, 2010)

erdvm1 said:


> You'd really go play boating October through late march????
> I want some of the drugs your on.


We playboat October through March here in Idaho.


----------



## KSC (Oct 22, 2003)

I'm reluctant to discourage more water parks, but I tend to agree with a couple comments above that the biggest problem with WW parks in CO is the lack of water. If Longmont puts in a park that runs 6/1 - 6/20, the chances of me using it are about 0%. If it has a park that runs in Oct or March, that would be great. 

It's good to hear they're going to improve Confluence. Water quality is certainly bad, but when I'm trying to prep for a trip and it's the only place with water in it, I'm thankful. It's got the longest season of anything on the FR, for sure. 

CO boaters seem to have a bad attitude about boating in anything other than ideal conditions, which is odd considering how short our season is, but I guess reflects all the other cool outdoor sports available. Seems like the old generation of top notch boaters would hone their skills all winter running gates in class II and freezing temps in DC so they could fire it up during runoff.

Lack of quality play holes in the existing parks, in my opinion, reflects that the cities are interested in creating popular spaces around these parks, not creating world class play holes. I think Boulder hasn't done anything to their park for years because they have no incentive. It's super popular rightnow (tubers, swimmers, runners, walkers, drinkers, gapers, Dave Frank), even though the features are kind of a joke. Seems like the same with Golden. There is untapped potential in some of the features, but it's packed with people in and out of the water, so they have no incentive to pay $ to improve the features. 

Back on topic though, it says the city has a RICD for a WW park, but what does this equate to in terms of actual cfs during the year?


----------



## johng (Apr 25, 2005)

Well, all those near Longmont should be happy. I'm still baffled, and disappointed, that Ft Collins, with the Poudre and a very active boating community, is so far behind Lyons, Longmont, Boulder, Golden, Reno, Pagosa, Durango, etc, etc. I can't believe we're so far behind. I wish our city leader would wake up and see the light.

Oh well, I think Longmont should go for it. I hope they develop a great park that attracts boaters and all those that just enjoy spectating. Seems like all these river parks are great attractions and a good way to help people appreciate the resource.


----------



## Phillips (Feb 19, 2004)

Oklahoma city of all places is putting in one of those Olympic center WW parks like the one in NC. OKC has maybe three kayakers including me ( and I've been in CO now for over 20 years). So yes great idea for CO



LongmontRafter said:


> I saw one of these posted in another thread...great idea for Colorado (and Longmont)!


----------



## stephenwright (Oct 20, 2012)

*Sweet!*

Sounds great! Having seen MANY parks in several countries, I'll kick in a few ideas of my own.

-No matter what else is listed as a priority, make sure that one of the top priority is to create a least one playable feature for low water...looks like there's generally more than 50 cfs in the river from march to november. You won't get a fantastic playspot with just 50 cfs, but you could have something constricted enough to be deep enough to cartwheel/loop, which would give paddlers something to do during some months when there isn't much else to do. There's already plenty of things to paddle during peak flow season, so creating another alternative is less valuable than creating something that will work during other times.

-create some sort of financial accountability system for whatever group is building the park...if a committee doesn't approve of the quality of the features after a year, a bonus is withheld and another company gets to come in and fix it (plan on spending some $ to fix whatever's originally built...it usually takes several tries to get something that's very good (like BV, Salida, Lyons, etc...which have been improved several times))....BUT if an oversight committee is satisfied with the quality of the park after a year, the $ saved on improvements could be given to the design group as a bonus. Otherwise there is no incentive for the design group to get it right, and there have been many crappy WW parks built with zero accountability.

-look into the guys @ riverrestoration.org for planning/construction (builders of Glenwood/vail's redesign). They seem to have fewer total failures than the other larger design groups.

Stephen Wright


----------

