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?