Waterpark to be ready for Summer 2018

Although the most recent date for release of the Waterfront Study is now May 2018, one idea from it is going ahead.  On Monday, Council approved going ahead with a Waterpark based on the tender bid by Peterborough based ATL Distributing.  They will supply and operate a Waterpark made by Aquaglide.  At the Council meeting, they provided operational and financial details.  Once finally approved at next week’s regular Council meeting, the contract will be for 2 years with a 3 year extension available.  The Town will get 10% of gross revenues which are estimated to be $278K – so an estimated $27.8K/year will go to the Town.  Economic benefits include 8 local seasonal jobs (mostly lifeguards) and an increase in Tourists who will likely also stay longer.

Aqua Glide - sample feature
Aqua Glide – sample feature

Dean Hustwick said that this “aligns with Cobourg’s Tourism Strategy” as well as being good for local residents – especially on week days.

The presentation (see link below) emphasized safety and that the WOW factor would make Cobourg’s Beach even more attractive to Tourists and get a lot of media attention.  Local residents would get a discounted rate during off-peak times.

The attraction would be divided into two parts – one closer to shore with water 4ft deep for 3 to 9 year olds and a larger one further out for older children.   Parents can accompany the younger children (at no charge).  It will be open from June 23rd to September 3 (2018 dates) starting at 10:00am – 7 days a week.  Closing times are 6:00pm weekdays and 8:00pm weekends.

Safety is paramount with multiple lifeguards on duty at all times as well as the requirement that all users must wear supplied life jackets. Lifeguards will be staged on structures and circle the park on stand up paddleboards to ensure participants’ safety. Waivers must be signed by all participants and rules of the park will be predominantly posted at the entrance. A security company will monitor the park during all closed hours.

Managing the park would be done on the beach then users would walk out to the park.  Marker buoys would indicate the area occupied.

Fees planned are:

  • Kid Park – 2 Hours: $10.00 each
  • Full Park – 2 Hours: $15.00 each
  • ½ Day – Kid Park: $15.00 each
  • ½ Day – Full Park: $25.00 each
  • Full Day – Full Park: $35.00 each
  • Group Rate Both Parks:
    • 2 Hours (15+ guests at one time): $12.50 each

These fees include the life vest rental.  Wetsuits will also be available for rent.

Financial Analysis

These numbers were provided by ATL Distributing based on their experience. Included is an allowance for average bad weather days (although last year was worse than average).

  • Estimated Annual Revenue:  $277,965
  • Estimated Total Annual Operating Costs:  $228,398
  • Operating Income before Concession Fees:  $49,567

Concession Fee payable to Town of Cobourg: 10% of annual gross revenue.

ATL Distributing will cover setup costs, safety equipment, life jackets, fencing and storage at a cost of $211,604 (pre-tax).

Size for Cobourg’s Installation

A – Large Aquapark (9+ years of age):
The large park would comprise of a mix of climbers, bouncers, swings and slides, as well as several other challenge pieces designed to get you wet in the water. The large park would measure approximately 192’ wide x 80’ deep and would hold a capacity of 100 people at a time.

B –The “Kid” Aquapark (3-9 years of age):
The smaller “kid” park would measure approximately 80’ wide x 60’ deep and would hold a capacity of 30 people at a time. Water depth in this area would be 4’ to 5’ deep, therefore parents can stand in the water to supervise their climbing, bouncing, sliding children. This smaller park however, is durable enough for adults to climb if a parent needed to access their child.

Cobourg will be joining other municipalities internationally in Australia, Germany, Great Britain, Croatia, Greece, France and Italy and in Canada in Kelowna, Montreal, Penticton and Barrie. New municipal waterparks are opening in Orillia and Oka in 2018.  Given the fast track on our Council, Cobourg should also open in 2018.

Below are a couple of pictures showing the design and location on the beach.  As you can see, the Park will be well way from the pier and nearer the east end of the beach.

Video from AquaGlide


Print Article: 


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
11 April 2018 1:21 pm

John Draper….does the platform for this blog allow you to limit the number of posts on any given topic by a commenter and if so, would you be willing to employ such a feature?

10 April 2018 10:26 am

It is really great to see council have not caved to the we don’t want more people in Our town people. This water park will go down a treat with my son and his young friends. Our friends in Toronto are already planning trips to come out and enjoy the water park. Friends that will also be eating and shopping in town. It’s sad to see (thankfully only a few) people that will try to stop something like this with silly arguments about safety. If this is considered dangerous you may just want to bubble wrap your kids and keep them locked up with their Xbox. At least that is safe, or is it?

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Damit
10 April 2018 10:41 am

Professional survey results indicate that your view is the view of the majority of Cobourg residents.

10 April 2018 8:59 am

As most of you know by now almost any study and question can be poised and slanted to create a
picture for which the study and purpose was intended,
I believe a simple way to resolve this waterfront nonsense once and for all and most importantly accurately.
would be to send out a Simple questionnaire to the residents on the Tax rolls of Cobourg which the Town already has the mailing info for asking straight forward questions on 1- Marina Expansion 2- water front floating park
3-Who do we want to spend our Tax dollars on locals or tourists 4 – Should we sell off a financial looser such as the CCC to a professional private operator while still maintaining programs there for the locals,
I also believe a independent group other than the town or conflicted parties should be allowed to tally the votes or info received back May be a Church or some other independent
Just a thought

Wally Keeler
Reply to  sandpiper
10 April 2018 9:28 am

Yes, “almost any study and question can be poised and slanted” BUT were they? What indication is there that this professional consultancy had done just that? If there is some evidence of this, then I’d love to see it.

I’d love to see the data that made the Cobourg Taxpayers Association pronounce in bold font and underlined as well, the assertion that Most of the citizens of Cobourg have indicated that they do not want more visitors coming to the beach. Ha ha ha. Talk about incompetence. The drafter of that foolish missive should be expelled from the CTA.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
10 April 2018 2:39 pm

If you don’t believe that the questionnaire and report was slanted then consider the consultant’s preliminary conclusions provided at the public meeting a few months ago. There was no question on the survey about a travel lift yet it was deemed to be the second most important change to the waterfront.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Dubious
10 April 2018 3:49 pm

blah blah blah

Wally Keeler
9 April 2018 5:51 pm

The President of Cobourg Taxpayers Association, Lydia Smith, asserted without any substantiation, that “Most of the citizens of Cobourg have indicated that they do not want more visitors coming to the beach.

Dean Hustwick, Director of Culture and Recreation cited stats acquired from the waterfront consultancy survey that indicates that 80% of Cobourg residents consider tourism to be and will be important to the Town economy. Only a miserable measly 8.95% disagree.

The President of CobourgTaxpayers Association, Lydia Smith, asserted “In direct opposition to the wishes of Cobourg citizens, municipal staff appear to be motivated by two things: To generate revenue for the town, To support our struggling King Street.”

Dean Hustwick, director of Culture and Recreation cited stats acquired from the waterfront consultancy survey that indicated that 56% of Cobourg residents and 72% of Cobourg businesses want development of waterfront activity. Only a meagre measly 24% disagreed.

The wide discrepancy between CTA’s unsubstantiated assertions, and Dean Hustwick’s citation of survey facts, would indicate that the CTA is seriously out of touch with the majority of Cobourg residents.

But this is the best bit of ludicrousness of the CTA letter: “municipal staff appear to be motivated by two things: 1. To generate revenue for the town 2.To support our struggling King Street.Satire can’t get any better than this. But wait for it, the elections are coming, more foot-in-mouth moments to come.

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Wally Keeler
10 April 2018 9:04 am

And this from the folks who want to replace Town Staff “who ignore Cobourg citizens” after the next election.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
10 April 2018 10:14 am

Yes, the gross mischaracterization of Deb McCarthy. as per “at the merest suggestion of
Q&A, Councillor McCarthy launched into a six-minute rant”
. and this gem, “four of seven members of council openly afraid of citizen questions.” CTA is openly afraid to reveal a simple stat — how many members? Of course they have the RIGHT to not disclose, but nevertheless, they are “openly afraid” to answer questions.

Will the CTA be openly afraid to answer a resident’s question about how the CTA concluded in bold underlined print that Most of the citizens of Cobourg have indicated that they do not want more visitors coming to the beach. Cobourg residents want to know how CTA could get it so wrong and be so out of touch with the majority of Cobourg citizens.

Wally Keeler
9 April 2018 3:55 pm

Many Cobourg baby boomers went to Toronto for its opportunities or to Belleville or Kingston or Ottawa or elsewhere, got married, had children. They all have memories of Victoria Park and Beach and especially The Pav. From time to time on the weekends they would return to Cobourg with their children in tow to frolic on the beach while visiting their parents. Then parents become grandparents, and now it is grandchildren who come to visit Cobourg grandma and frolic on the beach. Many of these “out-of-towners”, that the grump, gripe and groan committee contemptuously smear every chance they get, are often people with deep familial roots in Cobourg and area, and I dare say with roots deeper than many of the pathetic parachutes from outside who chronically grump, gripe and groan about day-tripping out-of-towners.

Wally Keeler
9 April 2018 1:15 pm

Victoria Park and Beach has been the playground of Cobourg’s residents for generations and it will continue that way. It’s not a place of peace and quiet and the grumpy geriatric generation that wants that sort of thing should move across from a cemetery.

During the 1960’s Louis Stover held the Saturday Night Dance at The Pav. Live rock bands, disco lights, etc. The local teens often enjoyed the attendance of visiting trailer park teens, and other day tripping teens from Port Hope, Baltimore, Grafton, Harwood, etc. to dance, party and get it on; often during break, small groups of teens hootin and hollerin, run into the water, or throw a squeeling teen girl into the water, and a least once a year, a brief skinny dip by a bunch of mixed teens.

Victoria Park and beach is one of Cobourg’s greatest educational institutions. It is here that teens often get their first kiss, their first drink of alcohol, or first toke, or first whatever. It is here that love can break out in July only to be broken in August. And some last. Local children from day cares are caterpillered to the park where they can squeal with total lungs and frolic bare feet in grass and sand. Man, that is freedom. That is the rite of passage of Cobourg children, Cobourg teens, and they still live here watching their children and grandchildren frolic free and loud as lungs permit.

Walter L. Luedtke
9 April 2018 9:24 am

And now some positive views:
“I think this is great — the fact you can be in the water to watch your young kids and have something for the whole family to enjoy, so I think it’s a really well put-together proposal,” said councillor Aaron Burchat.
Jason Pulchinski (owner of the company that will install Aquaglide) said the waterpark will prove to be a great draw for the town and its businesses.
“We found with all the parks, boating [and] camping traffic, you will find people will stay an extra day,” he explained.
“If they are transient boaters coming from Toronto to the Trent Severn Waterway, they may plan their schedule to stay an extra day because of the waterpark.” GlobalNews

9 April 2018 8:52 am

I remember when the shoe was on the other foot — Walters block of home owners had plenty of concerns about a few fishermen in his back yard and parking on his street . Didnèt they have the town impose some new Regulations and hire some policing é game wardens to scare those fishermen away .
Just some fathers taking their Kids fishing may be 50 or 60 of them But at least they are quiet == don t want to scare the fish – Something about Garbage , dead fish , noise etc
NIMBY possibly but as any body living south of King st in the summer can tell you its not that pleasant
we have a thousand or so out of towners down here at any given tine for up to 3 months . That I can tell you never shop in the down town They come prepared and go home tired in their beach attire .
Then there are a lot of idiots that rely on their car security systems to locate their cars , and then the
accidental and car break ins where the horns beep for an hour.

Its not NIMBYism just the same concerns you might have for your end of town if you could see and experience what actually happens down here and the lack of respect the Town has for its residents .

If there was a clear benefit to the downtown and the immediate neighbourhood I would say fine but thats not the
case here .

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  perplexed
9 April 2018 9:11 am

Perpy – please read my posts on that subject.
I posted that I thought their concerns were overblown.
It has been my experience that some folks who have chosen to live next to parks or the waterfront or any other public property, will try to restrict and/or prevent the public from enjoying that public property.
That is understandable, but still NIMBY.

Bill Thompson
Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
9 April 2018 9:31 am

“Perpy” . ….?

Reply to  Bill Thompson
9 April 2018 9:50 am

Walter L. Luedtke has a problem with some names so he just either spells them differently or changes them altogether.

Wally Keeler
9 April 2018 6:02 am

The CTA missive reads:
“Most of the citizens of Cobourg have indicated that they do not want more visitors coming to the beach. Many feel it is crowded enough already. In direct opposition to the wishes of Cobourg citizens, municipal staff appear to be motivated by two things: To generate revenue for the town. To support our struggling King Street. I believe that town staff are selling out our most beautiful natural asset – our Cobourg Beach – for less than $30,000.

FACT: the claim that most citizens don’t want more visitors to the beach is unsubstantiated.

CTA also claims that “Cobourg citizens” are opposed to two things: 1. the dastardly deed of desiring revenue for the Town and 2. and the dastardly deed of wanting to support “our struggling King Street”.

Some are, but CTA again offers no substantiation that “Cobourg citizens” oppose revenue and supporting King Street.

CTA righteously claims that the Town sold out our “most beautiful natural asset” for less than $30,000. CTA takes the condescending sniff sniff that any revenue under $30,000 is unworthy of the Town.

The $30,000 is arbitrary, a limit set for no substantial reason at all. What limit would the CTA accept? $100,000 or $500,000 or higher? Price haggling?

In any event, CTA claims that they take this stand to protect the “most beautiful natural asset”. The west beach is as natural as it gets, and as beautiful as it gets all seasons. There are unfettered views from this most beautiful natural asset. But then again, it doesn’t earn revenue.

The so-called view from Victoria Park beach is already fettered with yachts parked just outside the buoys, wind surfers, etc.

Concerned senior
8 April 2018 2:59 pm

The whiners and nay sayers boggles my mind. The New Amherst Catholic French School, and the Water Park are good additions to the community.We have a diverse population. Look around folks there IS something for everybody. I am 76 years old, living in Cobourg 50 years. Raised two children here…have 4 grandchildren in the Cobourg public school system within the French immersion program. My concern…is Cobourg becoming the “villages” of “Sunset City” of the north. Make it less about me and more about the youth of the community. If you see “bleakness” in your life…look at the mess we are leaving them.
It brings tears to my eyes…

Walter L. Luedtke
8 April 2018 9:26 am

Yeah well!
What about the fish?
Nobody talks about the fish.
And they were here first!

Wally Keeler
Reply to  ben
8 April 2018 12:11 pm

warm or cool, the exhilaration of young people noisily enjoying themselves, making their bodies stronger from the exercise. Lots of benefits, not least the $27.8k per annum and the 40,000 extra people added to the main street.

Methinks the chronic whiners about tourists should have moved closer to cemeteries for the peace and quiet they offer. In any event, there is the west beach with all of its splendid natural surroundings — it’s largely tourist-free.

Wally Keeler
7 April 2018 7:29 pm

CTA claims, “Most of the citizens of Cobourg have indicated that they do not want more visitors coming to the beach.”

According to what survey?

Reply to  Wally Keeler
7 April 2018 7:56 pm

Please provide us with your survey that shows that we do want more visitors.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Dubious
8 April 2018 11:37 am

There is no survey, period. I’m asking what survey, showing either do or don’t. Get it? Quit making everything personal. The pettiness is tiring, not to say boring.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
8 April 2018 7:18 pm

Thank you for admitting that there was no survey and that you merely fabricated a conclusion to suit your notions. Your pettiness is both tiring and boring.

Deborah OConnor
Reply to  Dubious
8 April 2018 7:35 pm

You missed the point Dubious. That was the CTA that claims to have done some sort of survey and concluded people don’t want more people on the beach. Where can we find details on that or is that an example of wishful thinking? I’ve never heard of it.

Reply to  Deborah OConnor
8 April 2018 8:01 pm

I asked what evidence Wally had that Cobourgians wanted more tourists since he implied that the CTA assertion was incorrect. Not speaking for the CTA but rather commenting on what my friends and neighbours have said: All are opposed to a water park. They don’t want more tourists.

Wally admitted that his beliefs, as usual, were unsubstantiated.

Fact Checker
Reply to  Deborah OConnor
8 April 2018 8:32 pm

Where exactly has the CTA claimed to have done a survey?
Please provide the link or source
I look forward to your reply and to reviewing this CTA information to see if their conclusions are invalid as you claim.

Reply to  Fact Checker
8 April 2018 8:37 pm

Don’t bother asking. Wally is only unsubstantiated bluster.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Dubious
10 April 2018 7:26 pm

It was the CTA that was proven to be unsubstantiated bluster. Ha ha ha.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Fact Checker
9 April 2018 5:13 am

CTA claimed “Most of the citizens of Cobourg have indicated that they do not want more visitors coming to the beach.”

How did they determine that? Tough question to answer. All I am asking is, Prove it!

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Fact Checker
10 April 2018 7:25 pm

FACT CHECKER: listen to waterfront survey facts enunciated by Dean Hustwick. Those stats indicate the opposite of CTA claims, which remain totally unsubstantiated. Check the facts Fact Checker.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
10 April 2018 9:38 pm

You are correct. Mr. Hustwick’s statements are totally unsubstantiated. Those who purport to be presenting the consultant’s results but are unwilling to present the actual consultant’s report have no credibility.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Dubious
11 April 2018 2:12 am

blah blah blah

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Deborah OConnor
9 April 2018 5:10 am

Well, the CTA fails miserably to support its ludicrous contention that “Most of the citizens of Cobourg have indicated that they do not want more visitors coming to the beach.”

It’s not wishful thinking, it is fake news. Ask CTA to put up or shut up.

7 April 2018 2:35 pm

Our beach has always been an egalitarian space. A place where children, regardless of how much money their parents had, could lose themselves in happy, peaceful, imaginative play on the edge of one of the mightiest lakes on Earth. And now, for the dubious possibility of this town adding a few thousand dollars to its coffers, the peace of everyone on the beach is to be shattered by the hysterical shrieks of children bouncing around on some gaudy excrescence off-shore. Often local people spend every day at the beach in the summer and, for the first time in the history of this town, it be will be transformed from a free and happy environment where families could spent all afternoon with a pause for a popsicle or ice cream cone to a place where a mother or father on a budget will have to explain to their children over and over again why they can’t join the other children who seem to be having so much fun. It is our beach. We pay our taxes and we have the right to enjoy the natural beauty of the lake, which will not be possible when this dangerous floating ‘playground’ is installed. And who is liable if someone should be seriously injured or even lose their life? There are many other reasons that this ‘attraction’ is inappropriate, many of which have been cited by others on this blog. This is just another idiot scheme by our idiot town council.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Tim
7 April 2018 5:13 pm

a place where a mother or father on a budget will have to explain to their children over and over again why they can’t join the other children who seem to be having so much fun. It is our beach.

Oh dear, now we have the politics of envy arguement. I grew up in a poor family, and when the carnival came to the park, I could afford a ride, a single ride, and candy floss on the side. No one in my family taught me to envy others. It’s a petty concern.

Everyone is required to wear a life jacket. There will be lifeguards on duty. Where is the danger? Perhaps a deranged speed boater will run into it and CNN can blame Trump supporters.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
7 April 2018 11:39 pm

The carnivals stayed for a week or two, not the entire summer and there was no admission fee. Everyone could wander through them and have fun even if they couldn’t afford a ride but the rides in those were pretty cheap and so was the candy floss. Don’t dismiss the difficulty of explaining that you can’t afford something to a child and trivialize it with some supercilious comment about the politics of envy. If you really did come from a poor family, you’re a little out of touch with your past.

Reply to  Tim
8 April 2018 9:18 am

Tim, you’ve said in one word what others having trying to (for years), with sentences, paragraphs, indeed whole stories and haven’t quite hit the nail on the head. Well done.

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Frenchy
8 April 2018 9:51 am

“This is just another idiot scheme by our idiot town council.”
But par for the course with your lot!

Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
8 April 2018 10:24 am

Walter, please be careful under who’s comment you post your replies. This appears as though you are attributing that quote to me and it could get confusing. Your lot is confusing enough.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Tim
8 April 2018 11:48 am

The carnivals always stayed less than a week. Get your facts straight. The beach and water are accessible for free for everyone, today, just as it was decades ago. Other children had families that could afford inflated water toys, whereas I could not. There was no despair because of this fact. I wasv’t screwed up with the politics of envy, about why some have more than others. If I wanted something bad enough, I earned it or did without. I don’t teach my children to exaggerate their entitlements, and cater to feelings of envy.

Yes, I really came from a poor family. Single mother, dishwasher at the hospital, father, a floor sweeper, committed suicide when I was 14, had to endure an individual yelling across the street, “You’re as crazy as your old man.” I received other cruel comments from righteous bullies, but such is life in a small town. Boo hoo to me. My father was too much of a coward to live, and I got the message. So your petty snipe that I am out of touch with my past is gratuitous nonsense and pathetic.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
8 April 2018 7:06 pm

I apologize for my flippant comment about you being out of touch with your past. There was no place for it on a blog like this. It was uncalled for, I was out of line, and your powerful response has shocked me. One of the worst things that could happen to someone, happened to you, and I honour your courage in refusing to define yourself as a victim. Few people in this world would have that strength of character. People have different endurance levels for this life and, although their end might seem like cowardice to those who loved them most, I don’t think they ever realize the pain they are inflicting on the loved ones they leave behind. Once, when I was discussing depression with a woman who had suffered from a severe form of depression for most of her life, she described its darkest moments like this: “You cannot accept love and you cannot give love.” Incidentally, I don’t think you were poor at all. No one with strength of character ever is.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Tim
9 April 2018 5:29 am

Kudos Tim, because of your integrity. Anyway, the pathetic individual who yelled across the street also served the purpose of building up my immune system to my petty pseudonym detractors. Now back to the issues at hand.

7 April 2018 2:33 pm

Now listen up, folks. The reason I moved to Cobourg from Toronto was because Toronto was just too quiet. Not enough attractions, nothing to do on weekends. No culture. No social scene. Deadsville.

Cobourg on the other hand – wow! Carnivals! Ribfest! An Expanding Marina! And, just when I thought it couldn’t possibly get any better – a Water Park! Did I just die and go to heaven?

Walt Dismay would be proud.

Wally Keeler
6 April 2018 9:42 pm

Gosh, this town has a lot of imported grumps. After reading many of the comments below, I’m getting the idea that there is quite a few people who are downright miserable living in this town. I grew up here and I know the people who grew up here and we are in the majority and a vast majority of that majority love living in their hometown. I suspect most of the moaners, groaners and miserable tightwads came from away to stay, whereas they resent the day trippers who also come from away but don’t stay.

6 April 2018 12:47 pm

Be careful Cobourg as “Dean” tries to build his empire.

Pamela Jackson
6 April 2018 11:54 am

Please, don’t let the wonderful town I remember turn into another “Blackpool” or similar waterfront location that has been turned into a laughing stock with tacky, “carnie” like attractions. Cobourg’s beauty is the beach, plain and simple, leave it alone. This won’t attract visitors who shop downtown, it will bring more of the same day trippers who don’t care a jot about the beach, the town and its amenities. They only care about getting a cheap
family day out, leaving their garbage and getting back to the highway as soon as possible. On Council a few years ago I remember the problems that came up time and time again with the influx of weekend beach users.
Downtown will not benefit, the town coffers will not benefit, give your collective heads a shake and remember
what makes Cobourg’s waterfront so very special. It’s certainly not more tacky “attractions”.

Reply to  Pamela Jackson
6 April 2018 1:08 pm

Well said!

Reply to  Pamela Jackson
6 April 2018 2:45 pm

I disagree

Reply to  Ewok
6 April 2018 8:12 pm

Clearly we disagree.
If you have feelings about the planned waterpark you can now express your opinion. See https://www.cobourg.ca/en/have-your-say.aspx

I suppose that this is a good thing except it is a little late since the waterpark has been approved!

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Pamela Jackson
6 April 2018 2:49 pm

“What’s a “Blackpool”?

Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
6 April 2018 3:00 pm
Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Dafuq
6 April 2018 3:35 pm

Thank you Daf**k Strange name.
Perhaps I should remind you that this is a family blog.
Far from being a laughing stock, Blackpool seems to be doing rather well indeed.
“Big construction projects such as the new £25m Winter Gardens conference centre, the £20m Hampton by Hilton, the five star Sands Hotel and several quality housing and apartment developments show that there is huge confidence in the future of Blackpool. “There is a real dynamic feel about the town.”
Read more at: https://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/our-region/blackpool/blackpool-s-key-projects-are-set-to-bring-a-dynamic-feel-to-2018-1-8934815

Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
6 April 2018 7:08 pm

“Thank you Daf**k! Strange name.”

I assumed that someone with a name like Luedtke might be more accustomed to unusual sounding names in North America. I have a friend Tariq Dufaq from Oman, I’ll be sure to tell him he has a strange name.

There are only 33 Luedtke’s listed on 411.ca in a country of 36,000,000. I’d say that’s a strange name in our country never mind a small town like Cobourg, yet no one feels the need to make comment on it.

Why would you spell it out like that on a family blog? We all know you are the master of cut/paste, couldn’t you have just done that instead of spelling it like you did in front of the kids? No one, including you, likes to see their name misspelled.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Frenchy
6 April 2018 9:33 pm

Where was your righteous scold when Ben Burd commented “F*** off, …”?

Reply to  Wally Keeler
8 April 2018 7:08 am

Walter, an ‘open’ apology to Dafuq is in order. Plus I think John may have missed the offensive statement as it should have also been deleted.

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Pamela Jackson
6 April 2018 9:30 pm

“Downtown will not benefit, the town coffers will not benefit,”

The town coffer is expected to gain $27.8K, which would be helpful to construct a bigger washroom and change room. Heck, it’s still a benefit if it only makes $18.7K per year.

A recent study determined that during the months of July and August, a total of 40,000 extra visitors stroll the downtown. It’s up to the retailers to bring that extra 40,000 into their stores.

6 April 2018 9:39 am

I think what EWOK was trying to get across in one of the comments — to the rest of us , was that fact that Most of Cobourg’s
Ventures into entertainment , programs , and services are Loosing $$$ for the purposes of attracting new residents , tax payers and tourists to our community . Whats wrong with those great Realtors you know
don’t they market out side of Cobourg .?? if there is reasonable product / homes , apartments or attractions for buyers & tourists they will come —– Lets just stop Loosing money to start with ! This town needs a year round solution to attract and keep people I don’t go to the Beach on cold damp windy off season days any more than the tourists do .
As far as the NIMBY comment goes thats getting Tired . This Council and Economic advisors are constantly imposing them selves and their failing Ideas on the Residents of Cobourg and their Wrights to Peaceful Enjoyment with out concern or Consequence ie Who wants a school in their back yard at New Amhurst
Retirement development , what property owners including the Trailer park residents south of King st want a
NOISY water park at their front door . The last thing I would want to hear is some loud Air Compressor
running all day or early in the morning inflating the water toys , Lets hold the Rib fest on your street next year
at least it won’t be muddy or damaging the park trees and landscape ,

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  perplexed
6 April 2018 10:31 am

Perpy, have you ever wondered whether you made a mistake by moving so close to the waterfront? Wouldn’t Roseneath or Warkworth have suited you more?
Seems that NIMBYs like you won’t stop folks from having fun in the water.
Speaking of water, wasn’t it you who claimed to have dirty, smelly, cloudy water in your taps in your post of June 25th last year?
And wasn’t it you who were all upset that the Health Department did not issue a ‘Boil Water’ Advisory for Cobourg?
Seems to me that the same hysteria is at work with the Waterpark.

Reply to  perplexed
6 April 2018 11:30 am

Perpy, why do you keep saying New Amherst is a retirement community, it is not advertised as one, and I do know there are famililies living there.And by the way, there are a lot of families in Cobourg or maybe you have never noticed. Their wants or needs are different than yours.
You are so negative about about so many things in Cobourg….please give it a break, relax, enjoy Cobourg , which is a wonderful place to live whether you are young or older.

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Pierre
6 April 2018 2:23 pm

This comment from the Civic Awards night:
“Great pictures and summary of a wonderful evening. So many young people involved in sports and volunteer activities.”

Rusty Brown
Reply to  perplexed
9 April 2018 1:48 am

Do you mean “losing” perhaps?

5 April 2018 3:19 pm

Please correct my thinking if I’m off here but it would appear to me that ATL Distributing is undertaking this venture to make $20867 per year? ( Operational profit of $49567- 28700 (concession fee).

7% profit to revenue doesn’t seem like a great return given the risk.

Am I missing or misinterpreting something here?

Reply to  Dafuq
5 April 2018 5:43 pm

I’m missing it too Dafuq.
Taken from ATL’s proposal to the Town:
The following waterpark set up costs will be covered by ATL Distributing at a cost of $211,604.00 (pre-tax):
• Waterpark structures, safety equipment, life jackets, fencing and storage.

At an anticipated profit of $21,771 per year, it will take them almost 10 years to pay off their original investment of that $211,604. Not sure of the life expectancy of these types of structures but I’ll bet it isn’t 10 years.
How do these guys make any money?

Maybe their budget will balance itself and they will make lots of dough while the kids frolic and network.

Reply to  Dafuq
6 April 2018 12:01 pm

Over the years we’ve had experience regarding the Town’s capabilities related to Business Case development/justification. Far to many times “let Holdco and / or Northam pay for it” is the prevailing mantra. Or like the Waterfront Master Plan where many of the huge projects, within that plan, haven’t any $$$$$ attributed to them and somehow assumed that would be okay. I understand that this community has to take on projects, for the purposes of enhancing the quality of life for its citizens, that don’t make a profit or even loose money (i.e. CCC). The ‘but’ is that it can become a habit; inconvenient analysis inhibiting expeditious delivery of pet projects without the requisite transparency to enable in-depth review/oversight.

5 April 2018 12:38 pm

Does anyone know why the Waterfront Report has now been delayed for 8 MONTHS?

Bill Thompson
Reply to  waterwatcher
5 April 2018 4:50 pm

Possibly waiting for summer when people go on holidays or at the cottage and not in town ?
Just a thought ..!

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Bill Thompson
6 April 2018 8:20 am

Uh Oh!
Another conspiracy being hatched by the Town Hall?
Good thing that the CTA is ever vigilant.

Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
6 April 2018 8:46 am

Walter, I would love to read your alternate explanation. Why the delay?

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Dubious
6 April 2018 10:15 am

Patience, Patience!
Want to ensure you are kept up-to-date with all the latest news and information? Sign up for the distribution list by emailing waterfront@cobourg.ca and providing your first and last name and email address.

Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
6 April 2018 10:55 am

I have provided my email at each public meeting and have received nothing so far. Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide a summary of the latest news and information here? Or have you also received nothing?

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Walter L. Luedtke
8 April 2018 11:59 am

The CTA has sent an email around this weekend accusing the “municipal staff appear to be motivated by two things: To generate revenue for the town. To support our struggling King Street.

Furthermore, the CTA accuses the “town staff are selling out our most beautiful natural asset – our Cobourg Beach – for less than $30,000.

Evidently the price ain’t right, that if it generate less than $30,000, then CTA sniffs at it, whines, then rejects.

One feature that the CTA fails at; what ideas have they put forth to generate more than $30,000 per annum to benefit the town?

Reply to  Wally Keeler
8 April 2018 3:05 pm

It would be trivial to reduce Cobourg’s expenses by $30K which has the same effect as adding $30K to the town’s income. A few suggestions:
No money for a consultant to produce a waterfront survey that was ignored when deciding to allow a waterpark.
No money for a consultant to develop a “cultural masterplan”.
No money for an “attraction specialist”.
No money for a visitor guide.
No money for a ridiculous sign in Kingston.
No money for an AGN which cannot attract visitors.
No money for an assistant for Mr. Hustwick’s empire.
No money for french fries at the CCC.
No money for…

Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  dubious
9 April 2018 3:45 pm

Don’t hurt yourself, Duby!

Wally Keeler
Reply to  dubious
9 April 2018 3:59 pm

Miserable tightwad. A song for Cobourg’s Scrooge: https://youtu.be/UskDupcLM0M

Deborah OConnor
Reply to  dubious
9 April 2018 9:38 pm

That’s quite a list Dubious, filled with backwards thinking and austerity for the future. Gruel and tepid water for everyone! Downright counter-productive if we want a vibrant and diverse community with a happy place for everyone in it. Perhaps you’d like to put up a fence at the beach and make everybody pay to use it, is that the kind of town you want?

Reply to  Deborah OConnor
9 April 2018 10:21 pm

Our residents and business cannot afford our high taxes. The only way to reduce taxes is to reduce expenditures. Do you disagree?

Our residents deserve first access to our beach. Do you disagree?

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Deborah OConnor
9 April 2018 11:00 pm

The thing of it is Deborah, that Dubious said, “commenting on what my friends and neighbours have said: All are opposed to a water park. They don’t want more tourists.

Dean Hustwick, Director of Culture and Recreation cited stats acquired from the waterfront consultancy survey that indicated 80% of Cobourg residents consider tourism to be and will be important to the Town economy. Only a miserable measly 8.95% disagree. That includes Dubious’ alleged “friends and neighbours.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
9 April 2018 11:09 pm

The results and recommendations of the waterfront study have not yet been released. Why do you believe that Dean’s summary is completely accurate?

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Dubious
9 April 2018 11:17 pm

What makes you think I believe that you have any friends or neighbours. Dean’s figures stand. Your figures? well, there ain’t none standing, other than your abysmal membership of the miserable measly 8.95%. Talk about a resident out of touch with the majority of what citizens of Cobourg think about. You’re it.. LOL.

Reply to  Wally Keeler
10 April 2018 8:45 am

Thank you for your confidence!

I don’t live downtown so the waterpark won’t affect me; I won’t see it and I won’t use it. My objection is to the process of approval. Cobourg spent many thousands of dollars to determine what residents wanted albeit using a survey with very slanted questions to elicit the desired answers. The results of the “dot exercise”, survey, stakeholder meetings, etc. have not been released yet Dean used his version of the results to justify a project. Why not wait for the final report of the consultants and its approval by Council before making decisions?

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Dubious
10 April 2018 9:04 am

Blah blah blah

Walter L. Luedtke
5 April 2018 11:29 am

Yeah well!
Kids having fun and learning French in Cobourg!
Don’t they know this is a ‘Senior’s Community’?

5 April 2018 10:26 am

It’s a shame it’s so expensive. Would like to see the local discount. I have two kids and wouldn’t pay $70 for a water park for them.

5 April 2018 9:28 am

Yes sure, that is what we need for our grandchildren as a seniors community another expense added when going to the beach. Yes sure, that is what we need more noise coming from the beach area.
The reality I know, the Cobourg beach Lake Ontario water is either too cold or often has unsafe bacteria levels.
The reality I see, something that is detrimental to the beach area. An eyesore. For the people who want to use the beach in the traditional way of enjoying the beach as sand, water, and sun this is a setback plan.
The reality I see is this does not bring in profit to Cobourg or the downtown area. People who bring their family to use a water park are not the same people who frequent shopping or eating in local downtown restaraunts.

Reply to  Donna
5 April 2018 11:50 am

Donna – Wow…I know a few good real-estate reps and I hear there is good value in Frankford 🙂 Cobourg is more than a seniors community, I would add much more. Our youth soccer programs, baseball programs, volleyball programs, boys/girls minor hockey, lacrosse programs, YMCA Day Camps, rock and bowl, church programs, etc… are filled to the brim with young people who will utilize the waterpark not to mention the crazy moms, dads, uncles, aunts and grandparents – maybe even you?! haha

Reply to  Donna
5 April 2018 3:06 pm

I do question how many customers there will be throughout the early and later part of the season. Call me a wimp if you must, but the water does tend to be too cold during some of the time when the park will be opened. But then again, kids may just put up with the discomfort :).

Donna, I tend to agree with you on your point about those families not eating in the local restaurants. Given the cost of the water park fee, many may decide to bring food from home in order to cut the cost of this day trip. It’s not easy for many families to survive the cost of living these days. I have always questioned how much money the “tourists” spend when in town. I could be wrong, but I think there are many who just come to town to use the free beach. I would really be interested in hearing from the businesses in town and find out how much more they make during those “tourist” months. Perhaps this has already been published?

5 April 2018 9:19 am

Great idea – I also like the term agreement with either a termination or extension after 2 years….splash away people!

5 April 2018 9:18 am

Desperate Moves from desperate people Cobourg’s Tourism Strategy What strategy the beach has always done well on its own This will do ZIP for the down town more $$ will be spent at the beach not down town .
This is merely attracting families with Children Budgets , fixed income save for their future kind of thing Not the Shoppers that will benefit downtown .The $27 K if there is that much and weather permitting will be gone in a heart beat from increase in expense , enforcement , clean up
and possibly even insurance costs and claims and I hope we have resolved the Parking issues
and Noise that comes along with all this .

Reply to  perplexed
5 April 2018 9:40 am

Great comment perplexed

Reply to  perplexed
5 April 2018 11:24 am

Perplexed that really was a NIMBY post. Like arenas sometimes the town has to provide services or attractions that operate at a net zero (or less) operating cost for the purpose of creating interest, entertainment, etc.. in/for the community. Where was the benefit in hosting the seniors games, the RBC Cup, buskers downtown, highland games, movies in the park, the lights at Christmas, the art gallery or employing a Town Crier. Not any one group benefits from all of these initiatives however the over arching effect is the creation and promotion of a wonderful, thriving community which (perhaps) attracts new tax paying residents while improving the quality of life for existing Cobourgians.

In this case a third party operator assumes most of the risk and the town, while a stake holder, should have little to do with the operation. Kids are going to love it – I can’t wait to try it!

Reply to  Ewok
5 April 2018 3:30 pm

Sorry Ewok, but I must say that I am tired of hearing accusations of NIMBYism thrown in someone’s face just for having an opinion that actually may make sense to many . In many cases, that word is too easily used as a quick excuse these days. Anyway, that’s my opinion :)!

5 April 2018 8:59 am

Welcome to Wasaga Beach East. With only $27.8K going to Cobourg, this should just perhaps cover the cost of the 8 new lifeguards for the summer. So where is the net benefit for Cobourg?

Reply to  John Draper
5 April 2018 9:38 am

Are they covering the bad press when someone gets a major injury or worse? Are they covering the added cost of disposable waste on the beach and clean up crews? Are they adding more washrooms change rooms to the beach?

Wally Keeler
Reply to  Donna
6 April 2018 9:22 pm

Please Google ‘bad press’ for such waterpads to ascertain how often there has been “major injury or worde.” What disposable waste? People are going to wade out to the waterpark with their Timmies or burgers or pizza boxes and tater chip bags? Perhaps with the first year’s $27.8K it would a good idea to finance an additional change room and additional washroom.

Reply to  John Draper
5 April 2018 4:02 pm

Merci beaucoup pour l’information.

Old Sailor
Reply to  cornbread
5 April 2018 9:15 am

The $27k number is the promotional number given to Council by the operator. It would have been better to agree to a fixed fee not based on revenue – something like $50k or more. Some meaningful net contribution to the town’s budget.

I wonder out loud where the increased crowds are going to park? The pier parking is gone. Parking lots near the beach and residential streets are already jammed with beachgoers in the summer.

Reply to  Old Sailor
5 April 2018 9:45 am

parking a real issue. I like your fixed fee suggestion not based on revenue.

Reply to  Donna
5 April 2018 11:42 am

There probably was a better way to structure a fee agreement which could have maximized the return for the town that said, this is a significant initial investment for the organization. I’m hopeful the town has included language which would allow for increased fees in years 3, 4 and 5 should the business remain viable.

Reply to  cornbread
5 April 2018 9:46 am


Walter L. Luedtke
Reply to  Donna
5 April 2018 11:30 am

Tourists welcome!
But only if they walk to Cobourg!

Wally Keeler
Reply to  cornbread
6 April 2018 9:16 pm

$27.8K is $27.8K more than last year. It’s a benefit.

5 April 2018 8:23 am

Now how to get these folk to eat and shop downtown? How about a coupon booklet, featuring downtown businesses, handed out to them as they purchase their tickets? Or have local businesses offer a discount on the water park if patrons shop there? All in an effort to prevent them hitting Walmart on the way into town. I hope it is a success, and by that, I hope local businesses profit from having it here.

Reply to  Elaine
5 April 2018 9:34 am

good point Elaine

Miriam Mutton
4 April 2018 2:29 pm

Blue, yellow (gold) and white … Cobourg’s colours. And, the proposed location seems a better one than originally proposed attached to the east pier.

Have fun, water play people! May this summer be a warm sunny one.