California Splash loses first round California Splash loses first round (December 19, 2003)

Expansion bid now up to City Council
by Jeb Bing

The owner of the Shadow Cliffs park waterslides will have one more chance in the coming weeks of gaining city approval for his proposed $7 million California Splash expansion project after the city Planning Commission rejected it in a 3-2 vote.

Glenn Kierstead, who has owned and operated the waterslides on Stanley Boulevard since opening them in 1981, said he was stunned by the Planning Commission's actions. The commission voted against the expansion, with a majority of the members saying that it would be too large of a waterslides theme park for that part of Pleasanton and would likely attract more than 200,000 visitors a year, too much traffic for city streets.

Commissioners said they were also influenced by the more than 120 e-mails that were sent to city planners by residents throughout Pleasanton, most of them opposed to the waterslides. Twenty spoke at a public hearing before the commission, although those comments were evenly split among speakers favoring the project and those opposed.

Planning Commission Chairman Brian Arkin led the discussion against Kierstead's request for approval of a revised conditional use permit to allow the expansion. He said the community appeared split over the proposal, and later said his own survey showed that 75 percent of residents were against it. His own children said they might use the expanded waterslides facility once or twice a year, leading Arkin to ask why Pleasanton should risk possible traffic congestion and crowds for a theme park many don't want.

Also voting against the proposal was Matt Sullivan. Although opposed to the waterslides generally because of their high energy and water uses, he said he wouldn't even consider voting favorably on the plan unless its zoning status was changed to allow the public to place a referendum on the ballot to stop the development.

Since the waterslides were approved in 1980 as part of an expansion by the East Bay Regional Park District, which owns Shadow Cliffs and the waterslides, approval for the operation came in the form of a conditional use permit. Only the City Council can grant these permits and voters can't challenge that action through the referendum process. City planner Jerry Iserson said the zoning could be changed to a Planned Unit Development category, which would allow for a referendum, but that could take months to complete.

Planning Commissioner Harvey Kameny also voted against the motion to recommend that the City Council grant the use permit.

"I've lived in Pleasanton since 1975 and I've supported a lot of developments that have made our community a better place to live," Kameny said. "I don't have a problem with the California Splash proposal as such, but this site on Stanley Avenue just isn't the right place for such a large development. It's the wrong place and the wrong type of development for that site."

Only two commissioners - Mary Roberts and Trish Maas - favored the plan, although both had reservations about traffic flows.

"The young people in this community support the waterslides expansion, the Youth Master Plan Implementation Committee wants it, and I believe the developer intends to make this a truly enjoyable family park," Roberts said.

Planning Commissioner Mass agreed.

"I like the idea of a watersports park that will keep our kids in the community instead of seeing them drive to the large water parks in Concord or San Jose," she said.

In the end, after nearly five hours of public discussion, concerns over traffic appeared to convince three of the commissioners to vote against California Splash. Because the application is for a conditional use permit, planners couldn't reject the plan outright, only make a recommendation to the City Council that it deny the permit.

Several downtown business owners, Realtors and development groups supported the plan. Jan Batcheller, owner of Gift Source on Main Street, told commissioners: "I think this a grand idea. It brings jobs and recreation to the area."

Another, mortgage consultant Nicole Reckling, added: "I think it is a great idea and will bring a lot of revenue for the city that I work in and reside in."

Even so, more than 80 percent of e-mails sent to City Hall in the past few weeks expressed opposition to the project.

Paul Milley a Pleasanton resident and chief financial officer of MegaPath Networks, said the proposed mid-size theme park for water enthusiasts would not be "an advantage for anyone and a significant impairment to the reasons most of us live here."

"Everywhere I turn these days, open space and park land is being turned into commercial development," he said. "Let's not continue to infringe on the things that make Pleasanton a great place to live and raise a family: a town with a rural feel with ample parks and open space."

Stacey Ristow had another reason to oppose California Splash.

"Along with traffic, I do not like the idea of Pleasanton being a 'main attraction' city where people from all over come to visit," she said. "We are a close knit group and having such a water park could change the dynamics of our neighborhoods and the city as a whole."

"Crime is another issue I have with putting a large scale water park in Pleasanton," she added. "Each year we deal with fairgoers for a limited time. This would be exponentially worse."

Fay Thomas of Glacier Court South summed up the views of many who oppose the waterslides:

"If you're looking for votes from the 'local yokels,' I'm afraid mine would have to be: No, thank you."

Besides comments from individuals, the Planning Commission also received petitions with more than 400 signatures opposed to the project from residents of California Reflections, a residential community one mile west of Shadow Cliffs, and another petition with 600 signatures in support of the project.

The City Council is expected to hear the California Splash bid for approval of its project at its meeting Tuesday, Jan. 20, or on Tuesday, Feb. 4.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.