Update on Splash Pad Park
The article "Splash Pad Park" in the Summer 2003 newsletter from Friends of Oakland Parks and Recreation comments on the wonderful community involvement but ignores the failures and shortcomings of the city government and the process by which it happened.
I began working on this issue from the beginning when commercial sale and development was proposed for this part of Eastshore Park in July, 1998.
As a matter of setting a precedent, I was strongly against the selling of park land that was bought with bond money. My first questions to the city were: How much would it cost to restore the fountain? How much would it cost to rip out the splash pad? Tony Acosta, the former head of the Life Enrichment Agency, gave a rough estimate of $100,000 to repair the fountain but in all the years from 1998 to 2002, not once did the city bother to find out those answers.
Fountains are wonderful features in parks but often break and remain broken and then get filled with trash. In fact, the park that Walter Hood designed in downtown Oakland has a water feature that's been broken for years. For that reason, I could not contribute to or support a fountain.
The former design built in the 1960's after the freeway cut through Eastshore Park represented the hills of Oakland with the splash pad representing Lake Merritt. I tried to find out who the designer was from library resources and from Parks & Rec but there was no record or blueprint. The new design is just one more example of how Oakland throws out its history for something that is new even though new is not necessarily better. The former design was a park. The new design is a thoroughfare from the parking lot to the street. It does not feed the soul as the greenery and small hills of the old design did. It may be good for the farmers' market but that market is only there once a week.
The process, through community meetings with Walter Hood, was one that took a development track. By the second meeting, I could see that it was being manipulated to go in the direction that he wanted. By the fourth meeting, the plans were still incomplete but the public meetings were over. A select few continued to meet with Danny Wan and Walter Hood. Many people felt so burned by the process that they stopped coming to the meetings and withdrew from the process entirely. Walter Hood never answered my concerns when I emailed him several times about the design.
Basically, the community wanted to preserve the park with minor improvements such as more benches, maybe some trees near the freeway and either reinstating the fountain or taking it out. About 3,000 people signed petitions to keep out development and preserve the park. What we got for more than $875,000 was a decent park destroyed, a lot of paving which will no doubt exacerbate flooding and a park that will need more maintenance at an increased operating expense. This sum,which isn't enough for all the projects, was spent at a time when facilities for children in parks in East Oakland were severely wanting.
Caroline Kim
It is important to note that this parkland-to-plaza plan was pretty much a merchant-driven project from the get-go and was only momentarily derailed by the residents. The primary users are the weekend merchants – the farmer’s market.
Writer Caroline Kim referred to the water run-off problem. For those who are new to the issue, the Splash Pad is actually a land fill that sits over a confluence of two large creeks (Grand Avenue and Lakeshore Avenues are built over two giant culverted streams.)
Flooding of the merchant district is a yearly occurrence. Splash Pad's exposed ground served as a great big earthy sponge. Now that the park is a "plaza" (with limited landscaping) THAT water run-off will meet the rising water from the creeks and storm drains…. and will worsen the flooding.
Mother Nature’s Instant Kharma. I guess angry, water-logged merchants can just send the repair bills to....themselves?
As for the Farmer’s Market: A recent NPR report concerning a certain kind of highway pollution called "ultrafines" (airborne metals and hyper-heated motor oil) that rain down on residents and school yards adjacent to schools, raised quite a few red flags.
The ultra fines are very toxic and are very, very small. The largest of the polluted particles are about one tenth the width of a human hair. Those particles tend to be dumped in the air adjacent to freeway then immediately drop to the ground. Ultrafines, however are much smaller and drift further. They are bad to breathe, and -- after they softly rain down over our farmer’s market produce stalls next to the freeway --bad to eat, as well.
Now that the political charge behind the Splash Pad project has dissipated, many think it’s time to concentrate on finding a healthier outdoor site for the market.
For every 100 feet, the exposure to ultra fines is diminished by a factor of 10. Should we revisit the idea of moving it closer to the lake, between the library and the colonnade area? Just a small bump of half a block or so would dramatically decrease the toxins mixing with our organic food.
Imagine joggers stopping for some fruit juice ….Gondola’s floating up to the lake's edge and picking up riders whose arms are full of fresh flowers and and lunch boxes, packed with organic fruit and smoked salmon….
You get the picture.
Meanwhile, if ultrafines concern you, and you end up choosing to shop at Jack London farmer's market because it's located in a healthier place, don't forget to tell the farmers BEFORE you change your shopping habits.
To learn more about the NPR news feature on ultrafines, click on this url:
http://northlakegroup.org/news.cfm?ID=1399
Nancy Rieser
While I continue to applaud Caroline Kim's role in preventing commercial development in Splash Pad Park, I take serious exception to the spirit and factual content of her comments and even more so, to those made by Ms. Rieser. They reflect the "sour grapes" attitude of two individuals whose own personal aspirations for this space were not in keeping with a majority of Grand Lake residents.
No! We did not want the existing park fenced in so it could be used as an off-leash dog park nor did we want the existing park preserved in time with a minimum of improvements.
The Splash Pad Forum surveys, our volunteer Design Teams and all the community meetings pointed in the identical direction: provide safer access to a park that is both more useable and more attractive. The enthusiastic feedback I'm hearing from the community indicates that Walter Hood's inspired design has accomplished just that.
While I don't want to get mired in specifics, several of their comments do require an emphatic response. Regarding a fountain, a water feature was always at the very top of the community agenda. When the city axed the proposed fountain due to inadequate funding, we pitched in and raised over $50,000 to insure its inclusion. We also set aside several thousand dollars to help guarantee its maintenance.
Regarding the drainage and flooding issue, the majority of the surfaces in the new park are water permeable. The surfaces that are not are roughly equivalent to the fountain, sidewalk and two lane roadway that were removed. It should also be noted that the new park includes far more landscaping than previously including forty maple trees that will help screen off the freeway and a 1400 square foot California Native Garden that was planted and will be maintained by members of the community.
I'm particularly offended by Ms. Rieser's remarks about the Farmers Market which are prompted by her continuing desire to relocate it to her own "Embarcadero Project". Due to a lack of adequate parking, such a move has been soundly rejected by Nancy Nadel, Danny Wan and the Market, itself.
Finally, her gratuitous invitation to skateboarders to use the park in violation of City of Oakland park regulations is beyond the pale. Those of us who have worked so long and hard to make this park a reality are also making a long-term commitment to maintain it as an attractive and valuable asset to our neigborhood and the city as a whole. Unfortunately, potential damage by skateboarders using the park irresponsibly is high on our list of concerns.
For more information, please visit our web site: www.geocities.com/splashpad . More importantly, please join us on Saturday, October 25 for our festive Grand Opening Celebration. Details including an entertainment scheduled are posted on the web site.
Posted by: Ken Katz on October 15, 2003 07:22 AMOh, the horror of not getting everything done YOUR way.
Reality check:
The park looks much nicer than it did before. How long that lasts depends on the parks department, which like everywhere else, does a good job with capital projects and a lousy job on maintenance.
However, the over-riding (pun intended) issue is that here we have a parcel practically under the dang freeway and shoehorned by busy Lakeshore and Grand avenues and two freeway entrances. The site, which may have once been an excellent park location, is now a patch of green blasted by the cacaphonous sounds of cars, truck and buses. A fantastic place for a picnic, frisbee game, kickball or to sit on a bench and quietly read----NOT
You'd think that "the community" would have some common sense and instead agreed that a park on the site would be problematic and let this one go.
Let something that generates boat loads of tax money and could benefit from the freeway entrances and complement the neighboring commercial districts (can anyone say TJ's?) move in. After all "the community" can walk another two blocks to Lake Merritt. Nope, not in Oakland, where whoever screams the loudest gets their imitation vegetable pork projects built.
Congratulations to everyone who made Freeway Park possible, your pressure really paid off. I'll look for you having a picnic there, serenaded by the honking SUVs, screeching tires and bathed in the soot of 100 diesel semis.
You just proved the axiom "that one person really can change the world, but most of the time, they probably shouldn't."
...and why would kids skateboarding be in violation of park rules? And geeze, Louise, -- why on earth would anyone get their knickers all wadded up in a bunch because kids might use parkland for recreational purposes?
As far as the parking business and the farmer's market : the alternate location would be just a half a block away from the parking lot under the freeway. In the light of the danger of ultrafines, perhaps the subject of the moving the market over a bit should re-visited...in a calm and dispassionate manner.
So everyone out there....breathe, count to ten and loosen up a bit. We all do our bit for the greater community good. The collaboration between neighbors and the city to make Oakland a better place shouldn't be reduced to a chest bumping contest.
Enjoy your celebration this weekend -- you and many other people have worked very hard on this. Pat yourself on the back.
And breathe.....
Posted by: Nancy Rieser on October 23, 2003 04:34 AMFor a gentleman who has proven so adept at reaming his opposition during the life of his project, Mr. Katz seems to have developed a very thin skin.
A million dollars of taxpayer money have been spent on this controversial issue. No project of that size gets to skip away without an evaluation by the community that ultimately paid for it. And my own eyes tend to narrow when someone at the head of the parade over-uses the royal "we" and deflects differing opinions as "sour grapes " -- and does so in a vicious and personal fashion.
(Back to Charm School for you, mister! )
As for moving the market away from the freeway, it sounds like a good idea to me. My husband had to haul our herb garden off the patio after we noticed black dust streaming down the sink drain during dinner prep. Dirt is brown. Vehicle pollution is black.
The park project is finally done and really doesn’t need the farmer’s market to attract funds. Surely the plaza could be filled with a collection of some other type of non-food vendor. Perhaps an outside art gallery of sorts?
Molly Epstein
Posted by: Molly Epstein on October 25, 2003 02:05 AMI was at the farmers' market gala today first as a customer and then later at the celebration. As you know from my above letter, I've had misgivings about the design so I was astounded at how it perfectly suited the market. There were a lot of vendors including crafts. They all had their booths tented and there was a feeling of spaciousness between booths. There was an area for performers by the fountain and places for people to sit and eat and meet with each other.
I felt that somehow in spite of everything, something really good has come out of the effort of five and a half years. Many people contributed a lot in time, creativity and money. It was wonderful to see something so positive.
The ceremony took a lot of thought and planning and the turnout was phenomenal. Children were playing in the fountain and having a great time decorating small pumpkins. I noticed more people on Lakeshore Ave. too.
I had issues about the expense for the project but Peter Brady of The Smoke Shop stated his sales were noticeably up today. Perhaps the city will make more in tax revenue not only from the market but from increased sales from the Grand and Lakeshore Ave. businesses.
Now - the next project in our neighborhood- How to save the Community Center? How about using the extra tax money from the sales? A white elephant sale at the park?
Caroline Kim
A lot of people had a lot of very hot feelings about
Splash Pad Park, and Caroline was one of them.
Thank you, Caroline, for a gracious and graceful comment, and for all the time that you, too, put into
the Park effort. Good idea about saving the community center.
Yes it was a lovely ceremony.
Dare I say anything to interrupt the afterglow?
Merchant revenues: suffice it to say, today’s big crowd was attracted by two large and unusual events:
1. The annual costume parade, sponsored by the local merchant association, and
2. The opening party with honorary guests and celebratory bands.
It would be prudent to wait at least three or four months from now -- long after the party decorations are back in the box, after the politicians have gone home and when the market returns to its once a weekly task of just selling food – to see if there is extra money in the till.
It also remains to be seen how the park’s austere design will attract park users Sunday through Friday. The park’s overall design does not feel very inviting without the tents and the band. But time will tell, I suppose.
Having said that, I would agree that the real test of this community will be how it rallies around its PEOPLE after the bulldozers and the other Tonka Trucks go away. If, after all the hyperbole and speeches, the Community Center folds due to lack of economic and human support, then the farmers’ market plaza will represent a million bucks of empty calories...
Molly,
Good letter. I agree with all your points.
The city receives about 1% of the sales tax which means that to pay for a $1 million upgrade the farmers' market and local business districts must generate $100 million worth of additional business for the city - not business dollars just relocated from another part.
Posted by: Caroline Kim on October 26, 2003 01:51 PMThat's one expensive tomato.
If I understand the situation correctly, the intent of the park's design is to increase the bottom line of the farmers and other business owners, correct? Would it not be a reasonable to ask the market and the local businesses to contribute to the community center?
Seems like a fair exchange.
If I might add a comment to my earlier note about the non-human friendly design of the park: The thin, three to four story high palm trees throw off as much shade as a light pole at high noon.
If I can describe what I saw this afternoon, which could illustrate this point: Today is Saturday, the day after the celebration. It’s beautiful and is a very warm day. I drove past Splash Pad at a little after 1 p.m. and noticed only one person was inside the park. She was seated at the base of the shortest palm tree (about 10 feet high?), her back shimmied up against a trunk, placing herself carefully inside the only place in the park where there was a small ring of a shadow.
The rest of the interior of the park was empty -- not even a toddler playing in the sprinkler fountain. There were two people sitting in the chairs at the parking lot entrance edge near Lakeshore -- in the shade provided by the freeway over-hang.
I drove past the park coming back after doing errands, a little over one hour later around 2:30. The woman under the palm tree was gone. The interior of the park was empty. One person replaced the two men who were sitting by the parking lot entrance. He was sitting in the only shade to be found: under the freeway, a structure that was bought and paid for in the 1960s.
A million dollars and no shade? (And the rain shelter for those using the bus is gone. Oh dear! I confess I am a more than a little confused about the design priorities of the park!)
And as far the community enthusiasm for the place: it was disappointing to see "bloom off the rose" so soon. One can only wonder how the poor little community center will fair in the future.
Perhaps little skateboarders will enfuse some life into the place. All they need is flat pavement and there seems to be plenty of that to go around. It will be interesting to see how the little park evolves.
Re: Caroline Kim
I don't see anyone charging sales tax at the famers market. Redirecting sales tax revenue for a community center seems far fetched.
Re: Molly Epstein's there isn't any shade so no one will go there:
Sunday was unseasonably warm--I don't know how long you have lived in Oakland, but I'll let you in on a little secret known to a few locals: temps near 90 are unusual in Oakland. Your reasoning, like much else on this site is quite specious.
It is more likely the decibel level keeps people away.
Mr. Fine writes:
> "Your reasoning, like much else on this site is quite specious."
Oh dear. More chest bumping. The project is done, dear heart. Is the huffy, mean spiritedness really necessary at this point? And surely you would agree that ALL phases of a project paid with taxpayer dollars should be transparent and open to comment....even during the evaluation phase.
If I may respond to your point about the weather: With all due respect, if we followed your reasoning in your posting above, there wouldn’t have been anyone in the big park two blocks away. Yet there were people all around Lake Merritt...and there were hardly any souls at Splash Pad.
Just a simple observation, Mr. Fine.
Not an opening jab at your chin.
I don't know anything about the history of the project, or, whose who in the politics of it all, but I do know I like the lights. The lights imbedded in the ground shining on the collumns. The rest of the park design seemed sparse and unwelcoming when I walked around before it opened but I am willing to give it a chance. The only thing that really matters is how it feels to walk, sit, perhaps as a meeting place before going to points beyond. Is it safe at night? Is it beautifull to look at? These are the things that make a public area. Interestingly enough, the negatives of sound, traffic, and even the pollutants can be mitigated if there is enough imagination and beauty. Time will tell.
Posted by: Jared L. McFerrin on October 27, 2003 11:06 PMI wasn't able to go to the opening festivities on Saturday, but on my way home from work Monday evening I looked forward to walking through the park. What greeted me was a dark empty space. No people, no lights, no fountain. I hope that this is temporary. I wonder if the best materials were used. I can already see the gravel mixing up with the crushed stone with trash on top by the Lakeshore Av entrance to the carpool line.
For the people concerned about shade, I haven't had a chance to review all of the plantings, but keep in maind that everything is new and will take time to mature. The palms don't give much shade, but are visually delightful. The other trees should do the trick, I hope.
Now that the park is here, lets all hope for the best and support it as much as we can.
Gregg
Posted by: Gregg Cook on October 29, 2003 10:49 AM
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
Posted by: Covington Barrie Tragash on December 10, 2003 01:19 PMOccasionally you will find dumb comments like the above one in OaklandNews. You might later discover that the total number of comments listed
is more than the number of comments you count.
THat's because "Covington" is a phony name used by a new breed of spammer. "Covington" works for an outfit that sells penis enlarging pills.
The Webmaster and I work furiously to remove these
creeps, but...
George's comment isn't dumb -- it's the latest spam attack that is.
Posted by: Jeannette on December 11, 2003 06:45 AM*This discussion has been closed. No more comments may be added.*