California Great America (CGA) Discussion Thread

[asimowalk]

With Cedar Fair changing their ad campaign, I personally think CGA needs one that pokes fun at this whole thing. Is it a hot topic with the GP?

 

 

Either way, they need ads that tell people to scream louder at the park.

[Angry_Gumball]

Doing some digging last night, this sounds like a 2008 rerun, 4 years later. Back then from an old article I read, they felt adding a coaster in that spot was unnecessary, let alone being a second woodie.

 

Old article if you're interested:

Wooden roller coasters are usually beloved for the bone-rattling drops and head-snapping twists they deal to their devil-may-care devotees. But at Great America this summer, it's been a proposed roller coaster enduring the bumpy ride, buffeted by a next-door neighbor's gripes over the shrieks of delight it might bring.

 

Whether that trip turns smooth — or comes to an abrupt halt — could be decided Tuesday night.

 

Santa Clara's city council, in a first for the city, could keep the ride on the lumber pile, swayed by those noise complaints from a valued commercial landlord. Or, giving in to the recommendation of its planners, it could push forward on the sprawling, 111-foot-tall behemoth, billed as the park's biggest capital investment in years. And a third option? Build the coaster, but check back later to make sure it isn't louder than expected.

 

Of course, judging by those who might have the biggest stake in the debate — roller coaster fans — whatever decision council members reach won't be easy.

 

"If it's by some offices, just keep this one," said Logan Breitbart of San Jose, emerging from the theme park's other cherished wood coaster, the Grizzly, on Saturday afternoon. "Another one is unnecessary."

 

Not so said Aubrey Merriman of San Jose, another Grizzly rider. As he sees it, noise is one of the perils of setting up shop next to a theme park. "It'd be a shame," he said. "I'd be pretty disappointed if they couldn't see the greater good. It would be different if they were going from complete silence to having a new ride."

 

The months-old quarrel — which found its way to a handful of coaster buffs' blogs and transformed the stuff of child's play into big-person problems like mitigation and decibel levels — blossomed from what's typically been a routine zoning request: an exemption from the area's 35-foot height limit. But after a compromise failed, and as the two sides staked out their positions in dueling noise-level reports, at public hearings and in tersely worded letters, the issue of height was quickly trumped.

 

For Prudential Real Estate, which owns the 8-year-old office complex along the park's western edge, those concerns about noise quickly came down to one word: location. Their property line sits about 150 feet from the proposed coaster site, home to another coaster some 20 years ago but empty since then. Prudential's lawyers argued their noise report showed that the employees in those buildings, occupied by telecom equipment maker Nortel, will find their workdays unduly disrupted by the ongoing howls just across the way.

 

And, anyway, their lawyers told city officials, the park is already too loud, even without a new coaster next door.

 

Prudential officials declined to comment, referring instead to their correspondence with the city.

 

But the 32-year-old theme park, which leases its site from the city, begged to differ. Not allowing the heavily promoted new ride — and possibly setting new restrictions on heights and volume levels — would put shackles on the park's future, they said. Even more importantly, its operators said, their noise report revealed no problems for office workers.

 

"Everyone is always adding new projects, new capital, new improvements," said Jim Stellmack, the park's director of marketing. "A lot of this business is, 'What have you done for me lately?'"‰"

 

So which side was right? In May, the planning commission voted 5-1 in favor of the theme park. But when Prudential appealed, forcing a hearing before the council in July, council members weren't so sure. They were certain, however, that they needed more information. And so a third noise study, which included reviews of the first two, was commissioned.

 

It's that report which formed the basis of the city staff's recommendation to approve the height exemption this week. The study, conducted by East Bay firm Wilson, Ihrig, essentially agreed that screams, even from 150 feet away, wouldn't intrude.

 

Still, some officials say, a battle that's seen two city stakeholders pitted against one another, echoing the controversy over a proposed San Francisco 49ers stadium on the other side of the park, points to larger issues, especially as tech companies like Yahoo and others seek to deepen their presence in the area.

 

"It's almost at a point where we need to seriously consider what happens next with the whole park," Mayor Patricia Mahan said, "all the buildings that have gone up since the park has gone in. There are bigger questions here."

 

Since when do third parties decide what the park should get and feel they have the ultimate say-so? Santa Clara, you've dealt with these bozos 4 years ago. Put your foot down and let the park do their business. Prudential is distracting Cedar Fair's plans more than our screaming and rattling wood would distract that office complex. Im sure their double panes glass cuts out most of that noise anyway.

 

morning rant>

Edited April 5, 2012 by Angry_Gumball

[Tmcdllr]

Yeah what he said!

 

That's ok with the stadium being built now I have a feeling the city will side more towards the park now, it would be in their best interest to.

[JJnCFL]

Yeah what he said!

 

That's ok with the stadium being built now I have a feeling the city will side more towards the park now, it would be in their best interest to.

That's exactly what I was thinking, I had a feeling the stadium issue was the real culprit back then, and now with that out of the way, I have no doubt this will finally breeze on by.

[robman]

I completely agree with what above has been mentioned. I even recall the mayor (I think) was excited for the new coaster and planned water slide going into the park. Which was mentioned in an article,that is sadly no longer available.

[Angry_Gumball]

I completely agree with what above has been mentioned. I even recall the mayor (I think) was excited for the new coaster and planned water slide going into the park. Which was mentioned in an article,that is sadly no longer available.

 

I remember hearing about that as well, both the mayor excited about the park, and the whole waterslide/coaster thing.

The whole Prudential thing is still annoying me: their past reasoning that 'another one is unneccessary' (let that decision be up to the Cedar Fair development team, ok) and 'the park already makes too much noise.' Well, excuse me Prudential...sorry if our coaster riding is too loud for your sensitive ears and we are out enjoying our lives. How boring must these people be anyway? After all, it is a finance/real estate company so I can only imagine a bunch of up-tight boring folk, or a bunch of Squidward-like beings. I wish there was something we could do that would mean something other than blowing off our steam here for each other to read and laugh at.

 

Easy solutions to this to tone down noise would to build the structure as planned, do their tests with the initial agreed 70db (or whatever it was), and make the modifications as necessary, being 'scream tunnels' and urethane wheels to dampen the noise. On Prudential's behalf, I'm sure they can afford building that ugly soundwall that they can stare at all day.

 

As mentioned, perhaps with the stadium project (Aren't they going to love Monday Night football in a few years, hello traffic!), I still see the park now having an easier time getting this in regardless of the crybaby antics of Prudential. Until then, welcome back to "Wait and See Mode."

[Tmcdllr]

Squidward....lol!

[fpsphil]

I see Prudential not causing as much problem as they have in the past. With Great America getting new lease conditions with the construction of the stadium I see the city wanting to accommodate the park more now then the surrounding businesses. We will see.

 

Heading out to the park today for a few hours, if i see anything interesting i'll post up photos

[larrygator]

The whole Prudential thing is still annoying me: their past reasoning that 'another one is unneccessary' (let that decision be up to the Cedar Fair development team, ok) and 'the park already makes too much noise.

 

I wish there was something we could do that would mean something other than blowing off our steam here for each other to read and laugh at.

 

I'm just going to paraphrase you to make a point and elaborate on what you said.

 

As you mentioned, blowing off steam and calling Prudential "stupid" on TPR (or any other message board) will not help the situation.

 

As far as wishing there was something to do.

Has anyone tried to contact the mayor or other local politicians? Guess what? Even though the rest of the world communicates exclusively through Twitter/Facebook a well written e-mail or even a letter will get read. Supposedly the mayor is on board, right? But if all he hears is big business complaining and it's many corporations against one (CGA) his opinion could be swayed because he doesn't know where public opinion stands. If politicians don't hear from their constituents about an issue, they assume the public in indifferent.

 

Has anyone reached out to CGA Public Relations department? I'm sure CGA/Cedar Fair are working on a case to show that the new coaster in necessary for the vitality and growth of the park. Customers are what bring in the tax dollars for the area and allow the park to be properly staffed, creating jobs. I don't know if CGA would utilize 5, 10 or 20 rabid enthusiasts to help promote the necessity of the coaster, but you never know if you don't ask. i.e.: Imagine the headlines, "20 Enthusiasts ride the World's worst wooden coaster in protest for a new wooden coaster".

Edited April 6, 2012 by larrygator

[XYZ]

"20 Enthusiasts ride the World's worst wooden coaster in protest for a new wooden coaster".

 

It's not the world's worst wooden coaster. Also, I don't think that calling Grizzly the world's worst wooden coaster would really help the park.

[MrSum1_55]

My only question is why is a real-estate company opposing this project so much? If they actually own real-estate in the area, wouldn't that small increase in noise be beneficial to local real-estate? With a new investment, wouldn't value of local land increase?

 

"I could do nothing and take advantage of this potential increase in profits, but I would rather go through a bunch of legal work to make sure the value of my land stays the same"

[rolercstrluvr]

I emailed the office of mayor Chuck Reed today and just got a response to my email saying.

 

Dear Mr. Baker,

Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts and suggestions regarding California’s Great America roller coasters. We appreciate that you have reached out to our office, and I will forward your comments to the Mayor and his senior staff for their review.

You may also consider contacting the City of Santa Clara, as Great America is located in Santa Clara. You can reach the City Council by calling (408) 615-2250 or by e-mailing MayorAndCouncil@santaclaraca.gov.

Please contact us with any additional comments or questions. Thank you again for writing to Mayor Reed’s Office.

Best regards,

 

Sara Wright

Agenda Services Manager

Office of San José Mayor Chuck Reed

San José City Hall | 200 E. Santa Clara Street, 18th Floor | San José, California 95113

(408) 535-4800 | sara.wright@sanjoseca.gov

 

Just thought i'd share this amongst my fellow coaster enthusiasts.

[Angry_Gumball]

That's a start. I may contact the mayor of SC as well to express my concerns as a member of the public.

[JJnCFL]

Great idea you guys. As they say, the pen is mightier than the sword!

[larrygator]

"20 Enthusiasts ride the World's worst wooden coaster in protest for a new wooden coaster".

 

It's not the world's worst wooden coaster. Also, I don't think that calling Grizzly the world's worst wooden coaster would really help the park.

 

Have you looked it the results from Mitch's poll over the past 15 years? http://www.ushsho.com/woodpoll18yeartable2011.htm

It might not have finished in last place for 2011, but for sustained crappiness it's #1. Also, that was just an example of a P.R. stunt to build awareness to the cause.

 

Also, based on the second half of your comment it is clear that you have never worked in P.R. or marketing.

 

I emailed the office of mayor Chuck Reed today and just got a response to my email saying.

 

Dear Mr. Baker,

Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts and suggestions regarding California’s Great America roller coasters. We appreciate that you have reached out to our office, and I will forward your comments to the Mayor and his senior staff for their review.

You may also consider contacting the City of Santa Clara, as Great America is located in Santa Clara. You can reach the City Council by calling (408) 615-2250 or by e-mailing MayorAndCouncil@santaclaraca.gov.

Please contact us with any additional comments or questions. Thank you again for writing to Mayor Reed’s Office.

Best regards,

 

Sara Wright

Agenda Services Manager

Office of San José Mayor Chuck Reed

San José City Hall | 200 E. Santa Clara Street, 18th Floor | San José, California 95113

(408) 535-4800 | sara.wright@sanjoseca.gov

 

Just thought i'd share this amongst my fellow coaster enthusiasts.

 

Big props to you for taking that step.

Edited April 6, 2012 by larrygator

[Angry_Gumball]

Well, after spending a day thinking how to present my case sensibly while bringing up my points we've ranted about here, I've submitted my letter to the Santa Clara Mayor and City Council. Larrygator was correct, if the public doesn't step up about things like these, politicians will most likely assume that the general public couldn't care any less.

 

This reminds me of back in high school when I had a class assignment involving writing a letter to my city's mayor. Little did I know, I was bound on an adventure, trying to persuade my city's park district to get a skatepark up in the northern portion of town as skaters were constantly getting kicked out of places and skating in dangerous places. So, we'll see what this brings.

 

And anyone planning on contacting the SCCC, be prepared for an autoresponder as they won't be back in office until Tuesday:

 

Thank you for your message. You have reached the Mayor and Council offices, City of Santa Clara. I am away from the office and will be returning on Tuesday, April 10th. Please note that Friday, April 6th is a City Holiday and Monday, April 9th is a scheduled City Furlough Day and City Hall will be closed. For further information regarding scheduled city furlough days, please visit our web site, http://www.santaclaraca.gov.

 

I will review all incoming messages and will reply appropriately when I return. If you have an urgent need, please contact the City Manager's office at 408-615-2210 or manager@santaclaraca.gov

 

Regards,

Kimberly Green

Executive Assistant

Mayor and Council Offices

City of Santa Clara

1500 Warburton Avenue

Santa Clara, CA 95050

408-615-2250

mayorandcouncil@santaclaraca.gov

 

Not sure how effective it will be but I'd recommend the rest of us CGA-ers (and anyone else that cares for that matter) to speak up. Sure the idea's still proposed but the threat still looms.

 

And...

Imagine the headlines, "20 Enthusiasts ride the World's worst wooden coaster in protest for a new wooden coaster".

That would be the most epic headline ever! So...Occupy Grizzly anyone?

[KDCOASTERFAN]

Doing some digging last night, this sounds like a 2008 rerun, 4 years later. Back then from an old article I read, they felt adding a coaster in that spot was unnecessary, let alone being a second woodie.

 

Old article if you're interested:

Wooden roller coasters are usually beloved for the bone-rattling drops and head-snapping twists they deal to their devil-may-care devotees. But at Great America this summer, it's been a proposed roller coaster enduring the bumpy ride, buffeted by a next-door neighbor's gripes over the shrieks of delight it might bring.

 

Whether that trip turns smooth — or comes to an abrupt halt — could be decided Tuesday night.

 

Santa Clara's city council, in a first for the city, could keep the ride on the lumber pile, swayed by those noise complaints from a valued commercial landlord. Or, giving in to the recommendation of its planners, it could push forward on the sprawling, 111-foot-tall behemoth, billed as the park's biggest capital investment in years. And a third option? Build the coaster, but check back later to make sure it isn't louder than expected.

 

Of course, judging by those who might have the biggest stake in the debate — roller coaster fans — whatever decision council members reach won't be easy.

 

"If it's by some offices, just keep this one," said Logan Breitbart of San Jose, emerging from the theme park's other cherished wood coaster, the Grizzly, on Saturday afternoon. "Another one is unnecessary."

 

Not so said Aubrey Merriman of San Jose, another Grizzly rider. As he sees it, noise is one of the perils of setting up shop next to a theme park. "It'd be a shame," he said. "I'd be pretty disappointed if they couldn't see the greater good. It would be different if they were going from complete silence to having a new ride."

 

The months-old quarrel — which found its way to a handful of coaster buffs' blogs and transformed the stuff of child's play into big-person problems like mitigation and decibel levels — blossomed from what's typically been a routine zoning request: an exemption from the area's 35-foot height limit. But after a compromise failed, and as the two sides staked out their positions in dueling noise-level reports, at public hearings and in tersely worded letters, the issue of height was quickly trumped.

 

For Prudential Real Estate, which owns the 8-year-old office complex along the park's western edge, those concerns about noise quickly came down to one word: location. Their property line sits about 150 feet from the proposed coaster site, home to another coaster some 20 years ago but empty since then. Prudential's lawyers argued their noise report showed that the employees in those buildings, occupied by telecom equipment maker Nortel, will find their workdays unduly disrupted by the ongoing howls just across the way.

 

And, anyway, their lawyers told city officials, the park is already too loud, even without a new coaster next door.

 

Prudential officials declined to comment, referring instead to their correspondence with the city.

 

But the 32-year-old theme park, which leases its site from the city, begged to differ. Not allowing the heavily promoted new ride — and possibly setting new restrictions on heights and volume levels — would put shackles on the park's future, they said. Even more importantly, its operators said, their noise report revealed no problems for office workers.

 

"Everyone is always adding new projects, new capital, new improvements," said Jim Stellmack, the park's director of marketing. "A lot of this business is, 'What have you done for me lately?'"‰"

 

So which side was right? In May, the planning commission voted 5-1 in favor of the theme park. But when Prudential appealed, forcing a hearing before the council in July, council members weren't so sure. They were certain, however, that they needed more information. And so a third noise study, which included reviews of the first two, was commissioned.

 

It's that report which formed the basis of the city staff's recommendation to approve the height exemption this week. The study, conducted by East Bay firm Wilson, Ihrig, essentially agreed that screams, even from 150 feet away, wouldn't intrude.

 

Still, some officials say, a battle that's seen two city stakeholders pitted against one another, echoing the controversy over a proposed San Francisco 49ers stadium on the other side of the park, points to larger issues, especially as tech companies like Yahoo and others seek to deepen their presence in the area.

 

"It's almost at a point where we need to seriously consider what happens next with the whole park," Mayor Patricia Mahan said, "all the buildings that have gone up since the park has gone in. There are bigger questions here."

 

Since when do third parties decide what the park should get and feel they have the ultimate say-so? Santa Clara, you've dealt with these bozos 4 years ago. Put your foot down and let the park do their business. Prudential is distracting Cedar Fair's plans more than our screaming and rattling wood would distract that office complex. Im sure their double panes glass cuts out most of that noise anyway.

 

morning rant>

 

I agree but prudential may have the upper hand here since they have the money to hire lawyers & lobbyists to argue on their behalf....same thing goes for the sound study that they allegedly conducted in an impartial manner.I so hate the fact that businesses come into the park's area & tell them what to do when,going into the lease they should know what they're getting into beforehand....SFA has the same problems with housing communities nearby that weren't there when the place first opened.

 

If anything the park played a crucial role in the development of the area & prudential should give them credit for the interest in building THEIR offices on the site to begin with,but like any business prudential sees CGA as a competitor that must be hampered from success in any way possible even if they're not even a part of the same respecitve industry.

[XYZ]

"20 Enthusiasts ride the World's worst wooden coaster in protest for a new wooden coaster".

 

It's not the world's worst wooden coaster. Also, I don't think that calling Grizzly the world's worst wooden coaster would really help the park.

 

Have you looked it the results from Mitch's poll over the past 15 years? http://www.ushsho.com/woodpoll18yeartable2011.htm

It might not have finished in last place for 2011, but for sustained crappiness it's #1. Also, that was just an example of a P.R. stunt to build awareness to the cause.

 

Also, based on the second half of your comment it is clear that you have never worked in P.R. or marketing.

 

I was more basing my reasoning on that it's not the world's worst wooden coaster because the most recent Mitch Hawker Poll shows Grizzly isn't the worst wooden coaster. Also, the coaster has greatly improved over the last few years. There is numerous examples that horrible coasters can become much better very quickly with one example being Arkham Asylum: Shock Therapy which is discussed now as a great improvement.

[Angry_Gumball]

I don't think LG's point was to bag on Grizzly exactly. Yes Grizzly has earned that infamous badge of honor for being the world's worst woodie due to past polls for the past several years, therefore using that badge of honor as an example of a potential headline. To me, it makes sense. Basically, 1 extreme is being used to receive an opposite extreme.

 

Though not the same context Larrygator was using, this reminds me of a headline I saw back when the 49ers dilemma was starting to errupt: "Drop Zone may become the 49er's end zone." In that case, it's a play on words, being the ride's name, and an element of a football field. It's an attention getter, what s headlines are meant for.

[larrygator]

^You got it! Exactly.

[c0sterfreek]

The way I see it is that if the Grizzly was really "the worst wooden roller coaster" than no one would go on it. During the busy season, that ride almost always has a line. When I went to the haunt last year, the line went past drop zone. IMO, Grizzy may not be the fastest and most over the top ride but it's not as terrible as people make it out to be. I used to ride it all the time but I'm to tall now and they still use the older lap bars.

[cfc]

I've always found Grizzly to be boring--that's my issue with it. I've never thought Grizzly was the "worst" wooden coaster ever (Anaconda at Walygator and Bandit at Movie Park are much worse), but I still rank it pretty low.

[rolercstrluvr]

Well i'm on my way to the park today to see whats going on.

[larrygator]

The way I see it is that if the Grizzly was really "the worst wooden roller coaster" than no one would go on it. During the busy season, that ride almost always has a line. When I went to the haunt last year, the line went past drop zone. IMO, Grizzy may not be the fastest and most over the top ride but it's not as terrible as people make it out to be. I used to ride it all the time but I'm to tall now and they still use the older lap bars.

 

 

Do you work for Prudential?

[Tmcdllr]

Grizzly, I don't think, is considered one of the worst because or roughness, not really anymore, but more so that it is just a boring ride. A lot of the GP like boring rides like this so for that reason it may be popular and with so few coasters there the crowds have to go somewhere.