A proposed expansion at the Ravine Water Park in Paso Robles cleared a key regulatory step April 7 after the City Council unanimously denied an appeal and upheld the Planning Commission’s approval, allowing a “no splash” pool and hot tub addition to move forward.
The decision followed a lengthy hearing that focused less on the size of the new amenities and more on whether the project would trigger broader environmental review, traffic studies, or infrastructure upgrades tied to the long-running water park.
At issue is an amendment to the park’s original 2004 conditional use permit and planned development approvals. The approved application would allow construction of a 1,879-square-foot “no splash” pool and a 153-square-foot hot tub, with surrounding deck and seating, located within an already-developed portion of the site near Airport Road and State Route 46 East.
City staff and the applicant described the project as a modest upgrade to existing facilities rather than an expansion of the water park.
“The proposed project represents an adaptive reuse of these existing amenities to serve visitors already utilizing the water park and it does not expand its overall capacity,” said Community Development Director Warren Frace. He added that under building code calculations, “the project will result in a reduction in capacity as the pool accommodates fewer people than the existing lawn and concrete active use areas.”
Because of that, staff concluded no new traffic study or off-site improvements were required. An April 7 staff report stated that “no evidence has been provided demonstrating that the project would increase the water park’s capacity.”
The appeal, filed by Ranch and Coast Properties, raised eight separate concerns, including drainage impacts, traffic, airport compatibility, and whether earlier approvals and existing conditions at the park were being properly considered. The appellant also questioned parking access along Paso Robles Boulevard and erosion issues near Airport Road.
City staff responded that most of the concerns were related to existing conditions or earlier permits rather than the proposed pool addition.
“The majority of the issues raised by the appellant pertain to existing site conditions and ongoing maintenance matters, rather than impacts directly attributable to the proposed project,” the staff analysis stated.
On environmental review, City Attorney Elizabeth Hull said the project is covered by prior analysis and multiple categorical exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
“We are comfortable that it meets that exemption,” she said. “We do have substantial evidence to support approval of the project under any of the three, and we don’t have any substantial evidence suggesting that we couldn’t use them.”
The council also heard from Ravine Water Park operator Brett Butterfield, who has overseen the facility since its early development and described it as both a community anchor and an evolving business that has repeatedly adapted to growth.
He told the council the park has become deeply woven into the region’s identity.
“Hundreds of people every season say, ‘Thank you for bringing this to Paso. Thank you for the jobs that you bring,’” Butterfield said.
He added that operational challenges such as parking demand and traffic on nearby roads have been ongoing since the park opened in 2007.
During council deliberations, members acknowledged neighborhood concerns but emphasized that the current proposal was limited in scope.
The council also discussed possible future aesthetic improvements along Airport Road, including landscaping or screening between the roadway and parking areas—such ideas would be considered separately from the current approval. ∆
This article appears in April 23-30, 2026.