1.) Look: cities (i.e., they are NOT skatepark companies) seem to understand how to create stuff street skaters like to skate, in many cases more so than skatepark companies
2.) Look: cities seem to understand their design expertise, else they wouldn't have put skate stoppers all over the park
3.) Look: the park isn't even open yet, and it's been skated plus one of the skate stoppers have been knocked out
4.) Look: cities haven't yet grasped that they can aesthetically address the risk of damage by choosing not to expose low-grade concrete, that they can instead cover the edges with a higher-strength material and thus eliminate the risk of damage in the first place.
Oops, before we start, let's address what most assume to be "the answer" to the problem of kids skateboarding where they shouldn't be. Wilsonville already has a "skatepark." It's terrible, clearly ignores those things that kids want to skate, and is perhaps the most un-fun thing in Oregon, but it's still a "skatepark," by definition.
As if the park wasn't awful enough, the sprinklers regularly water the park because the parks people haven't yet changed the sprinkler's orientation, you know, now that the "skatepark" has been there for 2 or 3 years. At no point did the city of Wilsonville actually ask the kids what they wanted to skate, instead they leaped at an opportunity to pick up some discarded ramps abandoned by (I think) Beaverton.
As you can see here, the kids of Wilsonville have been gifted a new and more appealing place to skate.
Even those elements that are in water have skate stoppers. Everything does.
At first the "skate stopping" of the water bound elements was a mystery, but then I realized that when the park is empty of water the entire thing becomes even more appealing. I mean, it's on a downhill track and there are several things to ollie onto and off of. Good job, Wilsonville!
Check this out: low, sidewalk-grade concrete with embedded home-made skate stoppers. It doesn't take a civil engineer to know what's going to happen here over the course of a few years. I visualize a badly chipped and damaged park. I can think of a better way to address this risk! Can you?
A look from the top looking back down the "track."
Most of my adult life has been spent in the private sector. In my world people would be canned for making these sorts of decisions. Regarding medium-term TCO (total cost of ownership) people should know better by now. Might I emphasize by now. It's not 1985. Cities have sought to criminalize skateboarding for over 20 years. Efforts have not only failed, but have (as will be the case for Wilsonville) end up being unduly expensive.
As I said, I function in the private sector. Within the realm of engineering, in fact. Engineering could be thought of as the art of thoughtfully applying resources to identified risks and constraints. It's been over 20 years and those engineers who design features such as what's seen above still haven't got the memo: your efforts aren't working and are costing you money. Maybe it's time to get humble and start consulting with your citizens on skateboards.
