A (visual) argument for a skate park?
I came across this YouTube video that was listed under East Hampton, CT – it was posted June 22, 2009 by Butternut Films – and wondered what readers would think – Is this an argument for an organized and perhaps supervised skate park ? Or against?
Here’s another, from skateforlife2343 posted on YouTube on Oct. 30, 2008
15 Responses to “A (visual) argument for a skate park?”
The skatepark these kids needs has to be a compelling enough alternative to the excellent street spots they’ve already uncovered. The second video is proof they travelled as far as Northampton Mass, which has a skatepark that genuinely meets that “more compelling” criteria.
Putting ramps on an old tennis court would be a waste of money. Hiring a pad nanny, charging money? Forget it. Go big or go home.
Comment made on July 20th, 2009 at 9:20 amthe first video is actually from east hampton ct
Comment made on July 20th, 2009 at 9:46 amthe other one is not
Thanks to the readers who pointed out that the second video is from Massachusetts (although it comes up if you do a YouTube search for East Hampton CT)… I included it because it shows the difference between an improvised skate park and a park created specifically for skateboarding.
Comment made on July 20th, 2009 at 10:51 amBest skateparks in CT: Groton, Wethersfield, Stamford, Bristol, Milford, Sprague. Fairfield has a 10K SF concrete gem currently under construction. All share the same common denominator: They are design-built by skaters, using concrete.
The ramps-on-asphalt skatepark is a waste of tax $$: They’re loud, ugly, and provide minimal skateable terrain in flat, linear layouts. Like what an astroturf mat is to golf. Combining those shortcomings with an attendant and restrictions and it will be an empty eyesore.
Comment made on July 20th, 2009 at 11:36 amI was against the first skatepark we built – which was trashed – and I am against this on, because I still don’t think there are enough users to justify the enormous expense and liability.
Comment made on July 20th, 2009 at 10:28 pmResponse to: “The ramps-on-asphalt skatepark is a waste of tax $$. They’re loud, ugly, and provide minimal skateable terrain in flat, linear layouts. Like what an astroturf mat is to golf. Combining those shortcomings with an attendant and restrictions and it will be an empty eyesore.”
1. You obviously have little knowledge about the potential skatepark in East Hampton. NO taxpayer money is being used; the skatepark committee is being required to raise ALL the money.
2. Meriden, Guilford, Hebron, Cromwell are all great examples of fun ramps-on-asphalt parks. Sure, concrete would be great, but we’ll take what we can afford.
3. Ugly? We’re more interested in effective ramps, not pretty ones. Bristol is a gorgeous park, but our pockets aren’t 1/3 that deep.
4. BMX bikes will be permitted in this skatepark and cement and bikes always ends up being an issue. ARC ramps, Rampage Ramps, etc. are very bike friendly.
Comment made on July 21st, 2009 at 9:19 amNice video guys!
The biggest factor here is money! Then space. I’m curious, is the town going to be responsible for insuring the skatepark (taxpayer dollars) or is the skatepark committee going to be required to raise that money? For the skate & bmx jams at Center School the past few summers, the skatepark committee had to pay for the insurance. I agree with Bill that cement skateparks offer endless lines and are very smooth and flowy, but I can relate to Bry’s comment, too… We’ll take what we can get/afford. If the town is only going to give us a tennis court-sized area, that would yield a pretty tight cement park – like New London’s. Either way, the riders and skaters need a place of their own, and we’re going to keep working toward that!
Does anybody know how much any of those new cement parks in the Eastern portion of the state cost? Sprague, Norwich, etc.
Comment made on July 21st, 2009 at 9:36 amGood afternoon, Brenda. Please check with the town manager on the insurance issue. The youth group spent two years researching and documenting the fact that a park costs no more to cover under the umbrella policy for the town than what is already there. Another contact to verify that is Luis DePina, the Parks and Rec Director for the City of Norwich, who also saw no increase in insurance rates with the addition of a skatepark. I’m sure you’d agree that it would be unfair to keep the insurance question on the poll once you verify the above information. Thanks for your interest in this issue. Best, Kimberley
Comment made on July 21st, 2009 at 1:18 pmI will get more information about the insurance question and share what I find out… thank you for the input and suggestions – Brenda Sullivan |HTNP.com Editor
Comment made on July 21st, 2009 at 10:26 pmCheck out the skate park at Marthas Vineyard if you are ever over there, they have one that is really nice.
Comment made on July 22nd, 2009 at 11:05 amIn response to: “because I still don’t think there are enough users to justify the enormous expense and liability.”
……Seriously?? There would be waaaaayyyy more use for the skate park than the two existing tennis courts.
Also, all you residents who itch and complain about skaters abusing area businesses and schools will see a huge decrease in "illegal" skating.
Skateboarding, BMX, and rollerblading are still on the rise.
Not to mention, the potential they offer our youth. I don’t have statistics, but there are probably hundreds of thousands of careers related to these sports.
The town offers baseball fields, basketball courts, a brand new track, soccer fields, multiple tennis courts, swimming areas. Where is there a place to legally skate? NOWHERE!
I don’t even skate, but I say DO IT and DO IT RIGHT THIS TIME!!!
Comment made on July 24th, 2009 at 1:07 amVERY WELL SAID!
What enormous costs and liability are you speaking of Mrs. Jacobson?
The Skatepark Committee is raising all the funds and the park should be covered under the town’s umbrella insurance policy. It is no more dangerous to be at the skatepark than it is to swim at Sears Park, play on the playground at Center School, or participate in any other activities on town property.
In addition, what does “we built” mean? The Skatepark Committee built that park on their own and the town was nice enough to allow them to use that space at Center School. It was money spent out of their own pockets.
Again, what “enormous expense” are you speaking of?
Comment made on July 24th, 2009 at 12:47 pmHello — I spoke with Parks & Rec Director Ruth Plummer today (Friday, July 24) and she explained that there may be some confusion about the insurance question among people in town, because the town was told to close the old skatepark on Barton Hill because it was in poor condition and could jeopardize the town’s insurance coverage. That would not be the case for the skatepark at Sears Park – which would be built to safety standards and would be included under the town’s insurance as part of Sears Park at no additional cost. — Brenda
Comment made on July 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pmStay up to date on the latest skatepark info…
http://belltown-skatepark.blogspot.com/
Comment made on July 25th, 2009 at 9:23 amBrain donor video. How nice.
Comment made on September 19th, 2009 at 12:27 pmLeave a Comment