|
We believe a quantitative analysis of all material options measuring total cost of ownership
(TCO) and return on investment (ROI) favors concrete over modular
skateparks.
Further, too many skaters, vulnerable to surface inconsistencies due to hard
wheels as small
as 50mm, have experienced first-hand the unnecessary hazard caused by the seam between
the base of modular ramps and the pad it sits upon, specifically eliminating prefabricated
concrete park elements from the list of superior materials.
Finally, modular ramps (concrete pre-fab not included)
, in the
words of Portland, Oregon's Noise Control Officer: "are essentially speakers," broadcasting
the sound of skateboarding great distances, relative to concrete, which emits sounds
quantified as "comparable to a conversation between two adults" at just a few meters
(Van Orden, et al. 2001).
There exist many different options for those seeking to provide a skateboard park. There
are temporary structures, movable or "modular" ones, and permanent skateparks build from
concrete. Skateparks today are made from wood, steel, fiberglass, composites, and concrete.
The spectrum of materials available fall into two categories:
Permanent parks are typically constructed from concrete. Modular parks are constructed from
wood, steel, fiberglass, and composites, depending on the vendor and quality of the materials.
So which is better?
"Better" can easily become a topic of subjectivity, regarding how one segment of skateboarder
prefers one over another. Instead, we've chosen to focus on economic reality: return on investment,
or "ROI."
"ROI," of course, is initial investment plus maintenance cost, over the
life of the product. Although many modular vendors promote an
apparently inexpensive acquisition cost, quantified in a metric
identified as "price per square foot," we've found that these values
are inaccurately derived, as many vendors divide the investment cost
with the total area of the facility, ignoring that they weren't hired
to provide the flat pad the facility is placed upon (a task typically
assigned to the city). Once normalized, the "cost per square foot," and
therefore, the "cost of acquisition" for modular typically far exceeds
that of more traditional materials, such as concrete.
Further, common "value added" features promoted by modular companies pertains to the very modularity
of the equipment, as well as impressive-sounding warrantees. However, in a large and growing
number of cases many vendors invalidate the equipment's warrantees as soon as they are relocated
or dismiss usage-damage as vandalism. Many cities have complained of poor responsiveness from
vendors while seeking remediation, causing unanticipated variability in operational maintenance costs, as
personnel are required to make more frequent "safety inspection" trips to the parks.
SPS recommends requiring any vendor to provide several references to cities who purchased
their equipment 3 or more years ago, and evaluate them for their service, responsiveness, and
the durability of the equipment. A growing archive of photos and video has demonstrated the frailty
of modular materials when subjected to everyday usage.
One final caveat: ensure your concrete vendor has experience with skateparks, as they require
engineering constraints often unknown to a general contractor. Our recommendation to seek referrals
from prior (3+ years) customers applies equally to concrete.
For more information, see this article from Warranty Week Magazine:
Additional information on this topic and more is available within the Design phase of the Skatepark Process.
|
