For
years now, companies within the hard-goods sector of the skateboard industry
have grown accustomed to manufacturers from outside the industry introducing
products to the masses in an attempt to obtain their share of the market.
Oddly enough, it has been the skatepark industry, particularly the
manufacturers of semi-permanent facilities (ramp builders), that have
enjoyed the longest sustained period of freedom from this form of additional
competition. However, we all knew it was only a matter of time before
companies outside the industry began introducing skatepark equipment to the
market. It was not so much a question of whether or not this was likely to
occur, but rather, when? By whom? And to what result? For the last couple
of years there had been rumours that manufacturers of playground equipment
were preparing to enter the skatepark market, but the information was always
sketchy and, upon further examination, proved to be more conjecture than
fact. Further, unless one simply wanted to stew over the potential
ramifications of such an event, there was really nothing that could be done
until it happened.
New
Face in the Marketplace.
In case you have not
heard, this is no longer conjecture. When? and by whom? was answered last
March during the annual assembly of California Parks and Recreation. It was
at this assembly that the public was introduced to the SkateWave Modular
Skatepark system. SkateWave is the recent creation of Landscape Structures,
Inc., a privately held company that was founded in 1971 by Barb and Steve
King. Over the last thirty years, Landscape Structures has grown into the
nation’s predominant supplier of playground equipment for schools, municipal
parks, and childcare centers. Landscape Structures’s mission (according to
their website) is “to enrich the lives of children through play”, so moving
into the design and manufacture of skatepark equipment probably seemed a
fairly logical extension of their current company goals. We all know that
if you ask a roomful of youth what type of recreational facility they would
most like to have in their community, (I am guessing) nine times out of ten
the answer will be a skatepark. So certainly the demand is there.
For more insight, I recently sat down with product representative John
Nessen of SkateWave to learn first-hand what they have been up to in their
Delano, Minnesota factory, and maybe to catch a glimpse of the answer to
that final question, “what results will come from a blending of playground
and skatepark? I will describe a few of the possible results this will have
on the industry, including changes in liability and the development of
skatepark standards, at the end of this article, but first let me describe
what I learned about SkateWave.
Judging from the terminology used on the web site and the sample designs
they propose, it is clear that the principals at SkateWave are not skaters
and know little or nothing about the roots of skateboarding and current
trends within the industry. But, with three decades worth of background in
the playground equipment industry, they have dealt with more than their
share of city officials and, as a result, they know how to attractively
design, market, and sell playground equipment. You can bet that they will
not hesitate to use that knowledge and network to sell their skatepark
products.
The SkateWave web site
suggests that the four most important requirements of parks and recreation
directors are typically flexibility, durability, safety, and low
maintenance. And, it seems that they designed their products to match those
criteria first rather than focusing on the products suitability for
skating. To meet the first criteria, flexibility, the products were
designed as a customizable, modular system. The various events (in parks
and recreation jargon the term ‘event’ is interchangeable with ‘obstacle’ or
‘ramp’) can be self-assembled and configured in different ways to fit the
space requirements and characteristics of a selected park site. Once
assembled, the components can be rearranged to provide new combinations of
events and challenges. The importance of this is will depend primarily
whether skatepark professionals are consulted from the start of a project.
Basically, if a design is right from the start, there is no reason to be
shifting stuff around.
As for durability, each SkateWave obstacle is fabricated from 11-12 gauge
steel with a wrinkle, powder coat finish applied to the transitions and
decks with sides and back panels made from a synthetic material. For
corrosion resistance and sound deadening, all toe-plates are PVC coated and
foam strips exist wherever metal joins metal. They also claim to use only
stainless steel fasteners and foot levellers. As for safety, there are no
sharp corners or entrapment areas on any events. But that tends to be a
non-issue as most other professional ramp builders avoid potential safety
issues equally well.
The individual components offered by SkateWave cover all of the basics for
ramps from jumps, launch and fun-boxes, to mini-ramps, pyramids, spines, and
quarter pipes. In addition to these skatepark components, they also offer
custom signage, as well as a variety of benches, trash cans, and bike
racks. So, if a community is looking at buying a skatepark and hasn’t done
their research with regard to their options, SkateWave is going to be
one-stop shopping. And, with glossy promo materials, an introductory video,
22 representative’s nationwide and toll-free service, they are positioned to
sell some product.
To assist with design,
SkateWave offers a park configuration kit to facilitate hands-on modelling.
The configuration kit is a small scale 3D catalog of their products that
allows skaters and other interested parties to envision their park and
accurately determine what their needs are, while at the same time being able
to adhere to a budget. The resulting skatepark plan can also be used as a
tool for fundraising or lobbying city council. It’s actually a good thing
that they turn the design over to skaters because, as I have said before,
the sample designs on their web site are….well, see for yourself. The
biggest design error the staff at SkateWave makes is confusing ‘flexibility’
and ‘flow.’ You and some friends can move these components around until
everyone is blue in the face and too tired to session, but if the most
complex transition available is a square-sided quarter-pipe you are only
going to dial in so much flow. And this is perhaps the greatest weakness of
their products. Due to a lack of any bowled corners, any design comprised
only of SkateWave product will lack the complexity and continuous flow
patterns needed to hook intermediate to advanced skaters. But in all
fairness, this criticism would hold true when discussing any such facility
regardless of the manufacturer of the ramps. Given the selection of
obstacles currently offered by SkateWave, a community could work together to
design a skatepark that would more than meet the interests and needs of
beginning skaters. To meet the needs of intermediate to advanced skaters,
the SkateWave system would have to be effectively combined with concrete
structures in order to incorporate enough challenges. At that point, you
might as well make the entire thing out of concrete.
To date, I have not had the chance to personally test any of the SkateWave
line of products and can therefore not comment on the skateability of the
ramps, the powdercoat finish applied to the trannies, or what, if any, sound
deadening qualities the ramps possess in comparison to a basic steel ramp.
Likewise, I cannot determine how durable the various applied finishes are.
Only time, a few seasons out doors, and a thorough and repeated grinding
will tell us these things. But, what I can tell you is that the equipment
has a safe, innocuous look to it. It looks every bit as cute as a piece of
playground equipment should. And to a safety minded consumer, uneducated as
to what skateparks can really be, it will likely sell.
With the addition of the SkateWave product line, Landscape Structures is
now the first major manufacturer to offer customers a single-source solution
for commercial playground equipment and modular skatepark equipment. The
current skatepark industry may not be thrilled with these products, but
skateparks are increasingly being added to existing playgrounds, and parks
and recreation departments around the country are interested in skateparks
as an addition to their current facilities. Hence, these two industries are
beginning to form closer connections. In the future; they will likely
merge, becoming indistinguishable, as more outside companies follow the lead
of Landscape Structures. How this will affect the current skatepark
industry will not be known for some time. However, I will take this
opportunity to make a few prognostications free of charge.
Future Changes in Liability
One of the first
changes we may see in the near future will be in the area of liability.
Most of us know that the injury rate among skaters is lower than other
sporting activities that take place within municipal facilities including
football, soccer, baseball, basketball, and hockey. But in spite of this,
rather than treating a skatepark as the recreational facility that it is,
municipalities and insurance carriers have subjected skateparks to an
inordinate degree of scrutiny and red tape. This liability/insurance issue
has slowed down countless projects and ultimately been the death of many
others. All municipalities face liability, whether it is for a sidewalk,
sandbox or skatepark and, as a result, insurance is always a question that
must be addressed. However, there is no reason to continue to single
skateparks out as places of undue risk. A validated link between playground
space and skateparks could very well be the first step toward insurance
coverage for a skatepark that is more in line with current insurance
coverage for other municipal park facility activities.
Standardization
of Design and Building
Relatedly, a subsequent
occurrence will be city leaders and the heads of various parks and
recreation departments beginning to lobby for (likely demanding) forms of
standardization within the skatepark industry. Playground equipment has
been subject to this form of standardization for years and now that the
lines are blurring, skatepark builders will likely have to follow suit. Now
before everyone dashes to the computer to lob one of those tasty hate
e-mails into the ether let me set the record straight. The folks at
Landscape Structures do not have any more interest or desire to see
standardization of the skatepark industry than the rest of the skatepark
builders out there. Frankly when the time comes, it is going to be a long,
complex, tedious process that will eat up a whole bunch of peoples’ time and
energy. But skateparks have become increasingly popular recreational
facilities and with this popularity will ultimately come the bureaucratic
desire for regulation and standardization of the industry. The fact that
skateparks will now be equated with playgrounds and other recreational
facilities that have been standardized for years now will only quicken the
pace.
So far the builder and designers of skateparks have been fortunate. For
years now skateparks have been built with little or no eye toward industry
specifications. Sure, a city engineer may have required that this or that
aspect of skatepark construction conform to city code, but that’s a small
detail. What I see coming is a demand for an industry-wide set of standards
by which all skatepark construction can be held accountable (concrete and
otherwise). Almost every other industry has consistent standards, and the
fact that the skatepark industry has avoided them for so long should
rightfully be viewed more as an unexpected privilege than a right – a
bonus. Likewise, when this movement for standardization does occur, it will
probably follow lines similar to the standardization that took place within
the playground industry. So, in keeping with that, let me introduce you to
four of the more powerful standardization entities currently in place.
The first is the International Play Equipment Manufactures Association (IPEMA).
IPEMA is a member-driven, international trade organization that represents
and promotes an open market for the manufacturers of play equipment. In the
interest of public safety, IPEMA provides a Third Party Certification
service whereby a designated independent laboratory validates a
participant’s conformance to American Society for Testing and Material
(ASTM) standards. The use of the IPEMA seal by any manufacturer signifies
that the company has received written validation from the independent
laboratory that the product associated with the use of the seal conforms to
the ASTM standards. Existing standards worth having a look at would include
ASTM F1487-98 Standard Consumer Safety Performance for Playground Equipment
for Public Use. CAN/CSA-Z614-98 Children's Play Spaces and Equipment.
A second standardization entity is ISO 9001. ISO 9001 is a set of
international quality assurance standards that provides industries with the
framework necessary to ensure that operation processes are consistent and
effective. ISO 9001 is the most comprehensive of the ISO group of standards
and establishes quality processes for both design and manufacturing. What
exactly are these standards? To quote the ISO web site, standards are
“documented agreements containing technical specifications or other precise
criteria to be used consistently as guidelines, or definitions of
characteristics, to ensure that products, processes and services are fit for
their purposes”.
The third and fourth standardization entities are the American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC).
ASTM is a scientific and technical organization that establishes standards
for testing different types of materials, one of which is recreational
equipment. Their goal according to the web site is “to promote public
health and safety by contributing to the reliability of materials, products,
systems and services while fostering national and international commerce”.
Their federal twin is the CPSC. CPSC is an independent agency of the
federal government whose charter is to inform the public of unreasonable
risks associated with consumer products. CPSC guidelines are closely linked
to the standards of ASTM. That would just about cover it for the United
States, but most other developed nations all have their own standardization
bodies such as the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) which establishes
guidelines for children's play spaces within Canada and TUV Product Service,
which covers Germany.
Let me interject that standards (if properly developed) would not
necessarily have to stifle the creativity of existing builders and could
have the potential to dictate that only the highest quality parks get
built. Fundamentally, there needs to be a shift in mind-set. The question
of “how can we continue to avoid standards?” needs to be abandoned. That is
simply no longer an option. What we need to concentrate on is “how can
skatepark professional’s work together to ensure that when standardization
takes place, it can be used as a tool to ensure that only the highest
quality skatepark facilities get constructed? For some reason, I am
reminded of the end to Charles Dickens “A Christmas Carol” when that bitter
old root Scrooge, who has been heckling everything and everybody from the
start looks at the ghost of things to come and says (I’m paraphrasing) “tell
me spirit, are the things you have shown me what will be, or what might
be?” And that spirit never says a word.
The time for discussing whether standardization is right, or wrong, or in
keeping with the traditions of the “core” and those working for the “Cause”
is fast running out. I think we all know instinctively that it is not ‘if’
standardization will occur, but when and how, and to what result.
Skateparks are becoming a mainstream recreational facility and the upside is
that quality builders have years of business to look forward to. But that
popularity is going to come with a price. However, that price does not have
to be the creative freedom that we have enjoyed to date. The choice of what
to do currently lies with skatepark industry professionals. We can both
take a proactive stance in the development of these industry standards and
shape them to suit our needs and the future of the skatepark industry, or
grumble and acquiesce and to leave it to the bureaucrats.
