Oakham's £48,000 Skate Park not yet open is causing a bit of a stink.

The Skatepark is not yet finished but the volume of comment suggests
its not very good or even safe.

I am not sure how permanent the wooden support shown above is meant to be?

A comment shared by a Melton Mowbray Skateboard Shop

Had a job over by Oakham today. I'd heard reports the Council over there had forcefully inserted a new skatepark so i went over to have a look. JESUS! What a sack of shit. Its unbelievable in 2015 when pretty much every town and large village has a Skatepark that monstrosities like this are still getting built.

Who signed this off as being a fit for purpose skatepark?
Why has it just appeared with no apparent consultation with any of the local user groups?
Who designed this?
What manufacturing company could build something like this and hold their head up and say it's fit for purpose?

Well done Oakham council. You've just set back Skateboarding, BMXing and Scootering in your town 15 years and wasted probably £30000 in the process.

I feel sorry for the parents of Oakham who are going to take their children down to this park who will inevitably attending to the cuts, grazes and bruises this park will cause. Just look at the tarmac surface!!!

A facebook page has been set up:

https://www.facebook.com/Oakhamskatepark

Oakham Town Council Report on which members made the decision:

Skatepark Report

Background

Council has already agreed in principle to fund £7500 toward the cost of replacing the Skatepark in Cutts Close which is now around 7 years old, and in need of replacement.

An additional £2000 has been committed by the Trustees of the Memorial Institute.

An Initial Project Proposal was presented to RCC on 20^th December 2014 requesting funding towards the balance of any capital costs from the Recreation, Sports and Leisure Facilities Grant and Loan Scheme (essentially the distribution of s106 monies). The basis of this proposal was a grant rather than a loan.

If approved at their eligibility check to go forward (decision awaited), then the next step in the financial process is to submit a Full Project Proposal.

THIS HAS A DEADLINE OF 20^TH JANUARY 2015

If we miss this deadline for any reason, then we would need to wait for a second round of funding - or seek an alternative source of funding.

The Brief

As previously noted at the meeting of 12^th November the replacement will need to fit on to the existing footprint of the skatepark. The facility is likely to be aimed at the younger / less experienced user and intermediate users as this is more appropriate for the demographics of users of the park.

Quotations need to include the complete removal (and appropriate disposal) of the old structure, should include guarantees, and must meet all appropriate safety standards and industry standards.

Quotations and designs

Individual quotations and designs from three suppliers are attached to this report as appendices. They are discussed in the following sections:

Quote and design 1. Flow-skatepark Construction Ltd indicative £41,025

This is a concrete structure, with polished surface, small damage should be normally repairable by ourselves/contractors though damage may less than with other materials. The height is reduced from present levels by around 6inches at its maximum to benefit the target users. The design requires 150mm hard core base and the supplier would need to investigate the existing base in case extra work / material is required. External facings would be rendered to our choice of colour and rails could be powder coated to our colour choice. The design incorporates some additional features to the existing structure.

Quote and design 2. Evolution Skateparks indicative £38,236

This is a modular design (which in theory could be largely removed and relocated) comprising wooden riding surfaces on a steel structure. The riding surface is “Skatelite Pro” fixed through two layers of birch to the frame. There is no wood in the frame. The structure is then encased in galvanised steel with edges flush to the riding surface. Outer faces could be powder coated as also the railings. Again the final figure will need to take account of any work required to the foundations. This would have a tarmac surface visible which would degrade over time. Again the spine ramp has a feature to the side.

Quote and design 3. Caloo Ltd (Monster) indicative £39,995

This is a more complex initial design, based on steel section subframes with roller ramps, spines etc described as “steel”. Further clarification will be sought on the material used in the riding surface. The quotation states that it includes “excavation, assembly and setting in concrete”. The design may be more appealing though the pipes are only 2.4 m wide compared to 4.8 for evolution and the full structure is 7m wide for Flo.

Decision required:

To select a preferred supplier from the three quotations and designs.

Recommendation:

No particular supplier is recommended by the author. It is however recommended to determine a preferred supplier and then any other acceptable suppliers ranked in order of preference , taking in to account cost, value for money, preference of users, likely maintenance, health and safety and any other factors members see fit to consider bearing in mind the target demographics of the users. It may be that one or more supplier is considered not acceptable and is not ranked at all.

Reason for recommendation:

To allow the project to move forward within required timescales, whilst leaving an option if English Heritage are for any reason unable to agree to the Council’s first choice.

2014 Post

Oakham Town Council, Oakham Skatepark, Replacement, No User or Community Involvement?

2015 Post