A CLOSER LOOK -- City’s plans for skate park just spinning

Jennifer Kho

COSTA MESA -- With another skateboard park site freshly in its grave,

council and community members are trying to predict whether the city has

a skateboard park in its future at all.

Some have lost hope, while others convey a confidence that the third

time is sure to be the charm.

The now-defunct location, at the corner of Charle and Hamilton

streets, is the second site that was approved by the City Council only to

be killed at a later meeting.

Residents have been waiting for the skateboard park to come to life

since the idea was conceived 10 years ago.

The effort to open the park has included years of waiting, searching,

researching and debating, along with $42,750 of city spending on

architectural fees.

The city began looking seriously at locations in 1998, when state law

changed to protect cities from skateboard liability.

Council members approved a site at Lions Park in 1999 but changed their minds after neighbors pointed out potential flooding and traffic

problems, as well as diminishing green space at the park.

The council followed that decision by approving the Charle and

Hamilton streets site in October.

Designs for the park were in the final stages last week, with the city

less than a month away from putting the project up for bid, when the

council voted the site down in a 3-2 vote, with Mayor Libby Cowan and

Councilwoman Linda Dixon dissenting.

HOPES AND DESIRES

In the aftermath of the decision, Councilman Gary Monahan and Cowan

said they think the skateboard park could be doomed.

Although Monahan said he would like to provide a skateboard park, he

said he would rather not have one at all than to have one at a bad site.

“I think it’s becoming more obvious we’re probably not going to end up

providing a skateboard park,” Monahan said. “The best locations have been

ruled out and to sit on [poor] locations is unfeasible for the users. The

skateboard park is something there is definitely a demand for, and it is

something I would like to provide for the skateboarders in town, but I’ve

been frustrated by my opponents. The answer is not, as suggested at

Charle and Hamilton, to throw a poor site together with an unlimited

budget.”

Monahan is in favor of building the skateboard park at a “regional

park” such as Lions Park, Fairview Park, TeWinkle Park, Costa Mesa High

School or the Farm Sports Complex.

Cowan, on the other hand, has turned from her hope for a permanent

location toward making an effort to set up temporary locations.

“I certainly think the city deserves a permanent location, but I don’t

have a lot of faith it will happen and, in the meantime, I think

portable, temporary structures will provide a place for our youth,

particularly beginners and intermediates, to skate,” she said.

Costa Mesa resident Paul Schmitt said he’s worried the council could

face the same opposition from the “not in my neighborhood” group and the

same problems finding locations for the temporary sites as they have for

a permanent one.

Cowan said she hopes the city will be able to use neighborhood parks,

parking lots and blocked-off streets.

Unlike her colleague, Dixon said she has not given up hope that a

permanent park could be built, although she has lost some of her faith

that it will be.

“The council members who opposed the Hamilton Street park felt that

there were no other places in town that it might be possible,” she said.

“I hope they get back to us real soon with their recommendation. I’m led

to believe that they really don’t want a skateboard park in Costa Mesa. I

don’t know if it will ever be built, unfortunately.”

That isn’t how the other two council members who voted to kill the

park, Karen Robinson and Chris Steel, said they feel.

“The city does deserve a skateboard park and there are plenty of

locations we can find that will be far safer than that site,” Robinson

said. “I am committed, as I know [Steel and Monahan] are, in finding

another location. I know not everyone will be happy about it, but if the

city is going to be the one that develops it, at least it will be in a

safe place.”

Steel said he thinks he has already offered a number of good

alternatives to the Charle and Hamilton streets site, including

commercial sites such as the Harbor Boulevard building where the Ice

Chalet was previously located.

Costa Mesa residents Jim Gray and Schmitt, who have spoken many times

in favor of a skateboard park, said they believe the city’s skateboard

park should be public.

“Kids don’t pay money to play basketball, football, soccer or anything

else in this city,” Schmitt said. “They shouldn’t have to pay to

skateboard. Vans at The Block [in Orange] is between $10 and $14 for two

hours at peak hours. Can we really expect our kids to be able to pay $5

to $7 per hour to skateboard? I don’t think so.”

Gray and Schmitt own two of the three skateboard manufacturers in

Costa Mesa.

“I think it’s a pretty sad irony that kids all around the world are

riding on skateboards made in Costa Mesa and yet they can’t ride in Costa

Mesa,” Gray said. “We’re looking for something hopefully in a fairly

central area that kids can get to, but at this point we don’t really feel

we have a choice. We have to take whatever we can get them to buy into

because they’re not picking based on what’s best for our kids, they’re

picking based on what comes with the fewest political problems.”

DEFINING THE CHALLENGES

The dispute is, and has always been, about location, location,

location.

And the council and skateboarders both have had trouble persuading the

park’s potential neighbors to welcome it in with open arms.

Skateboarders have said repeatedly they will try to comfort neighbors’

fears about having a skateboard park near them.

Former parks commissioner Michael Scheafer, who was opposed to the

Charle and Hamilton site and who resigned because of a dispute about the

skateboard park, said he thinks this is the biggest challenge -- to “make

sure the neighbors realize that this is not going to ruin their

neighborhood.”

“I really think that’s how some of them feel,” he said. “I just think

people still have this idea that skateboarders aren’t what they want in

their neighborhood. They think of skateboarders, surfers and teenage kids

as being trouble, which is really unfortunate. Everybody was a teenager

hopefully at some time in their life.”

Gray said he thinks people are afraid because they’ve never had a

skateboard park in the city before.

“Everybody looks at it like ‘Oh my God, they’re bringing a bunch of

hoodlums into our neighborhood,”’ he said. “So wherever the park is,

somebody is going to be opposed to it.”

Gray said he is considering starting an “underground campaign” with

bumper stickers to try to encourage the city to build a skateboard park.

Skateboarders and Cowan say the council is going to have to withstand

pressure from the few people who will oppose any site.

Robinson, Monahan and Steel said their decision to dismiss the Charle

and Hamilton streets site had nothing to do with political pressure, but

was instead based on sound arguments against the site including safety

problems, the high cost and the lack of parking and existing bathrooms.

But Cowan, Schmitt and Gray said they believe the decision was a

matter of “buckling under pressure.”

“They had no problems deciding on a skyscraper near South Coast Plaza,

and I have no problems with that, but the point is they were able to make

a decision,” Gray said. “I think their priorities are a bit wacked. They

had a few people jumping up and down and gave in. It was such a small

amount of pressure it was not even funny. But they were able to pass a

Home Depot even though a lot more people were jumping up and down. Have

we given up hope? No. Have we given up fighting? No. Do we think they

care? No.”

QUESTION

A place to park

Is there a perfect site for a skateboard park in Costa Mesa? Call our

Readers Hotline at (949) 642-6086 or send e-mail to o7

dailypilot@latimes.comf7 . Please spell your name and include your

hometown and phone number, for verification purposes only.