Skatepark Werdau Participation

The fenced-in skatepark is accessible via an entrance area that is fenced off from the thoroughfare.

The almost cruciform facility has king-size banks and a quarter pipe of different heights on three sides, which are connected by a concrete flat. In this a Rooftop Ramp with low Flatrail from steel was arranged between Quarter Pipe and bank.

Opposite the second bank a stair in combination with Ramp and different Ledge Banks connects the lower level of the Flat with the somewhat more highly convenient second level. The lower level also houses a curb box and a railing element.

The facility was supplemented by robust seating elements made of concrete blocks and greened.

Youth in the city - skate park in Werdau

Werdau is a small town with just over 20000 inhabitants in southwest Saxony.
The city is one of the typical in this region, former industrial cities.
Here was a strong commercial vehicle and engineering sector and a long tradition
of the textile industry. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, large parts of this industry have disappeared, and the city has had to contend with a sharp decline in population and an ageing population. This has the
strongest impact on the city centre. The originally urban city center eroded increasingly in the
last decades, not least because factory ruins demolished and
the areas in part could not be rebuilt.

In the immediate vicinity of the city center, the area of the Pleiße was cleared in recent years of
maroder development. The city-owned land
along the Pleiße was to be designed as a green space for all generations. 2010 took
the city with several topics, including the planning of a generation and skate
park on the Pleiße in the state competition "Ab in die Mitte-die City-Offensive Sachsen"
part and won this.

2011 landscape architects were commissioned with the over-planning of these areas.
In the first preliminary consultations, the client and planners agreed that, if the
Facility is to be accepted and maintained, the planning must be developed together with the
potential users.

The small skater and BMX scene in the city had long caused some displeasure
with the population, they made the inner-city open spaces and supermarket
parking unsafe. City spokesman and street worker used their connections to the scene
and transported the idea.

At the first meeting in the city hall, employees of the city administration,
the commissioned landscape architects, street workers and especially amazing
many skaters and BMXer of different faiths sat at one table.
The young people brought ideas, wishes and already small drafts.
The city staff and the planners also had initial ideas and
it was discussed and weighed.

From the beginning, a cost limit was set in which the planning should move.
Also the time frame of implementation and the project funding were already relatively
largely clarified. The young people formed at this time only a loose
interest group, whose contact persons were so far the Streetworker.

In order to arrange the planning for all involved ones efficiently and at the same time comprehensibly,
a small working group from the planning involved ones was formed.
It was agreed with the young people that they should designate from their circle two firm contact
partners for the city and the landscape architects, who represent all interest
groups.

Already in this first phase it became clear that it could not only be ostensibly about the construction

of a needs-based facility, but also about its maintenance.
Consensus was that the young people should and wanted to take care of it themselves.

It was also important that the young people were integrated into the planning process, in which it is also always

again about costs. With it the hope was connected that they deal as
user responsibly with the investment financed by tax funds.

But since it was a question of loose, changing groups, which were not really "tangible" as a contact for
the city, an association was sought, which would take the group under
its roof. Model was here also the planning of the skate facility in Zwickau,
which was only implemented when the young people, there a much larger group,
had founded an association.

Including the ideas of the young people, the first
design variants were developed. Unfortunately, the originally planned
location had to be discarded for various reasons.
The search for a new adequate area, it should be absolutely close to the
city center, because one hoped for a revival by the young people, turned out
to be difficult. After discussions in the political committees, a nearby
location, which was originally intended for a different use, was found.
The young people were also able to identify with the new area, after joint inspection in the working group
and the development of initial ideas.

A few weeks and some common consultation and discussion dates later there were
several design variants, which transported the ideas of the young people.
Together, the design variant to be implemented was selected.
In the meantime, a supporting association was also found, the socio-cultural environment and
family center diversity e.V.
With the city agreements were made for the maintenance of the plant and from the structural
implementation were small parts for personal contributions, such as colored design of the concrete
seat blocks and individual parts of the plant herausgelöst.

After the start of construction in September 2011, the inauguration of the plant took place in May 2012.
The organization and execution, including a speech, of the decidedly well-
attended ceremony was largely in the hands of the young people.

Use of the Sakte facility is intense, although there are
larger facilities several miles away. Unfortunately, it has now become apparent that while the youths who belong to the club
try to keep the facility in good repair, there
are groups who do not abide by the agreements with the city and
the use regulations, rioting and vandalizing.

At present, the municipality, together with the association and the street workers, is looking for
ways to counteract this fact.
For the committed young people who were involved in the success of the project, this is also
a learning process that they must face.

The involvement of the young people meant a somewhat

increased effort in the initial planning phases, since more time was invested in talks and discussions, which

but could be well integrated into regular consultations.

The implementation planning and even the structural implementation were not

quite problem-free, since despite extensive prior cooperation, additions

and requests for changes were repeatedly introduced by the young people. These were
discussed and, if technically and financially possible, incorporated. The bundling
of the ideas and activities of the young people shifted more and more
to the planners in the course of the process, which resulted in more effort. From this experience
the responsibilities should be clearly clarified from the beginning and included in the fee
negotiations. The clients must be made to understand
that such extensive user participation and steering of the process means an additional effort for the planners
but are important for the success and sustainability of the project
. It is therefore advisable to agree on a fee
surcharge from the outset for similar projects.

Conclusion
1. The planners insisted from the outset on involving
the user group, bundling it and taking as much responsibility as possible.

2. The city, planners and young people sat at the table as equal partners.
Building trust and the feeling of being taken seriously is immensely
important.

3. The young people directly involved were, on the whole, reliable partners.
The disadvantage was that it was a loose grouping with different
interests and bundling was only partly possible. This was
done by the planners.

4. At a certain point it was difficult to incorporate the changing ideas into
the planning process. It is understandable that it is difficult to make the
youth understand that the discussed
final state of planning cannot just be changed quickly because something
supposedly essential was forgotten or an interest group was not sufficiently
considered. This has led to additional work in the planning.

5. The care of the facility by the young people is difficult if by the
core group itself can not be exerted sufficient pressure on rioters.
Then often only the regulatory power remains and this is counterproductive for all involved
because a good thing is thwarted.