Ramps Closed

Ramps Closed

Postby Ken » Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:39 am

If you've been out trying to ride the roller ramps, hopefully not, you've probably noticed that we've marked them as closed. For your own safety and in the best interests in preserving the condition of the trail and technical trail features, please respect the closure.

LAMBA will be taking a closer look at the ramp situation this winter and spring to determine if they should be moved or removed.

Reasons for this include but are not limited to:
-Riders "sessioning" the features, oftentimes without the use of a helmet.
-Riders cutting through / riding off trail to get to the ramps.

Comments / feedback welcome...
User avatar
Ken
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1819
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:47 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

Postby Cole82 » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:31 pm

Personaly don't see what is so wrong about a session area. That is the kind of riding I like to do. Maybe one day CR will have a session are for me to ride. :wink:
Image
Image
I'm too busy to do anything....
Self description, tattoo'ed contractor.......
Cole82
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:48 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

Postby Crank Addict » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:49 pm

It would be a shame to see them go. It's something that I think a lot of people were excited about. I really hope there is a way to keep the rollers and even and add to it. Maybe we need better signs.
User avatar
Crank Addict
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:20 am
Location: Hiawatha, Iowa

Postby hojong » Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:19 pm

It would be a huge shame. Sessioning is one way to increase skills, isn't it? Shouldn't we fight hard to keep a feature that people enjoy so much, that they want to ride it over and over again? Clear signage about dangers, helmets, etc would help. How about a designated access trail to the ramps?

Back in a trail system near Washington D.C. there was a set of berms that people both sessioned and made a part of their ride. It had a switchbacky access trail that was a tough climb, but I always saw people goin down the berm, riding back up, and repeating the berm over and over.

Image

Image

Image
hojong
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

Postby iLuvTechnical » Sun Dec 14, 2008 4:09 am

Who's questioning whether they should be there or not? That is what I want to know.

Why is it that everything is a battle in this area? Remember the pictures of the stuff up in Michigan? Or even Decorah, Jubilee Park, Farmdale...? Why is it that they can have nice features and we can't?

The area that the ramps are in isn't really good for anything else, so what are the roller ramps hurting? Okay, let's say someone gets hurt...well, they could get hurt hitting a tree while riding.

No helmet...that is not negligence on LAMBA's part, that is recklessness on the behalf of the rider. There are people that wear helmets in British Columbia and some that don't.

As long a something is built properly and certain precautions are taken, the rider assumes the liability. Negligence is a huge factor in liability. If all "reasonable" steps are taken to make something structurally sound and safe, there is no negligence.
There is always someplace in the world dry enough for kick'n up a little dirt.
FIND IT AND LET THE REST OF US KNOW!
User avatar
iLuvTechnical
 
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: "Where everyone knows your name"

Postby hojong » Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:32 am

Yeah, I really wonder how other places are able to have awesome features in public parks. Can we find out what processes they went through to keep their features open?

Cedar Falls has a public dirt jump park... and we can't keep our rollers where they are?
hojong
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

Postby Farmboy » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:55 pm

Unfortunately, in a lawsuit, we the public do not get to decide who is negligent. Lawyers and judges get to decide that. These same judges could close the park for everyone due them feeling that LAMBA was negligent. We all know that Cedar Rapids is difficult to deal with. That is what it is.

I like the ramps how they are, but that's the way it goes. If everyone always did what they were supposed to do and took responsibility for their actions, we wouldn't need insurance, or police, or lawyers, or judges.
User avatar
Farmboy
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Marion, IA

Postby iLuvTechnical » Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:04 am

farmboy,
I understand exactly what you are saying, but I think may have missed my point.

It is not me that is saying do it right and we are okay, it's the law.
Webster's New World Dictionary says "Negligent: 1. habitually falling to do the required thing; neglectful. 2. carless, inattentive, etc" (I know the law books are more in depth, but the premise is the same)

I am not a lawyer, but from what I learned in College for my degree; the way I understand it is that the courts do decide, yes, but they follow the above definition.

So, I have to agree w/ hojong:
Yeah, I really wonder how other places are able to have awesome features in public parks. Can we find out what processes they went through to keep their features open?

Cedar Falls has a public dirt jump park... and we can't keep our rollers where they are?
There is always someplace in the world dry enough for kick'n up a little dirt.
FIND IT AND LET THE REST OF US KNOW!
User avatar
iLuvTechnical
 
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: "Where everyone knows your name"

Postby Farmboy » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:30 am

I got your point. In the event of an accident on those ramps, the question is, who was negligent? Just like if you have a crack in your sidewalk that makes some moron trip and break their hip. Who is liable? The moron who tripped or the homeowner who didn't fix the crack?

Was protocol followed by LAMBA and its constituents when creating this area? Is the club and Beverly in jeapordy right now because they are open? Those questions have not been answered yet and until they are, it's probably best for all if the ramps are closed.

This among other reasons is why you shouldn't go building a table top jump in the middle of a green trail just because you feel like it. Even if you didn't do a half-assed job of it. Unfortunately, the city AND internal LAMBA issues sometimes make it difficult to move forward quickly and efficiently regarding these matters.

As it appears, this closure may or may not be temporary. I hope they stay open, but if they can't they can't.
User avatar
Farmboy
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Marion, IA

Postby RollerCoaster » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:28 pm

I'll help with whatever LAMBA decides. If they get moved within Beverly park or if they need a new home.

My vision was to have a pump track that could be ridden when the trails are too muddy to ride. Which seems to be from October to July. I'd like to place the rollers, and more like them, in the main park with a limestone trail between each piece. That way we can ride something when the snow and rain eliminates our trails.

A safer pump track can be built using dirt mounds and dirt berms instead of wood. But the mud and erosion is a problem.

Peace be with you.
User avatar
RollerCoaster
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:40 pm
Location: Corvallis, OR

Postby Cole82 » Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:33 pm

I think it is rediculous Lamba is even thinking about removeing ramps that you ROLL over. The last one is backwards, that would be the only one to change. If this is the start when will it end? Will we next have to flatten out the trails to get rid of the hills we ROLL down.
Check out the rules for the skate park. IMO the skate park is way more dangerous than the roller ramps or table top at beverly. Even more so than dirt jumps. Steel ramps and concrete are a lot harder when you wreck.

http://www.cedar-rapids.org/parks/skatepark.asp

Image

Image
I'm too busy to do anything....
Self description, tattoo'ed contractor.......
Cole82
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:48 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

Postby Hank » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:34 pm

If the ramps were installed without land managers approval then Lamba is liable. If they where not built to IMBA standards, them Lamba is liable. Now I know Lamba has a extended insurance policy to cover them self on anything built at the park, so the question should be does Lamba want the liablity? And is the officers ready to fight the fight? If the first two sentences were not meet the fault will be 100% Lamba and the person who built them.

Gee can't tell I've looked into this can ya?


AG
I need more info here...
User avatar
Hank
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 5:19 pm
Location: Don't know let me look around

Postby Cole82 » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:52 pm

If lamba as a group is liable, then they should maybe have tried to get around them haveing to have insurance and the whole liabilty in the first place. There isn't a group liable at the skate park but the city. Same with cedar falls at the dirt jumps. Why is it that lamba is liable? What made lamba to decide to take the liability anyways. Sounds like Lamba got the short end of the liabilty stick.

Image
I'm too busy to do anything....
Self description, tattoo'ed contractor.......
Cole82
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:48 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

Postby Farmboy » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:45 pm

LAMBA is required to have insurance by the city. At this point it's part of the deal. We can kick and scream all we want, but it's part of the deal. Trying to apply logic when analyzing the city's stance on Beverly Park is futile at best. Yeah Cedar Falls has a dirt jump park, but this isn't Cedar Falls. There's a skate park in Cedar Rapids, but it serves a purpose for the city that the city and its citizens benefit from.
User avatar
Farmboy
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Marion, IA

Postby iLuvTechnical » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:46 pm

Cole82 wrote:...What made lamba to decide to take the liability anyways. Sounds like Lamba got the short end of the liabilty stick.


From what I understand; the city wasn't going to let LAMBA into the park unless we assumed the burden of liability, thus, letting CR do what it always does...dictate from their perch.

AND, yes, "LAMBA got the short end of the stick."!!! That is a whole other issue! I can only sympathize w/ our Beloved President for having to fight that fight to see a dream of many come true. I have my opinions on what we should all tell CR to do w/ their do-nothing-to-grow-a-more-"active"- community attitude. (Green Bay, WI. has a pro football team and they are smaller than CR :shock: )

P.S. maybe we should abandon the park, go where we will be welcome and appriciated, let it become overgrown and unused. That would attract more people to that growing area and our exciting community. Just a thought.
There is always someplace in the world dry enough for kick'n up a little dirt.
FIND IT AND LET THE REST OF US KNOW!
User avatar
iLuvTechnical
 
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: "Where everyone knows your name"

ramps etc.

Postby Rob » Sun Dec 21, 2008 6:39 pm

Nobody said the ramps have to go, but they need further study to be sure the placement is correct. As has been said, we don't want to lose access to land over this one feature.

I understand the frustration some of you feel, but I'm also a little upset.

I started out as a dirt motorcyclist 40 years ago, my motocross career ended by a broken arm and leg on a nasty jump. I've also protested much since then. From the Vietnam War to environmental problems - I'e made my feelings known about a lot of things and I've worked to make changes.

That said, one of the most productive things I've done is help create LAMBA and get the cities permission and help in creating mountain biking trails in Cedar Rapids.

Sure, we have some restrictions, but now we have a great local place to ride. Through Hotel/Motel grants, the city also backed this project up with serious money.

If you want a freeride park, find the land (or building) and do the work to raise the money to set it up. Study and work to change Iowa's laws concerning liability for challenging venues. A lot of the pictures you look at are on federal lands or states with totally different laws than Iowa.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it takes a great deal of work (and money) to make things happen. If freeriding is your passion - put the time into making it a reality.

Let's work together to keep mountain biking viable in this area.
Rob
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 5:58 pm

Postby Barkleyfan » Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:57 am

iLuvTechnical wrote:
Cole82 wrote:.

P.S. maybe we should abandon the park, go where we will be welcome and appriciated, let it become overgrown and unused. That would attract more people to that growing area and our exciting community. Just a thought.



They don't care. They can always bring in a developer to increase the revenue with more subdivisions, or condos. We have to convince them why us using that pristine land is a better idea than free money from turning a few developers loose. Another idea I had for targeting is all that virgin forrest behind Shawnee park. More hills there, so better to set up more technical riding there.
User avatar
Barkleyfan
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:25 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

Postby jaghouse » Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:12 am

A separate freeride/dirt jump/trials park would satisfy those interested in this type of riding better than the appeasing attempts by Beverly. I am just thankful that Beverly has come as far as it has. I had a blast ripping the trails this year.
Freeriding and Risk Management>>>
http://www.imba.com/resources/freeridin ... ement.html
User avatar
jaghouse
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:17 pm
Location: Cedar Rapids

good info

Postby Rob » Mon Dec 22, 2008 5:28 pm

Thanks Jaghouse for the link to IMBA's info on free riding. It clearly points out the amount of work needed to safely provide for this one aspect of mountain biking.
Rob
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 5:58 pm


Return to Archived Posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron