The destruction of property argument is also valid. People have the right for their property not to be destroyed. Skateboarders are then reduced to going to a handful of skate parks available in the state. Most, though, agree that they are grossly insufficient in comparison to skate parks in other states. 244.1620, which states that skate ramps or similar structures are prohibited in residential areas, as they constitute a public nuisance.
Ramps also cause a visual nuisance, according to the ordinance.
They are aesthetically unattractive and have the potential to decrease market values within the surrounding area. This line of reasoning is not valid. It is hard to understand how a small mini-ramp included in a normal park with other gymnasium type equipment will decrease the value of a neighborhood. Additionally, normal park equipment could injury someone as easily as a skate ramp. There is a hypothesis to explain why other types of facilities, such as ice rinks and jungle gyms are allowed, while skate ramps aren't.