CF-Park Land-CS 970714 LEISURE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Date: July 14, 1997
To: Ken Griffin, City Engineer and A.C.M.
Gary Sieb, Director of Pla~ing
From= Gary D. Sims, Director
Subject= Park Parking Lots
Per City Council's instruction, received during the Council
Retreat, I am asking your assistance with developing a review and
recommendation to them, regarding alternative
parking lot construction in municipal~arks and alrevision of the
-~y ordi~~' r~t~'Cti~'~'athletic field lighting~c~O~'~
/and the amount of acceptable spill over light to adjacent
,' properties, in particular those adjacent to parks.~'~-
As you are aware, current subdivision ordinances require all
parking lots to be constructed of concrete. The cost of concrete
parking lots, currently projected at $1,~00 per parking space,
impacts overall park development, resulting in a trade off in the
~.quantity and potentially the quality of park amenities.
is severely restrictive and unrealistic. As written, the Leisure
Services Department is not able to pro?ee? with illumination
requests of various youth sports associations for lighted game
and practice facilities. Likewise, these ordinances do not take
into consideration recent innovations in lighting technology nor
typical municipal athletic field lighting practices common to
~ Park and Recreation facilities across the metroplex.
C:~mo~.ct~g
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gary Simms, Director
FROM: ~ary L. Sieb, Director
SUBJECT: Park Parking Lots
DATE: July 15, 1997
Pert and I have looked at your memo of July 14, Gary, and share some concerns with park land
development that needs discussion here. Incidentally, most of the following comments have been
expressed to Jim Witt in earlier conversations.
First, although Council did ask you to investigate alternative materials for parking lot
construction with the obvious focus on cost savings, we need to point out here that initial savings
are not always long-term savings. It is common knowledge that asphalt parking is cheaper to
install than concrete, but over the long haul, a very convincing argument can be made that total
costs weigh on the side of concrete parking lots. Although Andy Brown West was constructed
with asphalt, it was my recommendation that concrete be our material of choice. With the
expansion of the Kid Country site we did follow our guidelines, and quite frankly, I do not know
why they should not be followed for all park improvements in the future.
My second point regards construction standards. If the standard is an accepted development
guideline, then everyone should abide by that standard including the City. I can not tell you
how many times I have had to defend our ordinance requirements to developers--both residential
and commercial/retail/industrial--when the Andy Brown West asphalt lot is brought to my
attention. It's as if the city is saying: "Do as I say, not as I do" and that philosophy is--or
should be--unacceptable city policy.
Three, if asphalt is allowed, it undermines one of the basic tenants of our new Historical
Overlay zoning district. We sold Council on the District, in part, by citing the unique
development possibilities to be encouraged only in the District and asphalt parking was a major
selling point. By adopting a similar standard for park development only diminishes the District
itself.
Fourth, by adopting such a policy the city would be setting a very dangerous precedent that
would certainly be asked for by other development players such as churches, shopping centers,
office complexes, the school district and who knows who else. No, Gary, I can not recommend
a different parking material for park properties for all of the above reasons. In addition, our
fire stations, the city hall, justice center and fire administration buildings all complied with
today's standards. I'll leave this subject with one last argument. When I worked with George
Schrader in Dallas, (incidentally, City Manager Schrader is credited as being the architect of
most of what is now modern Dallas) he once advised me that if a construction
guideline/standard/policy was good enough for the development community, then it was good
enough for any City project. I remember that as good, solid advice, offered to me almost
twenty years ago, and suggest that it is advice this City would be prudent to follow also.
Lighting is another of those standards that needs to be followed. You might be interested to
know that even with the Andy Brown West soccer/baseball/basketball fields being lit much,
much earlier than occupancy by the first resident of Copperstone Subdivision, I frequently get
calls from angry citizens who feel the existing zoning standards are not stringent enough.
Indeed, I know that at one time Councilman Wheeler was entertaining a re-examination of the
lighting guidelines for possible updating which I interpreted as becoming more stringent. I
would, therefore, be inclined to recommend no changes in our current lighting ordinance, and
offer instead a suggestion that field lighting be rigorously turned off at 10:00 p.m. or so, Many
is the time I've gone by Andy Brown West well after 11:00 p.m and the lights are glaring out
with absolutely no one playing on the fields. To me, we have more of an enforcement problem
with existing lighting, than we have with our current development standards. One (more) final
comment. Our ordinance reads that we measure light and glare from the property line separating
the light source and adjacent property. With our new west-side park it seems to me that with
careful site orientation, spill-over of field lighting can be kept to a minimum, thus negating a
reasOn to amend our lighting standards.
In the illustrious words of that famous Dodge City official: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" I
don't believe either the pavement standard or lighting guideline are "broke". And in the words
of that infamous Coppell official (me): "What's good for the goose, is good for the gander!"
If you require additional comments, please contact me at your convenience. I believe by this
memo you know my feelings on both of these issues! Finally, and in the name of that famous
planner (I forget his name right now!): "Make no small plans...make plans that stir men's
souls..."
cc: Jim Witt
Ken Griffin
Pert Virtanen
pankl
CITY OF COPPELL
LEISURE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
OFFICE MEMO
Date: August 11, 1997
To: Gary Sieb, Director of Planning
From= Gary D. Sims, Director of Leisure Services.~~_~
Subject: Parking Lots and Park Lighting
I understand from your memo of July 15, 1997 you have personal
concerns regarding the utilization of alternate materials for
parking lot construction on park property. From this same
correspondence, it would seem you have similar concerns with the
idea of changing the lighting ordinance-to allow more flexibility
at certain park facilities. However, the City Council has
requested these items be brought forth. Again, I request your
assistance in developing a review and recommendation to the City
Council.
Should you require the Leisure Services Department assistance
with this request, we will gladly help with these recommended
amendments to the ordinances for City Council review.
Please let me know if you have questions or need furthur
information.
GDS
cc: Jim Witt
Ken Griffin
Pert Virtanen
Clay Phillips