Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Lighting Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council asks staff to study solar lighting for neighborhood parks; 90-day marker set
Summary
Council members asked staff to assess solar-powered versus utility lighting for neighborhood parks and to return with cost estimates and options; a 90-day marker was placed and staff outlined recent playground investments and planned 2025 park projects.
Get email alerts on the Parks Lighting Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council members asked city administration to study the feasibility and cost of solar-powered lighting in neighborhood parks and to compare vendor and utility (Georgia Power or local electric cooperative) options, with staff to return within about 90 days.
A councilmember said the city should "start testing to see what those lights are like" and proposed evaluating a small pilot — for example, purchasing two lights to assess performance and costs. The council discussed price estimates offered in earlier presentations: one vendor quoted about $3,000 per light in a prior presentation; another local example cited $1,200 per light. A councilmember said she would be willing to authorize about $2,000 for two lights as a test.
City parks staff provided a five-year summary of neighborhood park investments (2020–2024) and listed planned 2025 work: Deerfield Park basketball court repainting and mulch, Fairfax Park mulch and upkeep, Kennesaw Station playground replacement and fencing, Shillings Park upkeep, repainting of Terra and Winchester courts and completion of Chalker Park and McCollum Park fencing. Staff told the Council that neighborhood park upgrades have been on a multi-year cycle and that some parks had not been invested in before recent council action.
On the lighting study, the city manager and parks staff agreed to compile vendor quotes and compare Georgia Power or cooperative-installed standard lighting to solar options and return with findings. Council placed a marker to have the staff report back within 90 days; if staff needs more time they may request an extension. No formal funding allocation for the pilot was approved at the meeting; the directive was for staff to research options and costs and present results.
