Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#15-3785 <br /> 16 November 2015 <br /> Page 2 of 2 <br /> term. <br /> Existing lighting is a permitted, non-conforming improvement, and therefore, grandfathered, <br /> unless it falls within the definition of a nuisance. New lighting would need to meet the <br /> requirements of the city code. <br /> A full moon on a cloudless night is approximately .03 foot candles, based on internet studies, <br /> though that measure can vary based on several factors, including elevation and time of the year. <br /> The standard for variance (1.0 fc) is purposely higher than the design standard for new fixtures. <br /> We recognize that existing lights provide light higher than 0.4 foot candles at the property line, <br /> but those lights would be allowed to remain as a permitted non-conforming improvement. <br /> Staff performed a real world test from a single light source in a residential neighborhood on a <br /> clear night with a crescent moon 2% illuminated. Results are tabled below. Topography, <br /> vegetation and competing light sources prevented full measurements. <br /> 60w clear 75w Excel <br /> Distance bulb side 60w 150w energy <br /> from ' frosted flood <br /> source �lear door enclosure light street <br /> enclosure sconce light <br /> @S feet 0.34 <br /> @ 10 feet 1.73 0.9 12.5 0.46 <br /> @15 feet 0.2 0.4 0.34 <br /> @20 feet 0.22 <br /> @25 feet 0.22 3.3 <br /> @30 feet 0.12 0.13 <br /> @50 feet 0.07 .03-.06 <br /> @60 feet 0.02 <br /> All measurements are taken in footcandles. Areas in gray would be in violation of the ordinance. <br /> Items in blue would be in violation of proposed nuisance language. <br /> Enforcement: The enforcement of this code may be challenging,and will likely require equipment <br /> not currently owned by the city. Due to the nature of the potential violation, enforcement will <br /> most likely be completed by Police officers. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. The Planning Commission and City Council recently identified Dark skies regulations <br /> as the second highest priority. Should this item be tabled in favor of incorporating it <br /> into a more comprehensive lighting ordinance? <br /> 2. Does the lighting limit proposed (1.0 fc) appropriately define a nuisance situation? <br /> Should the nuisance level be brighter? <br /> 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this proposed ordinance? <br />