Huntsville’s Planning Committee is recommending that the municipality move forward with an outdoor lighting bylaw – making it mandatory for all businesses and private residences to replace existing lighting with non-intrusive ones within a ten year period.
It should be emphasized that the Outdoor Lighting Bylaw is not intended to get rid of outdoor lighting or reduce visibility and safety at night. The intent of the bylaw is to direct the light down to where it is needed and avoid light spillage up into the sky where it impacts the night environment.Staff report presented to planning committee on December 16.
Lake Vernon Association concerns
The bylaw, which mimics that of Lake of Bays’ bylaw, was prompted by concerns expressed by the Lake Vernon Association. If approved, it would, among other things, ban the use of strobe lights and regulate the type of lights and colours to be used to warn people about open water on lakes.
The lake association also raised concerns about commercial signs and the glow from business signs such as that of Home Depot.
“This is a difficult situation to control as even if the lights were full cut-off lights the fact that they are at a higher elevation means the light can be seen from lower elevations,” states staff’s report.
Suggestions by the lake association that businesses turn their lights off after 11 p.m. were met with apprehension from business owners who use their lights and signs for advertising as well as security purposes.
“Reducing the light spill from these businesses could be improved by tilting the existing spot lights down and by phasing in full cut-off lights,” states the report.
Concerns expressed by businesses
The proposed bylaw would require signage lighting to be mounted on top of signs facing down so that 90 per cent of the light is on the sign. It also states that signs adjacent to residential areas should be turned off between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. The proposed bylaw would also prohibit the use of laser source light or any similar high intensity light for outdoor advertising or entertainment purposes.
Area industries were also consulted. Panolam indicated that it cannot have full cut-off lighting as it requires lighting to monitor emissions and it has staff on the site 24 hours a day, so lighting is important for health and safety. The proposed bylaw makes an exemption for Panolam.
Other industries such as Kimberly-Clark and Uponor (formerly KWH Pipe) are already in the process of replacing or investigating their outdoor lighting as an energy-saving initiative, while car dealerships are expressing concerns with the upfront costs as well as the security of their inventory.
“There are a number of things that can be done to existing lighting in auto dealerships to reduce their
light pollution such as directing spot lights down and shielding existing lights. The bylaw does not
require lights to be turned off at night as this was a concern for security reasons,” states the report, adding, “The concerns with security and advertising are issues that could be dealt with in a proper lighting plan but the concern with the upfront cost of replacing the outdoor lights is a legitimate concern that many businesses and residences may find difficult to accept.”
Compliance options
The initial proposal suggested that the bylaw give residents and business owners either a five-year period to comply or take on a compromise approach by requiring proper lighting as lights are being replaced. Staff was in favour of the latter, but a presentation by local resident and champion of dark-sky friendly lighting James Solecki, who also has a lighting business, seemed to sway committee.
Solecki indicated that without setting a deadline for adherence, the bylaw would become difficult to enforce.
“I think it is very important to back this with some measurable and deliverable results,” he said. He also said a ban should be imposed on back-lit signs. “So I would like to see more teeth in the signage portion.” He also suggested that the bylaw not refer to wattage but rather lumens as a measure of light intensity.
In the end, committee decided to go with a 10-year deadline for adhering to the bylaw for existing outdoor lighting as new lighting would be regulated through site plan controls. The bylaw could also have a financial impact on the municipality and its infrastructure, for example it would costs an estimated $200,000 to replace lighting on just one of its baseball diamonds.
Staff indicated there are grants available to help recover some of the cost associated with switching to LED lighting as an energy-savings measure through the Independent Electricity System Operator, which is tasked with balancing and monitoring the flow of electricity, planning and securing energy for the future, as well as overseeing the electricity wholesale market.
The recommendation will be presented to Huntsville council on Monday, December 21 for approval. To see the proposed bylaw click here and turn to page 50.
You don’t need a telescope, only a history of looking up at the stars in our area. I live “out of town” and until recently I could distinguish the Milky Way. No longer. That makes viewing the sky “a problem”. I believe it can only be the increased general amount of, and colour (ie. high, over 3000K) temperature of the lighting changes made in Huntsville and Bracebridge (and Gravenhurst, too) that have caused this elimination/degradation for me, my children and grandchildren. It does not have to be so. Town lighting can be efficient (ie. lower cost) and directed and timed and on purpose. Like I read: it took that starlight so long to get here, why would we want to dim it in a fraction? Let everyone have a chance to see it first, before denying it to them. This a very valid “return” on thoughtful expenditure.
It’s not just about telescopes. Another poster nailed it on the head, it’s no different than noise bylaws. Why should I have to be blinded by my neighbours’ lights? Regardless of whether I have a telescope or not?
Look here and note that this map was created in 2006, can you imagine how much has changed in the past ten years with advances in light technology?
http://djlorenz.github.io/astronomy/lp2006/overlay/dark.html
Note that one must drive a considerable distance outside of Huntsville to get a dark sky. Why does a business’s right to advertising outweigh my right to see the Milky Way? Telescope or not! Just because you don’t think it’s important doesn’t mean it’s not important to others.
10 years is far too long, IMO. For something that is not a difficult fix for residents and businesses. However it is a step in the right direction and something more cities and towns should be doing. A light pollution bylaw is no different really than a noise bylaw. You wouldn’t aim and blast a loud speaker at your neighbours so why is it okay to do with outside lights at night, all night long? This is where light trespass bylaws are also effective. In fact targeting light trespass and glare from outside artificial lighting at night, will effectively address skyglow as well to a great degree. The CCT (colour temp) is of course important as well, since rich in blue white light 4000K and up as example, the blue scatters more in the atmosphere (Rayleigh and Mei effects). This increases skyglow versus low CCT lighting (under 3000K). I found it interesting Panolam stated health and safety as justification for not altering their lighting within the community and working with residents. Excessively bright not shielded lights create glare and hard contrasts in a working environment (extreme dark and extreme bright) which the human eye has difficulty adjusting to (disability and discomfort glare). Also, high colour temperature lighting during night time periods is actually a biological hazard for their employees – circadian rhythm disruption and increased breast cancer and prostate cancer risks. Scientifically and medically researched and studied. Panolam’s reasoning is typical of those who do not understand good lighting practices and revert to the notion that more lighting is safer – which has been disproved in studies in the UK, Chicago and Calgary under Police supervision in which there was no increase in crime.
Actually, the special council meeting begins at 5:30 today and regular council, which is where proposed lighting bylaw will be addressed, begins at 7 p.m.
Please tell me that Mr. Salecki owns a telescope and is an ardent amateur astronomer. Otherwise, the skeptic in me regards his support of this proposal as entirely self-serving. What a cash cow for his lighting business!
Other than possible interference with aircraft, is the urban lighting pollution that serious an issue? How many individuals have their telescopes pointed skyward in the centre of Town anyway? Can anybody name a residential area (sufficiently remote from the Town) where viewing the sky is a problem? And now these people-friendly lights are to be replaced with ones which come with a radiation warning. Certainly, the municipality, area businesses, and residents are able to expend their scarce resources of money and time for far better returns than this.
I did not sign up for this when I agreed to a reasonable tax increase.
The Council needs to follow the lead of certain authorities in the New England area and set a strict maximum CCT of 3000K to minimize the environmental and health impacts of blue-rich LED lighting.
Thanks
Hi Sandy,
Council meets this Monday, December 21, at 5:30 and their meetings are public.
Need to consider colour temperature of lighting. The new lights may face down but they are so blue/white (5000 degrees Kelvin) they bounce off the pavement and light up the night sky. I used to be able to distinguish a The Milky Way near Menominee Lake , yet no longer.
What time is the meeting Monday, December 21 and is it public?
Much of our present lighting is reminisce of a wasteful society. The by-law manoeuvre is keeping in step with the times & changing technology. Also, with a cost of $200,000.00 for 1 baseball diamond lighting overhaul, looks like there will be a surplus of day games.