Whitefish moves to dim the lights
The Whitefish City Council on Monday gave initial approval to new outdoor lighting standards, but acknowledged the ordinance still needs some fine-tuning.
Language in the new law will be tweaked before the council takes a final vote later this month.
The new standards are a culmination of several months of study by a committee. The group followed guidelines promoted by the International Dark Sky Organization to help cities protect their night skies from light pollution.
"Here in Montana, the issue is not only one of wasted energy, but goes to the very core of what draws people to the state," said committee chairwoman and City Council member Cris Coughlin.
The city will give residents and business owners three years to comply with the law; it applies to all residential, commercial, industrial and public lighting within the planning jurisdiction.
In parking lots, lights can't exceed 17 feet, but can go as high as 30 feet with an illumination plan reviewed and approved by the city. Mercury-vapor lights are prohibited and canopy lights must be fully recessed or fully shielded.
All outdoor lights are required to have full cut-off domes to prevent light trespass and glare, but there are exceptions if the bulb wattage is low enough.
The city itself will have to bring about 300 decorative street lamps into compliance. Instead of spending $600 to $900 per fixture to replace the lights, the city will raise the bulbs about 1 1/2 inches in the fixture stanchion and limit the bulbs to 50 watts to diminish the glare.
Public Works Director John Wilson said he supports the light law, but cautioned the council in touting the energy savings. To get the same amount of illumination from city street lights, the city would need twice as many to produce the same amount of light as the existing fixtures. A recommendation on the spacing of lights is one of the details to be decided before the final vote.
No one from the audience spoke at Monday's public hearing, but the city gathered a fair amount of input from citizen e-mails.
Rick McCamley of the Pine Lodge said street and parking-lot lights protect people and property.
"I have no idea whether or not my parking-lot lights are more or less than 30 feet tall," McCamley said in an e-mail to the lighting committee. "I do guarantee you, though, that before I reduce lighting one bit litigation will take place."
Bill Fitzpatrick, a Houston Point resident, said "the whole concept is ridiculous and must be shelved.
"Those who are out at night and have a problem with lights should wear sunglasses," he wrote in a e-mail.
There were supporters, too.
Anthony Arrigo approves of the new ordinance.
"Get rid of those ugly glare-bombs. Skies should be filled with stars, not a pinkish glow," Arrigo wrote.
David and Jennifer Boye said they appreciated the city's effort and welcomed a light ordinance but felt the compliance period is too short.
Council members had questions about how Flathead Electric Cooperative's 285 street lights in Whitefish would be converted and who would pay for it.
When Kalispell passed its light law and requested the cooperative to replace lights, Bonneville Power Administration provided an energy conservation credit and the city of Kalispell paid the difference.
Senior city planner Wendy Compton-Ring said she'd check into a similar arrangement for Whitefish. She also noted the city would continue to work with the state Department of Transportation and Burlington Northern Santa Fe in reducing glare and wattage.
Lighting committee member Lisa Jones said the group would conduct an educational outreach program that would include brochures explaining the new standards.
Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by e-mail at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com