Loading...
07. Ordinance 1546 - Text Amendment - Lighting Standards - 1st ReadingREPORT TO: FROM: SUBJECT MEETING DATE: City of Kalispell Planning Department 17 - 2"`i Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website: kalispellplanning.corn Kalispell Mayor and City Council Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner James H. Patrick, City Manager Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Lighting Standards July 18, 2005 BACKGROUND: A work session was held on this item on July 11, 2005 and was well - attended by interested parties of the public representing the Dark Sky Association and the Big Sky Astronomy Club as well as members of the Kalispell City Council. Planning Board President George Taylor and Planning Board member John Hinchey explained the board's work on the lighting standards. The city council discussed some of the finer points of the proposed ordinance and made some amendments to the document recommended by the Kalispell Planning Board. The amended lighting standards are attached as Exhibit A. This is a request by the City of Kalispell to consider changes to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance text to develop lighting standards for residential and commercial development. The Kalispell City Council directed the Kalispell City Planning Board to draft a set of lighting standards. The planning board worked on these standards from December of 2004 until the public hearing held before the planning board on April 12, 2005. The Kalispell Planning Board is recommending the Kalispell City Council adoptAhe lighting standards as part of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: A .motion to adopt the first reading of the ordinance to amend the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, as amended by the Kalispell City Council would be in order FISCAL EFFECTS: To be determined. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the city council. Lighting Ordinance Memo July 13, 2005 Page 2 Respectfully submitted, Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner Report compiled: July 13, 2005 c: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk arrzes City Manager Attachments: Attachments: Transmittal letter Staff report KZTA-05-3 and application materials Draft minutes from, 4/ 12/05 planning board meeting TRANSMIT/ KALI SPELL/2005KZTA- 0 503 MEMO3. DOC ORDINANCE NO. 1546 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO. 1460), BY CREATING NEW SECTION 27.22.104, OUTDOOR LIGHTING STANDARDS, DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CODIFY THE SAME. WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has submitted a written request to amend the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, by developing standards for outdoor lighting that would apply to both commercial and residential development, and WHEREAS, the request was forwarded to the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission by the Tri-City Planning Office after having been evaluated under 27.30.020, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the text of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended by adding new section 27.22.104, Outdoor Lighting Standards, to the Supplemental Regulations, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the TCPO Report and the transmittal ftom the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission and hereby adopts the findings made in Report #KZTA-05-3 as the Findings of Fact applicable to this Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 1460, is hereby amended as follows on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and thereby made a part hereof. SECTION II. All parts and portions of Ordinance No. 1460 not amended hereby remain unchanged. SECTION III. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. SECTION IV. The City Attorney is hereby authorized and directed to recodify this Ordinance. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS 1 ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2005. Pamela B. Kennedy ATTEST: Mayor Theresa White City Clerk EXHIBIT A Section 27.22.104 -OUTDOOR LIGHTING PURPOSE AND INTENT: Light pollution obscures the night sky, a resource important to residents and visitors. Light trespass interferes with the quality of life and public safety of the community. Standards for outdoor lighting are intended to control artificial light from non -vehicular sources that produce glare light trespass, nuisance light and / or degrade the night sky. These standards are intended to reduce and eliminate nuisance glare and light trespass from poorly placed, inappropriate, misaligned or improperly shielded light sources. It is the further intent of these standards to conserve energy and resources as well as to curtail and reverse the degradation of the night sky through the regulation of the type and use of outdoor lighting while maintaining night-time safety, utility and security. APPLICABILITY: All residential and commercial lighting whether on public or private property installed in the city limits of Kalispell shall comply with the requirements and specifications established with these regulations. STANDARDS: 1. All lights shall be shielded and directed in such a way as to direct all light toward the intended area and away from reflective surfaces. 2. Lighting shall be designed, directed and shielded in such a manner that direct light does not leave the perimeter of the site as limited by these regulations. 3. All outdoor lighting, including the fixture, pole, and other supporting elements, shall be designed to complement the overall architectural appearance of the site and prevent excessive glare. 4. The height and level of lighting should be appropriate for the development. Lights mounted on poles shall not be taller than the building area they illuminate or taller than 30 feet, whichever is less. 5. Roof illumination is not allowed. 6. When practical, tinting mechanisms and photo cells shall be used to reduce light levels and conserve energy during non -operational hours. 7. Lighting mounted on the building should be integrated as an architectural component. It shall be designed so the light is fully shielded and directed toward the building. S. Canopy lighting, such as service station lighting, shall be fully recessed and shielded to ensure that no light source is visible from or causes glare in the public right of way or adjacent properties. Any canopy structure used at a business location must have recessed lights with diffusers which do not extend below the surface of the canopy. 9. Low voltage landscape lighting will be allowed provided it is directed toward the object or building and does not leave the perimeter of the site or contribute to light trespass. 10,All pole mounted lighting shall have a full cut-off fixture that does not allow light to shine above a 70 degree angle measured from a vertical line from the center of the lamp. 11. Mercury vapor lights are prohibited because of the poor color spectrum, light intensity and inefficient energy use. 12.Low pressure or high pressure sodium lights and metal halide are encourages rather than the use of florescent lights, 13.Light fixtures or lamps shall be shielded or shaded in such a manner so that the light emitting surface is not visible and to direct incident rays away from all adjacent property. 14.Any light fixture must be placed in such a manner so that no light emitting surface is visible from any residential area or public/private roadway, walkway, trail or other public way when viewed at ground level. 15.The level of lighting shall not exceed 0.3 foot candles at any residential property line or 0.5 foot candles at any non-residential property line. 16. Floodlights shall have external shielding or shall be directed and angled so that no light is visible above a 70 degree angle measure from a vertical line from the center of the lamp and shall not shine onto any adjacent public right of way or adjacent property. 17. Any interior lighted signs may not be lit at night when any face of the sign is removed or damaged in such a way that the light may distract or intrude on drivers or adjacent properties. 18. Signs that have exterior lighting must be lit from above the sign and the light shielded except that ground lighting may be used for ground mounted signs with a solid base. In all cases lighting must be directed at the surface of the sign. area. SPECIFIC USES: Security Lighting for Commercial and Residential Uses: Security lighting is defined as lighting designed and used to discourage crime and undesirable activity which includes parking lot lighting. I. Security lighting should use the lowest possible illumination to effectively allow surveillance. 2. The use of sensor technologies, timers or other means to activate lighting during times when it will be needed may be required by the zoning administrator to conserve energy, provide safety, and promote compatibility between different land uses. 2 3. Both commercial and residential security lighting shall be shielded so the light source is not visible and the light is aimed _so that illumination is directed to the designated areas. All non -essential exterior commercial lighting is to be turned off after business hours. Architectural Accent Lighting: 1. Fixtures used to accent architectural features, materials, colors, style of buildings, landscaping, or art shall be located, aimed and shielded so that light is directed only on those features. Such fixtures shall be aimed or shielded to minimize light spill into the dark night sky in conformance with the luminaire standards. 2. Lighting fixtures shall not generate excessive light levels, cause glare, or direct light beyond the facade onto neighboring property, streets or the night sky. Canopy Lighting and lighting of Service Stations: In addition to the general standards previously listed, the following also apply: 1. Lighting of such areas shall not be used to attract attention to the business. Lighting levels shall be adequate to facilitate the activities taking place in such locations. In order to minimize the extent of direct glare, light fixtures mounted on canopies shall be .recessed so that the lens cover is recessed or flush with the bottom surface (ceiling) of the canopy or shielded by the fixture or the edge of the canopy so that light is restrained to 85 degrees or less from vertical. 2. As an alternative (or supplement) to recessed ceiling lights, indirect lighting may be used where light is beamed upward and there reflected down from the underside of the canopy. When this method is used, light fixtures must be shielded so that direct illumination is focused exclusively on the underside of the canopy. 3. Lights shall not be mounted on the top or sides (fascias) of the canopy. The sides (fascias of the canopy) shall not be illuminated in a manner. Outdoor Sports or Recreation Fields or Performarice Areas. Lighting of outdoor recreational facilities (public or private), such as, but not limited to, football fields, soccer fields, baseball fields, softball fields, tennis courts, special event or show areas, shall use fixtures with a full -cutoff lens. 2. Lights are to be used only when the field is in use. Flags of the United States or Montana may be illuminated from below provided such lighting is focused primarily on the individual flag or flags to limit light trespass and spill into the dark night sky. Flags are encouraged to be taken down at sunset to avoid the need for lighting. Searchlights. The operation of searchlights for any purpose other than an emergency need is prohibited. 3 Towers. Lighting on towers is prohibited except as required by regulations of the Federal Aviation. Administration. PROCEDURE: At the time of site plan approval by the Kalispell Site Development Review Committee, the applicant must supply a lighting plan in accordance with these regulations and shall demonstrate conformance with these standards. At a minimum the lighting plan shall include: 1. Manufacturer specifications regarding the light fixture, proposed locations, mounting heights and direction of all exterior lighting. 2. if the building, signage or landscaping is proposed to be lit, relevant drawings shall be provided showing the type, location and direction of the light fixture. 3. if needed, additional information may be required by the site development review committee in order to demonstrate compliance with these regulations which may include photometric data of all lighting and other descriptive information on the fixtures and / or a computer generated photometric grid showing foot candle reading every 10 feet within the property or site and ten feet beyond the property boundaries. NON -CONFORMING LIGHTING Lighting for commercial uses including but not limited to parking lot and building lighting that does not conform to these regulations shall be brought into compliance within five years of the effective date of the adoption of these regulations or by September 1, 2010 or when the light fixtures are removed or replaced whichever occurs first. Residential lighting that does not conform to these regulations shall be brought into compliance within one year of the adoption of these regulations or by September 1, 2006 or when the light fixtures are removed or replaced whichever occurs first. DEFINITIONS, FIGURES AND TABLES: The attached definitions figures and tables are incorporated as guidelines for public information and enforcing this section. 4 DEFINITIONS 1. Canopy structure: Any overhead protective structure which is constructed in such a manner as to allow pedestrians/vehicles to pass under. 2. Fixture: The assembly that holds a lamp and may include an assembly housing, a mounting bracket or pole socket, a lamp holder, a ballast, a reflector or mirror, and a refractor or lens 3. Foot candle: A unit of illumination produced on a surface, all points of which are one foot from a uniform point source of one candle. Originally the measure of the amount of light emitted by a candle onto one square foot of surface one foot away, foot candles are now the standard unit of measuring light. A foot candle is equal to one lumen per square feet. 4. Full cut off fixture: A fixture, as installed, that are designed or shielded in a such a manner that all light rays emitted by the fixture, either directly from the lamps or indirectly from the fixture, ar projected below a horizontal plane ru nning throught the lowest point on the fixture where light is emitted. 5, Glare: Direct light emitted by a luminaire that causes reduced vision or momentary blindness. 6. illuminance: The level of light measured at a surface. 7. Lamp: The component of a luminaire that produces the light. 8. Light direct: Light emitted directly by a lamp, off a reflector, or through a refractor of a luminaires 9. Light emitting surface: Any part of a fixture (lamp, diffusor) which emits light rays. 10. Light pollution: General sky glow caused by the scattering of artificial light in the atmosphere, much of which is caused by poorly -designed luminaries. 11. Light shield: Any attachment which interrupts and blocks the path of light emitted from n lurninnire or fixture. 12. Light trespass: Light emitted by a luminaire that shines beyond the boundaries of the property on which the luminaire is located. 13. Lumen: A unit of measurement of luminous flux. 14.Lurninaire: The complete lighting system, including the lamp and the fixture. 15. Luminaire full cutoff: A luminaire that allows no direct light emissions above a horizontal plane through the luminaire's lowest light -emitting part. 16. Luminaire permanent outdoor: Any fixed luminaire or system of luminaries that is outdoors and this is intended to be used for seven (7) days or longer. 17. Lux The international standard unit for measuring light levels (as oppose to Foot - Candle in the U.S.A). It is one lumen per square meter. (See Lumens and Foot - Candle). 18.Wattage: the amount of electrical power consumed by a lamp or light fixture measured in "watts". One watt is equal to the power dissipated by 1 ampere of electrical current flowing across a resistance of 1 ohm or the power produced by 1 ampere of electrical current under an electromotive force of 1 volt. One horsepower is equal to 746 watts. Formulae: watts = volts x amps, P = V x 1, electrical power = electromotive force x electric current. Lighting Fixture Types - - - - - - - ------- POURS 9 as' Pint Cw>CH Fki,ra ,s+ r ` � T > 9MURE C SSvelaed a' 5 P€DEER$ S ae• Ught with E�ernai J>3lelorhg PM4JRE! PardoKy SMvsdvu tftR wILM"t Wdlol; • owb eat VW17�01 Orwhiolded w..Ith OpEque lap {€vsa than 375 fdm") F€13UR! T DireciMnal .^i0cd :i�hl 6 What is a True M) Cutoff Outdoor Lighting fixture? Flat glass lens, elitrunates or mirritnizes diva glare, no tVwwd throw of llghL The txwing for t xw fbattres are available in many styles. Same fiXtuTv as above mounted incorrectly -- defeating the horizontal mounting design. The fixhu'e now aroduees direct glare and can also aroduce u4li6t at steeper mounting angles. No No t- Known as just "Cutoff" Center "drop" or "sag" lens with or without exposed bulb, produces direct glare. POOR G7tmrt]=nwu d Billbowd Flood4hb i a � iSk le Lamp ,900 w -:CItA13'f� (ear fullyiE s*d onto ] 9 y} b S x R x S )) y ,S t } ,1 4 POSW L p tomme o 8 k 4 S i Typical 'Thor Bo*' (f,,xw) I�ght Tri-City Planning Office 17 Second Street East — Suite 211 Kalispell, Montana 59"1 Phone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 tricity@een turytel.net April 26, 2005 James H. Patrick, City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment -- Lighting Standards Dear Jim: The Kalispell City Planning Board met on April 12, 2005 and held a public hearing to consider a request by the City of Kalispell for changes to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance text to develop lighting standards for residential and commercial development. The Kalispell City Council directed the Kalispell City Planning Board to draft a set of lighting standards. The draft document presented for public hearing was the result of several months of research and work sessions on the part of the planning board and staff. Narda Wilson of the Tri-City Planning Office, presented staff report ##KZTA-05-3 evaluating the proposal and recommended approval of the amendments outlined in Exhibit A of the staff report. She explained this amendment was initiated at the request of the Kalispell City Council and the result -of many months of hard work by the planning board. At the public hearing there were several, people who spoke in favor of the proposed standards citing quality of life, safety, the Astronomy Club's interest in dark skies for viewing, and energy conservation and efficiency. There were some suggestions from the public regarding an active enforcement program with regard to lighting and light heights. The board discussed the issues the ordinance and the work they had done, including the recommendation to the council to consider the mercury vapor light replacement, the enforcement process and height limits. A motion was made and passed on a unanimous vote to recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended to include lighting standards as outlined in attached Exhibit A. Please schedule this matter for the May 2, 2005 regular Kalispell City Council meeting. You may contact this board or Narda Wilson at the Tri-City Planning Office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Providing Community Planning Assistance To: • City of Kalispell - City of Columbia Falls - City of Whitefish - Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Lighting Standards April 26, 2005 Page 2 Sincerely, Kalispell City Planning Board George Taylor President GT/NW/ma Attachments: Exhibit A Staff report #KZTA-05-3 and application materials Minutes 4/ 12/05 planning board meeting c w/ Att: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk c w/o Att: James H. Patrick, City Manager, City of Kalispell, P.O. Box 1997, Kalispell, MT 59901-1997 P.J. Sorensen, Zoning Administrator, City of Kalispell, P.O. Box 1997, Kalispell, MT 59903-1997 CITY OF KALISPELL TRI-CITY PLANNING OFFICE STAFF REPORT #KZTA-05-3 APRIL 6, 2005 This is a report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for a text amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to develop standards for outdoor lighting. A public hearing has been scheduled before the planning board for April. 12, 2005 beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The planning board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City of Kalispell is proposing an amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance that addresses outdoor lighting standards for commercial and residential development. The purpose of the amendment is to control artificial light from non - vehicular sources that nroduce glare_ light trespass_ nuisance light or / or degrnrif- --.. .... _ . .... -... .. ... , .U... _ .- _, __....... ._V.......... ... .- I ----0----- the night sky. It is further the intent of these standards to conserve energy and resources while maintaining night --time safety, utility and security. A. Petitioner: James H. Patrick, City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 (406) 758-7701 B. Area Effected by the Proposed Changes: Any area within the Kalispell zoning jurisdiction could be effected by these proposed standards. C. Proposed Amendment: This text amendment includes standards for outdoor lighting that would apply to both commercial and residential development in the city limits. It is the intent of these regulations to provide speck standards for lighting that will avoid light trespass, prevent and curtail the degradation of the night sky as well as conserve energy. Therefore an additional section is being recommended to be added to the zoning ordinance under Chapter 27.22, of the Supplemental Regulations, that outlines standards for lighting, identifies specific types and uses of lighting, provides an administrative review process for new commercial development and addresses enforcement and bringing non- conforming lighting into compliance with the new standards. The standards as proposed are outlined on attached Exhibit A, Outdoor Lighting. D. Staff Discussion: This text amendment was initiated by the Kalispell City Council in response to citizens concerns and the council's concerns regarding inappropriate, misdirected or excessive lighting that has resulted in the diminished quality of life and dark night skies. The Kalispell Planning Board was directed by the Kalispell City Council to develop lighting standards that would address concerns related to unwanted light trespass and other light Page 1 of 15 related issues. The planning board met in work sessions over several months to develop the standards that are being proposed. The resources used were ordinances from other cities, American Planning Association articles, industry information, the Dark Sky International Association as well as local citizens input. During the several months of work and research on this project the planning board and staff have come to find that lighting can be a rather complicated issue and not all lighting types are the same or as effective or as desirable as another. However, the board feels that they have come up with a fairly straightforward proposal that a lay person can generally understand. In order to measure light, a lumen level was established at the perimeter of the site. The City will need to invest approximately $150 or so in a light meter in order to monitor, enforce and maintain the light standards that are being proposed. EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2--205, M.C_A. Findings of Fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-203, M.C.A. 1 _ Does the requested zone comply with the growth policy? The growth policy generally anticipates use of development standards that will conserve and protect the quality of life of the citizens of its community. The lighting standards being proposed are intended to further this goal and thus the proposed amendment will generally promote the goals and objectives of the growth policy plan. 2. Is the requested zone desi ed to lessen congestion in the streets? The proposed amendment will not typically have a significant impact on traffic congestion in the streets since lighting is not related to land use or level of traffic that would be generated. This amendment will not affect overall traffic patterns, amount of traffic in an area, or contribute to traffic congestion. 3. Will the requested zone secure safety from fire anic and other dangers The proposed amendment would not reduce any security from fire or other health and safety issues since the standards are intended to maintain night- time security and safety as well as to protect the night sky. There would be no compromise with regard to public safety. 4. Will the requested thane romote the health and general welfare? The general health and welfare of the public will be promoted by creating standards for lighting that avoids glare, trespass, poorly placed or directed lighting that can diminish the quality of life as well as the general health and safety of the community. Page 2ofIS S. Will the requested zone provide for ade uate light and air? Light and air between and surrounding buildings would not be altered or impacted by the proposed text amendment. d. Will the reguested zone reven.t the overcrowding of land or undue concentration of people? The proposed change would not increase the intensity of uses currently allowed within the zoning districts since the proposed change does not deal with land uses per se but rather lighting standards. 7. Will the requested zone facilitate the ade uate Provision of trans ortation water, sewerage, schools arks and other public requirements? The amendment would not impact the availability of public services. This text amendment will not have any adverse impact on the availability or provision of ni thlir 'R&rvirrF-' anti iitilitioc S. Does the requested zone give consideration to the articular suitability of the pr©petty for particular uses? The lighting standards were crafted with consideration tieing given to the specific applications of lighting for specific uses and gives adequate consideration to the suitability of the standards. 9. Does the requested zone ive reasonable consideration to the character of the district? The character of the area in which the lighting standards are applied will be maintained and promoted by lighting that does not degrade, visually impact or devalue the overall quality of life within those neighborhoods. By providing lighting standards in the commercial as well as residential areas, reasonable consideration is given to protection of the character of a district. 10. Will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? The lighting standards will not only conserve the value of buildings but will conserve the quality of life within the community in both the residential and commercial area. The building values will be conserved by promoting and encouraging reasonable standards within these districts. These amendments will conserve the value of buildings. Page 3 of 15 1 i. Will the re nested zone encourage the most a ro riate use of the land throughout the jurisdiction? The most appropriate land uses throughout the jurisdiction are promoted by encouraging reasonable design standards that promote the general well-being of all citizens of the community. These changes will not only encourage appropriate land uses through the planning jurisdiction., but will. also provide greater opportunities for the enjoyment of the visual elements of the night sky in a safe and healthy environment. RECOMMENDATION Staff' recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt the findings in staff report KZTA-05-3 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that lighting standards be included in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance as shown on attached Exhibit A. NW Page 4 of 15 DISCUSSION Schutt said it is a reasonable requirement to put in, and you can make it work, but his objection is to the density rather than the sloughing. ROLL CALL - AMENDMENT The amendment passed unanimously on a roll call vote. 'ROLL CALL - MAIN The main motion passed 5-1 on a roll call vote. MOTION MOTION Norton moved and Gabriel seconded to adopt Staff Report KPP-05-4 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat approval for Granary Ridge Townhomes be approved subject to the listed conditions with Condition 6 amended and Condition 23 ( added. BOARD DISCUSSION There was no discussion. ROLL CALL The motion tied 3-3 on a roll call vote with Gabriel, Taylor and Norton voting for and bull, Schutt and Hinchey voting against. DISCUSSION There was discussion about how to handle the split vote. Wilson said it could go on to the City Council on the 3-3 vote. Another option is for the Board to amnend the plat. Schutt said he does not want to redesign the project. f MOTION Hull moved and Taylor seconded that 14 units instead of 16 units be built, with only four units on the east boundary. DISCUSSION Norton stated we should not be subdesigning this project and it should be seat on to Council as is. Taylor stated this could solve the density issues they are having, and this is still a quality development. Hinchey said he is comfortable with sending it on to Council as it is. ROLL CALL -- AMENDMENT The motion tied 3-3 on a roll call vote with Taylor, Hull and Hinchey voting for and Norton, Schutt and Gabriel voting against. 1 CITY OF KALISPELL A request by the City of Kalispell for a zoning text ZONING TEXT amendment to develop lighting standards that would apply AMENDMENT REQUEST to residential and commercial properties in the City limits. i STAFF REPORT KZTA-05-3 Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a presentation of Staff Report KZTA-05-3, a request by the City of Kalispell to develop lighting standards that would apply to residential and commercial _properties in the City limits, Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of April 12, 2005 E i Wilson stated that the Planning Board undertook this at the request of the City Council and citizen groups' concerns about the lighting standards for commercial and residential developments. She said the Planning Board did a lot of work j on this issue, with the goal of protecting the night sky, reducing trespass light, and benefiting the overall quality of life in the community; this issue has raised everyone's awareness. She stated that these are new standards, and that staff is recommending the lighting standards attached as Exhibit A be included in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. QUESTIONS BY THE Schutt commented that lumens is the amount of light at the BOARD fixture, and footcandles is the amount of light a distance away. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak E on the issue. I APPLICANTS/AGENCIES No comments. PUBLIC COMMENT Mark Paulson, 1045 3rd Avenue West, president of the Big Sky Astronomy Club, thanked the staff and the Board for their efforts to product this ordinance. He said he has seen a lot of changes in the valley, and he has a special interest in this matter, but there are many reasons to have an ordinance like this. He said the issue has come to the l rofrrv-�- ice-. +Ty. 1—+ -F'�a<rr mrc+nrc. --A U-T1i- �l1FTil�4ll1� —A —I,-- ie• prominent and widespread now; his group decided not to press for an ordinance, but they did want to promote quality lighting. They wanted to promote positive lighting to developers as opposed to forcing someone to do something and they developed a Quality Lighting Award to give to businesses do their He they who this on own. said embraced the efforts of the Planning Board and City Council to install a workable ordinance to accomplish Dark Sky goals and not be too intrusive. He said this is a complete and comprehensive first draft and praised Wilson for her work. He said for too long Montana has been the Big Sky Country only in the daytime and it should be so at night as well. Bob Gembolis, 1980 Pine Grove Lane, stated he wanted to emphasize the part about glare; it is difficult to see at night. He said that glare and safety are very important, and you cannot see when a light is shining in your eyes. Jackie Keyser, 545 2nd Avenue East, stated that there is no mounting height limit on fixtures on residential units on I homes. She stated that No. 14 on the old draft should be edited to say "mounting height of fixtures in residential areas should not exceed 10 feet". (new draft No. 13) She also stated she was afraid that this is not going to be enforced, and we Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of Arril 12, 2005 should be proactive and not reactive and should be educating people as to what they need to do. She said that all light is cumulative, and she would like to see an education process before the six month period is over. Bruce Ruby, 105 Spring Creek Road, Somers, asked how the public will know there is an ordinance should this pass, and stated that he is all for it. Russ Lucas, 117 Sunburst Court, stated he has the same bias because he is in the astronomy club, but it is a matter of aesthetics too and it is a wonderful thing to see stars. He said we have lost stars here and we have the technology to block the bad light for our telescopes, but that does not help our eyes. He said you need to see the beauty that is above you. He stated the City should not demand that businesses comply, but use a cost and safety standpoint; it is cheaper to use good lighting. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION ! Schutt moved and Hinchey seconded to adopt Staff Report KZTA-05-3 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, E recommend to the Kalispell City Council that lighting standards be included in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. BOARD DISCUSSION Taylor asked about the suggestion that residential height restrictions be addressed. Norton said he feels it has been addressed and it has already been covered. Schutt stated that using the standards of footcandles at the property lire, he feels the height is okay as long as the neighbors aren't bothered. Hinchey said enforcement is tricky and the clearer you make it the better off you are. Taylor suggested going with what we have, and amending it as necessary later. Schutt asked Wilson about the enforcement of nuisance neighborhood lights. Wilson said they will use spot complaints with residential areas and deal with those fires, but that commercial, multifamily and multi -family developments will be reviewed as part of the site development review process. Wilson noted a list needs to be made of the businesses that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the rneetin�z ofAorit 12. 2005 November 15, 2004 Kalispell Mayer and City Council 312 First Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Kalispell Mayor and City Council, I am writing about the Spring Prairie PUD, Attachment A ofKPP-03-14, Conditions of Approval for this section 36 planning. Item 16 deals with lighting. It talks about lights should be shielded and directed downward and have cut-offs. This direction is better than nothing, but I think it leaves the developer being able to have parking lots like Home Depot across the street. Especially at this planning stage I think that better light solutions can be used so there is less obtrusive lighting for the Lowe's project. Full -cutoffs lights put all of the light on the ground, like the Glacier Airport parking lot. Cutoff lights put most of the light on the ground, but some gets out and causes glare and glow, like 7T,._,, il....,.+., ..L:., .T TF-- € -L.+.... «+,. _..: tl. is,`i. a. 11U111G 1JGtJUL Vamit15 iUL. iv ai-1viaiL llrILLJ apt.iGal LU UQ L.LLLUlI VV IUl J11111G 1L�'11L GZ)lJapaJJ6 tV Lim side. Tidymans lights seem to go mostly down. Compare Albertson's Express gas station with full -cutoff lights with the seam -cutoff lights at the Excon gas station across the street. Effective amounts of light can be provided without blinding drivers and causing needless glow to the sky and at reduced energy costs. I would ask that these types of requirements be put into the Spring Prairie Subdivision approval. I . I would ask that full -cutoff lights be required, with a cutoff angle of 20 degrees below horizontal. 2. Use timers to turn outdoor lights off during those hours when they are not needed (e.g., in parking lots after stores close and employees have left). 3. Use motion -detector controls. For security applications, specify motion -sensing controls so that lights will turn on when somebody walks by. Infrared sensors are recommended over ultrasonic sensors for outdoor lighting. 4. Adopt the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) recommended light levels and standards for design of this section 36 PUD. It could also be used as a basis for new city and country lighting standards as well. Thank you for your consideration of my thoughts on lighting standards so that they can be incorporated into the Lowe's project so we end up with better lighting than we have at Home Depot.. Sincerely, Dale Luhman 169 Trailridge Road Kalispell, MT 59901 November 15, 2004 Kalispell Mayor and City Council 312 First Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Kalispell Mayor and City Council. I am writing about the proposed amendments to the Spring Prairie PUD, the Public Hearing at the December I" City Council Meeting and the Council's vote approving Ordinance No. 1486 at the first reading. Because some of you were not on the City Council 4 years ago and were not involved in this section 36 planning, I thought I would explain the situation from my point of view about proposed amendment 5. The State Department of Natural Resources and Conservation owns 620 acres of section 36. As a state agency, they are required to solicit public input on the management of state land. In 1999, the state invited the adjacent landowners to be involved in a neighborhood plan to decide how the land might be developed from its historical agricultural use to other higher revenue generating uses. The state held a series of meetings with 10-20 members of the public who showed interest. The state wanted to maximize the revenue to the schools so they wanted to have commercial activity along Highway 93 and professional activity along West Reserve Drive. To make this zoning more palatable to the neighbors, they agreed to remove some activities that were most objectionable to the neighbors. Key items were deleting some businesses that would typically be allowed in commercial areas including the total exclusion of gambling. They said that no gambling of any kind would be allowed in section 36 as described in the PUD, "Also specifically excluded as permitted uses are gaming/gambling establishments of any kind, including casinos." They said that no car dealerships or truck stops would be allowed in the area. Most of the neighbors believed that the area should all be residential development. In order to make it more palatable to existing the neighbors, some of the typical B-5 commercial zoning activities were restricted. This occurred in 1999. The neighbors had a neighborhood plan, zoning, and a contract with the state for the types of activities that we could expect to be proposed on the state property. On December 3, 2001 the state signed the PUD agreement with the City with these same agreements. The neighbors had their agreement in place and were satisfied with the zoning. We had all really hoped that the Tech Park would be built in this commercial area, but with the economy over the past two years, that just didn't happen. So the state started to solicit interest from other types of commercial development. The Lowe's project is the first project proposed for section 36, 4 years after the neighborhood plan was approved. The applicant wants to attract a restaurant to the project and apparently, no restaurant is interested unless they can serve alcohol. In Montana, to afford the high price of an all-purpose liquor license, apparently the cost needs to be offset by having a casino or gambling to make money to help pay for the high price of this liquor license. The Lowe's developer requested 18 changes to the PUD and the staff noted that 5 were major changes and needed Council approval to amend the PUD. The Council had a work session November 24 to discuss the amendments, and you came up with a proposed ordinance with a public hearing slated for December I". At the public hearing, I voiced my concerns about several amendment items, but especially the change to allow gambling on the site. The Council politely listened to my letter. Later you discussed my comments a bit on the status of the neighborhood plan. You didn't ask for more clarification from me. You asked the Tri-City Planning Office Director a few questions, and he said that the plan was approved in 1999 and this is no big deal to change this zoniniz. You routinely vote 8-0 to pass this ordinance. I took the time and effort 4 years ago to be involved in shaping a neighborhood plan that would be most palatable to my existing neighborhood, which is located immediately across the street from section 36. 1 thought this zoning would safeguard my property rights. These proposed PU"D amendments were not sent out to the 20 people involved in the 1999 planning efforts or to the immediate neighbors to get their input on the proposed changes. I had to read about the proposed amendments in the newspaper a few days before the December 1" hearing. What if I had been out of town or did not have a chance to read the paper? I took the effort to speak at a public hearing on December 1', and I get the feeling that I was not heard. You did not suggest that my comments be further discussed at the December 8 work session; you just voted on the 5 amendments and approved it. You steamroll over all of my objections to these amendments. I would suggest that the amendment allowing incidental casino use not be allowed. Not all restaurants need to have liquor or gambling to be successful. Maybe a restaurant could apply for a beer and wine license instead of a full liquor license if it feels it needs to provide this service. This Lowe's application is the first applicant for section 36. 1 don't think it is reasonable to make a major amendment to the PUD with the very first application. It seems like in the Kalispell area almost every restaurant and most gas station/mini marts have casinos and gambling. This does not seem to be a necessary service to provide at every establishment_ Once you allow incidental casinos in, what is to prevent the owner to say he really needs 10 or 20% of the establishment floor space to be used for gambling instead of the allowed 5% to keep his restaurant in business? Or asking that he put up just a few signs to indicate that gambling is offered inside? I mean the original PUD said no gambling of any kind and you just changed that without much consideration. I feel people trusted the DNRC and the City to keep this agreement in good faith, and this gambling proposal is just trying to be slipped in, hoping that no one will notice. There is so little of the county that is zoned. When my neighborhood and section 36 are both zoned, with the expectations of this PUD zoning to be followed, and it just gets changed, what is the point of the zoning? If everyone who applies for a project can just do what they want, why bother with rules for different types of areas? I thought the City of Kalispell would support the zoning that it has and the input people have into neighborhood plans. If not, it doesn't seem like the City Council really does represent the will of the people, just the will of the developers. If only one person wants to maintain the zoning apparently that is enough reason to just change it? Do you need 5, 10 or 100 people to influence the Council to maintain existing zoning? I know the Council has a lot of zoning and other issues to become knowledgeable on, but when a citizen takes the time to become involved and resist changes to current zoning, I feel that changes to zoning should not be done lightly. And in my opinion, this is what your Ordinance 1486 does; routinely make the changes that a developer wants at the expense of a zoned agreement with a neighbor. Thank you for your consideration of my thoughts in not changing the existing zoning for the area. Sincerely, Dale Luhman 169 Trailridge Road Kalispell, MT 59901 ROSS HOLIER 751-4483 CO-OP LAISON TO BPA CRAIG CIRCANNY BPA LIGHTING ENGINEER NEED TO ASK ROSS IF HE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO A CUSTOM APPLICATION FOR HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM FULL CUT-OFF LIGHTS TO REPLACE THE MERCURY VAPOR ONES. THE REBATE IS FIGURED OUT BY HOW MANY WATTS ARE BEING LOWERED IN EACH FIXTURE. IN THIS CASE THE MV'S ARE 175 AND WE WOULD BE LOWERING TO 100, THE REBATE WOULD BE ABOUT 40.00 OFF THE COST OF EACH FIXTURE, LOWERING THE REPLACEMENT COST TO 53,000 INSTEAD OF 72, 000, AND THERE BY LESSENING THE PAYBACK PERIOD. BPA IS CURRENTLY OFFERING AN 80.00 TO 140.00 REBATE FOR METAL HALIDE LIGHTS. THESE ARE THE KIND USED IN CAR LOTS BECAUSE THEY ARE A WHITE LIGHT, VERY .BRIGHT, AND SHOW TRUE COLORS. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO GET RID OF MV'S ONLY TO REPLACE THEM WITH ANOTHER EYE BALL PIERCING TYPE OF FIXTURE, EVEN IF IT IS MORE EFFICIENT. HENCE THE NEED FOR A SPECIAL APPLICATION FROM FEC. THEY HAVE GRANTED THIS TO OTHER CITIES. THE SAMPLE ORDINANACE FROM THE CITY OF TUCSON DOES NOT CONTAIN REGULATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL"LIGHTING, IT IS IMPERiTIVE THAT KALISPELL INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL RESTRICTIONS FOR REASONS OF HEALTH, AS IN LIGHTS SHINING INTO BEDROOMS, AND FOR ENJOYMENT OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY AND THE ABILITY TO ENVELOP THE DARKENESS AND VIEW THE NIGHT SKY. BELOW ARE SOME SUGGESTIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE CONSIDERED IN THOSE REGULATIONS. OUR CHIEF OF POLICE AND CURRENT ACTING CITY MANAGER FRANK GARNER FAVORS THE USE OF MOTION LIGHTS. HIS.SUGGESTION WAS THAT THEY BE ALLOWED WITH NO RESTRICTIONS OF ANY KIND FOR EASE AND SIMPLICITY AND THE LACK OF A NEED FOR ENFORCE MENT. WE AGREE, ALTHOUGH WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A HEIGHT RESTRICTION. TWENTY FEET UP ON A BUILDING IS GOING TO WAKE UP THE NEIGHBORS. MERCURY VAPOR, OR `FARM LIGHTS' MUST BE BANNED IN ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS. THESE MUST INCLUDE THOSE PRESENTLY UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CO-OP. ALL NAKED BULB PORCH LIGHTS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED UNLESS THEY ARE UNDER FORTY WATTS AND COLORED RED, AMBER OR GREEN. NO RESIDENTIAL LIGHTS WILL SPILL ONTO ANOTHER'S PROPERTY, NOR CAUSE A GLARE INTO ONE'S EYE. WE WOULD ALSO PROPOSE A VOLUNTARY MEDIATION COMMITTEE TO BE APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL WITH THE IDEA OF NOT INVOLVING THE POLICE DEFT IN LIGHTING DISPUTES. A GOOD ORDINANCE OR REGULATION SHOULD MAKE SMALL CLAIMS COURT AVAILABLE TO CITIZENS WHO CANNOT RESOLVE THEIR DIFFERENCES THROUGH MEDIATION. HIM STREET LIGHTS IN THE CITY OF KALISPELL OCTOBER, 2004 AT THE PRESENT TRAE, THE CITY OF KALISPELL IS PAYING TO OPERATE 482,175 WATT MERCURY VAPOR LIGHTS. EACH ONE COSTS 10.50 A MONTH. HIGH PRESSURE SOD1iJM LIGHTS, OUR CURRENT `DROP ` LIGHTS, AND OUR NEWER `FLAT' LIGHTS, COST ONLY 8.50 A MONTH TO OPERATE. MERCURY VAPOR LIGHTS LOSE BRIGHTNESS AND DIM OVER TIME, YET THEY STILL OPERATE AT THE SAME COST AS WHEN NEW. SODIUM LIGHTS TO NOT HAVE THAT PROBLEM IN THE 1980'S, BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION OFFERED A DEAL TO ALL COMPANIES CINDER IT'S JURISDICTION TO REPLACE, FREE OF CHARGE, ALL MERCURY VAPOR STREET LIGHTS. FOR REASONS UNBENOWNST TO US, PACIFIC POWER DID NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT OFFER THIS IS THE REASON WE HAVE SO MANY OF THESE HARSH, UNFRIENDLY, INNEFICIENT BLUE LIGHTS HERE IN OUR CITY. THE FLATHEAD CO-OP IS CURRENTLY TRY TO FIND OUT FROM THE BONNEVILLE POWER AD MINISTRATION IF THAT DEAL IS STILL BEING OFFERED UNDER THE GUISE OF POWER CONSERVATION. IF THERE ARE NO CONSERVATION CREDITS AVAILABLE TO US, THE COST OF RE -FITTING EACH LIGHT WITH A FLAT STYLE IS 150.00 EACH. THE PAYBACK PERIOD IS 75 MONTHS, OR 6.3 YEARS. AT THAT TIME, THE SAVINGS TO THE CITY WOULD BE 1,000.00 DOLLARS A MONTH. THE CITY IS NOW OPERATING 326 HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM LIGHTS AT 100 WATTS, 150 AT 200 WATTS, AND 10 AT 400 WATTS. THERE IS NO CLEAR INDICATION OF WHERE THESE LIGHTS ARE AT THIS TIME, HOWEVER THE CO-OP HAS A NEW GPS SYSTEM WHICH WILL BE ABLE TO LOCATE THEM ALL IN COUPLE OF MONTHS. LIGHT POLLUTION OBSCURES THE PRISTINE VIEW OF THE NIGHT SKY, WHICH IS A PRECIOUS RESOURCE TO ALL OF US. LIGHT TRESPASS INTERFERES WITH THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND PROPERTY OWNER'S ENJOYMENT OF THEIR. PROPERTY.ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STANDARDS FOR OUTDOOR LIGHTING ARE INTENDED TO CONTROL OUTDOOR LIGHTING FROM NON -VEHICULAR LIGHT SOURCES. IT IS THE FURTHUR INTENT OF THESE STANDARDS TO CURTAIL AND REVERSE THE DEGREDATION OF THE NIGHT-TIME VISUAL ENVIRONMENT BY MINIMIZING LIGHT POLLUTION, GLARE, AND LIGHT TRESPASS THROUGH REGULATION OF THE FORM AND USE OF OUTDOOR LIGHTING, AND TO CONSEIWENERGY AND RESOURCES WHILE MAINTAINING NIGHT-TIME SAFETY, UTILITY AND SECURITY. WE HAVE ACCUMULATED QUITE A LOT OF INFORMATION ON VARIOUS KINDS OF LIGHTS, THEIR BEST APPLICATIONS, COSTS, GLARE, LUMENS, WASTE ETC. WE WISH TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU. WE ASK THAT THE CITY OF KALISPELL TAKE THIS ON AS A CITY PROJECT TO BE ADDED TO THE ZONING TEXT AS AN AMENDMENT, THEREFORE SAVING US A FILING FEE OF 400.00, AS WE DO NOT STAND TO GAIN MONETARILY FROM THIS AMENDMENT. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH NARDA WILSON AS TO THE FEASIBILITY OF THIS PROTECT, AND WE NOW PRESENT IT TO YOU. JACKIE KISSER CITY OF KALISPELL RESIDENT BRUCE RUBY REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BIG SKY ASTRONOMY CLUB