New Humboldt Light Control Law Advances to Supes

WI-Photos, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Humboldt County is on its way to being the only local jurisdiction that limits the amount of light that can be emitted outdoors, with the Planning Commission supporting a draft ordinance that aims to reduce light pollution.

Having shaped a version in a workshop last month, the commission took up the ordinance again at its May 15 meeting and reached consensus on recommending Board of Supervisors approval.

With the ordinance in place, the county will be able to take permitting and complaint response actions to control “light trespass,” a term referring to lighting that leaves a property and illuminates another.

A key provision is limits on lumens, the brightness or intensity of light, and kelvins, which refers to the “temperature” or color of light.

The ordinance sets a residential limit of 1,000 lumens and a 3,000-lumen commercial limit. An original 3,000-kelvin limit has been downscaled to 2,700 kelvin, in line with a recommendation from the Dark Sky Association.

If the ordinance is approved by supervisors, that will distinguish the county area from cities like Arcata and Eureka, which don’t have lumen limits.

The ordinance’s text says control of lighting will be done through “reasonable design standards,” including shielding, height maximums and directing lighting downward.

Under the ordinance, lighting is required to be “fully shielded to preclude light glow above the fixture and from going beyond the intended area of illumination.”

Lighting must be “directed downward” to prevent it from lighting up “neighboring properties, the public right-of-way, biological resources or the sky.”

Types of prohibited lighting include “aerial lasers,” “search-style lights” and flashing lights.

But those categories can be allowed at “special events” such as concerts through a Conditional Use Permit process.

Lighting that’s exempted from the ordinance (but still required to be contained within property boundaries) includes holiday decorations, athletic field lighting and emergency lighting.

During a sparsely-attended public comment period, Arcata resident and agriculturist Shail Pec-Crouse said she’s “grateful to look up and see stars” at night, describing it as a “precious resource” that many people don’t have due to light pollution.

“I’m really excited that this is something that’s being discussed and it looks like there will be regulations on it,” she continued, adding she lives next to a property that’s been bought by Cal Poly Humboldt and is concerned about how it will be developed with lighting.

When commissioners did a line-by-line review of the ordinance, the lumen limits were primary points of discussion, particularly the residential limit.

While the commercial limit can be exempted if so decided through a Conditional Use Permit process, the residential limit is firm.

“We’re not lighting experts here,” said Commission Chair Iver Skavdal. “I’m going under the assumption that somebody’s 1,000-lumen front porch light is going to provide enough lighting for them to be able to walk up the steps safely or down the steps safely in their house and those types of issues.”

“We are absolutely wanting to say in a residential setting, we’re not creating a process that you can illuminate your whole yard and turn it into a parking lot or whatever,” said Planning Director John Ford. “That’s not to say that on your front door you can’t put two lights, one on each side of the door, to make sure that you’ve got a good illuminated area for walking in – we’re just not going to have excessively bright lights.”

But that was questioned in the case of larger rural residential and agricultural properties.

Commissioner Thomas Mulder, a cannabis farmer, said he works at night at times and uses headlamps that are as bright as 3,000 lumens.

Commissioners agreed to add “agricultural” to the categories of properties with the higher 3,000-lumen limit.

Written public includes concerns about illumination from streetlights but that’s regulated under a special district process administrated by the county’s Department of Public Works and approved by the Board of Supervisors.

But heeding the public input, commissioners agreed to send a memo to the Board of Supervisors indicating that streetlight illumination is a concern among commissioners and the public.

Commissioners unanimously voted to recommend the ordinance for approval by the Board of Supervisors.