www.lincoln.ne.gov

City of Lincoln Urban Development Department Mayor's Neighborhood Roundtable Meeting Agenda and Summary February 2008

Chairperson Tracy Lines Corr called the meeting to order at 5:32 P.M., Thursday, February 14, 2008, in the Mayor's Conference Room, County/City Building, Lincoln, Nebraska. Twenty-four participants attended:

Tracy Corr, 40th & A St. NA	Carl Tesch, Autumn Wood NA
Richard Earl, Autumn Wood NA	Dan Marvin, Country Club NA
Rick Noyes, Downtown NA	Cherie Krueger, East Campus CO
Paula Rhian, Everett NA/NeDED	Dianna Wright, Highlands NA
Kristine Meek, Highlands NA	Ed Patterson, Malone NA
Mike Dennis, South 48th St NA	Gary Irvin, South Salt Creek CO
Bill Vocasek, West A NA	Larry Frisch, Witherbee NA
Fred Freytag, Witherbee NA	Erik Laing, Free to Grow
Russell Miller, Lincoln Neigh Alliance	Shawn Ryba, NeighborWorks-Lincoln
Harry Haefer, L/LC Health Dept.	Rick Hoppe, Mayor's Office
Nancy Engel, Urban Development	Wynn Hjermstad, Urban Development
Marvin Krout, Planning Dept.	Mayor Beutler

WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
Ms. Corr opened the meeting and asked the participants to introduce themselves. A sign-in sheet was provided for check-in.

She mentioned the 2008 Household Hazardous Waste Collections handout and the Compact Flourescent Light Bulb recycling handout, both provided by the Health Department.

MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Beutler has been working on the neighborhood initiative with Council Member Dan Marvin, NeighborWorks - Lincoln, and others. He anticipates making a public announcement about a week from tonight about who will head that program and establish the initial strategy. Everything is looking very good.

The Mayor also mentioned the budget. The budget will be presented to the City Council in July, but the Mayor's Office never stops working on it. It will be one more difficult budget year. He will be doing many things differently moving toward an outcome-based budget. Mayor Beutler wants to communicate well with the public before this next budget using a scientific survey, focus groups, and the internet. He will engage the Journal Star to stimulate a conversation on the budget and city government. He also plans to have town hall meetings with public officials. He is making a real effort to know what people think and will act, to a large extent, in accordance with those desires. Obviously, he has leadership responsibilities that will interplay with the public opinion survey and his budget. He anticipates much interaction between public officials and the public on the budget that will be good for all of us. He urges the citizens of Lincoln to participate. Neighborhood perspective is very important in the various forums available.

Mayor Beutler fielded questions and comments from the Roundtable.

PROPOSED LIGHTING STANDARDS, presented by MARVIN KROUT
Marvin Krout, Director of Planning Department, made a PowerPoint presentation about proposed lighting standards. The idea of looking at lighting arose a couple of years ago from a request by the Near South Neighborhood Association. Neighborhood convenience stores were being reconstructed. Near South had concerns with lighting of existing convenience stores. The lights were becoming brighter and more glaring. In older neighborhoods, commercial use is often not buffered by other uses. Residential and commercial uses often abut.

A loophole seemed to exist in the lighting standards. For about 20 years, several lighting standards have been on the books regarding parking lots. One of those standards restricted light trespass light from a parking lot on an adjacent residential property beyond a certain level, measured in foot-candles. The standard is one-half foot-candle not difficult to attain. One-half foot-candle is considered about twilight so the edge of the property may be lighted, but not as bright as daylight. The problem is that standard applied only to parking lots and no standard existed for lighting that comes with other commercial uses such as security lighting and canopy lighting.

The neighborhood requested, and the City Council approved, broadening the standard of light trespass from just parking lots to any kind of lighting situation and applying the standard citywide. When planners looked into the lighting standards they found problems: loopholes, technical language the average citizen would not understand, and technical terms no longer used by the industry.

Current lighting standards for Lincoln are found in several places and are difficult to navigate: parking lot standards one place; street light standards in another; special regulations for outdoor recreation in another. Also, a comparison of Lincoln's lighting standards with other communities revealed incompleteness. For example, glare remained unresolved by direct reference. Light trespass is one issue; glare is another. Most complaints deal with glare. Glare requires another sort of measurement than light trespass. Glare may come from various sources in a neighborhood, for example, security lighting for an apartment complex.

Conventional wisdom says, "The more light I throw on the area, the more crime-free I will be." That opinion is not necessarily true. Experts on crime and environment say evenness of lighting is the most important factor, not more lighting. They also state enough light is that level in which a person can distinguish a face. The "enough light" level is lower than the level currently allowed by the City of Lincoln or what would be allowed under the proposed standards. Cheap fixtures do not direct or control light, nor shield bulbs that may have intensive light. The intent was to address the lighting standards consolidating, simplifying, and even deleting to address issues of glare.

The Planning Department hired Olsson Associates, a local engineering firm that has lighting specialists on staff. The Building and Safety Department is responsible for enforcing the lighting standards, but they are not experts. Planning relies, to some extent, on Lincoln Electric System, who are experts, but they specialize in street lighting which is entirely different.

A task force was created by Olsson Associates that looked at examples of lighting in the community and at other codes and ordinances. A broad-based group comprised the task force, including neighborhood representatives, dark-sky advocates, and business representatives (e.g., Valentino's, LIBA, a local developer). The task force conducted surveys, looked at the community, tried to understand terms, such as: vertical foot-candle (a measure of glare) and horizontal foot-candle (ambient light involved in the light trespass issue). The task force looked at other communities. Some are dark-sky communities with more restrictive regulations and some are more typical. The task force worked a long time drafting standards, which resulted in The Outdoor Lighting Study. The study includes proposed changes to the lighting standards.

The task force discovered the best regulatory coverage occurred in the Use Permit Districts (new zoning districts located mostly in the outlying areas of the city). Those districts have lighting standards that were part of their approval criteria because of zoning code adopted in 1979. Many older, commercial districts that predate 1979 have very little regulation except that for parking lot lights.

Residential areas have no regulations about lighting. Apartments, or your neighbor, may purchase an inexpensive light, install it, and create light trespass and glare. Nevertheless, they would meet current lighting standards. Also, current regulations deal with street lights and not with security lights, ornamental lights, flood lights (for lighting flags, landscaping, or buildings at night). The biggest complaints are about security lights that are misdirected creating glare, causing discomfort and disabling night vision. Sometimes this even leads to vehicle accidents. Our eyes, especially older eyes, have difficulty making the transition from very bright places to very dark places. Also, standing in a very brightly lit area may incapacitate vision such that an object outside the bright light is unseen. A bright light also creates very dark shadow areas and produces non-uniformity of lighting. More lighting does not correlate with fewer incidents of crime. Rather, how the lighting illuminates the area impacts crime. Mr. Krout then showed various lighting situations that illustrated the difficulty in defining lighting scenarios that fit the standards.

The task force, adopted the recommendations unanimously. One recommendation specifies that a light of more than 2,850 lumen lights (just over a 150-watt incandescent bulb), must be in a cutoff fixture. A lumen is a measure of intensity -- light output. A watt is a measure of electricity. A cutoff fixture shields the bulb and directs the light so it does not go above horizontal. A loophole in the current parking lot regulation allows a 10,000- lumen bulb to not be shielded or directed. Most communities have better standards and more control, so this loophole was atypical. The task force felt there was a place for flood lighting (sometimes called up lighting), but the beam ought to be directed and controlled, which can be done easily.

Automobile display lots and canopy lighting have generated many complaints over the years. In the past, the glaring auto lots were near highways, or in industrial areas, or commercial areas, but not near residential development. Today, some auto dealerships are moving close to residential areas as a new marketing approach. This situation led to the feeling among some, including the Planning Commission and the City Council, that lighting levels and glare around auto dealerships needed to be control.

One such dealership agreed to a lower lighting level. The level agreed to was still about 2.5 times more than a typical parking lot, but half as much as a typical, glaring auto lot. Another dealership moved into the area and achieved the same lower lighting level. However, when a third dealership moved in and agreed to the same lighting standard, they did not meet it no cutoff fixtures and a lighting intensity much greater than the other two dealerships. This lighting situation generated neighborhood complaints and became an issue that finally came before the City Council. The task force created a lighting standard that is a little more liberal than that imposed on the first dealership. Initially, the glaring dealership voluntarily turned off half their lights because of the cost. It's worth noting that the dealership did not lose any sales because of the reduced lighting level. However, the lighting still caused a glare because they did not use cutoff fixtures. Then, as part of the settlement of the lighting issue, the dealership retrofitted cutoff fixtures which shielded the bulb. The result satisfied the needs of the dealership and the neighbors who had complained some as far away as one-half mile.

The task force discovered another loophole in the ordinance. Where regulations require cutoff fixtures, they do not have to be directed downward. So, because the fixtures are designed such that they can operate at an angle, sometimes the fixtures were misdirected. Misdirected light can be a safety hazard because a nearby vehicle operator may look directly at the light and experience poor night vision.

The task force's general idea was to set new lighting level regulations for auto dealerships and service stations that encourage even lighting that isn't brighter than reasonably necessary. However -- after visiting with LIBA, commercial Realtors, the Planning Commission, and the Urban Design Committee -- the outcome seems uncertain. Considerable opposition has surfaced from lighting contractors within LIBA.

The extensive list of concerns seems answerable, but the discussion of the issue tends to devolve into philosophical points for view, rather than addressing questions about additional cost or regulation to development. In fact, the new standards would eliminate some regulations currently on the books and make development simpler. Nevertheless, as the Planning Department and task force continue developing lighting standards, comments from people like the Roundtable members are very important. The process will continue if enough interest exists and compromises can be reached with those opposing.

These proposed lighting standards have not yet been adopted, nor has the Planning Department tried to take them through the formal process. Planning may pursue formal approval in a couple of months. The proposed lighting standards first go before the Planning Commission and then the City Council for approval.

Marvin Krout fielded questions and comments from the Roundtable.

LINCOLN POLICY NETWORK presented by SHAWN RYBA
Shawn Ryba, NeighborWorks-Lincoln, gave a brief presentation about the Lincoln Policy Network (LPN). It includes residents from the Heart of Lincoln neighborhoods and a few other neighborhoods. LPN has met three or four times discussing issues like corrective code enforcement, enforcing existing rental licences, fines for slum lords, an ordinance for vacant/abandoned properties, and licencing duplexes and single-family rentals. This group is important because it intends to take action on problem property. He invited members of the Roundtable to the next meeting, February 19, 2008, 5:30 P.M., at the First United Methodist Church, 2723 North 50th Street. Council Member Doug Emery will be the guest speaker. Shawn may be reached at 441-7181 or by e-mail (sryba@nwlincoln.org).

Mr. Ryba fielded questions and comments from the Roundtable.

SET MARCH AGENDA
The next meeting of the Mayor's Neighborhood Roundtable is scheduled for March 13, 2008, 5:30 p.m., in the Mayor's Conference Room, County/City Building, 555 South 10th Street, 2nd floor. The March agenda will include a presentation and discussion of neighborhood association newsletters. Each neighborhood association is asked to bring copies of their newsletter for the Roundtable.

ADJOURN
There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m.

Submitted by: David G. Ensign
Urban Development Department

Urban Development Community Development Division Mayor's Neighborhood Roundtable

---