Loading...
Transmittal - 8/24/2021ERIN MENDENHALL MAYOR LAURA BRIEFER, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 1 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL _______________________ Date Received: ___________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 10-14-2020 FROM: SUBJECT: Amy Fowler, Chair Laura Briefer, Director, Department of Public Utilities 2020 Salt Lake City Street Light Master Plan STAFF CONTACTS: Jesse Stewart, Deputy Director, jesse.stewart@slcgov.com; Jason Brown, PE, Chief Engineer, jason.brown@slcgov.com; David Pearson, PE, Street Lighting Manager, david.pearson@slcgov.com; Jeff Snelling, PE, Senior Engineer, jeff.snelling@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the 2020 Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan. BUDGET IMPACT: The adoption of the 2020 Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan does not have a budget impact for this fiscal year. The Street Lighting Utility budget is prepared annually, and implementation of this proposed plan will be reflected in future annual budgets. Due to certain recommended changes related to pedestrian lighting and safety, it is anticipated that Public Utilities will need to prepare an updated capital improvement program and financial strategy for the Street Lighting Enterprise Fund to implement the Plan beginning in Fiscal Year 2022. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City was the 5th City in the United States to have streetlights. The City’s first systematic plan for installing streetlights was adopted in 1908. The most recent street lighting plan was completed in 2006. In 2013, the management of the streetlight system was transferred from the Transportation Division to the Department of Public Utilities. This transfer included changing the funding source for the operation, maintenance and capital improvements of the system from the General Fund and Special Assessment Areas (SAA’s) to a newly created street lighting enterprise fund. Currently Public Utilities maintains over 15,500 streetlights within Salt Lake City boundaries. The Street Lighting Enterprise Fund was primarily developed to maintain existing lighting and upgrade fixtures to newer technology LED. First generation LED lights installed had few options regarding lumen output (measure of light output and brightness) and color temperature (whiteness of the light). The City’s practice was to replace the older fixtures with LED fixtures at the same lumen output using a 4,000-Kelvin temperature, which at the time was the industry standard. These new LED fixtures had the same measurable light output but were perceived as a brighter light. During the first few years of conversion to the new LED fixtures mainly within industrial, commercial and higher density residential areas, Public Utilities received more positive feedback than negative. When installation began in the residential neighborhoods, there were more complaints. Residents were not pleased with the brightness of the lights as well as the white light emitted. The City is also proactively working on various streets projects, community improvement projects, pedestrian and bicycle 10/14/2020 1/13/2021 Lisa Shaffer (Jan 13, 2021 13:43 MST) friendly projects, and issues related to crime. Street lighting has a role to play in all of these endeavors. 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan Development and Content In 2018, Public Utilities began the process of updating the Streetlighting Master Plan (Plan). This planning effort includes a review and update of policies related to the system, engagement of stakeholders in the planning process and design guidance for the City’s street light system. Public Utilities partnered with GSBS Consulting and Clanton & Associates to develop the Plan. This Plan provides design guidance for improving street and pedestrian lighting that will create a quality nighttime visual experience while being more energy efficient. Four guideposts, developed by stakeholder committees, that include Safety, Character, Responsibility, and Equity, drive the Plan’s policies. The Plan also draws on bodies of knowledge throughout the world regarding advancements in the technology and science of how we can light our public ways. The 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan incorporates two volumes, including the Master Plan itself and Technical Guidance and Implementation guide. Both are attached to this transmittal, as well as the Executive Summary for the Master Plan. Primary components of the Plan include: •System Background •System Evaluation •Plan Guideposts •Street Lighting Basics Overview •Process for Evaluating the Lighted Environment •Comprehensive Improvements •Minimal Improvements •Lighting Controls and Adaptive Dimming Strategies •Lighting Calculations •Appendices o Lighting Terms o Meeting Notes o Existing Conditions Report o Nocturnal Infrastructure for Ecological Health (report) o Luminaire Submittal Form If approved, the 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan would implement the following major policy statements for the City: 1)Street lighting will enhance safety through the implementation of industry recognized standards. 2)Street lighting standards will include allowances to encourage dimming strategies relating to pedestrian activity, wildlife, and dark skies lighting. 3) Street lighting will minimize the obtrusive effects of light at night resulting from light trespass, light pollution, and glare through the selection and placement of appropriate poles, fixtures, light type, and light levels. 4) Provide pedestrian lighting in accordance with neighborhood plans and in accordance with the typologies of this Plan. 5) Provide street and pedestrian lighting that minimizes impacts to sensitive wildlife species. 6) Select fixture types to provide dark skies protection. 7) Implementation based on neighborhood and community input to determine pole, fixture type, maximum and minimum light level, and the implementation of adaptive dimming applications when appropriate. Funding and prioritization are the key drivers in implementation of the polices, standards, and strategies in the Plan. Implementation recommendations outlined in the Plan are as follows: 1)Priority One a.Neighborhoods currently underserved for street and/or pedestrian lighting based on adjacent land uses b. High conflict areas including school zones, bus stops, transit stations, and neighborhood byways. 2)Priority Two a. Areas with non-compliant existing street lighting. 3) Ongoing a. Replacement of lamps with LED luminaires on regular maintenance schedule as appropriate. b. Replacement of non-compliant street lighting in areas of ecological sensitivity. c. Installation of dimming capability. d. New development or redevelopment proposals. 4) Step One a. Identify high conflict areas in the City b. Review the current lighting map to identify underserved neighborhoods. c. Respond to requests from community or neighborhoods for lighting changes 5) Step Two a. Contact community and neighborhood representatives to identify priorities and review options according the matrix developed in the Plan. b. Identify the community preferred option. 6) Step Three a. Estimate cost of preferred option. b. Seek funding approval/develop financial strategy 7) Step Four a. Design, schedule, and implement the preferred option. If the Plan is adopted, it will reflect public feedback and the City’s street lighting system will be better incorporated into City livability and development goals. Major changes in the 2020 Plan from the 2006 Plan include a systematic approach for choosing lighting strategies of public ways based on adjacent land use, pedestrian activity, and street typology. Procedures for determining pedestrian lighting are included, as are lighting procedures for environmentally sensitive areas. Because of this, the current base street lighting standard will likely change depending on the land use, pedestrian activity, and street typology. It is anticipated that Public Utilities will need to prepare an updated capital improvement program and schedule for the street lighting system if this Plan is adopted, along with an updated evaluation of street lighting rates, rate structure and financial strategies for capital improvements. PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Utilities consistently receives feedback regarding the current lighting system, both positive and negative. A major driver of the 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan includes this public feedback. For instance, Public Utilities has received feedback regarding the performance of LED fixtures, public safety, environment, and equity. As part of the Plan effort, three groups were formed to advise in the development of the Plan. The first group, the Advisory Committee, consisted of representatives from each City Council District recommended by City Councilmembers or Council staff. Advisory Committee members were asked to provide input on lighting in their specific district and in common areas of the City. Throughout the course of developing the Plan this committee helped in evaluating the existing system and provided guidance pertaining to the Plan’s scope and reach. A second group formed as a Technical Committee consisting of staff from City Departments and Divisions who hold a direct interest in the street lighting program. Technical Committee members include representatives from Salt Lake City Police Department, Fire Department, Sustainability Department, Engineering Division, Planning Division, and the Urban Forestry Division. Technical Committee members provided input based on their unique responsibilities with respect to how streetlighting influenced their tasks. This committee provided direction in how lighting design criteria could assist in meeting the City’s goals and more specifically, helping to accomplish their Department’s individual responsibilities. The third group was formed from stakeholders in the community including representatives from agencies and groups in the transportation, education, environmental, and business sectors who have a vested interest in Salt Lake City. The primary purpose of this group was to provide input as the Plan progressed. This provided a level of transparency and allowed for feedback to ensure the Plan had a solid foundation to address the multiple values of a comprehensive lighting system. Public Utilities and the GSBS Consulting team met with the Advisory and Technical Committees to help frame the vision and goals of the Plan. The committees were encouraged to offer their opinion on existing lighting conditions throughout the City and what improvements could be made. These Committees toured 17 sites throughout the City with varied lighting characteristics and land use. At each of these sites committee members were asked several questions to gauge their opinion on the existing lighting conditions. The GSBS Consulting team also took light measurements at each of these locations to compare with current industry lighting standards. Using the data collected from the measured light readings and input from the committees, GSBS created an Existing Lighting Conditions report. This report summarized current lighting conditions to assist with developing design criteria and a future implementation plan using the guideposts detailed in the Plan. Meetings and Formal Engagement: •November 5, 2018: Street Lighting Site Tour and Surveys – Advisory and Technical Committees •April 3, 2019: Street Lighting 101 – Advisory Committee •April 25, 2019: Visioning Session – Advisory Committee •April 26, 2019 – Technical Committee •May 24, 2019: City Council and Mayor’s Office Briefing •July 29 and 30, 2019: Stakeholder Update •April 2019 – November 2019: Public Street Lighting Survey, 160 respondents •January 8, 2020: Progress Update – Advisory Committee •October 22nd, 2020: Public Utilities Advisory Committee (planned) Enclosures: Draft Ordinance Adopting the 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan Executive Summary 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan Volume 1 – Master Plan (June 2020) 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan Volume 2 – Technical Guidance and Implementation (June 2020) SALT LAKE CITY, UT Street Lighting Master Plan VOLUME 1 - MASTER PLAN JUNE 2020 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESS..........7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................. 9 Current System Evaluation ................................9 Policy Statements ................................................10 Implementation Steps ..........................................11 SYSTEM BACKGROUND, HISTORY ..........................13 CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATION ..........................16 CURRENT LIGHTING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS ...16 2006 Street Lighting Master Plan .............16 Special Improvement Districts ...................16 Private Lighting Program ..............................16 EXISTING LIGHTING CONDITIONS ........................17 Process ...................................................................17 CITY PLANNING GUIDANCE .................................19 Plan Salt Lake ......................................................19 Neighborhood Master Plans ......................20 Lighting Levels & Gaps ..................................24 Evaluation by Community/District ..........25 PLAN GUIDEPOSTS ..................................................27 Safety .........................................................................27 Character ..................................................................27 Responsibility .........................................................27 Equity .........................................................................28 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW ..................29 SYSTEMWIDE CONSIDERATIONS ............................29 Health and Wellbeing..........................................29 Wildlife Impacts .....................................................29 LIGHTING CHARACTERISTICS ..................................29 Appropriate Light Levels ..................................29 Glare Reduction .....................................................31 Uniformity vs. Contrast ......................................32 Adaptation ...............................................................33 Color Rendering and Nighttime Visibility ....................................................................34 Color Temperature and Nighttime Visibility .....................................................................35 Light Trespass ........................................................36 Light Pollution ........................................................37 COSTS AND IMPLEMENTATION ................................38 Initial Costs ..............................................................38 Long Term Life Cycle Costs .............................38 Maintenance ............................................................39 Energy ........................................................................39 Standardization .....................................................39 STREET LIGHTING PLAN..........................................40 Lighting Improvement Strategies ...........40 Purpose ................................................................40 Lighting Layout Strategies .........................40 Street Lighting Only ........................................42 Street and Pedestrian Lighting .................43 Pedestrian Lighting Only .............................44 TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS 4 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Special Lighting Districts ............................ 45 Intersection Lighting .....................................46 Vertical Illumination in Crosswalks ..........47 Bus Stop ..............................................................48 Environmentally Protected Areas ...........48 IMPLEMENTATION OF UPGRADED LIGHTING .......48 Street Lighting Equipment and Technology ........................................................50 Lighting Improvements Complexity & Cost ...........................................52 Minimal 1-for-1 Replacements .....................52 Supplemental .....................................................52 Comprehensive .................................................52 PRIORITIZING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS ...........52 Areas Underserved by Street Lighting ...................................................53 High Priority Conflict Areas ........................53 1-for-1 Lighting Improvements ...................57 APPENDIX ..........................................................59 A. Glossary of Lighting Terms ........................59 B. Committee Meeting Notes ..........................61 C. Existing Conditions Report Presentation ......................................................67 D. Nocturnal Infrastructure for Ecological Health ...........................................89 E. Luminaire Submittal Forms ......................123 5 FIGURE 1: Site Evaluation Map ...................................10 FIGURE 2: Neighborhood Master Plans Map – 2017 ...........................................20 FIGURE 3: Street Light Density Map .......................24 FIGURE 4: Community Character Map ..................25 FIGURE 5: Appropriate Light Level ..........................29 FIGURE 6: Glare Reduction ...........................................31 FIGURE 7: Uniformity Vs. Glare ..................................32 FIGURE 8: Adaptation ....................................................33 FIGURE 9: Color Rendering ........................................34 FIGURE 10: Color Temperature ..................................35 FIGURE 11: Light Trespass .............................................36 FIGURE 12: Light Pollution ............................................37 FIGURE 13: Initial Costs: Guidepost Synergy & Balance ...............................................................................38 FIGURE 14: Energy ..........................................................39 FIGURE 15: Street Lighting Warrants Matrix .........41 FIGURE 16: Street Lighting Only Cross Section ..................................................................42 FIGURE 17: Street & Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section............................................... 43 FIGURE 18: Pedestrian Only Lighting Cross Section...............................................44 FIGURE 19: Cactus Lights Cross Section .............. 45 FIGURE 20: Intersection Lighting Plan ..................46 FIGURE 21: Crosswalk Lighting ..................................47 FIGURE 22: School Locations .....................................53 FIGURE 23: Bus Stop Locations ................................54 FIGURE 24: Transit Stations .........................................55 FIGURE 25: Neighborhood Byways .........................56 TABLE OF FIGURES TABLE OF TABLES TABLE 1: Plan Policy Statement Comparison 2006-2020 ........................................................................14 TABLE 2: Street and Sidewalk Lighting Conditions Council District Locations ..................17 TABLE 3: Street and Sidewalk Existing Lighting Ratings ............................................19 TABLE 4: Street Lighting Policy and Implementation Items .........................................21 TABLE 5: Lighting Layout Strategy By Land Use ....................................................................49 TABLE 6: Recommended Luminaries By Land Use ......................................................................51 6 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 7 The 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan was developed with the input and guidance of two committees and reviewed by a Stakeholders group. The Advisory Committee included representatives from: • Each City Council District • Department of Public Utilities • Mayor’s Office The Advisory Committee met six times during the process to provide guidance on policy issues: • Street Lighting Site Tour & Surveys (November 5, 2018) • Street Lighting 101 (April 3, 2019) • Visioning Session (April 25, 2019) • Council & Mayor’s Office Briefing (May 24, 2019) • Stakeholder Update (July 30, 2019) • 50% Progress Update (January 8, 2020) The Advisory Committee created a list of lighting concerns and priorities for each district across the City as well as provided guidance on the City’s street lighting vision and guideposts. Notes from their meetings are found in the appendix. The second committee was the Technical Committee with representatives from the following City departments: • Police • Fire • Sustainability • Engineering • Planning • Urban Forestry Technical Committee members represented the interests of their departments in the master planning process. They also participated in the street lighting site tour. Technical Committee input also contributed to the vision and guiding principles used in the planning process. Notes from their meetings are found in the appendix. The current system evaluation and the plan vision and guideposts were reviewed by stakeholder groups on July 29-30, 2019 with representatives from: • Education • Business • Transit/Multi-modal transportation • Environmental Stakeholder input is included in this draft plan. This draft plan is submitted to the City Council for review, possible revision, and adoption. Following adoption, the Department of Public Utilities will hold a series of community meetings to familiarize residents, developers, and stakeholders on the policies, standards and processes included in this plan.INTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESSINTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESS 8 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYEXECUTIVE SUMMARY Salt Lake City requested an evaluation of existing street lighting conditions and a master plan to aid in transitioning all Salt Lake City-owned street lighting from a high pressure sodium system to an LED system, a process begun in 2013. In addition, the master plan identifies methods to improve visibility and aesthetics while reducing energy and maintenance through a lighting control system. The master plan identifies new street lighting standards for retrofit and new construction. The goal of this document is to provide Salt Lake City with a consistent approach for street and pedestrian lighting that creates a quality nighttime visual experience. Street and pedestrian lighting plays a key role in how people experience the city in which they live, work, and play. Lighting helps drivers and pedestrians understand the streetscape through visual cues and heightened awareness of their environment. Providing good visibility with lighting increases comfort levels and encourages use of public streets and spaces. The plan identifies a strategy that balances safety, character, responsibility, and equity using a series of guideposts for evaluating the lit environment and the technical elements of a streetlighting system. CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATION The Advisory and Technical Committees along with the consulting team surveyed seventeen locations in the city. In addition, the consulting team conducted nighttime surveys and measured the light levels along primary arterial, minor arterial, collector and local streets. Survey sites were selected in each Council District to represent a variety of existing lighting conditions throughout the city. Based on the survey and evaluations, the consulting team created an Existing Conditions Report (Appendix C) to aid the city in understanding relationship of visual perception to measured light levels. The consulting team categorized each survey site according to IES standards acceptability light level, lamp wattage, street type, luminaire spacing and measured lighting levels. The four levels of acceptability are: • Excellent. the survey sites identified as “Excellent” received the highest scores from the Advisory and Technical Committees, indicating excellent visibility, appropriate light levels, low glare, uniformity and good color. • Acceptable. the street meets lighting standards based on street classification and existing luminaire spacing. Block faces categorized as “Acceptable” require only LED retrofit. • Moderate. the street does not meet lighting standards based on street classification and existing luminaire spacing. Block faces categorized as “Moderate” require minor improvements to address relatively small dark spaces between poles as well as LED retrofit. • Poor. the street has very low or no street lighting. Block faces categorized as “Poor” require significant investment in new lighting and electrical infrastructure to meet lighting standards. As seen in Figure 1, of the sites surveyed, 17 percent are categorized as Excellent, 35 percent are Acceptable, 24 percent are Moderate and 24 percent are Poor. The following policy statements are intended to guide the approach to addressing identified needs and gaps in the City’s current street lighting as well as apply to future changes in the system. 10 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPOLICY STATEMENTS Based on the application of planning guideposts and input of the steering and technical committees, the master plan implements the following major policies: • Street lighting will enhance safety through the implementation of industry recognized standards. • Street lighting standards include allowances to encourage dimming strategies relating to pedestrian activity, wildlife and dark skies lighting. • Street lighting will minimize the obtrusive effects of light at night resulting from light trespass, light pollution, and glare through the selection and placement of appropriate poles, fixtures, light type, and light levels. • Provide pedestrian lighting in accordance with neighborhood plans and in accordance with the typologies in this plan. • Provide street and pedestrian lighting that minimizes impacts to sensitive wildlife species. • Select fixture types to provide dark skies protection. • Implementation based on neighborhood and community input to determine pole, fixture type, maximum and minimum light level, and the implementation of adaptive dimming applications when appropriate. The standards and implementation strategies to achieve Salt Lake City’s major street lighting policies are included in this plan. Salt Lake City utilizes IES standards with allowances to respond to pedestrian, wildlife, and dark skies priorities. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 SLC Public Utilities Excellent Site Acceptable Site Moderate Site Poor Site 1000 North I-80 Redwood RoadSouth Temple 400 South 900 South 1300 South 1700 South Sunnyside Avenue Footh i l l D r ive 1300 East700 EastState StreetI-15900 West1 2 Figure 1: Site Evaluation Map Site # Site Name Street Classification Existing Lighting Sterling & American Beauty Dr. Local / Residential Excellent Riverside Park & 600 North Arterial / Park Acceptable Redwood Rd. & South Temple Collector / Industrial Poor 700 South & Post Street Local / Residential Poor 500 West & Dalton Ave.Arterial / Residential Acceptable Glendale Dr. & Navajo St. Collector / Residential / Commercial Moderate J St. & 2nd Ave. Local / Residential Poor 800 East & South Temple Arterial / Commercial Excellent 200 South & Floral St. Arterial / Commercial Excellent 650 South & Main St. Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 700 East & Harrison Ave.Arterial / Residential Poor 900 East & 900 South Arterial / Commercial Acceptable Layton Ave. & West Temple Local / Residential Moderate 1500 South & Yale Collector / Residential Acceptable 19th East & Sunnyside Arterial / Residential / Commercial Moderate 1400 East & Redando Local / Residential Moderate 1000 East & 2100 South Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 11 IMPLEMENTATION STEPS Funding and prioritization are the key drivers in implementation of the policies, standards, and strategies in this plan. Road classification and adjacent land use are the driving factors in selection of street lighting type, spacing and light levels. There are neighborhoods and high conflict areas of the City that are recommended for priority implementation. In all cases, the initial step in implementation is coordination with the community and immediate neighborhood to ensure that the solution identified meets resident, business owner and user needs. Implementation recommendations prioritize the following: • PRIORITY ONE: - Neighborhoods currently underserved for street and/or pedestrian lighting based on adjacent land uses. - High conflict areas including: • School Zones • Bus Stops • Transit Stations • Neighborhood Byways • PRIORITY TWO: - Areas with non-compliant existing streetlighting (luminaire, light source or pole spacing) • ONGOING: - Replacement of lamps with LED luminaires on regular maintenance schedule as appropriate - Replacement of non-compliant street lighting in areas of ecological sensitivity - Installation of dimming capability at neighborhood request - New development or redevelopment proposals STEP ONE: • Identify high conflict areas in the City • Review the current lighting map to identify underserved neighborhoods and high conflict areas • Respond to request from community or neighborhood for lighting change STEP TWO: • Contact community and neighborhood representatives to identify priorities and review options according to the matrix • Identify neighborhood-preferred option according to the matrix STEP THREE: • Estimate cost of preferred option • Seek funding approval STEP FOUR: • Design, schedule and implement preferred option 12 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK SALT LAKE CITY, UT Street Lighting Master Plan VOLUME 1 - MASTER PLAN JUNE 2020 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESS..........7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................9 Current System Evaluation ................................9 Policy Statements ................................................10 Implementation Steps ..........................................11 SYSTEM BACKGROUND, HISTORY ..........................13 CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATION ..........................16 CURRENT LIGHTING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS ...16 2006 Street Lighting Master Plan .............16 Special Improvement Districts ...................16 Private Lighting Program ..............................16 EXISTING LIGHTING CONDITIONS ........................17 Process ...................................................................17 CITY PLANNING GUIDANCE .................................19 Plan Salt Lake ......................................................19 Neighborhood Master Plans ......................20 Lighting Levels & Gaps ..................................24 Evaluation by Community/District ..........25 PLAN GUIDEPOSTS ..................................................27 Safety .........................................................................27 Character ..................................................................27 Responsibility .........................................................27 Equity .........................................................................28 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW ..................29 SYSTEMWIDE CONSIDERATIONS ............................29 Health and Wellbeing..........................................29 Wildlife Impacts .....................................................29 LIGHTING CHARACTERISTICS ..................................29 Appropriate Light Levels ..................................29 Glare Reduction .....................................................31 Uniformity vs. Contrast ......................................32 Adaptation ...............................................................33 Color Rendering and Nighttime Visibility ....................................................................34 Color Temperature and Nighttime Visibility .....................................................................35 Light Trespass ........................................................36 Light Pollution ........................................................37 COSTS AND IMPLEMENTATION ................................38 Initial Costs ..............................................................38 Long Term Life Cycle Costs .............................38 Maintenance ............................................................39 Energy ........................................................................39 Standardization .....................................................39 STREET LIGHTING PLAN..........................................40 Lighting Improvement Strategies ...........40 Purpose ................................................................40 Lighting Layout Strategies .........................40 Street Lighting Only ........................................42 Street and Pedestrian Lighting .................43 Pedestrian Lighting Only .............................44 TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS 4 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Special Lighting Districts ............................45 Intersection Lighting .....................................46 Vertical Illumination in Crosswalks ..........47 Bus Stop ..............................................................48 Environmentally Protected Areas ...........48 IMPLEMENTATION OF UPGRADED LIGHTING .......48 Street Lighting Equipment and Technology ........................................................50 Lighting Improvements Complexity & Cost ...........................................52 Minimal 1-for-1 Replacements .....................52 Supplemental .....................................................52 Comprehensive .................................................52 PRIORITIZING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS ...........52 Areas Underserved by Street Lighting ...................................................53 High Priority Conflict Areas ........................53 1-for-1 Lighting Improvements ...................57 APPENDIX ..........................................................59 A. Glossary of Lighting Terms ........................59 B. Committee Meeting Notes ..........................61 C. Existing Conditions Report Presentation ......................................................67 D. Nocturnal Infrastructure for Ecological Health ...........................................89 E. Luminaire Submittal Forms ......................123 5 FIGURE 1: Site Evaluation Map ...................................10 FIGURE 2: Neighborhood Master Plans Map – 2017 ...........................................20 FIGURE 3: Street Light Density Map .......................24 FIGURE 4: Community Character Map ..................25 FIGURE 5: Appropriate Light Level ..........................29 FIGURE 6: Glare Reduction ...........................................31 FIGURE 7: Uniformity Vs. Glare ..................................32 FIGURE 8: Adaptation ....................................................33 FIGURE 9: Color Rendering ........................................34 FIGURE 10: Color Temperature ..................................35 FIGURE 11: Light Trespass .............................................36 FIGURE 12: Light Pollution ............................................37 FIGURE 13: Initial Costs: Guidepost Synergy & Balance ...............................................................................38 FIGURE 14: Energy ..........................................................39 FIGURE 15: Street Lighting Warrants Matrix .........41 FIGURE 16: Street Lighting Only Cross Section ..................................................................42 FIGURE 17: Street & Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section...............................................43 FIGURE 18: Pedestrian Only Lighting Cross Section...............................................44 FIGURE 19: Cactus Lights Cross Section ..............45 FIGURE 20: Intersection Lighting Plan ..................46 FIGURE 21: Crosswalk Lighting ..................................47 FIGURE 22: School Locations .....................................53 FIGURE 23: Bus Stop Locations ................................54 FIGURE 24: Transit Stations .........................................55 FIGURE 25: Neighborhood Byways .........................56 TABLE OF FIGURES TABLE OF TABLES TABLE 1: Plan Policy Statement Comparison 2006-2020 ........................................................................14 TABLE 2: Street and Sidewalk Lighting Conditions Council District Locations ..................17 TABLE 3: Street and Sidewalk Existing Lighting Ratings ............................................19 TABLE 4: Street Lighting Policy and Implementation Items .........................................21 TABLE 5: Lighting Layout Strategy By Land Use ....................................................................49 TABLE 6: Recommended Luminaries By Land Use ......................................................................51 6 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 7 The 2020 Street Lighting Master Plan was developed with the input and guidance of two committees and reviewed by a Stakeholders group. The Advisory Committee included representatives from: • Each City Council District • Department of Public Utilities • Mayor’s Office The Advisory Committee met six times during the process to provide guidance on policy issues: • Street Lighting Site Tour & Surveys (November 5, 2018) • Street Lighting 101 (April 3, 2019) • Visioning Session (April 25, 2019) • Council & Mayor’s Office Briefing (May 24, 2019) • Stakeholder Update (July 30, 2019) • 50% Progress Update (January 8, 2020) The Advisory Committee created a list of lighting concerns and priorities for each district across the City as well as provided guidance on the City’s street lighting vision and guideposts. Notes from their meetings are found in the appendix. The second committee was the Technical Committee with representatives from the following City departments: • Police • Fire • Sustainability • Engineering • Planning • Urban Forestry Technical Committee members represented the interests of their departments in the master planning process. They also participated in the street lighting site tour. Technical Committee input also contributed to the vision and guiding principles used in the planning process. Notes from their meetings are found in the appendix. The current system evaluation and the plan vision and guideposts were reviewed by stakeholder groups on July 29-30, 2019 with representatives from: • Education • Business • Transit/Multi-modal transportation • Environmental Stakeholder input is included in this draft plan. This draft plan is submitted to the City Council for review, possible revision, and adoption. Following adoption, the Department of Public Utilities will hold a series of community meetings to familiarize residents, developers, and stakeholders on the policies, standards and processes included in this plan.INTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESSINTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESS 8 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYEXECUTIVE SUMMARY Salt Lake City requested an evaluation of existing street lighting conditions and a master plan to aid in transitioning all Salt Lake City-owned street lighting from a high pressure sodium system to an LED system, a process begun in 2013. In addition, the master plan identifies methods to improve visibility and aesthetics while reducing energy and maintenance through a lighting control system. The master plan identifies new street lighting standards for retrofit and new construction. The goal of this document is to provide Salt Lake City with a consistent approach for street and pedestrian lighting that creates a quality nighttime visual experience. Street and pedestrian lighting plays a key role in how people experience the city in which they live, work, and play. Lighting helps drivers and pedestrians understand the streetscape through visual cues and heightened awareness of their environment. Providing good visibility with lighting increases comfort levels and encourages use of public streets and spaces. The plan identifies a strategy that balances safety, character, responsibility, and equity using a series of guideposts for evaluating the lit environment and the technical elements of a streetlighting system. CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATION The Advisory and Technical Committees along with the consulting team surveyed seventeen locations in the city. In addition, the consulting team conducted nighttime surveys and measured the light levels along primary arterial, minor arterial, collector and local streets. Survey sites were selected in each Council District to represent a variety of existing lighting conditions throughout the city. Based on the survey and evaluations, the consulting team created an Existing Conditions Report (Appendix C) to aid the city in understanding relationship of visual perception to measured light levels. The consulting team categorized each survey site according to IES standards acceptability light level, lamp wattage, street type, luminaire spacing and measured lighting levels. The four levels of acceptability are: • Excellent. the survey sites identified as “Excellent” received the highest scores from the Advisory and Technical Committees, indicating excellent visibility, appropriate light levels, low glare, uniformity and good color. • Acceptable. the street meets lighting standards based on street classification and existing luminaire spacing. Block faces categorized as “Acceptable” require only LED retrofit. • Moderate. the street does not meet lighting standards based on street classification and existing luminaire spacing. Block faces categorized as “Moderate” require minor improvements to address relatively small dark spaces between poles as well as LED retrofit. • Poor. the street has very low or no street lighting. Block faces categorized as “Poor” require significant investment in new lighting and electrical infrastructure to meet lighting standards. As seen in Figure 1, of the sites surveyed, 17 percent are categorized as Excellent, 35 percent are Acceptable, 24 percent are Moderate and 24 percent are Poor. The following policy statements are intended to guide the approach to addressing identified needs and gaps in the City’s current street lighting as well as apply to future changes in the system. 10 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPOLICY STATEMENTS Based on the application of planning guideposts and input of the steering and technical committees, the master plan implements the following major policies: • Street lighting will enhance safety through the implementation of industry recognized standards. • Street lighting standards include allowances to encourage dimming strategies relating to pedestrian activity, wildlife and dark skies lighting. • Street lighting will minimize the obtrusive effects of light at night resulting from light trespass, light pollution, and glare through the selection and placement of appropriate poles, fixtures, light type, and light levels. • Provide pedestrian lighting in accordance with neighborhood plans and in accordance with the typologies in this plan. • Provide street and pedestrian lighting that minimizes impacts to sensitive wildlife species. • Select fixture types to provide dark skies protection. • Implementation based on neighborhood and community input to determine pole, fixture type, maximum and minimum light level, and the implementation of adaptive dimming applications when appropriate. The standards and implementation strategies to achieve Salt Lake City’s major street lighting policies are included in this plan. Salt Lake City utilizes IES standards with allowances to respond to pedestrian, wildlife, and dark skies priorities. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 SLC Public Utilities Excellent Site Acceptable Site Moderate Site Poor Site 1000 North I-80 Redwood RoadSouth Temple 400 South 900 South 1300 South 1700 South Sunnyside Avenue Footh i l l D r ive 1300 East700 EastState StreetI-15900 West1 2 Figure 1: Site Evaluation Map Site # Site Name Street Classification Existing Lighting Sterling & American Beauty Dr. Local / Residential Excellent Riverside Park & 600 North Arterial / Park Acceptable Redwood Rd. & South Temple Collector / Industrial Poor 700 South & Post Street Local / Residential Poor 500 West & Dalton Ave.Arterial / Residential Acceptable Glendale Dr. & Navajo St. Collector / Residential / Commercial Moderate J St. & 2nd Ave.Local / Residential Poor 800 East & South Temple Arterial / Commercial Excellent 200 South & Floral St.Arterial / Commercial Excellent 650 South & Main St.Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 700 East & Harrison Ave.Arterial / Residential Poor 900 East & 900 South Arterial / Commercial Acceptable Layton Ave. & West Temple Local / Residential Moderate 1500 South & Yale Collector / Residential Acceptable 19th East & Sunnyside Arterial / Residential / Commercial Moderate 1400 East & Redando Local / Residential Moderate 1000 East & 2100 South Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 11 IMPLEMENTATION STEPS Funding and prioritization are the key drivers in implementation of the policies, standards, and strategies in this plan. Road classification and adjacent land use are the driving factors in selection of street lighting type, spacing and light levels. There are neighborhoods and high conflict areas of the City that are recommended for priority implementation. In all cases, the initial step in implementation is coordination with the community and immediate neighborhood to ensure that the solution identified meets resident, business owner and user needs. Implementation recommendations prioritize the following: • PRIORITY ONE: - Neighborhoods currently underserved for street and/or pedestrian lighting based on adjacent land uses. - High conflict areas including: • School Zones • Bus Stops • Transit Stations • Neighborhood Byways • PRIORITY TWO: - Areas with non-compliant existing streetlighting (luminaire, light source or pole spacing) • ONGOING: - Replacement of lamps with LED luminaires on regular maintenance schedule as appropriate - Replacement of non-compliant street lighting in areas of ecological sensitivity - Installation of dimming capability at neighborhood request - New development or redevelopment proposals STEP ONE: • Identify high conflict areas in the City • Review the current lighting map to identify underserved neighborhoods and high conflict areas • Respond to request from community or neighborhood for lighting change STEP TWO: • Contact community and neighborhood representatives to identify priorities and review options according to the matrix • Identify neighborhood-preferred option according to the matrix STEP THREE: • Estimate cost of preferred option • Seek funding approval STEP FOUR: • Design, schedule and implement preferred option 12 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 13 SYSTEM BACKGROUND, HISTORYSalt Lake City was the fifth city in the United States to have electric lights. By 1887, streetlights were operating on Main Street and along First and Second South Streets. The City’s first systematic plan for locating streetlights was adopted in 1908. The most recent previous update to Salt Lake City’s streetlighting plan was completed in 2006 when the system was operated and maintained by the Salt Lake City Transportation Department within the Community Development Department. In 2012 responsibility for streetlight policy, operations and maintenance was transferred to the Street Lights Department within the Department of Public Utilities. This move coincided with the implementation of a monthly user included in business and residential public utility bills along with drinking water, wastewater, stormwater and sanitation services. The Department manages and maintains more than 15,500 streetlights in Salt Lake City and has overseen the conversion of the City’s inventory to high-energy efficiency LED lamps with a target completion date of 2021. The Department placed the conversion to LED streetlights on hold in 2018 to allow this Street Lighting Master Plan to guide the conversion of the remaining streetlights. As part of the Street Light Master Plan update, the current system was reviewed and recommendations for changes to the system and updates to Salt Lake City’s streetlighting policies were developed. In addition, guidance for installation of new lighting in newly developed areas as well as changes to existing areas is included in Volume 2 - Technical Guidance and Implementation Plan. SYSTEM BACKGROUND, HISTORY 14 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1SYSTEM BACKGROUND, HISTORYThe 2012 LED conversion project implements the 2006 Master Plan policy statements. In the interim there have been lighting technology advances, revisions in standards and a new awareness of the impact of exterior lighting on human and environmental health as well as attention to dark skies initiatives. This plan updates Salt Lake City’s policies and standards to reflect these advances and changes. Table 1 provides a comparison of the 2006 Street Lighting Master Plan policy statements and revisions and additions to those policy statements recommended in this update to the Plan. TABLE 1 - PLAN POLICY STATEMENT COMPARISON 2006 TO 2020 2006 PLAN POLICY STATEMENT 2020 PLAN PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDED POLICY REVISIONS/ADDITIONS Salt Lake City lighting standards are based on IES recommendations Revise policy: Salt Lake City lighting standards are based on IES recommendations with allowances for adaptive standards that encourage dimming strategies relating to pedestrian activity, community engagement, wildlife and dark skies lighting. Lighting level and design will be upgraded to current standards as lights are replaced and new lights are installed No Change All newly installed utility lines shall be underground No Change When practical installation of underground conduit for utility lines shall be included in road reconstruction projects No Change Only dedicated publicly owned streets are eligible for street lighting funded by the City No Change (Possible future revision for public alleyways. Discussion with transportation and planning.) Placement of street light poles shall meet safety standards including lateral clearance requirements No Change Energy efficient lights shall be used for new and replacement lighting. Revise policy to balance energy efficiency with human/environmental health. Process to identify areas better suited to amber LEDs primarily for open space and wildlife. All new streetlights must meet, at a minimum, the “dark sky semi-cutoff” standard with the exception that all new “shoe box” or “cobra head” style streetlights must meet the “dark sky cutoff” standard. Provide street and pedestrian lighting that reduces the obtrusive effects of light at night, including light trespass that intrudes on private property, light pollution to preserve dark skies, and glare that reduces visibility and annoys drivers, pedestrians and residents. 15 SYSTEM BACKGROUND, HISTORY2006 PLAN POLICY STATEMENT 2020 PLAN PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDED POLICY REVISIONS/ADDITIONS Lighting appropriate for conditions shall insure uniform and safe lighting on major streets and commercial district streets No change to the policy. Standards relating to decorative poles and fixtures to be updated. Standards relating to private lighting standards in the Northwest Quadrant to be developed. Public input may be sought regarding fixture and pole type in commercial areas Additional public input may be sought to determine maximum and minimum light levels on residential collector and local streets for adaptive dimming application. Residential neighborhoods may adopt a decorative street light fixture and pole from the approved list on non-major streets in accordance with a neighborhood master plan No Change All new and replacement lighting shall be from the approved list developed by the City Transportation Engineer No change to the policy (except departmental designation.) Possible changes to the approved list. It is the policy of the Salt Lake City Transportation Department to support the use of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles in the design and operation of street lighting within Salt Lake City. No Change (except departmental designation) It is the policy of the Salt Lake City Transportation Department to support the use of banners on street light poles to enhance a sense of community and contribute to traffic calming. No Change (except departmental designation) It is the policy of the Salt Lake City Transportation Department to coordinate the location of new street lights with the Salt Lake City Forester and, in turn, coordinate on the planting of new trees such that both are compatible in providing desired benefits to the neighborhood. No Change (except departmental designation) Provide street and pedestrian lighting that minimizes impacts to sensitive wildlife species. Pedestrian scale lights (typically 12’ to 15’ mounting height) are on any streets where streetlighting alone does not effectively illuminate the sidewalk due to shadowing from trees, or the location of the sidewalk in relation to the street. Pedestrian scale lights on local residential streets to minimize light trespass and create more pedestrian friendly streets, and in commercial areas to encourage pedestrian usage. 16 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATION2006 STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN Salt Lake City last published a Street Lighting Master Plan in 2006. While most of the lighting principles and goals from 2006 are continued in this master plan, technical advancements in lighting equipment have allowed improvements to be made in the control and application of light. The 2006 Master Plan pushed the lighting in the city to be safer and more pedestrian friendly while minimizing light pollution and light trespass. It encouraged the use of decorative luminaires to match the character of the neighborhood or enhance downtown commercial districts. These principles of safety and character established in 2006 are guideposts to this Master Plan and will be continued in the lighting strategies and principles throughout the City. The new Master Plan is striving to create a more pedestrian centric city where auto-alternate solutions can be safer and more widely used. The new plan is still encouraging the use of decorative luminaire options in certain areas throughout the city but is requiring enhanced control of light to further minimize light pollution and light trespass. Since 2006 advances in LED technology have allowed for significant increases in control of light distribution and color. The new Master Plan takes advantage of these advances to recommend the best lighting solutions for each block based on adjacent land use, pedestrian volume, and environmentally sensitive areas. The new plan sets luminaire criteria for lumen output, distribution, and color temperature to ensure appropriate and effective lighting that aims to reduce light pollution and light trespass. Additionally, this master plan provides guidance on lighting controls to help the City establish a citywide wireless control network that will assist in more efficient management and control of streetlights. SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS Certain areas within the City have decorative lighting as a replacement or supplement to the baseline lighting as part of a Special Improvement District. In these residential or commercial areas, the property managers agree to pay the capital costs for new or replacement lighting plus 75% of the ongoing operating and maintenance costs. Special Improvement Districts include the Cactus Poles in the downtown commercial area and the pedestrian post top lights in the Rose Park Neighborhood. PRIVATE LIGHTING PROGRAM In 1995 Salt Lake City started the Private Lighting program, allowing residents to purchase, install and maintain streetlights on their blocks. The program is designed to allow the residents of Salt Lake to choose the poles and luminaires that are installed on their block while still ensuring sufficient lighting in the neighborhood. Each block is required to have at least six lights, including at least one at each intersection. Lights are owned by the residents and are connected to home of the owner with underground wiring. Residents can apply for a one-time grant from the city to help offset costs. Depending on funding, the grant can be up to $5,000 per block, but must be matched by the neighborhood, dollar for dollar. The City must approve all lighting equipment and will inspect all installations. CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATION 17 CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONEXISTING LIGHTING CONDITIONS PROCESS The Advisory and Technical Committees surveyed seventeen sites in different areas of the city. The sites were selected based on street type, arterial, collector, or residential, and on their surrounding environments in the city, industrial, commercial, transit or residential. The diversity of the sites provide an understanding of the lighting and environmental conditions found in different neighborhoods and along different transportation corridors throughout the city. Only streets, sidewalks and pedestrian paths in the Public Right of Way were evaluated. Privately owned lighting was not included. The survey asked participants about the street and sidewalk lighting conditions at each of the following seventeen sites. TABLE 2: STREET AND SIDEWALK LIGHTING CONDITIONS COUNCIL DISTRICT LOCATIONS LOCATION CLASSIFICATION COUNCIL DISTRICT Sterling Drive & American Beauty Drive Local/Residential 1 700 North & Riverside Park Arterial/Park 1 Redwood Road & South Temple Collector/Industrial 1 & 2 Boundary 700 South & Post Street Local/Residential 2 900 West & Dalton Avenue Arterial/Residential 2 Glendale Drive & Navajo St.Collector/Residential/ Commercial 2 J St. & 1st Avenue Local/Residential 3 800 East South Temple Arterial/Commercial 3 & 4 Boundary 200 South Floral Street Arterial/Commercial 4 650 South Main Street Arterial/Commercial 4 700 East Harrison Avenue Arterial/Residential 5 900 South & 900 East Arterial/Commercial 5 Layton Ave. & West Temple Local/Residential 5 1500 East & Yale Avenue Collector/Residential 6 1900 East & Sunnyside Arterial/Residential/Commercial 6 1400 East & Redondo Local/Residential 7 1000 East & 2100 South Arterial/Commercial 7 The survey included the following statements to which participants indicated their level of agreement by ranking their response between Strongly Agree and Strongly Disagree. • It would be safe to walk here alone during daylight hours. • It would be safe to walk here alone during darkness hours. • The light is uneven (patchy). • The light sources are glaring. • The lighting is poorly matched to the neighborhood. 18 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONTo supplement survey responses, High Dynamic Range photographs were taken and horizontal and vertical illuminance light measurements recorded for the sidewalks and luminance measurements taken along the roadway at each site. The measurements were compared to recommended levels in the IES Recommended Practice for Roadway Lighting (RP-8-18). Based on survey results, HDR photographic evidence and light measurements, the consulting team rated lighting at each site as Excellent, Acceptable, Moderate or Poor. Excellent rated lighting is sufficient and appropriate on the roadway, provides adequate vertical illumination to allow for object detection and facial recognition. Excellent lighting is relatively uniform, free of direct glare and properly illuminates the roadway and sidewalk. Acceptable rated lighting is comfortable. In some cases, such as residential areas, the light level might be lower than the IES Recommended Practice but the lack of glare and shadowing from surrounding landscaping, along with some surrounding surface brightness, creates a comfortable nighttime environment without light trespass. Moderate rated lighting does not provide enough light on the roadway or on the sidewalk. The color of the light may be inconsistent, and the presence of glare may result in an uncomfortable space. Some of these sites were shadowed due to trees, and lighting was not appropriately spaced. Poor rated lighting occurs when the luminaires are spaced too far apart to provide adequate light levels and uniformity or there are no luminaires on the street at all. These sites included residential areas without sufficient light, industrial sites and an arterial road where lights were malfunctioning. Of the 17 sites evaluated, three were excellent. Of the excellent sites one is a local residential street and two are arterial commercial streets. Six sites were ranked good. Of the good sites five are arterials, one adjacent to a park, one in a residential area, three in commercial areas, and one is a collector in a residential area. Four sites were moderate. Of the moderate sites two are local residential streets, one is a collector in a residential/commercial area, and one is an arterial in a residential/commercial area. Four sites were rated poor. Of the poor sites one is a collector in an industrial area, two are local residential areas and one is an arterial residential area. 19 CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONTable 3: Street and Sidewalk Existing Lighting Ratings SITE #CLASSIFICATION EXISTING LIGHTING RATING 1 Sterling Drive & American Beauty Drive Local/Residential Excellent 2 700 North & Riverside Park Arterial/Park Acceptable 3 Redwood Road & South Temple Collector/Industrial Poor 4 700 South & Post Street Local/Residential Poor 5 900 West & Dalton Avenue Arterial/Residential Acceptable 6 Glendale Drive & Navajo St.Collector/Residential/ Commercial Moderate 7 J St. & 1st Avenue Local/Residential Poor 8 800 East South Temple Arterial/Commercial Excellent 9 200 South Floral Street Arterial/Commercial Excellent 10 650 South Main Street Arterial/Commercial Acceptable 11 700 East Harrison Avenue Arterial/Residential Poor 12 900 South & 900 East Arterial/Commercial Acceptable 13 Layton Ave. & West Temple Local/Residential Moderate 14 1500 East & Yale Avenue Collector/Residential Acceptable 15 1900 East & Sunnyside Arterial/Residential/Commercial Moderate 16 1400 East & Redondo Local/Residential Moderate 17 1000 East & 2100 South Arterial/Commercial Acceptable The ratings provide an understanding of the variety of nighttime environments in different areas of the city and guided the development of improvement options. Each option focuses on improving light levels and uniformity, reducing glare, and enhancing wayfinding. The full report including site specific metrics can be found in Appendix C. CITY PLANNING GUIDANCE PLAN SALT LAKE In Plan Salt Lake adopted in 2015 the community identified 13 guiding principles. Although not always specifically mentioned, high quality street lighting can contribute to achievement of most of the guiding principles. Six of the principles can be directly affected through the implementation of quality street lighting: 1/Neighborhoods that provide a safe environment, opportunity for social interaction, and services needed for the wellbeing of the community therein. 4/A transportation and mobility network that is safe, accessible, reliable, affordable, and sustainable, providing real choices and connecting people with places. 6/Minimize our impact on the natural environment. 7/Protecting the natural environment while providing access and opportunities to recreate and enjoy nature. 20 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATION8/A beautiful city that is people focused. 13/A local government that is collaborative, responsive, and transparent. Plan Salt Lake includes specific initiatives to that mention street lighting to achieve the Guiding Principles. These include “Incorporate pedestrian oriented elements, including street trees, pedestrian scale lighting, signage, and embedded art, into our rights-of-way and transportation networks” as an initiative to create a safe mobility network. This is a critical initiative to achieve several other initiatives, including overall connectivity and safety in the public realm. Plan Salt Lake also includes an initiative to “promote and expand the city’s street lighting program throughout the City” as part of the beautiful city Guiding Principle. This is also a critical initiative to achieve several other initiatives, including reinforcing and preserving neighborhood and district character and providing a strong sense of place. In addition, implementation of this Street Lighting Master Plan to identify and address current gaps in service and upgrade overall lighting will contribute to the fulfillment of several other of the Guiding Principles. NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLANS Salt Lake City has completed eleven neighborhood master plans for the areas of the City represented on the map in Figure 2. Figure 2: Neighborhood Master Plans Map - 2017 21 CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONThe master plans date from the 1980s through 2017 with amendments and updates. Street lighting is mentioned in many of them as a tool to enhance community character and identify the City’s special lighting district program as a tool for implementation. Several of the plans also identify the installation of pedestrian level lighting as a community enhancement strategy. Some plans identified specific policies and implementation measures relating to street lighting as identified in the table below: TABLE 4: STREET LIGHTING POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS COMMUNITY ADOPTION GOAL OR POLICY STATEMENT ACTION OR IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS Avenues 1987 None • Streetscape “demonstration project” to illustrate use of streetscape, including street lighting, to improve the neighborhood. Capitol Hill 1999 Amended 2001 • Coordinate any new street lighting program in designated historic districts with the Historic Landmark Commission to ensure the design of the street lights are compatible with the historic character and comply with the historic district regulations. • Provide a consistent design theme and increase the amount of street lighting on 300 West and 400 West. • Analyze the feasibility and demand for increasing the amount of street lighting in areas of the Capitol Hill Community where needed and determine funding sources. • Develop and implement a consistent lighting and street furniture theme for the Capitol Hill neighborhood (north of North Temple). Central 2002 Amended 2006 • Relate right-of-way designs to land use patterns. • Ensure that public streets are maintained and improved throughout the Central Community • Encourage where appropriate rights- of-way that have landscaped street medians, landscaped park strips, street trees, on-street parking, pedestrian lighting, and furnishings such as major arterials. • Provide consistent neighborhood design themes for street lighting and ensure that street lighting is provided at a pedestrian scale. Coordinate street lighting in designated historic districts with the Historic Landmark Commission to ensure that compatible design and placement patterns are met. 22 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONDowntown 2016 • Make downtown a unique destination for visitors. • A complete pedestrian network that makes walking downtown safe, convenient and comfortable. • A public realm that is looked after 24/7. • A downtown known for its well-maintained public realm. • Maintain and refresh existing policies regarding sidewalk paving materials and street lighting in districts where these items have already been established in this plan or other plans such as the Street Lighting Master Plan. • Address pedestrian safety and comfort issues with regularly planted trees, shortened crossing distances, tighter curb radii, hawk or other pedestrian- activated signals, pedestrian lighting, and regularly spaced benches and seating. • Continue implementation of pedestrian lighting throughout downtown. • Maintain the city improvements such as street lights, seating, and paving. Westside 2014 • Create a more conducive environment for redevelopment at neighborhood nodes. • Street lighting should be emphasized at intersections and be scaled to the pedestrian level. 23 CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONEast Bench 2017 • Business Districts that Promote Neighborhood Identity • Improve the Street Rights-of- way to Create Beautiful and Safe Gateway Corridors • Dark Sky Friendly Lighting • Building features, such as height, placement and materials, as well as street improvements such as signage, landscaping, lighting, paving materials, and pedestrian crossings activate the individual business districts, create a distinct identity, create a sense of place, and help create a more pleasant auto- pedestrian interface. • Establishing a gateway should not stop at creating an entrance feature at the beginning of the street, but should carry through the entire length of the corridor with consistent design treatment, such as street lighting, street furniture, and pavement treatments that relate to the character of each gateway. • The East Bench is the interface between the natural and urban environment. As such the built environment within the community should respect the natural surroundings. One particular aspect of development that can impact both the natural and human environment is lighting. In an effort to minimize disruption to wildlife, impacts on adjacent property, and the community’s enjoyment of the night sky, lighting should: - Only be on when needed; - Only light the area that needs it; - Be no brighter than necessary; - Minimize blue light emissions; and - Be fully shielded and pointing downward. Northwest 1990 None None Northwest Quadrant 2016 • Promote the design of transportation corridors that support the natural landscape • North of I-80, provide a common Northwest Quadrant design theme for the public infrastructure, such as native landscaping, lighting, bridge design, signs, etc. • Use appropriate but minimal levels of lighting to keep sites darker near Natural Areas - Direct lights down and away from natural habitats. - Avoid tall street lights that may negatively impact wildlife habitat. - Use the minimum number of street lights necessary for safety. - Along trails, use lights that only light the trail and not wildlife habitat. • Street lighting should use poles and fixtures that are compatible with the natural environment. 24 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONIt’s clear from Salt Lake City’s adopted policy statements and implementation priorities in both citywide and community-level plans that pedestrian level street lighting is an important element for creating a sense of safety and community. LIGHTING LEVELS & GAPS Implementation of Salt Lake City’s current lighting policy, standards, and approach is illustrated in the streetlight density map in Figure 3. Key Lighting Strategies Heat Map SLC Boundary Streetlights Dense Sparse Each streetlight in the City is represented as a white dot on the map. The density of lighting generated is represented from gray and blue in the lowest light density areas to yellow in the highest light density areas. Not surprisingly, the highest density lighting occurs in Salt Lake’s commercial areas including downtown and the Sugar House business district and along arterials and other major highways. Lowest light density occurs in residential neighborhoods, parks, and industrial areas. Non-Salt Lake City Public Utilities lighting, including the interstate highways, at the University of Utah and at the Salt Lake International Airport, is not represented. Figure 3: Street Light Density Map 25 CURRENT SYSTEM EVALUATIONEVALUATION BY COMMUNITY / DISTRICT The approach to recommended street lighting improvements in this plan is influenced and informed by the street classification, adjacent land use, pedestrian levels, and specific situations found in each area of the City. Because past policies focused on street lighting for safety on the City’s roads, most areas of the city have lighting in compliance with IES and APWA road safety standards. As seen in the summary adopted master plan goals and implementation measures, many neighborhoods in the city would like to see additional pedestrian level lighting. Figure 4 is a map of the existing character districts in the City. Sugar House Wasatch Hollow Liberty Wells Glendale Central City/Liberty Wells Yalecrest Ballpark Central City DowntownPoplar Grove Fairpark Rose Park Capitol Hill Westpointe Greater Avenues SL International Airport East Liberty Wells East Central/Yalecrest East Central East Central/East Liberty Park Downtown/ Central 9th Ballpark/Central 9th East Central/University Gardens Federal Heights/Greater Avenues Residents, developers, and other interested parties can identify existing lighting location and type using the interactive map on the city’s website. The map provides the following information: • Location • Pole type • Luminaire type • Light source Figure 4: Community Character Map 26 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 27 PLAN GUIDEPOSTS PLAN GUIDEPOSTThe Advisory and Technical Committees developed a series of guideposts as a basis of evaluating street and pedestrian lighting characteristics. The four guideposts: • Safety • Character • Responsibility • Equity Lighting improvement strategies and characteristics were evaluated based on these guideposts. The safety, character and responsibility guideposts depend on the district in which the lighting is located and adjacent land uses. The equity guidepost underpins the entire plan and implementation strategy to encourage lighting improvements based on community need. The guideposts are intended to result in design decisions that contribute to safe and comfortable nighttime environments. The application of the guideposts and the design decisions they affect contribute to identifying lighting designs and approaches that best fit the needs of each project. SAFETY Appropriate street and pedestrian lighting improves safety by improving visibility for drivers, bikers, and pedestrians. Effective visibility in the nighttime environment depends more on the quality of light than the quantity. Higher light levels do not always result in better visibility. The qualities of light that achieve excellent visibility and therefore improve safety are: • Appropriate Light Level • Reduced Glare • Uniformity vs. Contrast • Adaptation • Color CHARACTER Salt Lake City’s existing street and pedestrian lighting is diverse with a variety of historic and industrial cobra-head style lights. Special Districts use street lighting to create distinct character and enhance the unique identity of the district. The characteristics of street and pedestrian lighting that can support and enhance the character of an area include: • Scale: Street Scale, Pedestrian Scale • Style: Luminaires, Mounting Brackets, Poles, Pole Bases, Additional Amenities • Appropriate Light Level • Glare • Color: Finish Color, and Color of Light Source RESPONSIBILITY Responsible implementation of street lighting includes minimizing potential negative effects of light intensity and spectrum on human and ecological health balanced with the responsible use of public funds. This is a complex challenge that includes many issues that sometimes require balancing opposing opinions and perspectives. This Master Plan references the 28 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1EXISTING CONDITIONSlatest research in the effects of light intensity and spectrum on visibility and human and ecological health in exterior nighttime environments. To implement the Responsibility guidepost the following issues are considered and balanced: • Light Trespass • Light Pollution • Health & Wellbeing • Impacts on Wildlife • Energy Use • Cost • Maintenance EQUITY The implementation of this Street Lighting Master Plan is intended to address issues related to street lighting in the most equitable way possible. The prioritization of street lighting funding will be an ongoing process within annual budget allocations. Recognizing that there are differing opinions throughout the City about the balance between the Guideposts and how to implement the Lighting Strategies in this master plan, particularly in residential neighborhoods, it is important that there is ongoing public engagement to determine the appropriate lighting strategies within each neighborhood. While some lighting strategies will be optional, there are some minimum requirements for lighting improvements to address safety needs in a consistent way throughout the Salt Lake City. • Ongoing Public Engagement • Prioritizing Areas Currently Underserved by Street Lighting 29 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWSTREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW SYSTEMWIDE CONSIDERATIONS HEALTH AND WELLBEING The natural daily cycle of light and dark is directly linked to the healthy sleep/wake cycles, also known as circadian rhythm. Light is the primary stimulus that triggers the suppression of melatonin in humans. Darkness at night is needed to allow the production of melatonin for healthy and complete sleep. Exposure to blue spectrum light after sunset can delay the nighttime production of melatonin. Controlling glare and light trespass and using light sources with warmer color reduces the exposure to blue spectrum content of LED for street, pedestrian, and area lighting. Warmer colors encourage healthy melatonin and sleep patterns for residents. It is also important to note that the current status of research related to light exposure at night and human health is still ongoing. According to the Lighting Research Center1 at typical street lighting levels, per IES RP-8-18, using LED light sources are “below the threshold for suppressing nocturnal melatonin (in humans) by light at night following a 30-minute exposure”. WILDLIFE IMPACTS Salt Lake City contains important wildlife habitat, from the foothills in the east to the open shore lands of the Great Salt Lake. Additional wildlife habitat is found along the north-south route of the Jordan River and along the four urban creeks extending west and south out of the foothills. Light at night can disrupt these wildlife habitats. Migratory species pass through the city itself, with nocturnally migratory birds attracted to the city lights. Controlling light pollution and light trespass, using only necessary lighting levels, and choosing an appropriate spectrum (color) of light for each area can protect these natural resources. Dimming lights during seasonal bird migrations is another wildlife-friendly approach. LIGHTING CHARACTERISTICS Each of the following characteristics represent considerations and decisions to be made in implementing street lighting in the various areas and neighborhoods of the city. Each characteristic is evaluated based on each of the guideposts. When one or more of the guideposts converge and coalesce around the characteristic, synergy is created. When the guideposts diverge decisions must be made to balance competing needs. Each characteristic is identified and described then evaluated based on four Guideposts. A comparative example of the characteristic is also included to enhance understanding of the concept. APPROPRIATE LIGHT LEVELS Appropriate light levels vary based on roadway classification, adjacent land use, pedestrian activity, and proximity to open space and wildlife habitat. The recommendations in the plan apply adaptive lighting criteria to the Illuminating Engineering Society’s Recommended Practice for Street and Roadway Lighting (IES RP-8-18) to allow for dimming during reduced pedestrian activity and the use of broad spectrum, white light sources, such as LED. Character, Safety and Equity converge around moderate light levels. • Using appropriate amounts of light increases nighttime visibility creating a safer and more comfortable environment. Figure 5: Appropriate Light Level 1 Rea MS, Smith A, Bierman A, Figueiro MG. 2012. The potential of outdoor lighting for stimulating the human circadian system. Alliance for Solid-State Illumination Systems and Technologies (ASSIST) 30 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW • The City is working to upgrade lighting to appropriate light levels based on locations with the greatest need. Appropriate light levels are balanced with environmental responsibility. • In environmentally sensitive areas, lower light levels are desired. The City will be installing more environmentally friendly luminaires with a lower CCT and better glare control Appropriate Light Levels: This photo demonstrates appropriate light levels for a commercial area with medi- um to high pedestrian usage, where moderate light levels provide excellent visibility through out the public streets and sidewalks. 31 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWGLARE REDUCTION Glare is caused by excessive or undesirable light entering the eye from a bright light source. Glare can result in discomfort, annoyance, and decreased visibility. There is the potential for direct glare when a light source is in direct view. The presence of direct glare depends on the intensity of the light source and contrast with the surrounding environment. With direct glare, the eye has a harder time seeing contrast and details. A lighting system designed solely on lighting levels aim more light at higher viewing angles, thus producing more potential for glare. Direct glare can be minimized with careful equipment selection as well as placement. Character, Safety, Equity, and Responsibility converge around reducing glare levels as it leads to more effective lighting and safer, more comfortable environments. Reducing glare: • Improves visibility on the roadways • Creates a more enjoyable nighttime environment • Reduces sky glow and light trespass, minimizing the obtrusive effects of light. Figure 6: Glare Reduction Lights that create glare can result in a range of negative effects for drivers, pedestrians and residents. From annoyance to reduced visibility, and may generate complaints from residents. Lights with low glare provide more comfortable streets and public spaces, providing lights, where it is needed without annoying nearby residents. 32 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWUNIFORMITY VS. CONTRAST Lighting uniformity refers to the evenness of light. Our eyes are continually adapting to the brightest object in our field of view. Any object lighted to 1/10 the level of the immediate surroundings appears noticeably darker. For roadway lighting, good uniformity indicates evenly lighted pavement. However, good visibility requires the contrast of an object against the background. An environment with perfectly uniform lighting provides low contrast, which can reduce visibility. To create enough contrast for good visibility, there should be a balance between uniform perception and having enough contrast to improve visual detection of objects on the road. Uniformity criteria are typically described as ratios of maximum to minimum and average to minimum luminance or Illuminance. Contrast is the difference between two adjacent luminance values. High contrast is necessary for good visibility. Differences in color also produce a visible contrast, even when both objects have similar luminance values, which support the benefits of using higher color rendering sources, as discussed below in the Color Rendering and Nighttime Visibility section. Character, Safety, Equity, and Responsibility converge around semi-uniform medium contrast lighting. This provides the proper balance of uniformity and contrast and is essential to quality lighting design. • Safety on the roadway is improved when street lighting properly strikes this balance, and subtle contrast can add character to an area with a unique lighting design. • When the proper balance of uniformity and contrast is achieved, the lighting is more effective at lower light levels reducing over lighting and light pollution. Figure 7: Uniformity Vs. Glare Color Contrast: In the photos above, the black- and-white image shows that the luminance of the flower and background are very similar. Only when the color is rendered does the color con- trast of the yellow flower make it highly visible next to its background. This demonstrates why street lighting with good color rendering can im- prove visibility of objects in a street, even at the same, or lower light levels. Further study on the effects of color contrast in street lighting appli- cations is needed to understand the improved visibility of broad spectrum light sources at light levels below current IES RP-8-18 recommenda- tions.2 2 Clanton N, Gibbons R, Garcia J, Mutmansky M. 2014. Seattle LED Adaptive Lighting Study. Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance Report #E14-286 33 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWADAPTATION Adaptation refers to the eye’s ability to adjust between changes in luminance. Our eye will automatically adjust to the brightest object in our field of view. Glare from headlights or fixed lighting can affect one’s ability to adapt to lower surface luminance. This is especially true as one ages. Another form of adaptation occurs when driving from a brightly lighted area to a non- lighted section of roadway. Here, the lighted area should slowly transition to darker to allow adaptation time. Off roadway brightness, such as driving past a brightly lighted gas station or LED sign, can also cause adaptation issues. While this Master Plan does not directly address lighting on private property, it is intended to set an example for future lighting guidelines that could apply these lighting strategies to all exterior lighting in Salt Lake City. Character, Safety, Equity, and Responsibility converge around low to medium levels of visual adaptation to improve visibility when transitioning from private parking lots and property into public streets. • When street lighting and adjacent private lighting is designed to appropriate light levels, the eye can maintain a proper degree of adaptation. When the eye is adapted to the existing light, it is more effective at detecting and identifying objects, increasing safety. Figure 8: Adaptation The privately owned lighting at this auto dealership are too bright and lack proper shielding creating high adaptation issues transitioning from the sales lot to the street. When roadways are illuminated to appropriate light levels with good control of light, the eye is able to adapt, increasing visibility and safety on the streets. 34 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWCOLOR RENDERING AND NIGHTTIME VISIBILITY The Color Rendering Index (CRI) is the standard metric used to evaluate how well a light source renders the true color of an object. CRI is measured on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 representing how an object would look under a reference incandescent light source. The higher the number, the better the color rendering capacity. Traditional High-Pressure Sodium (“HPS”) streetlights have a very low CRI of approximately 30, making color detection difficult. Today’s standard LED streetlights are not only significantly more energy efficient, they also have a much higher CRI, typically 65 or higher, increasing color detection, visual acuity, and overall effectiveness of the streetlights. LED lighting technology advancements allow streetlights to be tuned to a specific correlated color temperature (“CCT”) without drastically reducing the CRI. This technology can be used to reduce the color temperature in environmentally sensitive areas without significantly reducing the CRI, preserving the effectiveness of the lighting system. LED’s emit light across the visual spectrum, considered white light, which appears brighter at night. When traditional HPS lights are replaced with LED’s similar light levels often appear to be much brighter with LED lights. Residents may find the light to be obtrusive. When upgrading to LEDs in residential areas, it is essential to have a dimming system to respond to complaints from residents. Safety and character converge around using higher CRI of 65 or higher. Eliminating blue spectrum light with lower CRI is responsible in areas with critical wildlife habitat. • Using a higher CRI improves safety by increasing visual acuity and object detection, making the roads safer or vehicles and pedestrians. • Higher CRI improves character in the area by enhancing colors of landscaping and objects within the streetscape. • Within or adjacent to critical wildlife areas a luminaire with a lower CRI and CCT should be used to responsibly illuminate the area while also minimizing impacts on wildlife. This car is illuminated by two different light sources. On the left, an LED light, with high color rendering, clearly reveals the color and details of the car. On the right, a low pressure sodium light, with low color rendering, distorts the color of the car and details of the vehicle are not clear. Figure 9: Color Rendering 35 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWCOLOR TEMPERATURE AND NIGHTTIME VISIBILITY Appropriate Correlated Color Temperature (CCT) of streetlights is largely depends on the location of the lights within the city. Salt Lake City consists of diverse land uses, ranging from high density urban areas to environmentally sensitive lowlands and foothills. Street type and adjacent land use determine the appropriate color of light. There are opposing effects on how the spectrum of light at night affects visibility for Safety and human and environmental health for Responsibility. Limiting the CCT of light sources for the City to a maximum of 3000K, and then adjusting to warmer CCT in residential and wildlife habitats provides a balance between the guideposts. CCT should vary throughout the City to achieve comfortable, safe and responsible street and pedestrian lighting throughout the City. • High Density Urban Areas – 3000K CCT (max). Lighting in higher density urban areas should prioritize color rendering for color contrast and object detection on the roadway. This increases visibility for drivers and pedestrians. In urban areas light should have a CCT of 3000K. This CCT is considered a warm white light source, which improves visibility at night, but also minimizes the amount of light in the spectrum that can cause disruptions to the surrounding environment as well as human health. The American Medical Association and International Dark Sky Association both recommend a maximum CCT of 3000K. • Residential Areas – 2700K CCT (max). Visual acuity from white light sources is needed for pedestrian safety, but residents typically prefer a warmer color temperature in their neighborhood. The recommended color temperature for residential local and collector streets is 2700K. On arterial streets in residential areas, 3000K CCT should be used due to increased speeds. This range will provide the appropriate amount of white light to preserve object detection but will also allow a warmer, more comfortable color of light in neighborhoods. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas – 2200K CCT (max). There are varying types of environmentally sensitive areas within and along the perimeter of the city. Where streets pass through or adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas, very warm, phosphor- converted amber light sources with CCT of 2200K or lower, should minimize impacts of light on plants and animals in the area. Additional shielding of both back light and front light may also be required to further reduce light trespass into these sensitive areas. Figure 10: Color Temperature In the distance, the warm amber glow of low CCT (1800K) high pressure sodium street lights is shown in comparison to higher CCT (4000K) LED street lights in the foreground. 36 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWLIGHT TRESPASS Light trespass is defined as a stray light that crosses a property boundary. The most obtrusive form of light trespass is often caused by an excessively bright luminaire that is unshielded and distributes light into adjacent property. Uncontrolled, non-shielded light sources are usually the cause of light trespass. However, even a controlled, fully shielded luminaire may cause light trespass if not properly located or oriented. In cases where the location of a light standard cannot be changed, additional shielding may be necessary to prevent light trespass. Although designers should always strive to minimize light trespass, sometimes higher levels may be acceptable in downtown, commercial, and area adjacent to civic land uses. The following strategies will identify acceptable levels of light trespass to balance the design guideposts. • When designing in residential areas and environmentally sensitive areas, minimizing light trespass should be the highest priority. • When designing in downtown commercial or retail environments, pedestrian safety should prioritize increasing vertical light levels in crosswalks. • The character of a certain light may result in high levels of light trespass, but designers should strive to find luminaires that meet the character of the area while still maintaining zero uplight and minimizing light at angles known to be obtrusive. A pedestrian light with inappropriate light distribution and poor shielding creates a significant amount of light trespass on a nearby residence. Figure 11: Light Trespass A well shielded street light with appropriate light distribution provides adequate light for the street and sidewalk with minimal light spill beyond the sidewalk. 37 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWLIGHT POLLUTION Light pollution and sky glow are caused by light aimed directly up into the sky and by light reflected from the ground or objects. Any additional light will add to light pollution. However, it is the direct uplight component that does not contribute to useful street level visibility, and is the most objectionable form of pollution. Unshielded luminaires are major contributors to sky glow. Over lighting, even with fully shielded or U0 luminaires, reflects unnecessary light into the atmosphere and adds to sky glow. To minimize light pollution, first minimize the overall amount of light. Exterior lighting should be used only where and when it is needed. Define the lighting requirements of each street or public area and provide only the necessary lighting. Street and pedestrian lighting in residential areas should be dimmable and have house side shielding options to allow the City to proactively address specific complaints about light pollution or light trespass. All lighting in the city should be designed based on the criteria in this plan to reduce over lighting. In addition, lighting should be shielded and dimmable. The strategies to limit light pollution are similar to those identified for Light Trespass. • Lighting in environmentally sensitive areas should always prioritize minimizing light pollution by not over lighting and using luminaires with zero uplight and minimal light at high angles. • In areas of heavy pedestrian traffic, light at higher angles may be necessary to provide the vertical illuminance and positive contrast to safely light crosswalks with more light at higher angles. • Decorative luminaires can contribute more to sky glow, but designers can still install decorative luminaires with minimal uplight component that maintain the historic character of the area. The historic acorn style lights currently used on the Downtown “Cactus” pole distribute a significant amount of light upward, contributing to increased light pollution and sky glow. Figure 12: Light Pollution 38 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWCOSTS AND IMPLEMENTATION The implementation of this Street Lighting Master Plan will require additional investment in the lighting and electrical infrastructure throughout Salt Lake City and multiple years to install. To ensure the equitable distribution of street lighting improvement projects, this Master Plan recommends how the City prioritizes these projects and some changes in the funding mechanisms. The current funding strategy provides a base level of street lighting under the standard Public Utility Street Lighting Fee. To apply for additional pedestrian scale lighting under the Special Improvement Districts program, an additional fee is required to install pedestrian scale lighting in a specific neighborhood. This results in more affluent neighborhoods with more lighting than less affluent neighborhoods. The City should develop an alternative funding mechanism that provides more equitable distribution and access to pedestrian scale lights throughout the City, not just in areas that can afford the additional fees. INITIAL COSTS The initial investment in street and pedestrian lighting improvements will vary based on the strategy chosen to bring the current system into compliance with this plan. Comprehensive improvements, such as lighting redesign, will have the highest initial costs, whereas 1-for-1 replacements of existing luminaires will have lower initial costs. In many areas the 1-for-1 replacement strategy will achieve plan purposes. Other areas require more comprehensive improvements, such as relocation of poles or installation of new lighting. Costs included design and engineering costs (Design & Construction Documents, Utility Surveying), lighting equipment costs (Luminaires, Poles, Lighting Controls), and infrastructure costs (Foundations, Conduit & Wire, Surface Replacement). The public engagement process identified that increasing the use of pedestrian scale lighting is a community-wide high priority. Prioritization of pedestrian scale lighting upgrades include: • Lighting upgrades and additional pedestrian lighting in currently underlit areas. • Strategic placement and appropriate light levels will minimize power consumption and eliminate unnecessary equipment. • Lighting upgrades and new projects in areas identified as critical wildlife habitats using proper equipment and lighting levels. LONG TERM LIFE CYCLE COSTS • Changing to LED lighting will drastically reduce the life cycle and operating costs of the street lighting system. LED lighting requires significantly less power than legacy sources, such as high-pressure sodium, reducing the life cycle energy costs of the system. With a lifespan of up to 100,000 hours, LEDs need to be replaced significantly less often than legacy luminaires, reducing maintenance costs. • Energy Costs (Luminaire Watts, Dimming, Part-Night Lighting, Annual kWh baseline, Annual kWh projected) • Maintenance Costs (Minimizing Lighting Equipment SKUs, Equipment Life) Figure 13: Initial Costs: Guidepost Synergy & Balance 39 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWMAINTENANCE • Proper maintenance is critical for the effectiveness of the lighting design. LEDs are known for their durability, longevity, and consistency in lighting, but quality components are essential to ensure this. The LED electronic driver will fail first if a low-quality luminaire is purchased. Planning and budgeting for high-quality luminaires ensures a longer lifespan with much less required maintenance. • Another aspect of maintenance involves the dirt and dust that can accumulate inside or on the outside lenses of luminaires. Because street lighting will rarely, if ever, be cleaned, luminaires must have adequate ingress protection (IP) against dust and water. Requiring the use of street and pedestrian luminaires with a minimum rating of IP65 means that the luminaire is dust-tight and watertight. ENERGY Reducing energy use in Salt Lake City can be achieved by using energy efficient LED light sources, providing appropriate light levels without over-lighting, and reducing light levels after a curfew by dimming or turning off non- essential lighting. Reduction in Energy use for street and pedestrian lighting is consistent with the guideposts as transitioning all lighting to LED significantly reducing the amount of energy that will be used. • The City is striving to reduce over lighting by installing a control system to allow for dimming and further reduction of lighting, adding to the energy savings. • In more environmentally sensitive areas, this master plan requires phosphor converted amber LEDs with additional shielding. Although these do not use as much energy as legacy light sources, they are still not as efficient as broad spectrum white LEDs. These lights will be used to reduce the adverse effects of lighting on the wildlife in ecologically sensitive areas. STANDARDIZATION Salt Lake City has a very diverse street and pedestrian lighting system that utilizes historic decorative lights of various types and provides distinct character to different districts within the City. Providing variety of character requires Public Utilities to stock more components to service and maintain the lighting system. While this Street Lighting Master Plan establishes Character as one of its Guideposts, this must also consider the balance with Responsibility to minimize costs and inventory for Public Utilities to manage and maintain the street and pedestrian lighting system within their budget. To strike this balance between Character and Responsibility, this Street Lighting Master Plan intends to provide some variety of options within a set of Standardized Components. • Luminaire Styles • Pole Styles • Armature Styles • Base Styles • Color Options Figure 14: Energy 40 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 STREET LIGHTING PLAN LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES PURPOSE There are several strategies the city can use to implement this Street Lighting Master Plan and improve the quality of street and pedestrian lighting. Each of the strategies will result in a safe environment for drivers and pedestrians while using equipment that minimizes light pollution and light trespass. The plan recommends that the city utilize each of the strategies as appropriate for the specific current streetlighting configuration, road classification, pedestrian volume adjacent land use, neighborhood or districts character and the presence of environmentally sensitive wildlife areas. In addition, each strategy should be discussed through a neighborhood engagement process and reviewed to ensure an optimal balance of the four guideposts is achieved. LIGHTING LAYOUT STRATEGIES Volume II – Technical Lighting Development Guide of this Master Plan provides a matrix by which the appropriate strategy should be identified using street types and warrants. The matrix is applied on a block by block basis to ensure the most appropriate lighting for each area. Figure 15 is a snapshot of the Salt Lake City Lighting Warrants matrix described in more detail in Volume II.STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW 41 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWPEDExisting ConditionsStreet Lighting Ped LightingPEDExisting ConditionsStreet Lighting Ped LightingPEDExisting ConditionsStreet Lighting Ped LightingSidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousORContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousORContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&ContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&ContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.&ContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousORContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont. ORContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.ORContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont.NASidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont.NASidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyORNon-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.NASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.NASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyORNon-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont.NASidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont.NASidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyORNon-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.NASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.NASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyORNon-cont.Cactus PolesCactus PolesCactus PolesSidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousORContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousORContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&ContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&ContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.&ContinuousCactus PolesCactus PolesCactus PolesSidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousORContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont. ORContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.ORContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. Only&ContinuousSidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuous&Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. Only&ContinuousSidewalk Lit By StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont.ORNon-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyOptionalNon-Cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightContinuousOptional Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. Only&Non-cont.Sidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyOptionalNon-cont.Sidewalk Lit By StreetlightNon-Cont.NASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightNon-cont.NASidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk Lit By StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyNASidewalk NOT Lit by StreetlightInt. OnlyNAOffice ParkOffice ParkOffice ParkLowLowLowLowLowCommercialHigh CommercialHigh CommercialHigh MedMedMedSLC Lighting WarrantsArterial StreetCollectorLocalLowMedMedMultifamily ResidentialLowHigh DowntownMedLowLowMedMedMedLowLowLowSingle Family ResidentialOpen SpaceNANAMultifamily ResidentialSingle Family ResidentialOpen SpaceMultifamily ResidentialSingle Family ResidentialOpen SpaceMedLowIndustrialIndustrialIndustrialHigh High MedMedContinuous Cactus Pole LightingContinuous Cactus Pole LightingLowLowDowntownContinuous Cactus Pole LightingContinuous Cactus Pole LightingContinuous Cactus Pole LightingContinuous Cactus Pole LightingDowntownFigure 15 - Street Lighting Warrants Matrix 42 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWThis section summarizes the strategies identified in the matrix. STREET LIGHTING ONLY PURPOSE • Quality street lighting must consider the entire context of the streetscape environment, extending beyond the street itself to provide quality light for sidewalks while controlling obtrusive light trespass, glare and light pollution. • Street trees with large canopies and thick foliage are integral to the character of Salt Lake City’s streets and public realm. Street Lighting Only can be a successful strategy in areas that have smaller and fewer trees but may result shadowing sidewalks on streets with large trees. • The wide streets and right-of-way in Salt Lake City provide opportunities on many streets to have a very wide Park Strip that separates the sidewalk from the street. The width of the Park Strip also affects the ability of Street Lighting Only to effectively illuminate the sidewalks. Figure 16: Street Lighting Only Cross Section 43 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWSTREET AND PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING • A combination of Street and Pedestrian Lighting is used in areas of high pedestrian activity, and on streets with street trees that create shadowing, or with wide Park Strips where Street Light Only is ineffective at illuminating the sidewalks. This will support a safer and more visually comfortable pedestrian environment. Figure 17: Street & Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section 44 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWPEDESTRIAN LIGHTING ONLY • Pedestrian lighting helps differentiate an area as pedestrian centric and is a visual cue for drivers to be more aware of people in the public right of way. • Pedestrian lighting in residential areas reduces light trespass into homes, and the character of the lights can differentiate neighborhoods throughout the city. • In downtown environments, pedestrian lighting identifies restaurants, retail and other pedestrian centric areas, creating a more inviting and safer place for people walking the city. • When using this Pedestrian Lighting Only strategy, street lights should still be located at intersections. Figure 18: Pedestrian Only Lighting Cross Section 45 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWSPECIAL LIGHTING DISTRICTS • There is a rich history of street lighting in Salt Lake City that has established Special Lighting Districts with unique street lighting character. Areas like Downtown and Sugarhouse District have unique historic street lighting that with a combination of both street and pedestrian lights mounted on the same light pole. As Salt Lake City evolves, new Special Lighting Districts may be desired to create and enhance a unique sense of place. Any new Special Lighting Districts must be coordinated with Salt Lake City to determine the ownership and maintenance agreements, and must follow the lighting strategies and lighting criteria established in this Street Lighting Master Plan. Figure 19: Cactus Lights Cross Section 46 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWINTERSECTION LIGHTING • Proper lighting at intersections is critical for vehicle and pedestrian safety throughout the entire city. • Intersection lighting is the minimum standard throughout the city. • Intersection lighting encompasses the roadway after the stop bar as well as any painted crosswalks. • See Intersection & Crosswalk Lighting for layout and spacing criteria. Figure 20: Intersection Lighting Plan 47 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWVERTICAL ILLUMINATION IN CROSSWALKS • Proper crosswalk lighting in high traffic areas, commercial corridors, will support a safer and more pedestrian friendly city. • Lighting in the vertical plane will increase visibility in crosswalks and help to reduce vehicle- pedestrian accidents. • See Intersection & Crosswalk Lighting for layout and spacing criteria. Figure 21: Crosswalk Lighting 48 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 BUS STOP • Uncovered bus stops should be lit by a street luminaire positioned 1/2 to 1 mounting height from the bus stop in the direction of oncoming traffic. • Bus shelters with integrated lights should provide vertical illumination to aid in facial recognition. Street lights in close proximity increase ambient light and visual comfort. • See Volume 2 for additional information. ENVIRONMENTALLY PROTECTED AREAS The Salt Lake Valley is not only home to a bustling urban city but is also home to diverse and vulnerable wildlife populations and sensitive Dark Sky Areas. Salt Lake City recognizes the impacts that street lighting can have on these sensitive areas and wants to minimize the negative effects of street lighting at night. The map below highlights environmentally sensitive areas where the following lighting characteristics should be used: • Color Temperature (CCT) no higher than 2200K, • All lights should have increase backlight control to reduce the amount of spill light • All lights should have zero uplight. To read more on the impacts of light at night within the Salt Lake Valley, reference Appendix D: Nocturnal Infrastructure for Ecological Health. IMPLEMENTATION OF UPGRADED LIGHTING When deciding which Lighting Layout Strategy to use at various locations throughout the city, the adjacent land use is a critical factor in determining nighttime pedestrian activity. Although there are many different zoning designations in Salt Lake City, this master plan consolidates land uses into seven different categories: Commercial, Office Park, Downtown, Industrial, Multi-Family Residential, Single Family Residential, and Open Space. The different adjacent land uses throughout the city and more information on determining adjacent land use can be found in Volume 2. Each adjacent land use has different primary considerations that determine lighting strategy and criteria. The most critical of these considerations is pedestrian and vehicle volume during nighttime hours. Areas of higher volume at night, such as Downtown and Commercial, require additional lighting, whereas industrial areas do not see the same traffic volumes during dark hours. This Master Plan also strives to be environmentally responsible, and balances vehicle and pedestrian safety with environmentally protective actions based on adjacent land use. The table below shows the main considerations, environmentally protective actions, max CCT, and lighting strategies for each adjacent land use. STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW 49 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWTABLE 5: LIGHTING LAYOUT STRATEGY BY LAND USE ADJACENT LAND USE MAIN CONSIDERATIONS ENVIRONMENTALLY PROTECTIVE ACTIONS MAX CCT*LIGHTING STRATEGIES Commercial • Diverse Land Use with High, Medium, and Low Pedestrian and Vehicle Activity During Night Hours • Adaptive Dimming • 3000K • All Lighting Strategies Possible to Safely and Appropriately Light the Streets and Sidewalks. Office Park • Low Pedestrian Conflict at Night • Overlap with Environmentally Protected Areas • Lower CCT • Adaptive Dimming • 3000K • Non-Continuous Street Lighting • Possible Non- Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Downtown • High and Medium Pedestrian and Vehicle Activity During Night Hours • Historic Character using Cactus Pole Lights • Adaptive Dimming • 3000K • Continuous Street and Pedestrian Lighting Industrial • Low Pedestrian Conflict at Night • Environmental Concerns • Lower CCT • Adaptive Dimming • 2200K • Street Lighting at Intersections Only Multifamily Residential • Pedestrian Safety • Representing the Character of the Area • Minimizing Light Trespass • Controlling Spectrum • Adaptive Dimming • 3000K (Arterial) • 2700K (Collector/ Local) • Continuous and Non-Continuous Street Lighting • Continuous and Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Single Family • Pedestrian Safety • Representing the Character of the Area • Minimizing Light Trespass • Controlling Spectrum • Adaptive Dimming • 3000K (Arterial) • 2700K (Collector Local) • Continuous and Non-Continuous Street Lighting • Continuous and Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Open Space • Environmental Concerns • Minimizing Light Trespass • Controlling Spectrum • Adaptive Dimming • 2200K • Non-Continuous Street Lighting • Street Lighting at Intersections Only *Max CCT to be 2000K in Environmentally Sensitive Areas. 50 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWSTREET LIGHTING EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY When future improvements are made to the lighting throughout Salt Lake City, the lighting equipment selected should reflect the principles established by the Guideposts of Safety, Character and Responsibility. New equipment should match or enhance the character of the area, while also safely and responsible lighting the area. This Street Lighting Master Plan places an increased priority on responsible lighting by using luminaires that reduce wasted light to sky glow and light trespass, and have the highest levels of energy efficiency. Future luminaires installed in the city will all be fully shielded LED lights with no light directed upward from the light source, understanding that there is a minimal allowance for reflected uplight from post-top style luminaires. As existing luminaires are upgraded to LED and new projects are constructed, the City will become a safer place for pedestrians and commuters. New pedestrian lighting will better illuminate sidewalks and crosswalks, while all new lights will reduce glare and improve nighttime visibility. As these upgrades are being made to safer and more responsible luminaires, the character of the new lights should also match the character of the area. The lighting equipment installed at a particular site will depend on the character of the site and the adjacent land use. Precedent character, such as Downtown Cactus Poles or Sugarhouse Teardrop luminaires, will be upgraded to similar style of luminaire that reduces uplight and light trespass onto adjacent private property. 51 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWLuminaires (Style, Finish Color, Lumens, Distribution, CCT, CRI, BUG Rating, Shielding, Dimming Driver (0-10V, DALI), ANSI 7-Pin Receptacle, Integral Wireless Dimming Node) Light Standards (Pole, Arms, Base, Finish Color, Banner Arms, Holiday Receptacles, Planter Arms, Traffic Signs, ANSI 7-Pin Receptacle (alt location)) Lighting Controls (Adaptive Dimming, Maintenance Reporting, Asset Management) Smart City Devices (4G/5G Small Cell, Security Cameras, Air Quality Sensors, Smart Parking, Speakers, Gun Shot Detection, EV Charging Stations, Traffic Monitoring, Noise Monitoring TABLE 6: RECOMMENDED LUMINARIES BY LAND USE CACTUS POLE TEAR DROP COBRA HEAD PEDESTRIAN ACORN PEDESTRIAN ARM MOUNT ADJACENT LAND USE Commercial N/A S. Temple State Street Sugarhouse BD Base Level N/A Non-Continuous or N/A Office Park N/A N/A Base Level N/A Non-Continuous Downtown Downtown Historic S. Temple State Street Sugarhouse BD Base Level N/A Continuous or Non-Continuous Industrial N/A N/A Base Level N/A N/A Multi-Family Residential N/A N/A Intersection & Mid- Block or Intersection Only Rose Park Continuous or Non-Continuous Single Family Residential N/A N/A Intersection & Mid- Block or Intersection Only Rose Park Continuous or Non-Continuous Open Space N/A N/A Intersection & Mid- Block or Intersection Only N/A N/A 52 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS COMPLEXITY & COST Throughout Salt Lake City, there are various existing lighting conditions, which results in lighting improvement projects with different levels of complexity and cost that range from minimal improvements, such as 1-for-1 replacements, to comprehensive improvements, such as complete lighting redesign. The complexity and cost to improve the lighting in certain areas will depend on the existing lighting conditions, location within the city, and the need for improved lighting. The City should evaluate each site and determine which level of improvements need to be made. MINIMAL: 1-FOR-1 REPLACEMENTS The most cost effective and quickest way to improve the lighting is 1-for-1 replacements. Salt Lake City has already begun the process for upgrading old HPS lights to new LEDs. This should be and has been implemented in areas that already have acceptable existing lighting layouts and where street lighting sufficiently illuminates the roadway and adjacent sidewalks. 1-for-1 replacements from HPS to LED will lead to lower life cycle costs through reduced energy and maintenance. When upgrading to LED luminaires, adjacent land use must be considered. 1-for-1 replacement luminaires should reflect the character of the area, while also maintaining consistent light levels and color temperature appropriate to the site. SUPPLEMENTAL: Additional street and pedestrian lighting may be required where the existing lighting layout does not sufficiently light the street or sidewalk. Additional street lighting may be needed if existing lights are spaced too far apart to uniformly light the roadway, or if there is no street lighting at all. Additional pedestrian lights may be needed when there is a large park strip between the sidewalk and the streetlights, where there is excessive shadowing from trees, or in areas where pedestrian lights are desired. See Volume 2 on recommendations on additional pedestrian lighting. COMPREHENSIVE: Comprehensive improvements to the current conditions call for complete lighting redesign. This should be considered in areas of the City where lighting redesign is required to meet requirements in the Lighting Warrants Table. Comprehensive improvements will need to be done on streets where new continuous or non-continuous street or pedestrian lighting is required. Streets without any lighting will also require comprehensive improvements and should comply with the lighting requirements in the lighting warrants table. PRIORITIZING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS Evaluating where lighting improvements should be made, and which projects should be prioritized can be a difficult process. The purpose of this section is to help provide guidance when deciding where and when lighting improvements should be made. Areas that are currently underserved by the existing lighting and are adjacent to “High Priority Conflict Zones” should be the first to be upgraded. The more “High Priority Conflict Zones” that an underserved area is adjacent to, the higher priority it should be to improve the lighting. If an underserved area is not adjacent to any “High Priority Conflict Zones” the City should get public opinion from residents in the neighborhood to determine is upgraded or additional lighting is desired. STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW 53 AREAS UNDERSERVED BY STREET LIGHTING As seen in the lighting density map in Figure 3 on page 24, there are neighborhoods and areas of the city currently underserved by street lighting. Public outreach is required in these areas to identify neighborhood interest in upgrading lighting in these areas, particularly for pedestrians. Neighborhood outreach will allow interested residents to review the options identified in the lighting matrix and make an informed decision for their area. HIGH PRIORITY CONFLICT AREAS High Priority Conflict Areas are locations throughout the city where there is typically increased pedestrian or bicycle activity. If a location underserved by the existing lighting and is near a High Priority Conflict Area(s), that site should be prioritized. Maps showing these areas are shown below. A site with more High Priority Conflict Areas should become a priority area for implementation. School Zones Streets within a one-block radius of all schools within the Salt Lake Valley should be lighted according to the appropriate adjacent land use and increased pedestrian conflict level as a result of being close to a school. If a school falls within a neighborhood where minimum lighting is desired by residents, additional lighting for pedestrian safety should be installed. Lighting near school zones should ensure that crosswalks are sufficiently lighted as well as all entrances and exits to the campus. 0 1 20.5 MilesSchool Overlay Key Lighting Strategies Heat Map SLC Boundary Schools Streetlights Dense Sparse STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWFigure 22: School Locations 54 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Bus Stops Lighting near bus stops should also be prioritized within the city. If a bus stop is not already sufficiently lighted, placing one light on the approach side of an uncovered bus stop one half to one mounting height is required. See Volume 2 for more information on covered and uncovered bus stops. 1 Mile I-215 I-15 I-80 I-80 700 E.STATE ST.FOOTHILL SOUTH TEMPLE REDWOODRD.5600 W.2100 S. 400 S. ¯STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWFigure 23: Bus Stops 55 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWTransit Stations Transit stations within the Salt Lake Valley are lighted by UTA and are not within the jurisdiction on Salt Lake City. However, these transit stations result in higher pedestrian and vehicle traffic volume on adjacent streets. Adjacent streets should be lighted according to the appropriate adjacent land use and the increased pedestrian volume as a result of being close to a transit station. ¯1 Mile I-15 I-80 I-80 Transit Stops Commuter Rail Stations Commuter Rail Light Rail Stations Light Rail I-215 I-80 700 E.STATE ST.FOOTHILL SOUTH TEMPLE REDWOODRD.5600 W.2100 S. 400 S. Figure 24: Transit Station Locations 56 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWNeighborhood Byways Salt Lake City is working on encouraging more biking and walking in the City by creating pedestrian centric streets called neighborhood byways. The streets should be continuous lighting with pedestrian lights to help encourage more pedestrian travel. ¯1 Miles I-215 I-15 I-80 I-80 700 E.STATE ST.FOOTHILL SOUTH TEMPLE REDWOODRD.5600 W.2100 S. 400 S. Figure 25: Neighborhood Byways Locations 57 STREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEWPRIORITIZING 1-FOR-1 LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS For areas where current street lighting is adequate in terms of pole type and head placement and type, one-for-one replacements from HPS to LEDs is the appropriate response to improve light quality and achieve energy savings. The City is currently working toward upgrading all street lights to LED, but should prioritize locations with existing HPS lights, are well as locations where LED lights are glaring or obtrusive. Streets with Existing High-Pressure Sodium Street Lights The City should prioritize upgrading existing HPS lights to new LEDs with increased glare control and dimming capabilities. More information on selecting the proper replacement luminaire can be found in Volume 2. Reduce Glare and Light Trespass Some LED lights within Salt Lake City are too bright and can cause glare and light trespass. These lights should be replaced with new LEDs that have better glare control and are compatible with the City’s lighting control system. Additionally, some LEDs within the city have a higher color temperature than 3000K and should be replaced by a luminaire with appropriate CCT based on adjacent land use. Reduce Light Pollution from Existing Decorative Lights Converting the existing Cactus Pole lights to LED lights with “U0” uplight rating will significantly reduce the amount of sky glow and light pollution around Salt Lake City. EXISTING CACTUS POLE LIGHTS UPGRADED CACTUS POLE LIGHTS 58 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 DESCRIPTION OF VOLUME 2: TECHNICAL LIGHTING DEVELOPMENT GUIDESTREET LIGHTING BASICS OVERVIEW 59 LLiigghhtt TTeerrmmss aanndd DDeeffiinniittiioonn The following terms are used throughout this Master Plan and in the lighting industry. Understanding these terms is essential to properly understanding and implementing this Lighting Master Plan. LLiigghhttiinngg TTeerrmm UUnniitt DDeeffiinniittiioonn Backlight, Uplight, and Glare (BUG) Ratings B0 – B5 U0 – U5 G0 – G5 Luminaire Classification System for Outdoor Luminaires per IES TM-15 describing the amount of uplight, backlight and glare. Lower numbers in each classification are associated with lower impacts. • BB == bbaacckklliigghhtt, or the light directed behind the luminaire. • UU == uupplliigghhtt, or the light directed above the horizontal plane of the luminaire. • GG == ggllaarree, or the amount of light emitted from the luminaire at angles known to cause glare. Color Rendering Index (CRI) 0 - 100 The color rendering index (CRI) is a developed metric on a scale of 0 to 100, to communicate the ability of the light to render an object’s natural color Continuous Lighting A street lighting system made up of regularly spaced luminaires along the street. Criteria typically defines minimum and maximum illuminance or luminance values and overall uniformity along the lighted area. Correlated Color Temperature (CCT) Kelvin (K) The color appearance of the light emitted by a lamp. The CCT rating for a lamp is a general "warmth" or "coolness" measure of its appearance. Fire has a CCT of 1850K and daylight is 6000K. Glare The visual sensation created by luminance (or brightness) that is significantly higher than the surrounding luminance that the eyes are adapted to, causing annoyance, discomfort, or loss in visual performance and visibility (disability glare). Illuminance Footcandle (Fc) The density of light (lumens per square foot) falling onto a surface. Commonly measured in the horizontal and vertical planes. Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) The IES strives to improve the lighted environment by publishing recommended practices to guide lighting designers, architects, engineers, sales professionals, and researchers. The IES’s The Lighting Handbook and Recommended Practices are the recognized authoritative reference on the science and application of lighting. Legacy Light Source All non-LED light sources: incandescent, halogen, high pressure sodium, low pressure sodium, induction, and fluorescent. Life Cycle Cost An economic analysis of an investment that covers all the costs and benefits over the expected life of the equipment or system. Unlike a simple payback analysis, it accounts for maintenance and energy even after the system is paid for with projected savings. APPENDIX A 60 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 61 DRAFT SURVEY 9/5/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SURVEY QUESTIONS: 1. Place pin on map in general location of where you live or work. o Provide map with pin location ability 2. Does the street lighting around this location allow you to feel safe while walking outside during dark hours of the day? (Mark One) o Yes o No 3. If the pin located reflects where you live, does the current street lighting interfere with your sleeping habits? (Mark One) o Yes o No o N/A (Pin does not reflect location of my home) 4. What is your impression of the light level on the street you live on? (the response will change the color of the pin) o Comfortable (pin color: green) o Too Dark (pin color: blue) o Too Bright (pin color: red) 5. Do you like the color of the light source? o Yes o No 6. Does the light source create too much glare? o Yes o No 7. Please provide any additional comments: o Write in additional comments APPENDIX B 62 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1APPENDIX B AGENDA PROJECT #: 2018.075 MEETING #: 2 PROJECT: SLC Street Lighting Master Plan NEXT MEETING: Tentative: Sept 19, 2018 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2018 ISSUED BY: L. Smith | GSBS Architects Revised post meeting ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ATTENDEES: X Jesse Allen X Brad Stewart X Lauren Smith Jesse Stewart Christine Richmond X Dane Sanders X Riley Rose X Jason Brown X David Pearson AGENDA ITEMS: 1. Review Public Outreach Strategy o Advisory Committee Members ▪ District 1 Citizen Representative (identified by District Representative) ▪ District 2 Citizen Representative (identified by District Representative) ▪ District 3 Citizen Representative (identified by District Representative) ▪ District 4 Citizen Representative (identified by District Representative) ▪ District 5 Citizen Representative (identified by District Representative) ▪ District 6 Citizen Representative (identified by District Representative) ▪ District 7 Citizen Representative (identified by District Representative) ▪ Mayor’s Office Representative ▪ Public Utilities Representative o Technical Committee Members ▪ SLC Engineering, Sean Fyfe ▪ SLC Transportation, Jon Larsen ▪ SLC Planning, Doug Dansie ▪ SLC Planning, Molly Robinson ▪ SLC Parks + Public Lands, Nancy Monteith ▪ SLC Fire ▪ SLC Police o Stakeholder Groups (Individual Groups + representatives representing each group) Draft List ▪ Downtown Alliance + Business Districts (9th and 9th, Sugarhouse) ▪ Environmental (Dark Sky, Tracy Aviary, Audubon) ▪ Multi-modal (UTA, Bicycle Transit) ▪ School District ▪ Inland Port, NW Quadrant o Draft Public Survey ▪ See Attachment ‘DRAFT SURVEY’ 63 2. Review Proposed Project Schedule o See Attachment 3. Status of Contract o Updates 4. Next Steps o SLC Public Utilities to review pass along revised Draft Survey for review o GSBS and Clanton to review and revise scope and fee – get to Public Utilities early next week o Brad to send GSBS and Clanton contact for Open City Hall to work together on upload process and capabilities of public survey OTHER INFORMATION: APPENDIX B 64 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1APPENDIX B MEETING NOTES PROJECT #: 2018.075 MEETING #: 9 PROJECT: SLC Street Lighting Master Plan NEXT MEETING: TBD MEETING DATE: April 26, 2019 ISSUED BY: L. Smith | GSBS Architects ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These notes represent the general understanding of the author concerning the topics covered. If there are errors or misrepresentations, please inform the author in writing and adjustments will be made with the next issuance of notes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ATTENDEES: X Jesse Allen, GSBS Architects Laura Briefer, Public Utilities X Lauren Smith, GSBS Architects Holley Mullen, Public Utilities X Dane Sanders, Clanton and Associates X Katie, Clanton and Associates X Riley Rose, Clanton and Associates X Technical Committee X David Pearson, Public Utilities X Annette, Planning X Jesse Stewart, Public Utilities X Cooper, Police Brad Stewart, Public Utilities X Ron Fife, Fire Department X Jack, SLC Engineering X Peter, Sustainability NEW BUSINESS: 1. Goal: o How to spend the budget within ▪ The next 5-10 years ▪ What is needed to budget and how to prioritize 2. Planning (Annette filling in for Mayara) o Design and color of the streetlights fit within the neighborhood • Historic Districts • Rose Park • Poplar Grove o Color meaning: the LED color temperature and the color of the poles/luminaries o Day time aesthetics ▪ No planning master plans include streetlights currently ▪ Need to double check to make sure if there is any overlap o Conflict between districts if they do not get the same thing? ▪ Historic districts are treated completely differently than others ▪ Guidelines for street lighting in historic districts o Have the street lighting master plan acknowledge the design guidelines o Review the historic districts and guidelines o Other districts: ▪ Downtown district o Districts vs. neighborhoods ▪ Rose park and poplar grove are known for their street trees ▪ These should be on the website ▪ Maybe already in GIS o Make sure to get those layers in GIS 3. Engineering o What existing programmatic controls does the city have that protect the existing streetlight utility/ power supply? o As more lights get installed, what can be done to make sure that the power supply is protected? o Subsurface in the right of way is getting really crowded 65 APPENDIX Bo Currently the lines are not in Blue Stake o Is it practical/room for improvement on location of lines? o As time/budget allows, possibility to move the lines into blue stake ▪ This would keep survey crews busy for about 2 years ▪ This would lie more in implementation vs. master plan ▪ Important to note in recommendations of how to move forward 4. Sustainability o Energy 2040 ▪ 80% reduction in our Green House Gases by 2040 (community wide for the whole city) ▪ 50% renewable energy goal by 2020 ▪ Baseline is 2009 o Updating Climate response plans o Solar Street Light just received ▪ On a cul-de-sac off 2700 S testing o Solar Roadways ▪ Lot of progress in Europe and a company in Idaho o Slowed wholesale replacements until this master plan is complete ▪ Replacing as needed but not overhaul now o What % of the City’s energy does Street light make up? o Strategies: ▪ LED obvious ▪ Dimming ▪ Lumens/watt o Technology, part of our perception o Dimmable LED’s at 17th and 17th ▪ Maybe run a test program and dim the lights down to 50% for a week then possibly dim down to 25% o Dark Sky 5. Police o Evidence Preservation o Preventing Crime o Controlling Crime o Smart Lighting ▪ Help a lot with tactical teams to go into a standoff – control the lighting on that block would be immensely important and helpful ▪ Dimming down and making brighter both could be helpful ▪ Dave can give Police and Fire log in to Smart Lights to be able to control on their own when needed ▪ Gunshot detection ▪ Lead the fire truck ▪ Citizens are asking for it too o Opportunities ▪ Brighten up when Jazz game lets out ▪ Lower the lights during snowstorm ▪ Over design for brighter level and dim? ▪ Or overdrive the LEDs for short period of time during when you want them up • What are those cost implications? o Lighting for the sidewalks in different neighborhoods o Support LED because of the color rendering for victims and witnesses to identify colors of cars and suspects o Trees block a lot of the light in different neighborhoods o Even/consistent lighting throughout neighborhoods o Lots of midblock lights are blocked by the trees o Acorn lights - because of the way they light ▪ A lot of glare ▪ The way it glares it creates a blind spot especially right at the pole o Stop the light right at the back of the sidewalk ▪ Glare makes it nearly impossible to see anything from a camera o Distribution of light 6. Fire o Inclusive with police o Uneven light when responding can lead to inability to see pedestrians and cars 66 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 ▪ Even light help the drivers see vehicle and pedestrians ▪ Evening lighting on the street and approach at a minimum to get where they need to be without obstruction o On seen ▪ Visualizing the addresses ▪ Ongoing issue ▪ Maybe hard to address with street lighting ▪ Able to illuminate the seen if needed see obstacles ▪ People step in holes because they cannot see where they are going, ▪ Focused on the issue they are there to solve End of meeting notes. APPENDIX B 67 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 1 Existing Street Lighting Conditions Salt Lake City, Utah Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Salt Lake City requested an evaluation of the existing street lighting conditions and a Master Plan to aid in transitioning the remainder of the street lighting from a high pressure sodium system to an LED system and implement a lighting control system,with the intent to improve visibility and aesthetics while reducing energy and maintenance. The Master Plan develops new street lighting standards for retrofit and new construction.To obtain a comprehensive understanding of the existing lighting, Clanton & Associates surveyed seventeen locations within the city,conducted nighttime surveys, and calculated the light levels along primary arterial,minor arterial, collector and local streets.From these evaluations, existing condition templates were created to aid the city in prioritizing improvement areas which will influence street lighting retrofits.By enhancing the street lighting, the city will promote a higher standard of well being as well as a more comfortable place for residents and commuters. Evaluation of Existing Lighting Conditions In November 2018,Clanton & Associates evaluated the current lighting conditions at seventeen sites around the city that provided an understanding of the diversity of lighting conditions. The selected sites included arterial, collector and local streets with industrial, commercial,and residential areas.Both horizontal and vertical illuminance 1measurements were taken along the sidewalks at each site. Luminance 2 measurements were also taken to provide an understanding of surrounding surface brightness. These measured light levels were used to compare the existing light levels to the light level recommendations by the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES). Clanton & Associates also took high-dynamic- range (HDR)images as a visual representation of the perceived nighttime experience.Along with the lighting measurements, the Advisory and Technical Committees completed a subjective survey assessing the lighted environment at each site. The survey evaluated how each participant felt about the lighting strategies and overall light levels at each site as well as how comfortable participants were at the sites. The survey results will be compared to existing light levels and lighting criteria to guide the development of the Street Lighting Master Plan and the lighting standards included in it. The site evaluations,and lighting measurements can be found in this report. Street Lighting Levels To understand the street lighting throughout the entire city,Clanton & Associates will calculate light levels on arterial, collector and residential streets. These calculations will be compared to existing street lighting GIS data to determine how well roadways were lighted.Street blocks will be categorized into three levels of acceptability based on the calculations, lamp wattage, street type,luminaire spacing,and by comparing measure lighting levels to IES standards. Acceptable:Streets that met the lighting standards based on street classification with existing luminaire spacing. These areas would not require any lighting improvements beyond the LED retrofit assuming all current luminaires are operating properly. Moderately Acceptable:Streets that do not meet lighting standards based on street classification with existing luminaire spacing.Typically,these are blocks that have relatively small dark spaces between poles and would require minor improvements in order to meet lighting standards. Poor:Streets that have very low,or no,street lighting. These are blocks that typically do not have enough existing street lights and will most likely require significant investment in new lighting and electrical infrastructure to meet lighting standards. Lighting Improvements Lighting improvements in Salt Lake City will enhance lighting on arterial,collector and residential streets by classifying each street,setting standards and guidelines for street lighting retrofit and new construction projects.Well lit streets will help to reduce vehicle accidents as well as pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. Various character districts will be designated throughout the city in order to provide cohesive and quality lighting based on the surrounding environment. Vertical light levels will also be increased to enhance pedestrian and object visibility.LED luminaires consume significantly less energy and require far less maintenance than traditional lighting systems resulting in a quick return on investment. Executive Summary Existing Conditions Example 3.5 0.1 0.9 cd/m2 The following High Dynamic Range images (HDR)and measured illuminance levels were taken during the November 2018 site visit.An analysis of the seventeen sites surveyed can be found in this report. 1000E 2100S–Acceptable (1.76 average luminance) 1900E & Sunnyside –Unacceptable (0.41 average luminance) Measured Illuminance Levels Criteria Acceptance Level Luminance Type (cd/m^2)Street Luminance Arterial Street Criteria Acceptable Average 0.9 1000E. 2100S.Acceptable Average 1.76 1900S. Sunnyside Unacceptable Average 0.41 3.5 0.1 0.9 cd/m2 1 Illuminance: the amount of light reaching a surface, expressed in units of footcandles [fc] 2 Luminance: the amount of light reflected from a surface that the eye perceives, expressed in units of candela per square meter [cd/m2]APPENDIX C 68 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 3 Street Classifications Street Classifications Map Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 6 SITE EVALUATIONS Surveys Conducted 04-01-2019APPENDIX C 69 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 7 INTRODUCTION Four “Levels of Acceptability”were determined from an analysis of the site observations and survey results: Excellent, Good, Moderate and Poor. Excellent acceptability is obtained by providing sufficient and appropriate lighting on the roadway,while also providing adequate vertical illumination to allow for object detection and facial recognition. The lighting in this location will be relatively uniform,free of direct glare and properly illuminates the roadway and sidewalk. Good acceptability indicates that the lighting in the area feels comfortable.In some cases, such as residential areas,the light level might be lower than the IES Recommended Practice but the lack of glare and shadowing from surrounding landscaping, along with some surrounding surface brightness, creates a comfortable nighttime environment without light trespass. Moderate acceptability is often seen in locations that do not provide enough light on the roadway or on the sidewalk. The color of the light may be inconsistent and sources may be glary resulting in a uncomfortable space.Some of these sites were shadowed due to trees and lighting was not appropriately spaced. Poor acceptability occurs when the luminaires are spaced too far apart to provide adequate light levels and uniformity or there are no luminaires on the street at all. These sites included residential areas without sufficient light,industrial sites and an arterial road where lights were malfunctioning. These levels of acceptability provide an understanding of the nighttime environments found throughout the city.This allows a variety of lighting improvement options to be developed. These future lighting options will enhance the nighttime safety and security around the city.Each option will focus on improving light levels, uniformity,and wayfinding while reducing glare.700E. Harrison Daytime Environment700E. Harrison Nighttime Environment700E. Harrison High-Dynamic RangeThis Salt Lake City Street Lighting Study provides an understanding of the current street lighting in seventeen different locations throughout the city. The sites were surveyed by representatives from each of the seven council districts,as well as Salt Lake City representatives from the Police,Fire,Engineering,City Planning, Sustainability, Transportation,and Urban Forestry departments. The sites were selected based on street type,arterial, collector,or residential,and on their surrounding environments in the city,industrial, commercial, transit or residential. The selected sites will help provide a collective understanding of the lighting and environmental conditions found throughout the city.This study and the Street Lighting Masterplan are limited to streets,sidewalks and pedestrian paths in the Public Right of Way and do not include any privately owned lighting. The seventeen sites surveyed asked about the street and sidewalk lighting conditions. Those sites included: Establishing Levels of AcceptabilitySite Observations Example of Good Residential Lighting Example of Poor Residential Lighting Each site was photographed using High Dynamic Range photography techniques and lighting measurements were recorded for the streets and sidewalks. Both horizontal and vertical illuminance (the amount of light reaching a surface) measurements were taken along the sidewalk. Luminance (the amount of light on a surface that the eye perceives) measurements were taken along the roadway to provide an understanding of roadway brightness at each site. These measured light levels were used to compare the existing light levels to the light level recommendation from the IES Recommended Practice for Roadway Lighting (RP-8-18).Clanton & Associates also took high-dynamic-range (HDR) images as a visual representation of the perceived nighttime experience.An example,of the images taken,is shown to the left. After measurements were taken,the Advisory and Technical Committee were broken into two groups and taken on a nighttime tour of the selected sites and asked to complete a survey assessing the lighted environment. The survey was comprised of several subjective questions regarding the safety and aesthetics of each site. The survey includes,but was not limited to, the following questions: •It would be safe to walk here, alone, during daylight hours. •It would be safe to walk here, alone, during darkness hours. •The light is uneven (patchy). •The light sources are glaring. •The lighting is poorly matched to the neighborhood. Participants answered each question with a ranking between Strongly Agree and Strongly Disagree. The answers to each question were combined to provide an understanding of each site. Participants surveyed 11 different sites featuring arterial, collector and residential streets in industrial, commercial and residential areas. 1.Sterling & American Beauty Dr. 2.600N & Riverside Park 3.Redwood Road & South Temple 4.700S & Post Street 5.900W & Dalton Ave 6.Glendale Dr. & Navajo St 7.Jay St & 1st Ave 8.800E & South Temple 9.200S & Floral St 10.650S & Main Street 11.700E & Harrison Ave 12.9th & 9th 13.Layton Ave & West Temple 14.1500S & Yale 15. 19 th E & Sunnyside 16.1400E & Redondo 17.1000E & 2100S Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 9 LIGHTING MEASUREMENTS AND SUBJECTIVE SURVEY SUMMARY Site # Site Name Street Classification Existing Lighting Sterling & American Beauty Dr. Local / Residential Excellent Riverside Park & 600N Arterial / Park Acceptable Redwood Rd & South Temple Collector / Industrial Poor 700S & Post Street Local / Residential Poor 900W & Dalton Ave Arterial / Residential Acceptable Glendale Dr. & Navajo St Collector / Residential / Commercial Moderate J St & 2nd Ave Local / Residential Poor 800E & South Temple Arterial / Commercial Excellent 200S & Floral St Arterial / Commercial Excellent 650S & Main St Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 700E & Harrison Ave Arterial / Residential Poor 9th & 9th Arterial / Commercial Acceptable Layton Ave & West Temple Local / Residential Moderate 1500S & Yale Collector / Residential Acceptable 19th E & Sunnyside Arterial / Residential / Commercial Moderate 1400E & Redondo Local / Residential Moderate 1000E & 2100S Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 1 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 4 17 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 SLC Public Utilities Excellent Site Acceptable Site Moderate Site Poor Site 1000 North I-80 Redwood RoadSouth Temple 400 South 900 South 1300 South 1700 South Sunnyside Avenue Footh i l l D r i ve 1300 East700 EastState StreetI-15900 West1 2 APPENDIX CSite # Site Name Street Classification Existing Lighting Sterling & American Beauty Dr. Local / Residential Excellent Riverside Park & 600 North Arterial / Park Acceptable Redwood Rd. & South Temple Collector / Industrial Poor 700 South & Post Street Local / Residential Poor 500 West & Dalton Ave.Arterial / Residential Acceptable Glendale Dr. & Navajo St. Collector / Residential / Commercial Moderate J St. & 2nd Ave.Local / Residential Poor 800 East & South Temple Arterial / Commercial Excellent 200 South & Floral St.Arterial / Commercial Excellent 650 South & Main St.Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 700 East & Harrison Ave.Arterial / Residential Poor 900 East & 900 South Arterial / Commercial Acceptable Layton Ave. & West Temple Local / Residential Moderate 1500 South & Yale Collector / Residential Acceptable 19th East & Sunnyside Arterial / Residential / Commercial Moderate 1400 East & Redando Local / Residential Moderate 1000 East & 2100 South Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 70 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 -4.0 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 Site 17 Site 15 Site 13 Site 11 Site 09 Site 07 Site 05 Site 03 Site 01 Summary of Surveys -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% -10.0-8.0-6.0-4.0-2.00.02.04.06.08.010.012.014.016.018.020.0 Site 17Site 16Site 15Site 14Site 13Site 12Site 11Site 10Site 09Site 08Site 07Site 06Site 05Site 04Site 03Site 02Site 01Survey Evaluations w/ Percent of Critiera Site Score % From Criteria Site # Site Name Street Classification Existing Lighting Sterling & American Beauty Dr. Local / Residential Excellent Riverside Park & 600N Arterial / Park Acceptable Redwood Rd & South Temple Collector / Industrial Poor 700S & Post Street Local / Residential Poor 900W & Dalton Ave Arterial / Residential Acceptable Glendale Dr. & Navajo St Collector / Residential / Commercial Moderate J St & 2nd Ave Local / Residential Poor 800E & South Temple Arterial / Commercial Excellent 200S & Floral St Arterial / Commercial Excellent 650S & Main St Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 700E & Harrison Ave Arterial / Residential Poor 9th & 9th Arterial / Commercial Acceptable Layton Ave & West Temple Local / Residential Moderate 1500S & Yale Collector / Residential Acceptable 19th E & Sunnyside Arterial / Residential / Commercial Moderate 1400E & Redondo Local / Residential Moderate 1000E & 2100S Arterial / Commercial Acceptable 1 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 4 17APPENDIX C 71 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 1 Site : Sterling & American Beauty Dr Local / Residential 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Sterling & American Beauty Dr 13 Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Local Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.4 0.1 0.3 Ave/Min 4 -6 Site 1 Average 0.2 0.0 0.1 Ave/Min 5.9 -1.9 Surveyed by: Group 1 1 1 Level of Acceptability: Excellent (Lighting Score = 17.5) Sterling Dr is in Tier 1 of the Enhanced Lighting Program with acorn lights spaced at intersections and mid block. Initial Site Observations •Local Residential street in Rose Park neighborhood. •Part of Enhanced Lighting Program Tier 1. •Adjacent to Rose Park Elementary School Lighting Measurements •Street lighting does not meet criteria for a local road with a low pedestrian conflict. •Low vertical light levels make it difficult for cars to identify pedestrians and objects in the roadway. Participant Survey •Participants said: •“Great lighting for a residential area.” •“This is nice lighting. A model for rest of city “ % From Criteria: -36% Below Site : Sterling & American Beauty Dr Local / Residential APPENDIX C 72 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 1 Site : Riverside Park @ 600N Arterial / Park 2 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Riverside Park @ 600N 15 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Arterial Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.9 Ave/Min 4 -3 Site 2 Average 0.5 0.0 1.0 Ave/Min 15.8 -1.9 Surveyed by: Group 1 2 2 Level of Acceptability: Acceptable (Lighting Score = 9.8) 600N is lit with LED luminaires in a staggered arrangement and meets roadway lighting criteria. Initial Site Observations •This is a wide arterial road with heavy traffic from commuters and shipping. •This site is located between Riverside Park and Backman Elementary School. •Street lights are LED and arranged in a staggered arrangement. Lighting Measurements •This street meets the roadway luminance criteria for an arterial street with a medium pedestrian conflict. •Horizontal illuminance on the sidewalks meets criteria, but vertical illuminance does not. Participant Survey •Participants felt the amount of light was good, however the style and color does not match the neighborhood. •Participants found the light the be slightly glaring % From Criteria: 14% Above Site : Riverside Park @ 600N Arterial / Park Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 73 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 1 Site : Redwood Rd & S Temple Collector / Industrial 3 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Poor (Lighting Score = -2.9) S. Temple is lit with HPS luminaires in a staggered arrangement and does not meet roadway criteria. Initial Site Observations •This site is an industrial part of town next to a ABF Freight. •There is no sidewalk on either side of the road and very minimal pedestrian traffic. •S. Temple dead ends at private property to the east. Lighting Measurements •The street is under lighted and does not meet roadway criteria. •The are currently no sidewalks, and light does not meet the edge of roadway where pedestrians would be walking. Participant Survey •Participants were very uncomfortable with this site. •Participants did not feel safe on this site during the day or night, due to the industrial location. •Participants felt that there was not enough light at this site. 17 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Collector Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.3 0.08 0.4 Ave/Min 6 -4 Site 3 Average 0.1 0.0 0.2 Ave/Min 1.3 -2.3 Surveyed by: Group 1 3 3 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Redwood Rd & S Temple % From Criteria: -54% Below Site : Redwood Rd & S Temple Collector / Industrial Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 74 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 2 Site : 700S Post Street Local / Residential 4 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 19 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Local Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.3 0.08 0.3 Ave/Min 6 -6 Site 4 Average 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ave/Min --- Surveyed by: Group 2 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 700S Post Street 4 4 Level of Acceptability: Poor (Lighting Score = -1.8) 700S is an extremely wide residential street with cobrahead style luminaires at intersections. Initial Site Observations •700S is an extremely wide residential street and was described by one resident as an “air strip.” •The streets in this area are lit by HPS luminaires located at intersections. Current luminaires are not capable of providing light across the wide intersections. Lighting Measurements •This street is dark and only lit by passing cars. •There is no light on sidewalks except directly below luminaires. Participant Survey •Participants felt uncomfortable in this location at night, but very safe during the day, which indicates additional lighting could be helpful. •They felt strongly that there was not enough light on the roadway or sidewalk and were not able to identify faces and colors. % From Criteria: -97% Below Site : 700S Post Street Local / Residential Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 75 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 2 Site : 900W & Dalton Ave Arterial / Residential 5 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Acceptable (Lighting Score = 5.2) 900W is an arterial street lit by HPS luminaires in a staggered arrangement. Initial Site Observations •This is a 5 lane arterial road next to Jordan Park. •Luminaires are LED and are in a staggered arrangement. •Sidewalks are separated from roadway by landscaping, but have sufficient horizontal illuminance. Lighting Measurements •Heavy traffic while measurements were being taken contributed to light levels. •Roadway luminance measurements meet criteria, but street feels slightly underlit. •Sidewalk horizontal criteria is met, but vertical illuminance is low. Participant Survey •Participants felt that the lighting was patchy and that trees obstructed light from hitting the sidewalks. •Overall they felt that this wide street had good coverage, however light sources appeared glaring. •Participants were split over if the sidewalks were sufficiently lit or not. 21 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Arterial Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.3 0.08 0.6 Ave/Min 6 -3.5 Site 5 Average 0.3 0.0 1.4 Ave/Min 2.9 -5.1 Surveyed by: Group 2 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 900W & Dalton Ave 5 5 % From Criteria: 137% Above Site : 900W & Dalton Ave Arterial / Residential Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 76 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 2 Site : Glendale Dr. & Navajo St Collector / Residential / Commercial 6 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Moderate (Lighting Score = 2.7) Glendale Dr. is lit by HPS lights and also sees major contribution from nearby private lighting. Initial Site Observations •This is a residential/commercial area near the US Dream Academy and a Church. •The street lighting is located midblock and at intersections, but private lighting from parking lots contribute to light on the street and sidewalk. •Building mounted lights are glaring and shine into residences across the street. Lighting Measurements •The roadway is under lighted, even with contribution from private lighting. •The horizontal and vertical illuminance on the sidewalk does not meet criteria. Participant Survey •Participants felt that the lighting was patchy with different types and colors and several dark areas. •Overall they were split over the nighttime conditions. 23 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Collector Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.6 Ave/Min 4 -3.5 Site 6 Average 0.2 0.0 0.2 Ave/Min 1.5 -1.7 Surveyed by: Group 2 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Glendale Dr. & Navajo St 6 6 % From Criteria: -60% Below Site : Glendale Dr. & Navajo St Collector / Residential / Commercial Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 77 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Both Groups Site : Jay St & 1st Ave Local / Residential 7 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Poor (Lighting Score = -0.3) 2nd Ave is residential street lit by a single HPS luminaire at each intersection. Initial Site Observations •This site is located in a residential neighborhood adjacent to a Church. •Sidewalks are separated from the road by landscaping and feel dark. Large trees shadow the sidewalks. •Sidewalk adjacent to the Church has light contribution from parking lot lighting. Lighting Measurements •The luminance on 2nd Ave does not meet criteria for a local street, but the lighting layout is in accordance with the current SLC Street Lighting Masterplan. •Sidewalks are dark and do not have any light, except directly below luminaire. Participant Survey •Participants felt that the street light only sufficiently illuminates the intersection. The remaining roadway and the sidewalks are dark. •Participants were split on nighttime safety and comfort levels. 25 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Local Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.3 0.08 0.3 Ave/Min 6 -6 Site 7 Average 0.1 0.0 0.1 Ave/Min 9.9 -3.3 Surveyed by: Both Groups -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Jay St & 1st Ave 7 7 % From Criteria: -67% Below Site : Jay St & 1st Ave Local / Residential Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 78 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Both Groups Site : 800E & S. Temple Arterial / Commercial 8 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Excellent (Lighting Score = 13.9) S. Temple is lit using LED Acorn style luminaires arranged in an opposite arrangement. Initial Site Observations •S. Temple is a 4 lane arterial road connecting downtown, the avenues and the University. •This is a commercial area with a restaurants, condominiums and businesses nearby. •Sidewalks are separated from the street by landscaping and are shadowed by large trees. Additional pedestrian lights are placed at crosswalks. Lighting Measurements •Heavy traffic while measurements were being taken contributed to light levels. •Roadway luminance far exceeds criteria, but light levels felt appropriate for this street. •Sidewalks are slightly below criteria, and there is some light contribution from nearby businesses. Participant Survey •Participants felt that the lighting at this sight was better than other similar site throughout the city. •Participants were split on light levels. Some felt it was too bright, while others desired slightly more light. 27 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Arterial Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.9 Ave/Min 4 -3 Site 8 Average 0.4 0.1 1.5 Ave/Min 3.0 -1.8 Surveyed by: Both Groups 8 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 800E & S. Temple 8 % From Criteria: 65% Above Site : 800E & S. Temple Arterial / Commercial Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 79 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Both Groups Site : 200S Floral St Arterial / Commercial 9 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Excellent (Lighting Score = 13.8) 200S is an arterial road running through the heart of downtown with cactus style poles. Initial Site Observations •This site is in the heart of downtown SLC nearby multiple bars and restaurants. •Cactus style poles are closely spaced on both sides of the road. •There is a large, non signalized, mid block crosswalk across 200S. Lighting Measurements •The roadway essentially meets criteria at this site and feels comfortable. •The cactus poles use acorn style luminaires that provide good vertical illuminance on pedestrians. •This site is essentially meets all criteria. Participant Survey •Participants felt that the lighting at this site was better then similar areas throughout the city. •Participants felt that the light sources were glaring and light could be better directed toward the street. •Participants also felt that the light fixtures meet the character of the area, but there are too many of them. 29 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Arterial Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.9 Ave/Min 4 -3 Site 9 Average 0.8 0.5 0.8 Ave/Min 4.2 -1.7 Surveyed by: Both Groups -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 200S Floral St 9 9 % From Criteria: -8% Below Site : 200S Floral St Arterial / Commercial Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 80 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Both Groups Site : 650S Main Street Arterial / Commercial 10 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Acceptable (Lighting Score = 6.3) Main St. is a collector street with a shared transit line, lit with LED luminaires in a staggered arrangement. Initial Site Observations •Main St. is shared by both vehicles and the TRAX line. •North and Southbound lanes are separated by a large landscape median that supplies power for TRAX. •Sidewalks are separated from the road by landscaping and are shaded by large trees. Lighting Measurements •The roadway exceeds criteria. Luminaires used are glaring. •Sidewalk essentially meets criteria, but have significant contribution from private lighting. •Overall, this site is well lit. Participant Survey •Participants felt that the trees blocked a lot of light to the sidewalks which caused the light to be uneven. •Overall, participants felt that the roadway was sufficiently lighted. 31 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Collector Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.6 Ave/Min 4 -3.5 Site 10 Average 0.4 0.1 1.3 Ave/Min 2.5 -1.6 Surveyed by: Both Groups -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 650S Main Street 10 10 % From Criteria: 116% Above Site : 650S Main Street Arterial / Commercial Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 81 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 2 Site : 700E Harrison Ave Arterial / Residential 11 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Poor** (Lighting Score = -2.1) 700E is a large arterial road spanning the whole Salt Lake valley with heavy traffic. Initial Site Observations •700E is a 7 lane arterial road with heavy commuter and shipping traffic, along with bike lanes that runs throughout the whole valley. •The site is adjacent to Herman Franks Park and Liberty Park. •The roadway is lit using LED luminaires in a staggered arrangement. Lighting Measurements •The roadway exceeds lighting criteria, but luminance levels feel appropriate for this size of street. •Light on the sidewalk does not meet horizontal or vertical illuminance criteria, but heavy traffic provides additional light. Participant Survey •**Lights on the west side of the roadway were not operational during surveys.** •Overall, participants felt this site was dark and was worse than similar sites throughout the city. 33 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Arterial Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.9 Ave/Min 4 -3 Site 11 Average 0.2 0.0 1.6 Ave/Min 1.7 -4.6 Surveyed by: Group 2 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 700E Harrison Ave 11 11 ** % From Criteria: 78% Above Site : 700E Harrison Ave Arterial / Residential Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 82 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 1 Site : 9th & 9th Arterial / Commercial 12 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Acceptable (Lighting Score = 10.1) 900S is a collector street in a commercial area with by pedestrian style luminaires Initial Site Observations •9th & 9th is a bustling commercial area and a destination in Salt Lake. •The streets and sidewalks are lit mostly by pedestrian style luminaires along with cobra heads mounted on signal poles. •Landscaping and on street parking separate the sidewalk from the roadway. Lighting Measurements •Overall, this site meets or exceeds the lighting criteria. •The roadway luminance exceeds the target criteria, but luminance levels feel appropriate on the street. •Sidewalk horizontal and vertical illuminance criteria is met. Participant Survey •Participants felt that this site was appropriately lit and was better than similar sites throughout the city. •Participants noted that lighting could be better controlled and less glaring. •Participants liked the style of lighting for the neighborhood character. 35 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Collector Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.6 Ave/Min 4 -3.5 Site 12 Average 0.5 0.3 1.2 Ave/Min 5.6 -2.0 Surveyed by: Group 1 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 9th & 9th 12 % From Criteria: 101% Above Site : 9th & 9th Arterial / Commercial12 Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 83 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Both Groups Site : Layton Ave & W Temple Local / Residential 13 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Moderate (Lighting Score = 3.6) West Temple is a collector road passing through residential area lit with HPS Luminaires along one side of the road. Initial Site Observations •West Temple is a 2 lane collector road passing through a residential area lit with HPS lights along the east side of the road. •Large, dense trees block most of the light from hitting the roadway or sidewalk. Lighting Measurements •Due to the large trees, most of the light does not reach to ground, causing the roadway and sidewalks to be under lighted. •Sidewalks feel dark is dramatic shadowing from trees. Participant Survey •Participants were split on how appropriate the roadway and sidewalk lighting was. •Participants were also split on nighttime safety and comfort levels at this site. •Overall, this is a very polarizing site. 37 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Collector Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.3 0.08 0.4 Ave/Min 6 -4 Site 13 Average 0.1 0.0 0.2 Ave/Min 6.5 -10.1 Surveyed by: Both Groups -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Layton Ave & W Temple 13 13 % From Criteria: -50% Below Site : Layton Ave & W Temple Local / Residential Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 84 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 1 Site : 1500S Yale Ave Collector / Residential 14 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Acceptable (Lighting Score = 6.0) 1500S is a collector road bordering neighborhoods with Enhanced and base level lighting. Initial Site Observations •This site has both cobrahead HPS lights as well as acorn style lights that are part of the Enhanced Lighting Program. •1500S is a collector street connecting multiple residential areas with private and enhanced street lighting. Lighting Measurements •The street is slightly below criteria, but feels appropriate in this area. •Sidewalk lighting does not meet horizontal or vertical criteria. •Overall the site does not meet criteria, but feels lighting feels appropriate to the area. Participant Survey •Participants were divided on if the lighting was better or worse compared to similar areas, however they did generally agree that this street might need additional lighting. •Overall, participants felt that this site could use additional light. •Survey was taken in a different location than the measurements were. 39 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Collector Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.3 0.08 0.4 Ave/Min 6 -4 Site 14 Average 0.2 0.0 0.3 Ave/Min 5.5 -8.4 Surveyed by: Group 1 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1500S Yale Ave 14 14 % From Criteria: -37% Below Site : 1500S Yale Ave Collector / Residential Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 85 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 1 Site : 19th E & Sunnyside Ave Arterial / Residential / Commercial 15 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Moderate (Lighting Score = 2.2) Sunnyside Ave is an arterial street connecting the residential neighborhoods with the University and Foothills. Initial Site Observations •This 5 lane arterial street is lit with LED lights from the north side of the road at a large spacing. •The side borders residential neighborhoods, Sunnyside Park, a church, University housing and is a major path into the University of Utah campus and to downtown. •Lights are glaring and cause light trespass at residences across the street. Lighting Measurements •Both the sidewalk and roadway are under lighted and do not meet criteria. •Lights are spaced too far apart and overly bright and glaring luminaires are used to help get light across and down the street. Participant Survey •Participants felt that the lighting was insufficient on the south side of the road, due to the single-side lighting arrangement. •Overall, participants felt that this lighting was worse than similar areas and could use additional light. 41 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Arterial Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.9 Ave/Min 4 -3 Site 15 Average 0.1 0.0 0.4 Ave/Min 5.7 -2.3 Surveyed by: Group 1 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 19th E & Sunnyside Ave 15 15 % From Criteria: -55% Below Site : 19th E & Sunnyside Ave Arterial / Residential / Commercial Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 86 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 2 Site : 1400E Redondo Ave Local / Residential 16 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Moderate (Lighting Score = 3.2) Redondo Ave is a residential street in the Sugarhouse area with private street lighting. Initial Site Observations •Redondo Ave is a residential street with private acorn style street lights. •Multiple lights along the street were burnt out or malfunctioning. •Large trees on the street shaded most of the lights. Lighting Measurements •This site does not meet roadway or sidewalk criteria. •The infrastructure for decent street lighting is present, but multiple lights were not on resulting in a dark street. Participant Survey •Some participants felt that the light sources were glary, and provided patchy, insufficient light coverage. •Participants liked the style of lights, but they did not feel comfortable, and would like to see more light on the roadway and sidewalk. 43 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Local Criteria Low Conflict Average 0.3 0.08 0.3 Ave/Min 6 -6 Site 16 Average 0.1 0.0 0.0 Ave/Min 5.3 -- Surveyed by: Group 2 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1400E Redondo Ave 16 16 % From Criteria: -48% Below Site : 1400E Redondo Ave Local / Residential Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative ResponsesAPPENDIX C 87 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Surveyed by: Group 2 Site : 1000E 2100S Local / Commercial 17 Salt Lake City –Existing Street Lighting Conditions February 2019 Level of Acceptability: Acceptable (Lighting Score = 12.0) 2100S is in the heart of the Sugarhouse business district and is part of the Special Assessment Lighting program Initial Site Observations •The site is in the middle of the Sugarhouse business district and is surrounded by commercial properties. •The luminaires used at this site have a street light as well as two pedestrian level light sources. •2100S is a four lane arterial road and luminaires are in an opposite arrangement. •Acorn style luminaires are bright and slightly glaring. Lighting Measurements •There is a lot of light at this site and all criteria is exceeded. •Multi-head luminaires with street and pedestrian luminaires plenty of light on the sidewalk and street. Participant Survey •Most participants felt that there was too much light, and that the light sources were glaring. •Overall, participants felt safe at this location. 45 3.5 0.0 cd/m2 Sidewalk Illuminance (fc)Roadway Luminance (cd/m^2)Horizontal Vertical (min) Collector Criteria Medium Conflict Average 0.5 0.2 0.6 Ave/Min 4 -3.5 Site 17 Average 2.5 0.3 1.8 Ave/Min 8.2 -2.6 Surveyed by: Group 2 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1000E 2100S 17 17 % From Criteria: 194% Above Site : 1000E 2100S Local / Commercial Green Bars are Positive Responses Blue Bars are Negative Responses APPENDIX C 88 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 89 APPENDIX D Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan Nocturnal Infrastructure for Ecological Health Prepared by: Travis Longcore, Ph.D. Prepared for: Clanton and Associates, Boulder, Colorado May 2020 Lights of Salt Lake City wash out the Milky Way viewed from Antelope Island State Park. Photograph: Ryan Andreasen. 90 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Potential Impacts of Streetlights on Wildlife in Salt Lake City .............................................. 4 2.1 Physical Geography ........................................................................................................ 4 2.1.1 Great Salt Lake Shorelands ..................................................................................... 5 2.1.2 Jordan River ............................................................................................................ 7 2.1.3 Urban Creeks .......................................................................................................... 7 2.1.4 Wasatch Mountains ................................................................................................. 8 2.2 Sensitive Species ............................................................................................................. 8 2.3 Effects of Lighting on Key Wildlife Groups ................................................................ 10 2.3.1 Attraction and Disorientation ................................................................................ 10 2.3.2 Loss of Connectivity ............................................................................................. 12 2.3.3 Foraging ................................................................................................................ 13 2.3.4 Interference with Visual Communication ............................................................. 14 2.3.5 Physiological Responses ....................................................................................... 14 3 Consideration of Spectrum in Municipal Street Lighting Systems ...................................... 16 3.1 Effects on Wildlife ........................................................................................................ 16 3.2 Effects on Dark Skies .................................................................................................... 19 3.3 Human Circadian Rhythms ........................................................................................... 22 4 Design Strategies for a Healthy Nocturnal Infrastructure ..................................................... 27 4.1 Systemwide Approaches ............................................................................................... 27 4.1.1 Need-based Lighting ............................................................................................. 27 4.1.2 Shielding and Directionality ................................................................................. 27 4.1.3 Intensity, Dimming, and Controls ......................................................................... 27 4.1.4 Spectrum ............................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Ecological Overlay Strategies ....................................................................................... 30 4.2.1 Bird Collision Zone............................................................................................... 32 4.2.2 Critical Wildlife Habitat Zone .............................................................................. 32 4.2.3 Jordan River and Urban Creeks ............................................................................ 33 4.2.4 Community Parks and Natural Lands ................................................................... 33 5 References ............................................................................................................................. 34 APPENDIX D 91 1 1 Introduction Salt Lake City is located in a region connected to its night sky. The awe and wonder inspired by a view of the Milky Way and sky overflowing with stars attracts visitors to Utah and contributes to the identity of the region for residents. Salt Lake City itself is brightly illuminated, with its cultural and institutional centers, commercial zones, and unique urban design. But just north of the city, Antelope Island State Park has sought and received recognition as a Dark Sky Park by the International Dark-Sky Association, joining eight other Dark Sky Parks, a Dark Sky Community, and a Dark Sky Heritage Place in Utah (Figure 1). The future of Antelope Island’s long-term status as a Dark Sky Park depends on the decisions of the cities along the Wasatch Front in protecting the night sky (see cover). Cities set the tone for night lighting in a region. They are the most brightly lit, and their size influences the markets, practices, and professionals in a region. Commercial zones of cities and towns tend to contribute the most light escaping upward (and therefore wasted), along with lighted sports fields when they are illuminated (Luginbuhl et al. 2009). Historically, street lights contributed a significant and constant amount to both useful and wasted light through the night, while residential lights and lighting from vehicles declines substantially through course of the night (Bará et al. 2017). Within residential zones, most of the light is from the streetlighting system, especially later in the evening when traffic rates are low and ornamental lighting is switched off (Bará et al. 2017). Decisions made at municipal level about its street lighting system therefore have a large contribution to the overall amount of useful and wasted light in a city. Because perception of lighting is based on contrasts (the same light appears dim next to a brighter source and bright next to a dimmer source), the decisions made in terms of municipal street lighting systems have ramifications to the nocturnal environment that extend beyond the system itself. As a metropolitan area, compared with the 125 largest metropolitan areas in the United States, Salt Lake City is well above average in terms of the average amount of light escaping upward that can be measured by satellites (Figure 2). It does not waste as much light as other larger cities with their greater areas, but on a per area basis it contributes more to regional light pollution than the average city, although not so much as New Orleans, which is a similar size. Figure 1. Distribution of recognized dark sky places in and near Utah. Circles are Dark Sky Parks, triangles are Dark Sky Communities, and diamonds are Dark Sky Heritage Sites. Source: List of Dark Sky Places maintained by Dark Skies Advisory Group, IUCN. APPENDIX D 92 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 2 Figure 2. Light escaping upwards from Salt Lake City 2012–2017 within the 125 largest metropolitan regions in the United States. Top: radiance normalized for area. Bottom: total radiance from entire city extent. Data from VIIRS DNB as analyzed by Horton et al. (2019). Large-scale transformations of municipal street lighting systems have occurred over the past decade as older lighting technologies have been replaced by light emitting diode (LED) systems. Because of the history of the technology, where the early high-efficiency LEDs had a high content of blue light, residents of many jurisdictions objected to the new lights. The bluish-white light of LEDs in those installations was perceived as brighter because of the visual sensitivity of the human eye to the greater proportion of shorter (blue) wavelengths in the light produced. In addition, when lights are more efficient and less expensive to operate, there is a tendency to use more light (Kyba et al. 2014). Not only does the color of light affect how humans perceive the lights; the color of lights is recognized as influencing the contributions lights have to light pollution (Aubé et al. 2013, Kinzey et al. 2017), wildlife (Longcore et al. 2015b, Donners et al. 2018, Longcore 2018), and human health (Garcia-Saenz et al. 2018). Researchers and engaged lighting designers are developing techniques to minimize undesirable effects of outdoor lighting on both astronomical and ecological light pollution. These include guidance for protected lands (Longcore and Rich 2017), recommendations for specific groups of species (Voigt et al. 2018), and recommendations balancing human vision and wildlife impacts (Longcore et al. 2018a). As Salt Lake City prepares a new Street Lighting Master Plan, this research can be synthesized and applied to inform decisions about the design of the future street lighting system that is consistent with the values embodied in the plan. Mean RadianceSummed Radiance0 10 20 30 40 50 0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 New York Chicago Los Angeles Las Vegas Salt Lake City New Orleans New York Chicago Los Angeles Las Vegas Salt Lake City New Orleans 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Area RankAPPENDIX D 93 3 This report provides guidance for minimizing the adverse impacts of unnecessary light at night on species, habitats, and ecosystems in the development of a Street Lighting Master Plan for Salt Lake City. The organization of the report is as follows. In the next chapter, the potential impacts of street lighting on wildlife in Salt Lake City are reviewed, based on the published scientific research. The following chapter explores the role of spectrum in determining the level of impact on dark skies, circadian rhythms, and wildlife. Then, this information is synthesized in a chapter outlining spatially explicit design strategies to reduce adverse impacts of street lighting on sensitive biological resources within the context of the further development of Salt Lake City’s municipal lighting system. With these strategies, Salt Lake City can build a nocturnal infrastructure that supports ecological health by providing high-quality lighting for human safety and well-being while protecting the night sky and nighttime environment within the city and across the region, setting an example for others to follow. APPENDIX D 94 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 4 2 Potential Impacts of Streetlights on Wildlife in Salt Lake City Street lighting has a large spatial footprint within the area of a city. For a medium-sized city like Salt Lake City, street lighting is provided throughout its residential, commercial, and industrial districts to different extents. In this chapter, the potential effects of this system on wildlife are considered, which requires assessment of the geographic extent of the city. To describe the environment potentially affected by lighting in Salt Lake City, the physical geography and habitats of the city were described and lists of sensitive species were compiled. Together, these natural features and species distributions can provide the background to devise spatially explicit schemes to minimize potentially adverse effects. Figure 3. Location of Salt Lake City within the physical geography of the region (USGS topographic maps, 1885, from http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/). 2.1 Physical Geography Salt Lake City is located on lacustrine terraces between the Wasatch Mountains and the Great Salt Lake. It grew up as a central location for travel, commerce, and mining, supported by a swath of irrigated lands extending north-south along the Wasatch Mountains. Although other regional cities were established first (e.g., Ogden), Salt Lake City arose as the most significant city through a confluence of its irrigation resources and its importance as a religious center. APPENDIX D 95 5 The growth of Salt Lake City depended in part on the array of some 35 streams that flowed downward from the Wasatch Mountains to the rich soils of the terraces above the Great Salt Lake (Harris 1941). These streams were not deeply incised and therefore they could be diverted for irrigation, compared with the rivers of the region, which although larger, are incised into canyons and consequently could not be used easily be irrigation by the white settlers in the 1840s. The climate is mild, with a long growing season extended by proximity to the Great Salt Lake. Snow accumulation in the mountains and a long melt season made agriculture attractive and productive within the region. The creeks flowing out of the Wasatch Mountains, City Creek, Red Butte Creek, Emigration Creek, Parley’s Cañon Creek (now Parley’s Creek), Big Cottonwood Creek, in turn flowed into the Jordan River, which flowed northward to debouche through a small distributary delta into the Great Salt Lake (Figure 3). The Jordan River has a winding, low-gradient pathway that remains to this day, dividing the territory of the city into eastern and western halves. The eastern half is characterized by the rising terraces climbing up toward the mountains with the remaining extents of the westward-flowing creeks, while the western portion of the city is an almost entirely flat open plain extending toward the shore of the Great Salt Lake (Figure 3). These features of the physical geography of Salt Lake City are a useful organizing framework to discuss zones that remain important to the ecology and sensitive species of the City today: 1) the Salt Lake shorelands, 2) the Jordan River, 3) the urban creeks, and 4) the Wasatch Mountains. Figure 4. Example of the open landscape of the Great Salt Lake shorelands. Photo from Google Local Guide Neil Martin, looking due east toward Salt Lake City. 2.1.1 Great Salt Lake Shorelands The shorelands surrounding the Great Salt Lake extend far into the City limits of Salt Lake City. The airport and western commercial and industrial areas extend into this zone. These flat, open areas are made up of deep lacustrine sediments of clay and loam (Flowers 1934). Although the vegetation changes by zones extending away from the lake, the plains and ponds within them tend to be saline, which leads to a flora free from trees and dominated by low succulent herbs and low shrubs, such as pickleweed, salt bush, salt grass, and seepweed (Flowers 1934). Open habitats such as these (Figure 4) are vulnerable to disruption by light pollution because light encounters no barriers and even a single unshielded streetlight can be seen from a great distance APPENDIX D 96 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 6 (De Molenaar et al. 2006, Longcore and Rich 2017). Birds in landscapes like this can be influenced by the direct glare from streetlights and will locate nests farther from lights when such sites are available (De Molenaar et al. 2006). These shoreland ecosystems are extremely important to shorebirds for foraging and breeding. The brine shrimp and salt flies that feed on algae in and around the lake provide food and the undisturbed open areas are used by Snowy Plovers, American Avocets, Black-necked Stilts, Long-billed Curlew, and dozens of other shorebird and waterbird species (Jones 2008). A portion of this area with Salt Lake City has been established and managed as the Inland Sea Shorebird Reserve by Rio Tinto/Kennecott as mitigation for impacts from its nearby mining operations. They took advantage of existing shallow depressions with soils high in clay that naturally held water and managed the drainage system to extend inundation times and provide high-quality bird habitat. The 3,670-acre reserve provides habitat for around 120,000 birds annually. The Great Salt Lake as a whole has been recognized as a site of “hemispheric importance” within the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Network (Andres et al. 20016). Nearly all the western shorelands with Salt Lake City have been designated as Very Important Bird Areas (IBAs) by Birdlife International. They are the Gilbert Bay/South Arm IBA and the Farmington Bay IBA, which each extend into and cover the undeveloped reaches of the shorelands. These IBAs are of global importance (the highest possible ranking). Figure 5. Extent of globally significant Important Bird Areas (blue) in Salt Lake City with City Council districts (red) for reference. APPENDIX D 97 7 Figure 6. Example of the vegetation of the Jordan River as it winds through Salt Lake City. Image from Google Local Guide Ross Pincock. 2.1.2 Jordan River The Jordan River is a low-gradient, meandering river that flows north to south through Salt Lake City. Considerable development has affected the banks and floodplain, but recent years have brought attention and restoration efforts to enhance the river, its habitats, and its water quality. The Jordan River supports riparian (streamside) habitats that are used for nesting by neotropical migratory bird such as Bullock’s Oriole, Willow Flycatcher, and Yellow-breasted Chat, all of which nest along the Jordan River and then migrate to Central America for the winter. The Tracey Aviary conducts surveys and nest monitoring along the Jordan River and birding hotspots along the river include Glendale Golf Course, Jordan River Parkway (200 S to 2100 S), Fife Wetlands Preserve, and Rose Park Golf Course. 2.1.3 Urban Creeks Salt Lake City has a series of creeks that flow down from the Wasatch Mountains and cut east to west across the city toward the Jordan River (Figure 7). Over time, the lower extents of these creeks have been undergrounded, cutting off the surface flows and diverting them to underground pipes. For example, City Creek, was undergrounded along North Temple Street in 1909 (Love 2005). These creeks have been the focus of daylighting and restoration activities that may Figure 7. Footprint of the Jordan River running south to north through the center of Salt Lake City. APPENDIX D 98 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 8 extend into the future (Love 2005). Because of the water flows and support of riparian vegetation, the remaining aboveground creeks remain important habitats for wildlife. They are now surrounded by neighborhoods and receive heavy recreational use and provide valuable access to nature within the urban fabric (Figure 8). Figure 8. Image of Emigration Creek as it flows through the Wasatch Hollow Open Space. Photo by Google Local Guide Joseph Muhlestein. 2.1.4 Wasatch Mountains The foothills of the Wasatch Mountains to the west of the Salt Lake City are contiguous with a large block of contiguous open space and wilderness area and therefore are easily recognized as being environmentally sensitive. One of the vulnerabilities of mountainous habitats to light pollution is that their slopes are directly in the light of sight for any light that is emitted upward from nearby sources (Longcore and Rich 2017). Any light from Salt Lake City that is emitted above the horizontal plane and directed toward the east has the potential to degrade the habitats of the Wasatch Mountains. 2.2 Sensitive Species Important wildlife species of Salt Lake City were reviewed in a 2010 program for the acquisition of natural lands. The program identified and mapped the distribution of critical habitat for wildlife. A list of species for which potential habitat is found in the City was also provided. This map identified all parcels within the city that intersected with areas that had potential habitat for Black Bear, Band- Figure 9. Four urban creeks (purple) extending out of the Wasatch Mountains into Salt Lake City. APPENDIX D 99 9 tailed Pigeon, Blue Grouse, Chukar Partridge, Moose, Mule Deer, Ring-necked Pheasant, Rocky Mountain Elk, Ruffed Grouse, or Snowshoe Hare. The resulting map forms a ring around the core of Salt Lake City, with critical wildlife habitat extending down the slopes of the Wasatch range to the urban edge on the east and also enveloping the shorelands and extending from the west to and around the north of the airport (Figure 10). The city also has potential habitat for a range of sensitive plant and wildlife species. These species include birds of the open shorelands (Bobolink, Burrowing Owl, Long-billed Curlew, Northern Goshawk, Short-eared Owl) those associated with the foothills and creeks (Lewis’s Woodpecker, Three-toed Woodpecker, Greater Sage Grouse, and some found throughout (e.g., Ferruginous Hawk, Grasshopper Sparrow). Other sensitive wildlife species include the Smooth Greensnake, found in the mountains, spotted bat and Townsend’s big-eared bat. Figure 10. Distribution of parcels (green) that intersect with critical wildlife habitat, with City Council districts for reference. Other wildlife species, although not recognized formally as sensitive, deserve attention in a street lighting plan intended to reduce and avoid impacts. Fireflies are known to be sensitive to light pollution and have popular appeal as wondrous symbols of the dusk and nighttime environment (Lloyd 2006). The Natural History Museum of Utah is collecting firefly sightings from around the state and has reports from both north and south of Salt Lake City and a few records have been reported from within Salt Lake City. APPENDIX D 100 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 10 Bats are also significantly influenced by lighting conditions. Mexican free-tailed bats (Tadarida brasiliensis) are well-known to residents because they roost at West High School near downtown during migration. Other documented species include hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus; https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/3742269). It is likely that more species and locations for bat foraging and roosting would be documented if acoustic surveys were conducted (O’Farrell et al. 1999). 2.3 Effects of Lighting on Key Wildlife Groups Artificial light at night can have a range of lethal and sub-lethal effects on wildlife (Longcore and Rich 2004, Rich and Longcore 2006, Gaston et al. 2012, Gaston et al. 2013, Meyer and Sullivan 2013). Some wildlife species will avoid areas with additional lighting (Beier 1995, 2006, Stone et al. 2009, Stone et al. 2012) or otherwise be adversely impacted (Hölker et al. 2010a, Hölker et al. 2010b, Longcore 2010, Gaston et al. 2013). The formally recognized sensitive species in Salt Lake City, or at least potentially present, include large and small mammals, migratory and resident birds, bats, one reptile, and at least one plant species. The types of disruption from lighting that could occur for these groups include attraction and disorientation leading to injury or death, disruption of connectivity between habitat patches, interference with predator-prey relations and circadian rhythms that influence foraging decisions, and disruption of pollination. 2.3.1 Attraction and Disorientation Attraction/repulsion and disorientation are possible outcomes of encounters between wildlife and artificial light at night (Longcore and Rich 2004). The most well-known situation is the attraction and disorientation of hatchling sea turtles on ocean beaches, which results in the death of the juvenile turtles that do not reach the ocean (McFarlane 1963). The two most relevant instances of attraction and disorientation for Salt Lake City are the impacts on migratory birds and on insects. Migratory Birds. Research with weather radar over the past five years has dramatically improved understanding of the influence of city lights on migrating birds. Most songbird species migrate at night and they can be detected and mapped on weather radar. A massive trove of radar data has been accumulated over the past 25 years and so researchers can now use those data and powerful new computing approaches to understand the influence of lights on the migratory paths of birds. Light at night escaping upwards so that it can be measured by a satellite is associated with greater numbers of birds present during the day, especially in the fall when juveniles are migrating south (La Sorte et al. 2017). As the birds are migrating southward they are attracted to the lights of the city and then end up disproportionately using habitats in and around cities as compared with potentially better habitats farther from cities (McLaren et al. 2018). Lights can rapidly increase the density of migratory birds in an area at night. A study of the Tribute in Light installation in New York documented an increase from 500 birds within 0.5 km of the vertical APPENDIX D 101 11 light beams before they were turned on to 15,700 birds within 0.5 km 15 minutes after illumination (Van Doren et al. 2017). Attraction at night is only the first hazard. Urban habitats and especially business districts are quite hazardous to these birds because once they are on the ground, they are susceptible to collisions with glass, which they do not perceive as a barrier (Klem 1990, Sheppard and Phillips 2015). The combination of night-time lights followed by daytime glass exposure is a significant threat to songbirds during the already strenuous migratory period (Cabrera-Cruz et al. 2018). Radar data have been used to track the relative exposure of migratory birds to lights within U.S. metropolitan areas ranked by area. The Salt Lake City–West Valley City urban area ranks 74th in area among cities in the continental US by area. When evaluated for the number of migrating birds based on radar tracking (average for 1995–2017) and the intensity to light as measured by the VIIRS DNB satellite (average for 2012–2017), the city ranks 120th in exposure for the spring and 112th in exposure for the fall (Horton et al. 2019) (Figure 11). Other cities have far more migratory birds flying overhead per unit area. For example, New Orleans has many more birds flying overhead because of its location on the Gulf Coast, where all of the birds heading to the northern forests and back again to Central and South America funnel overhead. Figure 11. Relative exposure of migrating birds to light in Salt Lake City within the 125 largest metropolitan regions in the United States (Horton et al. 2019). Salt Lake City has relatively fewer migratory bird species overhead during migration than other similarly sized metropolitan regions. Even though the relative exposure is low compared with other similar-sized cities, birds are attracted to and die at the buildings of Salt Lake City. The city can take a leadership position by reducing the amount of light escaping upward from lighting throughout the city and especially downtown to reduce this unfortunate outcome. Insects. Many families of insects are attracted to lights, including moths, lacewings, beetles, bugs, caddisflies, crane flies, midges, hoverflies, wasps, and bush crickets (Sustek 1999, Kolligs 2000, Eisenbeis 2006, Frank 2006, Longcore et al. 2015a). Any lamp with significant emissions 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Fall Exposure RankSalt Lake City New Orleans 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Area Rank APPENDIX D 102 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 12 in the ultraviolet or blue wavelengths is highly attractive to insects (Eisenbeis 2006, Frank 2006, van Langevelde et al. 2011, Barghini and de Medeiros 2012). Insects attracted to lights are subject to increased predation from a variety of predators, including bats, birds, skunks, toads, and spiders (Blake et al. 1994, Frank 2006). Moths are especially attracted to lights and they play a special role in the ecosystem as pollinators. Moths are killed in collisions with the lights or by becoming trapped in housings (Frank 1988, 2006). Short of death, this attraction removes native insects from their natural environments (Meyer and Sullivan 2013) in what Eisenbeis (2006) calls the “vacuum cleaner effect.” Attraction of insects by light results in significant reduction in pollination (Macgregor et al. 2015, Macgregor et al. 2017) and this effect spills over into daytime insect communities because of the decreased seed set and reproduction of plants (Knop et al. 2017). Bats. The responses of different bat species to lighting are complex (Rydell 2006). Some faster- flying and more maneuverable species will be attracted to lights, where they forage on insects also attracted to the lights. Slower and less maneuverable species will avoid lights, essentially being repulsed by their presence (Stone et al. 2009, Stone et al. 2012, Stone et al. 2015). Light at the entrance of a roost can keep bats from emerging for their nightly foraging (Boldogh et al. 2007). 2.3.2 Loss of Connectivity As is implied by the repulsion of some bat species by nighttime lighting, the presence of permanent outdoor lighting can severe landscape connectivity for wildlife species (Stone et al. 2009). The existence of the lights themselves, shielded or not, is sufficient to influence wildlife movement (Beier 1995, 2006). This phenomenon was illustrated by a radio telemetry study of young mountain lions in Orange County, California (Beier 1995): All travel in corridors and habitat peninsulas occurred at night. During overnight monitoring, the disperser usually avoided artificial lights when in the corridor or peninsula. For example, M12 [a juvenile mountain lion] consistently used dark areas as he rapidly (<4 hr) traveled the grassy ridge (6.0 X 1.5 km) separating San Juan Capistrano from San Clemente (Fig. 1). Also M12 seemed to use light cues when he negotiated the tightest part of the Pechanga Corridor; his consistent movements in the direction of the darkest horizon caused him to miss the only bridged undercrossing of I- 15. Overnight monitoring showed that dispersers especially avoided night-lights in conjunction with open terrain. On M12’s initial encounter with a well-lit sand factory and adjacent sand pits, he took 2 hours and 4 attempts to select a route that skirted the facility, after which he rested on a ridgetop for 2 hours. During 2 nights in the Arroyo Trabuco, M8 explored several small side canyons lacking woody vegetation. He followed each canyon to the ridgetop, where city lights were visible 300–800 m west. He stopped at each canyon ridgetop for 15–60 minutes before returning to the arroyo, without moving >100 m into the grasslands west of the ridgeline in view of the city lights. APPENDIX D 103 13 Further data on the use of underpasses and the influence of lighting on landscape connectivity have been reported. An experimental evaluation of underpass use by wildlife found that for mule deer, even nearby lights affected movement compared with a reference period (Bliss-Ketchum et al. 2016). Research conclusively shows that artificial night lighting can have an adverse impact on the foraging behavior of bat species, and exclude certain species from foraging routes or areas (Stone et al. 2009, Polak et al. 2011). 2.3.3 Foraging Small mammals respond to illumination in their foraging activities. For example, artificial light of 0.3 and 0.1 lux reduced the activity, movement, or food consumption of a cross-section of rodent species (Clarke 1983, Brillhart and Kaufman 1991, Vasquez 1994, Falkenberg and Clarke 1998, Kramer and Birney 2001). This phenomenon also has been shown in natural (in addition to laboratory) conditions (Kotler 1984a, Bliss-Ketchum et al. 2016, Wang and Shier 2017, Wang and Shier 2018). The driving force behind patterns of activity and foraging by animals influenced by artificial lights is presumably predation. Additional (artificial) light might increase success of visually foraging predators, thereby increasing risk to their prey, with one critical exception: prey species with a communal predator defence, such as schooling or flocking, have decreased risk of predation with additional light. Evidence for this general pattern continues to accrue. Partridge are documented to roost closer to each other on darker nights and can see predators farther away on lighter nights (Tillmann 2009). Some species of bats avoid artificial lights to reduce predation risk (Stone et al. 2009, Polak et al. 2011). A general review of nocturnal foraging suggests that night is a refuge with decreased overall predation on birds and mammals, and that foraging groups are larger at night, especially for clades that are not strictly nocturnal (Beauchamp 2007). Songbirds that were experimentally relocated moved back to their home ranges at night, a result that is most consistent with predator avoidance (Mukhin et al. 2009). Pollination is determined by foraging activities and the distribution of insect foragers, which in turn are susceptible to attraction, disorientation, and other behavioral disruptions from artificial lights (Knop et al. 2017). Predator-prey systems are tightly tied into lunar cycles, with many relationships affected by lunar phase (Williams 1936, Sutherland and Predavec 1999, Topping et al. 1999, Riou and Hamer 2008, Upham and Hafner 2013). Even within species, variation in color interacts with lunar cycle to affect foraging success. White-morph Barn Owls have an advantage foraging during the full moon because the light reflecting off their white feathers triggers their rodent prey to freeze in place, while Barn Owls with darker colored feathers do not have this advantage (San-Jose et al. 2019). Light pollution can be expected to interfere with such patterns (San-Jose et al. 2019). Predator-prey relations probably also drive the influence of artificial lighting on bird nest location. The one experimental study of the effect of streetlights on breeding bird density shows a negative impact (De Molenaar et al. 2006). The streetlights in De Molnenaar et al.’s study created a maximum illumination of 20 lux (1.8 footcandles). The adverse effects of these lights (decreased density of Black-tailed Godwit nests) were experienced up to 300 m (984 ft) from APPENDIX D 104 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 14 these lights, extending into areas with negligible increased illumination, which means that the adverse impact results from the light being visible, rather than the amount of light incident on the sensitive receptor. 2.3.4 Interference with Visual Communication Artificial light at night affects species such as fireflies that communicate visually at night with light. Although the distribution of fireflies is limited within the city, their recovery could be a laudable urban conservation goal. Artificial light washes out the signals that fireflies use for communication and is potentially contributing to the decline of fireflies and other organisms that rely on bioluminescent communication (Lloyd 2006, Hagen and Viviani 2009, Viviani et al. 2010, Bird and Parker 2014). A Brazilian study documented lower species richness of fireflies in areas of 0.2 lux and greater (even from sodium vapour lamps, which are otherwise considered to be more wildlife friendly), except for those few species that naturally fly at greater illumination (Hagen and Viviani 2009). 2.3.5 Physiological Responses Birds. The research on the effects of ambient and artificial lighting on bird reproduction goes back to the 1920s (Rawson 1923, Rowan 1938). Birds can be extremely sensitive to illumination, and extension of foraging by species under artificial lights is documented in the literature (Goertz et al. 1980, Sick and Teixeira 1981, Frey 1993, Rohweder and Baverstock 1996). Research shows an earlier start to seasonal breeding of birds in urban (lighted) environments than rural (dark) environments (Havlin 1964, Lack 1965). Many of the physiological impacts of lighting on birds are reviewed by De Molenaar et al. (2006) and Longcore (2010). • Dawn song in American Robins (Turdus migratorius) is influenced by ambient illumination (Miller 2006); • Dawn song and lay date in a songbird have been shown to be associated with proximity to streetlights, with evidence that this affected mate choice, which has implications for fitness (Kempenaers et al. 2010); • Light of 0.3 lux can move reproductive seasonality of songbirds by a month and cause irregular molt progression (Dominoni et al. 2013a, Dominoni et al. 2013b); • Light is a major driver of the daily activity patterns of songbirds (study animal European Blackbird; Turdus merula), causing them to be active earlier in the morning (Dominoni et al. 2014); • A songbird (Tree Sparrow; Passer montanus) exposed to 6 lux in the laboratory secreted luteinizing hormone earlier than controls, and urban birds exposed to 3–5 lux exhibited this pattern in the field; both of these response were statistically associated with night lighting (Zhang et al. 2014); • Artificial light outside of nest boxes affects perceived photoperiod of Great Tits (Parus major), which the authors interpret as creating an ecological trap (Titulaer et al. 2012); • Artificial light rather than traffic noise affects dawn and dusk song timing in common European songbirds (Da Silva et al. 2014). APPENDIX D 105 15 Artificial night lighting affects diurnal species substantially as well. As noted above, it affects timing of dawn and dusk song, seasonality of reproduction, mate choices, and can extend activities of diurnal species into the night (Stracey et al. 2014). Birds that sing earliest are responding to increases in illumination so faint that they are undetectable by humans (Thomas et al. 2002). This is true for impacts across species, where diurnal species are affected in numerous ways by an altered nighttime environment (Miller 2006, Kempenaers et al. 2010, Titulaer et al. 2012, Dominoni et al. 2013a, Dominoni et al. 2013b, Da Silva et al. 2014, Dominoni et al. 2014, Zhang et al. 2014, Da Silva et al. 2015). Mammals. Similar impacts on both seasonality and daily rhythms are documented for mammals. For example, lighting from a military base was shown to desynchronize the breeding time of tammar wallabies in the field in Australia, as well as to suppress nightly melatonin production (Robert et al. 2015). Studies on the physiological effects of light at night on mammals are abundant, partly because of the implications for understanding human health (e.g., Zubidat et al. 2007, Zubidat et al. 2010). As a whole, they show that artificial light at levels far less intense than previously assumed are able to entrain circadian rhythms and influence physiological functions such as immune response (Bedrosian et al. 2011). For example, extremely dim light is sufficient to entrain rhythms in mice, and can be done without phase shifting or reducing production of melatonin (other physiological indicators of light influence) (Butler and Silver 2011). For shorter wavelengths (blue and green) entrainment takes place at 10–3 lux. Much greater intensity, 0.4 lux, is needed for red light to entrain rhythms (Butler and Silver 2011). This research is consistent with recently documented differences in mice behaviour for exposure to 20 lux vs. 1 lux at night (Shuboni and Yan 2010). Mice that were exposed to dim (5 lux) light at night consumed the same amount of food as those under dark controls, but gained weight as a result of the shift in time of consumption (Fonken et al. 2010). Plants. Plants “anticipate” the dawn with a synchronized circadian clock and increase immune defence at the time of day when infection is most likely (Wang et al. 2011). The timing of resistance (R)-gene mediated defences in Arabidopsis to downy mildew is tied to the circadian system such that defences are greatest before dawn, when the mildew normally disperses its spores (Wang et al. 2011). Preliminary experiments show that carbon assimilation is lower in trees exposed to continuous night lighting, compared with controls in a “stereotypical urban setting” (Skaf et al. 2010). Some plants might use light-triggered circadian rhythms to synchronize expression of anti-herbivory compounds with periods of peak herbivory, leading to increased loss from herbivory in out-of-phase plants (Goodspeed et al. 2012). The importance of circadian rhythms in plants, for everything from disease response and flowering time to seed germination, and the potential for disruption by night lighting, has not been explored widely (Resco et al. 2009, Bennie et al. 2016). Light at night also affects the perception of seasonal change by plants and their associated physiological responses. Exposure to light at night is associated with earlier budburst in plants in the United Kingdom, in a pattern that cannot be explained by the greater temperatures in cities (ffrench-Constant et al. 2016). Trees exposed to nearby lights have long been observed to hold on to their leaves later in the fall (Briggs 2006, Škvareninová et al. 2017, Massetti 2018) and prevent seed set in plants cued to shorter daylengths (Palmer et al. 2017). APPENDIX D 106 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 16 3 Consideration of Spectrum in Municipal Street Lighting Systems The LED revolution in outdoor lighting has created new possibilities to select the spectral composition of lights. Unlike lighting technology of the past, such as high-pressure sodium or metal halide lamps, the range of colors that can be deployed using LEDs is wide. As a result, it is possible to select spectral profiles that can either reduce or increase the effects of a street lighting system on the visibility of stars in the night sky, on human circadian rhythms, and on wildlife (Longcore 2018). 3.1 Effects on Wildlife This review of the effects of lighting spectrum on wildlife is drawn from my recent article (Longcore 2018), which can be consulted for additional details. The effects of lights of different spectral composition on wildlife depends on the responses of different wildlife groups to those lights. A limited number of “response curves” are available that track the response for a species or group of species to light throughout the entire visible spectrum (and into the portion of the spectrum invisible to humans). These curves have been developed for insects in general, bees, moths, juvenile salmon, seabirds, and sea turtles. My colleagues and I have developed methods to compare different lamp types for their effects across these groups (Longcore et al. 2018a). Some patterns are clear. Insect attraction to LEDs is lower across the board when compared with lamps that emit ultraviolet light. Both “warm” and “cold” LEDs have been compared with metal halide and mercury vapor lamps and found to attract less than a tenth of the number of insects, a finding that is attributable to the difference in ultraviolet emissions (Eisenbeis and Eick 2011). Conversely, most broad-spectrum LEDs used in outdoor lighting do have a potential to adversely impact the perception of daylength (and thus seasonality) in plants, because the peak sensitivity of the phytochromes that detect daylength are in range of LED peak emissions for most full- spectrum LEDs. Several approaches are available to summarize the quality of light from different sources. One is to use the Correlated Color Temperature (CCT). This metric, although imperfect, is widely used in lighting design. Some jurisdictions that regulating lighting to protect species have a hard cut- off (e.g., no light allowed < 540 nm) or measure the amount of light emitted below certain thresholds. Another possible metric is the degree to which a light interferes with the non-image forming photoreceptors that result in disruption in circadian rhythms in humans, because nearly all vertebrates will have a similar response curve for suppression of melatonin production at night. Drawing on data from Longcore et al. (2018a), the response of different wildlife groups against these possible metrics describing spectrum were plotted (Figure 12). Across all groups, less blue light (shorter wavelengths) resulted in lower effects. As for metrics to describe this pattern, correlation with CCT was strong, but melanopic lux (the brightness of the light as sensed by melanopsin) correlated the best. These results will only hold true for lamps without ultraviolet or violet emissions, however. APPENDIX D 107 17 Figure 12: Relationship of modeled effect of lamps on different wildlife species or groups (juvenile salmon, Newell’s shearwater, sea turtles, insects, and their average) with percent emissions <530 m, % emissions < 500 nm, correlated color temperature (CCT), and melanopic power of the lamps. Data from (Longcore et al. 2018b). CCT is not a perfect predictor of effects on wildlife, but it is a reasonable rule of thumb that lower CCT will be less disruptive to wildlife and we already know that it will be less disruptive for circadian rhythms and astronomical observation (Aubé et al. 2013). The lamps with the lowest projected influence on wildlife overall were low pressure sodium (which is being phased out), high pressure sodium, PC amber LEDs, and filtered LEDs (Figure 13). APPENDIX D 108 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 18 Figure 13: Relationship of correlated color temperature to average wildlife sensitivity with lamps and illuminants labelled. Data from (Longcore et al. 2018b). These results represent the predicted effects of the lamps on wildlife. To account for preferences in outdoor lighting, another ranking was created that incorporated a penalty for low color rendering index (CRI). Any lamp with a CRI over 75 was assumed to have adequate color rendering, while those with lower CRI were penalized in the overall index. The resulting ranking of lamps is notable in that low pressure sodium ranks lower because of its extremely low CRI, while PC Amber and filtered LEDs rank the highest, balancing both lower wildlife impacts with reasonable if not high CRIs (Figure 14). As a rule of thumb, CCT can be used as an indicator of wildlife effects, but this may not hold true across all applications. Migrating birds cannot orient under red light and therefore solid red lights are to be avoided on communication towers (Longcore et al. 2008). Green light has support for minimizing attraction of nocturnal migrant birds (Poot et al. 2008). Many other special cases exist and would require consultation with experts on a taxonomic group or species at risk. For the species of concern in Salt Lake City, however, including insects as indicators of riparian health, bats, and nesting birds, lower CCT will decrease ecological impacts when combined with other good street lighting practices (low glare, no uplight, appropriate intensity, and only lighting when warranted). APPENDIX D 109 19 Figure 14: Ranking of lighting sources that equally weights wildlife response, melanopic response, astronomical light pollution (Star Light Index (Aubé et al. 2013)), and Color Rendering Index. Reprinted from (Longcore et al. 2018b). Shorter bars represent a combination of lower wildlife responses and higher CRI. None of the effects measured with these metrics addresses the scattering of light in the atmosphere, but tools to evaluate the effects of different spectra on astronomical light pollution are available to do that. 3.2 Effects on Dark Skies The introduction and widespread adoption of 4000K and greater LED streetlights poses a significant threat to astronomical observation and the quality of the night sky as a recreational amenity. It is well-established that the preponderance of light at shorter wavelengths found in high color temperature LEDs scatters more in the atmosphere and if replacing high-pressure sodium lamps with similar intensity and shielding, will result in degradation of the night sky (Kinzey et al. 2017). The effects of the adoption of high color temperature LEDs were quickly noticed and documented by night sky advocates, who could see the degree to which full- spectrum white lights adversely impacted the aesthetics of the night sky when compared with lower color temperature high-pressure sodium systems (Figure 15). APPENDIX D 110 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 20 Figure 15. View eastward from Antelope Island State Park, showing visible effect of spectrum on night sky aesthetics. Photo from park’s application to become recognized as a Dark Sky Park by the International Dark-Sky Association (2017). Although the U.S. Department of Energy originally paid little attention to the adverse environmental impacts of high-color temperature LEDs, focusing instead solely on energy savings, it has recently returned to this question and issued a report (Kinzey et al. 2017) investigating the role of lamp spectrum in degradation of the night sky, measured as sky glow. Rather than focusing solely on spectrum, the report investigates the influence of associated variables that are commonly adjusted in the process of converting from older lighting technology to LEDs. For example, it is common for older lamps to have a drop lens below the lamp that results in a portion of the light being reflected upward, above the horizontal plane from the lamp. It has also become increasingly common for full-spectrum LEDs (e.g., at CCT 2700–4200 K) to be reduced in measured intensity for daytime (photopic) vision when compared with the high- pressure sodium lamp that the LED is replacing. Such reductions in intensity result from complaints from residents that the new LEDs, although producing the same (photopic) illumination (in lux) as the HPS, are perceived as far brighter because they intersect more with the sensitivity of human dark-adapted (scotopic) vision. It is therefore often possible to reduce the intensity of LEDs (measured in photopic lux) compared with HPS and still achieve equal or greater visibility. The study modeled the effects of different combinations of spectrum, uplight, and intensity under different weather conditions, human vision adaptation levels, and distance from the lights. For the purpose of illustration, the nearby viewer results are reproduced here (Figure 16). These results compare high-pressure sodium as the baseline, with PC Amber LED (1872 K), and 2700– 6100 K LEDs. When compared on an equal basis for other factors (same uplight and intensity), only the PC Amber produced roughly equivalent light pollution compared with HPS and all full- spectrum LEDs produced significantly more light pollution, especially when considering human night vision. When both HPS and LEDs were assumed to have 0% uplight and the LEDs were set at half the intensity of the LEDs, then LEDs with CCT < 3000 K were comparable to or produced less light pollution than HPS. Results were similar with HPS at 2% uplight and LEDs at 0% uplight and 50% intensity. The take-home message of this research for the Salt Lake City street lighting master plan is that for LED lamps lights to reduce light pollution compared with the previously common HPS lamps, they must be 0% uplight, 50% less bright, and with a CCT of no greater than 3000 K. The minimum impact on light pollution could be achieved with PC Amber or comparable filtered LEDs that produce a similar CCT as HPS (~ 1800 K). APPENDIX D 111 21 Figure 16. Comparison of light pollution from different LED spectral power distributions (SPDs) with light pollution from a high-pressure sodium light (horizontal dotted red line). SPDs (see right): SPD5: 1872 K (PC Amber), SPD6 = 2704 K, SPD7 = 2981 K, SPD8 = 3940 K, SPD9 = 4101 K, SPD10 = 5197 K, SPD11 = 6101 K. APPENDIX D 112 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 22 3.3 Human Circadian Rhythms It is only in the last twenty years that the mechanism by which light affects human circadian rhythms has been discovered (Berson et al. 2002). The human eye has non-image forming retinal ganglion cells that detect light and perhaps contribute to perception of brightness but not to discerning objects (Hattar et al. 2002). The pigment that detects the light is called melanopsin and it differs in its sensitivity to light from the rods and cones that humans use for vision (Brainard et al. 2001, Schmidt and Kofuji 2009). The peak sensitivity of melanopsin is around 480 nm, in the middle of the blue portion of the spectrum. Evidence is strong that chronic exposure to light at night increases risk of cancer, diabetes, obesity, and heart disease (Fonken and Nelson 2014, Bedrosian et al. 2016, Lunn et al. 2017). The question for human circadian impacts from outdoor lighting is whether the exposures are bright enough and whether time of exposure is sufficient to affect circadian rhythms. Circadian rhythms can be affected by light in many pathways. The first pathway is suppression of melatonin through exposure in the evening, especially after dusk. This exposure could be indoors or outdoors, either in the sleeping habitat or not. Dose-response curves for light exposure and melatonin suppression have been developed and it is the basis for the definition of Circadian Light (Rea et al. 2010). The second pathway is through sleep disruption through exposure to light in the sleeping habitat, even if the light levels are insufficient to suppress melatonin. Lack of sleep and reduced long wave sleep, which is critical to recovery and repair (Cho et al. 2016), can result from disturbance glare, as anyone ever awakened by moonlight can attest. It remains an open question whether indoor exposure to street lighting is of sufficient magnitude to affect circadian rhythms directly, but recent research investigating light spectrum and cancer risk suggests that the color of light outdoors in the vicinity of residences is an important risk factor (Garcia-Saenz et al. 2018). The influence of outdoor lighting on sleep has been investigated through epidemiological studies that measure exposure using satellites, epidemiological studies using portable individual-level measuring devices (comparing with satellite measures), and experimental studies in humans. A set of studies from Haim, Kloog, Portnov, and colleagues provided correlational data connecting satellite-measured light at night from the DMSP OLS system to breast and prostate cancer, indicating a connection between outdoor lighting levels and rates of these cancers (Kloog et al. 2008, Kloog et al. 2009a, Kloog et al. 2009b, Kloog et al. 2010, Kloog et al. 2011, Haim and Portnov 2013). Similar studies have reinforced these findings in different populations around the world (Bauer et al. 2013, Hurley et al. 2014, James et al. 2017). Studies investigating sleep as the outcome also find an association with satellite-measured outdoor lighting. For example, those in the higher exposure to light at night in South Korea as measured by DMSP were 20% more likely to sleep less than 6 hours per night and on average slept 30 minutes less than subjects in areas with lower outdoor lighting levels (Koo et al. 2016). In a study in the United States, higher levels of outdoor lighting as measured by DMSP was significantly associated with reporting < 6 hours of sleep per night, an effect that remained in APPENDIX D 113 23 place even after accounting for noise and population density (Ohayon and Milesi 2016). In this study, people who lived in the brightest areas were more likely to go to bed later, get up later, and sleep less. They also were more likely to report that they were dissatisfied with sleep quality or quantity and to be sleepy during the day. DMSP-measured light at night was negatively associated with restorative long wave sleep. Importantly, this study validated that brightness in bedrooms correlated positively with satellite-measured outdoor light (Ohayon and Milesi 2016). Satellite-measured light at night was also associated with the use of more drugs for insomnia in a second South Korean study (Min and Min 2018). Residents living in the lowest two quartiles of light at night as measured by DMSP used significantly less insomnia medication, even after accounting for age, sex, population density, income, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol consumption, exercise, and psychiatric disease. Mean use of insomnia medication increased with each quartile of light exposure from lowest to highest for each of three insomnia medications (Min and Min 2018). Most recently, a study of the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study cohort in the United States investigated sleep and exposure to light at night as measured by the DMSP satellite (Xiao et al. 2020). The highest levels of light exposure associated with 16% (women) and 25% (men) increased probability of reporting short or very short sleep duration. Probability of reporting short or very short sleep increased from lowest to highest quintiles of light at night in models that adjusted for age, race, marital status, state of residency, smoking, alcohol, vigorous physical activity, TV viewing, and median home value, population density and poverty rate at census tract level (Xiao et al. 2020). The authors concluded that, “Taken together, these findings suggest that the prevalence of sleep deficiency is higher in places with higher levels of LAN [Light at Night]” (Xiao et al. 2020). While studies using remotely sensed data detect associations between sleep disturbance, circadian disruption, and associated diseases and light at night, others question the relationship between outdoor lighting and indoor exposure to light at night. Leaving aside the point that outdoor exposure to lighting can also contribute to circadian disruption, these studies focus on relationships between indoor and outdoor exposure. Recent work confirms the relationship between ground-level irradiance outdoors and satellite-based proxies for light at night. Using a dataset or 515 ground-based measurements of illumination from the upper hemisphere, Simons et al. (2020) showed that ground-based light exposure correlates highly with remotely-sensed light (VIIRS DNB annual composite) and even more with the New World Atlas of Artificial Night Sky Brightness (Falchi et al. 2016). This work conclusively establishes that satellite- measured light at night is a proxy for ambient light in the environment on the ground at night, as one would expect. With this relationship now established (Simons et al. 2020), in retrospect the individual-level studies of correlation between indoor light levels and satellite-measurements of light at night are testing whether increased outdoor light levels correlate with higher indoor light levels and documenting what those indoor levels might be. Along these lines, Rea et al. (2011) used a Daysimeter device with a resolution of 0.1 lux and found that DMSP measurements had “no apparent relationship” with personal-level exposure. The study concluded that outdoor lighting could have little effect on circadian rhythms in their study population of teachers in upstate New York, basing this conclusion on the assumption that measurable melatonin suppression would be APPENDIX D 114 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 24 needed to cause sleep disruption. That is, they assume that light equivalent to a full moon shining into a sleeping environment cannot affect sleep or circadian rhythms, which is a dubious assumption. In a more recent Dutch study, individual-level light exposure for children was measured indoors with a device that had a resolution of 0.1 lux (Huss et al. 2019). They found an influence of outdoor light on indoor light during the darkest time period with a correlation of 0.31. It should be noted, however, that 94% of the children in the study had curtains that controlled light entering the room. In a survey of lighting designers using their own light meters, Miller and Kinzey (2018) reported measurements in a number of different contexts within homes. At windows without drapes a maximum of 20 lux was reported, with a mean of 5 lux and median of 0.5 lux. All of these dramatically elevated above natural conditions (a full moon would produce 0.1–0.2 lux). Experiments that involve exposures to light at night document illumination levels that affect health and sleep outcomes. Sleeping under 5 lux of 5779 K light caused more frequent arousals, more shallow sleep, and more REM sleep (at the expense of long wave deep sleep) (Cho et al. 2016). Light greater than 3 lux during the last hour of sleep was associated with weight gain in an elderly population (Obayashi et al. 2016). In another study of an elderly population, increased light at night and especially light at night > 5 lux was associated with 89% increased risk of depression (Obayashi et al. 2013). Further studies indicate that elevated illumination is associated with higher blood pressure as well, with associated excess deaths, at 3, 5, and 10 lux exposures (Obayashi et al. 2014). Metrics of sleep quality (efficiency) were also consistently lower with higher illumination at each category (3, 5, and 10 lux) (Obayashi et al. 2014). Taken together, this research is consistent with a few different interpretations of the influence of outdoor lighting on human circadian rhythms and health outcomes. It is possible that the correlations between light at night and adverse health outcomes indicate instead variation in another factor, such as air pollution, as suggested by Huss et al. (2019). The robustness of sleep disruption correlations when controlling for population density, however, argues against that interpretation (Ohayon and Milesi 2016). Xiao et al. consider this question and conclude: “[I]t is also possible that the observed associations in our study population represent a true relationship, but primarily driven by individuals whose ALAN exposure was more heavily influenced by outdoor ALAN (e.g. individuals living in rooms facing bright streets and/or with insufficient window treatments to block out light, or individuals with a high amount of nighttime activities outside home).” Such an interpretation, that outdoor light can influence indoor sleeping environments and associated sleep and health outcomes, is consistent with the literature as it currently stands. Accepting a plausible argument that outdoor lighting affects human sleep in at least some contexts that depend on factors associated with socioeconomic status, the following areas of concern follow for design of a street lighting system. First, attention should be paid to minimize direct glare into windows of any habitable structure. One cannot assume that people only sleep in bedrooms; residents challenged by housing costs often use many rooms in apartments and houses for sleeping environments and the safest assumption is that any room in a residence might be used for sleeping. The assumption should also not be made that all residents have or can afford blackout shades or curtains. This becomes an issue of environmental justice; circadian disruption is exacerbated in low income communities APPENDIX D 115 25 (Xiao et al. 2020), presumably because the same amount of light results in more impact because of a lack of capacity to block light. Second, circadian responses that result from melatonin suppression are heavily dependent on the spectrum of light. As light is concentrated closer to the wavelengths of peak sensitivity for melanopsin, the intensity of light (measured in lux) required to suppress melatonin decreases (Grubisic et al. 2019). At 424 nm, the minimum illuminance for melatonin suppression is 0.1 lux (Souman et al. 2018). The relative impact of different lighting sources can be predicted using the melanopic response curve (Aubé et al. 2013, Longcore et al. 2018a). To illustrate this approach, the melanopic power of lamp sources was standardized to compare with high pressure sodium (HPS; Figure 17). All full-spectrum LED sources have a greater potential circadian impact than HPS, including 2200 K (1.5 times HPS), 3200 K (2.5 times HPS), and 4300 K (3 times HPS). Figure 17. Ranking of light sources by melanopic response (i.e. potential for circadian disruption), compared with a typical High Pressure Sodium (HPS) lamp. Green colors have equal or less melanopic response per lux, while purple colors have more melanopic response per lux than HPS. The sources that would have the lowest circadian impact are filtered LEDs that avoid the blue portion of the spectrum almost entirely, or PC amber LEDs that do the same. Calculations have not been done to compare LEDs at 50% intensity as has been done for astronomical light pollution impacts. It is reasonable to assume that a similar result would be obtained, with a reducing 50% in intensity for a ~3000K LED compared with HPS bringing it into parity with the potential circadian disruption potential of HPS. Anna's Light LPS 18 W AEL 75W PC Amber Cree 74 WW CW10 74 WW CW7 150 W HPS LLT Telescope Light Kerosene Oil Lumican 2251K LSG Good Night 2016 CFL Greenlite 13 W Iwasaki 60W Philips AmbientLED Cosmopolis 60W Ceramic Metal Halide 70 W 3000K LED A OCTRON 32 W Los Angeles LED Yard Blaster Full moon LEDway Streetlight CW 54W TL950 SORAA Vivid D65 0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% Circadian Impact Relative to HPS APPENDIX D 116 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 26 Third, planning for a healthy circadian environment should recognize high variation between individuals in their sensitivity to light, including a 50-fold variation between people in melatonin response to light exposure (Phillips et al. 2019). Children are more sensitive to disruption from light at night than adults (Nagare et al. 2019). Office workers exposed only to dim light during the day are more sensitive to disruption from light at night than those who work outside. Men are more sensitive to light at night, including decreased “long sleep” with increased exposure (Xiao et al. 2020). Some individuals are debilitated by the visual glare from LEDs that are not properly directed and diffused (Ticleanu and Littlefair 2015). A fair and equitable lighting design approach would recognize a need to accommodate the most sensitive individuals in society in a manner that still allows lighting to achieve its goal of providing a safe environment for pedestrians, cyclists, and people in vehicles. Because some of the medical conditions that are exacerbated by glare may be considered disabilities, it furthermore might be a prudent risk management step to explicitly incorporate these concerns in design to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Published studies thus far have not shown a decrease in traffic accidents associated with conversion to full-spectrum white LEDs (e.g., >2700 K) (Marchant et al. 2020). Total pedestrian and cyclist deaths in Los Angeles have increased since conversion from HPS to 3000–4300 K LEDs in 2009.1 Whatever marginal benefits might be associated with higher CCT street lighting, they have not been sufficient to result in significant decreases in accidents that have been documented in published studies. Although a full cost-benefit analysis is beyond the scope of this report and should be the subject of future research, a prudent approach to balance these human health and safety issues is to: use the lowest CCT deemed acceptable, specify high-quality optics to ensure delivery of light on desired surfaces instead of as glare, and avoid light trespass onto windows of any residential property. 1 See https://la.streetsblog.org/2019/10/29/vision-non-zero-the-human-and-financial-toll-of-los-angeles-dangerous- roads/ APPENDIX D 117 27 4 Design Strategies for a Healthy Nocturnal Infrastructure With the adoption of a Street Lighting Master Plan, an opportunity arises to reduce unwanted outcomes from outdoor lighting that might include degradation of the experience of the night sky in the region, disruption of human circadian rhythms, and interference with behavior of sensitive wildlife species within the city. Strategies are available to reduce these impacts, some of which can be implemented at all locations where street lighting is warranted, and others that could be applied in zones with sensitive resources or known adverse impacts. 4.1 Systemwide Approaches Reducing the adverse effects of artificial light at night is a matter of ensuring that the light is away enough for the identified need, but not more. 4.1.1 Need-based Lighting In defining the terms under which street lighting is warranted, consideration should be given in all instances to the threshold for need to ensure that the installation is supported by verifiable benefits. The need for lighting at night is in part a subjective judgment based on human feelings, so equal consideration should be given to those who are more comfortable with less light as to those who desire more light and final determinations made through a transparent and fair process that evaluates the costs and benefits. 4.1.2 Shielding and Directionality For all of the reasons discussed in this report, lights should be directed toward their intended targets (mostly roads and sidewalks) and not upwards or into other locations where sensitive receptors might be present (e.g., bedroom windows, habitats). This consideration will usually be built into a modern street lighting plan through specification of luminaire performance in terms of backlight, uplight, and glare. Uplight should be assiduously avoided throughout the system. This step alone will significantly reduce the current contribution of Salt Lake City to light pollution in the region as viewed from the surrounding open spaces and natural lands. 4.1.3 Intensity, Dimming, and Controls Any time a natural environment is experiencing illumination greater than the full moon (>0.1 lux), or even greater than a quarter moon (0.01 lux), one can assume that species are being affected. This is the case because many species show lunar cycles in behavior, often driven by predator–prey relationships that can be interrupted by elevated illumination (Price et al. 1984, Daly et al. 1992, Upham and Hafner 2013). For example, light as dim as 0.01 lux can inhibit foraging by small rodent species (Kotler 1984b). Strategies that could be deployed around light intensity across the street lighting system include setting the maximum intensity of lights lower, dimming or extinguishing lights according to a pre-set schedule, and use of programmable and flexible controls to adjust intensity in response to need. APPENDIX D 118 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 28 1. If full-spectrum LEDs are to be used (e.g., 2700K, 3000K), then the intensity must be at least half of that measured (in lux) for high pressure sodium to avoid increased light pollution impacts. Lower color temperature LEDs (e.g., 1800K, 2000K, 2200K) would require testing to set the maximum operational intensity to achieve system objectives. 2. Regularly programmed dimming or shut-off is a possibility for the system. Part-night lighting, where lights are shut off after a curfew is an improvement over whole-night lighting for bats but not adequate to reduce all impacts (Azam et al. 2015, Day et al. 2015). For the whole system in Salt Lake City, a dimming schedule, especially for residential areas, that reduced output from (for example) midnight to 5 a.m. seems feasible and would reduce overall contribution to regional light pollution, reduce human circadian disruption, and save energy. 3. Controls can be used as a complement to a lower overall intensity setting. When additional illumination is needed, in coordination with City officials, lighting levels can be increased during the period of the need and then reduce to the “normal” level. Controls can also be used on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis to find the illumination level that is most consistent with and useful within the character of the neighborhood. 4.1.4 Spectrum The unwanted impacts of the street lighting system would be minimized by using the lowest possible CCT for the most lights in the system. For wildlife, human health, and preserving dark skies, the preferable choice would be lamps with CCT <2000K. Other considerations lead to the use of higher color temperatures in some zones, but the lower the color temperature can be kept on average, the greater the environmental benefit. Low CCT lights are commercially available. For example, Signify makes 1800K cobra-head street lights (StreetView, RoadView, EcoForm, RoadStar) and decorative models as well (Domus, MetroScape, UrbanScape, LytePro). Cyclone produces a 1800K street light, as does Ignia Light (Figure 18). SNOC provides a 2200K light that mixes white and amber diodes, as does Ignia Light (Figure 19). Lumican also sells a range of street light luminaires that include 1700K through 2200K. RAB lighting sells a 2000K luminaire (Triboro) to match the color of HPS (https://www.rablighting.com/feature/led-roadway-lighting-triboro; Figure 20). Siteco sells 1750K, 1900K and 2200K street lights. CWES builds luminaire systems that use a warm white LED and a filter to avoid blue light emissions while keeping lumens per Watt high in comparison with 2700K and 3000K LEDs (Figure 21). Some communities in Utah are even manufacturing their own filters to protect the night sky and the tourism industry associated with it (Figure 22). Where full-spectrum light is desired for aesthetic reasons or other considerations, it should in no instance exceed 3000K and preferably not 2700K. Lower CCTs should be considered for residential neighborhoods citywide as acceptable to City officials and residents. APPENDIX D 119 29 Figure 18. Application of PC Amber lights by Ignia Light. Figure 19. Demonstration of mix of white and amber diodes to produce 2200K light for a roadway application by Ignia Light. Figure 20. RAB application of 2000K light to match color of High Pressure Sodium lamps. APPENDIX D 120 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 30 Figure 21. C+W Energy Solutions provides filtered LEDs that use with a warm white LED and filter blue light, resulting in a greenish yellow color that contrasts with yellow light of stop lights. Figure 22. Ivins, Utah is using filtered LEDs to protect the night sky (https://www.kuer.org/post/fast-growing-southwest-utah-one-city-organizes-protect-night- sky#stream/). 4.2 Ecological Overlay Strategies In addition to systemwide strategies, which would be implemented throughout all instances of land uses and road segment conditions (e.g., roadway type and associated land use combinations), several ecological overlay strategies would be appropriate that recognize the sensitive natural resources of Salt Lake City. These strategies are tailored to geographic regions where modifications to the light specifications could be used to reduce unwanted environmental impacts. APPENDIX D 121 31 Each of these strategies is based on a geographic footprint. Spatial data to delineate these regions were either obtained from custodians of those data or digitized by hand based on aerial photograph interpretation. These data sources include: • Important Bird Areas (from National Audubon Society spatial data webserver); • Bird Collision Survey Zone (digitized from map provided by Tracy Aviary); • Parcels that intersect with Critical Wildlife Habitat (digitized from Salt Lake City open space acquisition plan); • Jordan River Habitat Zone (digitized from aerial photograph interpretation of natural habitat); • Urban Creek Zone (digitized from aerial photograph interpretation of natural habitat); and • Community Parks and Neighborhood Parks (from Salt Lake City spatial data webserver). The digitized habitat zones could be revised with field checks. The purpose of these layers is only to classify roadway lengths for lighting strategies and should not be interpreted as a precise mapping of habitat values. Figure 23. Zones considered for ecological lighting strategies. A set of additional guidance to reduce impacts that are targeted to the resources in each of these zones is proposed (Table 1). APPENDIX D 122 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 32 Table 1. Strategy matrix for ecological overlay zones and major land uses. Strategy Uplight Spectrum (CCT K) Dimming Part-night lighting Intensity (of HPS lumens) Commercial / Bird collision zone 0.02 ≤3000 During migration No 50% Critical Wildlife Habitat 0 ≤2200K No No 50% Community Parks Natural Lands 0 ≤2200K No Yes 50% Jordan River 0 ≤1900K No Yes 50% Urban Creeks 0 ≤1900K No Yes 50% 4.2.1 Bird Collision Zone The area which is currently monitored for bird collisions is found in the central business district. It is also the brightest location when observing the region from space. Mortality of birds results from the mixture of lights that attract nocturnally migrating birds with the presence of tall buildings with large expanses of glass with which bird collide. The lights draw the birds in and then the glass kills them (Sheppard and Phillips 2015). Current lighting in this zone includes many decorative lights that are not yet shielded to direct light downward. The high lighting levels provided in a commercial zone with the lack of shielding explains the brightness of this area from above at night. Recognizing the need for lighting appropriate for a commercial business district and its level of activities leads to a suggestion of compromise for lighting. Rather than proposing no uplight, even reducing uplight to 2% would represent a dramatic improvement over existing conditions. If no uplight is possible, it would be preferable. Color temperature in this area, and other commercial zones, should be capped at 3000 K. Intensity of lights should be set to 50% of that measured for previous high-pressure sodium lamps to account for human sensitivity to 3000 K lights. With full controls available for the system, a dimming program could be further implemented during peak migration periods (April/May and September/October). If only one period is chosen, it should be fall because the fall migration includes all of the young of the year, which are especially susceptible to collision. Such additional dimming could be implemented either all night or after midnight or another set time. For this area, actions on the part of the City might catalyze participation in mitigation approaches by property managers (Light Out Salt Lake organized by the Tracy Aviary); turning lights out inside buildings at night would further reduce attraction of birds and resulting mortality. 4.2.2 Critical Wildlife Habitat Zone The region that intersects with parcels containing critical wildlife habitat is found in the foothills to the east of downtown and then in the flat shorelands to the west. The western area also includes the two globally significant Important Bird Areas. Because this zone contains a range of land uses, including commercial, industrial, and residential areas, the proposal is to match the low color temperature of previous lighting systems (e.g., 2000–2200 K) with full cut-off lighting APPENDIX D 123 33 to reduce impacts on nearby sensitive resources. This lower temperature is especially important near the Great Salt Lake, which is a source of fog (Hill 1988). Fog is extremely efficient at reflecting light and recent research has shown that foggy conditions result in a 6-fold increase in night sky brightness (a measure of light pollution) (Ściężor et al. 2012). Fog also scatters light down into habitats. Full cut-off lighting at a low enough color temperature to allow reasonable color rendering should balance the needs of the land uses in these zones with the sensitive resources found there. 4.2.3 Jordan River and Urban Creeks The Jordan River and the urban creeks cut through the street grid such that they intersect with only a few street lights along any given segment. It might therefore be possible to minimize impacts to these riparian zones by using low color temperature lights as street segment intersect these zones. Two major considerations in riparian zones are insect attraction and bat impacts, since both groups will be found at higher density in these zones. Best practices for reducing impacts to bats (Voigt et al. 2018) include a limit on light at the edge of habitat of 0.1 lux, avoiding direct glare into habitats, and seeking to avoid light <540 nm. A low CCT light would minimize insect attraction (Longcore et al. 2018a). Red lights are being used in Europe to minimize impacts to bats (Spoelstra et al. 2017) but it is not clear if red light would be acceptable within this context. 4.2.4 Community Parks and Natural Lands Community parks and natural lands may contain sensitive species and often have areas that are closed after dark. Lighting surrounding them could be limited in CCT to 2200 K and lights on roads within parks might be shut off after a curfew. Darkness in these instances can serve to reduce unwanted activity because any lights brought into a dark park would indicate unallowable activity. Recommendations for community parks and natural lands will probably need to be tailored by site to accommodate variations in use, park type, and surrounding land uses. Tracy Aviary is located in a community park and has captive birds that are kept outdoors. Reducing or eliminating street lighting around any outdoor exclosures with captive birds is recommended for the health of the birds. APPENDIX E 124 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 34 5 References Andres, B., R. Clay, and C. Duncan. 20016. Shorebird species of conservation concern in the Western Hemisphere. Western Hemispher Shorebird Reserve Network. Aubé, M., J. Roby, and M. Kocifaj. 2013. Evaluating potential spectral impacts of various artificial lights on melatonin suppression, photosynthesis, and star visibility. PLoS ONE 8:e67798. Azam, C., C. Kerbiriou, A. Vernet, J.-F. Julien, Y. Bas, L. Plichard, J. Maratrat, and I. Le Viol. 2015. Is part-night lighting an effective measure to limit the impacts of artificial lighting on bats? Global Change Biology 21:4333–4341. Bará, S., Á. Rodríguez-Arós, M. Pérez, B. Tosar, R. C. Lima, A. Sánchez de Miguel, and J. Zamorano. 2017. Estimating the relative contribution of streetlights, vehicles, and residential lighting to the urban night sky brightness. Lighting Research & Technology:1477153518808337. Barghini, A., and B. A. S. de Medeiros. 2012. UV radiation as an attractor for insects. Leukos 9:47–56. Bauer, S. E., S. E. Wagner, J. Burch, R. Bayakly, and J. E. Vena. 2013. A case-referent study: light at night and breast cancer risk in Georgia. International Journal of Health Geographics 12:23. Beauchamp, G. 2007. Exploring the role of vision in social foraging: what happens to group size, vigilance, spacing, aggression and habitat use in birds and mammals that forage at night? Biological Reviews 82:511–525. Bedrosian, T. A., L. K. Fonken, and R. J. Nelson. 2016. Endocrine effects of circadian disruption. Annual Review of Physiology 78:109–131. Bedrosian, T. A., L. K. Fonken, J. C. Walton, and R. J. Nelson. 2011. Chronic exposure to dim light at night suppresses immune response in Siberian hamsters. Biology Letters 7:468– 471. Beier, P. 1995. Dispersal of juvenile cougars in fragmented habitat. Journal of Wildlife Management 59:228–237. Beier, P. 2006. Effects of artificial night lighting on terrestrial mammals. Pages 19–42 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Bennie, J., T. W. Davies, D. Cruse, and K. J. Gaston. 2016. Ecological effects of artificial light at night on wild plants. Journal of Ecology 104:611–620. Berson, D. M., F. A. Dunn, and M. Takao. 2002. Phototransduction by retinal ganglion cells that set the circadian clock. Science 295:1070–1073. Bird, S., and J. Parker. 2014. Low levels of light pollution may block the ability of male glow- worms (Lampyris noctiluca L.) to locate females. Journal of Insect Conservation 18:737– 743. Blake, D., A. M. Hutson, P. A. Racey, J. Rydell, and J. R. Speakman. 1994. Use of lamplit roads by foraging bats in southern England. Journal of Zoology (London) 234:453–462. Bliss-Ketchum, L. L., C. E. de Rivera, B. C. Turner, and D. M. Weisbaum. 2016. The effect of artificial light on wildlife use of a passage structure. Biological Conservation 199:25–28. Boldogh, S., D. Dobrosi, and P. Samu. 2007. The effects of the illumination of buildings on house-dwelling bats and its conservation consequences. Acta Chiropterologica 9:527– 534. APPENDIX D 125 35 Brainard, G. C., J. P. Hanifin, J. M. Greeson, B. Byrne, G. Glickman, E. Gerner, and M. D. Rollag. 2001. Action spectrum for melatonin regulation in humans: evidence for a novel circadian photoreceptor. Journal of Neuroscience 21:6405–6412. Briggs, W. R. 2006. Physiology of plant responses to artificial lighting. Pages 389–411 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, DC. Brillhart, D. B., and D. W. Kaufman. 1991. Influence of illumination and surface structure on space use by prairie deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus bairdii). Journal of Mammalogy 72:764–768. Butler, M. P., and R. Silver. 2011. Divergent photic thresholds in the non-image-forming visual system: entrainment, masking and pupillary light reflex. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences 278:745–750. Cabrera-Cruz, S. A., J. A. Smolinsky, and J. J. Buler. 2018. Light pollution is greatest within migration passage areas for nocturnally-migrating birds around the world. Scientific Reports 8:3261. Cho, C.-H., H.-J. Lee, H.-K. Yoon, S.-G. Kang, K.-N. Bok, K.-Y. Jung, L. Kim, and E.-I. Lee. 2016. Exposure to dim artificial light at night increases REM sleep and awakenings in humans. Chronobiology International 33:117–123. Clarke, J. A. 1983. Moonlight's influence on predator/prey interactions between Short-eared Owls (Asio flammeus) and deermice (Peromyscus maniculatus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 13:205–209. Da Silva, A., J. M. Samplonius, E. Schlicht, M. Valcu, and B. Kempenaers. 2014. Artificial night lighting rather than traffic noise affects the daily timing of dawn and dusk singing in common European songbirds. Behavioral Ecology 25:1037–1047. Da Silva, A., M. Valcu, and B. Kempenaers. 2015. Light pollution alters the phenology of dawn and dusk singing in common European songbirds. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 370:20140126. Daly, M., P. R. Behrends, M. I. Wilson, and L. F. Jacobs. 1992. Behavioural modulation of predation risk: moonlight avoidance and crespuscular compensation in a nocturnal desert rodent, Dipodomys merriami. Animal Behaviour 44:1–9. Day, J., J. Baker, H. Schofield, F. Mathews, and K. J. Gaston. 2015. Part-night lighting: implications for bat conservation. Animal Conservation 18:512–516. De Molenaar, J. G., M. E. Sanders, and D. A. Jonkers. 2006. Road lighting and grassland birds: local influence of road lighting on a Black-tailed Godwit population. Pages 114–136 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Dominoni, D., M. Quetting, and J. Partecke. 2013a. Artificial light at night advances avian reproductive physiology. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 280:20123017. Dominoni, D. M., E. O. Carmona-Wagner, M. Hofmann, B. Kranstauber, and J. Partecke. 2014. Individual-based measurements of light intensity provide new insights into the effects of artificial light at night on daily rhythms of urban-dwelling songbirds. Journal of Animal Ecology 83:681–692. Dominoni, D. M., M. Quetting, and J. Partecke. 2013b. Long-term effects of chronic light pollution on seasonal functions of European Blackbirds (Turdus merula). PLoS ONE 8:e85069. APPENDIX E 126 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 36 Donners, M., R. H. A. van Grunsven, D. Groenendijk, F. van Langevelde, J. W. Bikker, T. Longcore, and E. Veenendaal. 2018. Colors of attraction: modeling insect flight to light behavior. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A: Ecological and Integrative Physiology 329:434–440. Eisenbeis, G. 2006. Artificial night lighting and insects: attraction of insects to streetlamps in a rural setting in Germany. Pages 281–304 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Eisenbeis, G., and K. Eick. 2011. Studie zur Anziehung nachtaktiver Insekten an die Straßenbeleuchtung unter Einbeziehung von LEDs [Attraction of nocturnal insects to street lights — a study of lighting systems, with consideration of LEDs]. Natur und Landschaft 86:298–306. Eisesbeis, G. 2006. Artificial night lighting and insects: attraction of insects to streetlamps in a rural setting in Germany. Pages 281–304 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological consequences of artificial night lighting. Island Press, Washington, DC. Falchi, F., P. Cinzano, D. Duriscoe, C. C. Kyba, C. D. Elvidge, K. Baugh, B. A. Portnov, N. A. Rybnikova, and R. Furgoni. 2016. The new world atlas of artificial night sky brightness. Science Advances 2:e1600377. Falkenberg, J. C., and J. A. Clarke. 1998. Microhabitat use of deer mice: effects of interspecific interaction risks. Journal of Mammalogy 79:558–565. ffrench-Constant, R. H., R. Somers-Yeates, J. Bennie, T. Economou, D. Hodgson, A. Spalding, and P. K. McGregor. 2016. Light pollution is associated with earlier tree budburst across the United Kingdom. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 283:20160813. Flowers, S. 1934. Vegetation of the Great Salt Lake region. Botanical Gazette 95:353–418. Fonken, L. K., and R. J. Nelson. 2014. The effects of light at night on circadian clocks and metabolism. Endocrine Reviews 35:648–670. Fonken, L. K., J. L. Workman, J. C. Walton, Z. M. Weil, J. S. Morris, A. Haim, and R. J. Nelson. 2010. Light at night increases body mass by shifting the time of food intake. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 107:18664–18669. Frank, K. D. 1988. Impact of outdoor lighting on moths: an assessment. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 42:63–93. Frank, K. D. 2006. Effects of artificial night lighting on moths. Pages 305–344 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Frey, J. K. 1993. Nocturnal foraging by Scissor-tailed Flycatchers under artificial light. Western Birds 24:200. Garcia-Saenz, A., A. Sánchez de Miguel, A. Espinosa, A. Valentin, N. Aragonés, J. Llorca, P. Amiano, V. Martín Sánchez, M. Guevara, and R. Capelo. 2018. Evaluating the association between artificial light-at-night exposure and breast and prostate cancer risk in Spain (MCC-Spain study). Environmental Health Perspectives 126:047011. Gaston, K. J., J. Bennie, T. W. Davies, and J. Hopkins. 2013. The ecological impacts of nighttime light pollution: a mechanistic appraisal. Biological Reviews 88:912–927. Gaston, K. J., T. W. Davies, J. Bennie, and J. Hopkins. 2012. Reducing the ecological consequences of night-time light pollution: options and developments. Journal of Applied Ecology 49:1256–1266. APPENDIX D 127 37 Goertz, J. W., A. S. Morris, and S. M. Morris. 1980. Ruby-throated Hummingbirds feed at night with the aid of artificial light. Wilson Bulletin 92:398–399. Goodspeed, D., E. W. Chehab, A. Min-Venditti, J. Braam, and M. F. Covington. 2012. Arabidopsis synchronizes jasmonate-mediated defense with insect circadian behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109:4674–4677. Grubisic, M., A. Haim, P. Bhusal, D. M. Dominoni, K. Gabriel, A. Jechow, F. Kupprat, A. Lerner, P. Marchant, and W. Riley. 2019. Light Pollution, Circadian Photoreception, and Melatonin in Vertebrates. Sustainability 11:6400. Hagen, O., and V. R. Viviani. 2009. Investigation of the artificial night lighting influence in firefly (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) occurrence in the urban areas of Campinas and Sorocaba municipalities [extended abstract]. Pages 1–2 in Anais do IX Congresso de Ecologia do Brasil, São Lourenço. Haim, A., and B. A. Portnov. 2013. Light pollution as a new risk factor for human breast and prostate cancers. Springer, Dordrecht. Harris, C. D. 1941. Location of Salt Lake City. Economic Geography 17:204–212. Hattar, S., H. W. Liao, M. Takao, D. M. Berson, and K. W. Yau. 2002. Melanopsin-containing retinal ganglion cells: architecture, projections, and intrinsic photosensitivity. Science 295:1065–1070. Havlin, J. 1964. Zur Lösung der Amselfrage [The solution to the blackbird question]. Angewandte Ornithologie 2:9–14. Hill, G. E. 1988. Fog Effect of the Great Salt Lake. Journal of Applied Meteorology 27:778–783. Hölker, F., T. Moss, B. Griefahn, W. Kloas, C. C. Voight, D. Henckel, A. Hänel, P. M. Kappeler, S. Völker, A. Schwope, S. Franke, D. Uhrlandt, J. Fischer, R. Klenke, C. Wolter, and K. Tockner. 2010a. The dark side of light: a transdisciplinary research agenda for light pollution policy. Ecology and Society 15:article 13. Hölker, F., C. Wolter, E. K. Perkin, and K. Tockner. 2010b. Light pollution as a biodiversity threat. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25:681–682. Horton, K. G., C. Nilsson, B. M. Van Doren, F. A. La Sorte, A. M. Dokter, and A. Farnsworth. 2019. Bright lights in the big cities: migratory birds’ exposure to artificial light. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 17:209–214. Hurley, S., D. Goldberg, D. Nelson, A. Hertz, P. L. Horn-Ross, L. Bernstein, and P. Reynolds. 2014. Light at night and breast cancer risk among California teachers. Epidemiology 25:697–706. Huss, A., L. van Wel, L. Bogaards, T. Vrijkotte, L. Wolf, G. Hoek, and R. Vermeulen. 2019. Shedding some light in the dark—a comparison of personal measurements with satellite- based estimates of exposure to light at night among children in the Netherlands. Environmental Health Perspectives 127:067001. James, P., K. A. Bertrand, J. E. Hart, E. S. Schernhammer, R. M. Tamimi, and F. Laden. 2017. Outdoor light at night and breast cancer incidence in the Nurses’ Health Study II. Environmental Health Perspectives 87010:1. Jones, L. R. 2008. Ecological factors determining nesting habitat for American Avocets on the Inland Sea Shorebird Preserve. Utah Birds 21:2–12. Kempenaers, B., P. Borgström, P. Loës, E. Schlicht, and M. Valcu. 2010. Artificial night lighting affects dawn song, extra-pair siring success, and lay date in songbirds. Current Biology 20:1735–1739. APPENDIX E 128 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 38 Kinzey, B., T. E. Perrin, N. J. Miller, M. Kocifaj, M. Aubé, and H. S. Lamphar. 2017. An investigation of LED street lighting’s impact on sky glow. U.S. Department of Energy (Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830), Richland, Washington. Klem, D., Jr. 1990. Collisions between birds and windows: mortality and prevention. Journal of Field Ornithology 61:120–128. Kloog, I., A. Haim, and B. A. Portnov. 2009a. Using kernel density function as an urban analysis tool: investigating the association between nightlight exposure and the incidence of breast cancer in Haifa, Israel. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 33:55–63. Kloog, I., A. Haim, R. G. Stevens, M. Barchana, and B. A. Portnov. 2008. Light at night co- distributes with incident breast but not lung cancer in the female population of Israel. Chronobiology International 25:65–81. Kloog, I., A. Haim, R. G. Stevens, and B. A. Portnov. 2009b. Global co-distribution of light at night (LAN) and cancers of prostate, colon, and lung in men. Chronobiology International 26:108–125. Kloog, I., B. A. Portnov, H. S. Rennert, and A. Haim. 2011. Does the modern urbanized sleeping habitat pose a breast cancer risk? Chronobiology International 28:76–80. Kloog, I., R. G. Stevens, A. Haim, and B. A. Portnov. 2010. Nighttime light level co-distributes with breast cancer incidence worldwide. Cancer Causes & Control 21:2059–2068. Knop, E., L. Zoller, R. Ryser, C. Gerpe, M. Hörler, and C. Fontaine. 2017. Artificial light at night as a new threat to pollination. Nature 548:206–209. Kolligs, D. 2000. Ökologische Auswirkungen künstlicher Lichtquellen auf nachtaktive Insekten, insbesondere Schmetterlinge (Lepidoptera) [Ecological effects of artificial light sources on nocturnally active insects, in particular on moths (Lepidoptera)]. Faunistisch- Oekologische Mitteilungen Supplement 28:1–136. Koo, Y. S., J.-Y. Song, E.-Y. Joo, H.-J. Lee, E. Lee, S.-k. Lee, and K.-Y. Jung. 2016. Outdoor artificial light at night, obesity, and sleep health: cross-sectional analysis in the KoGES study. Chronobiology International 33:301–314. Kotler, B. P. 1984a. Effects of illumination on the rate of resource harvesting in a community of desert rodents. American Midland Naturalist 111:383–389. Kotler, B. P. 1984b. Risk of predation and the structure of desert rodent communities. Ecology 65:689–701. Kramer, K. M., and E. C. Birney. 2001. Effect of light intensity on activity patterns of patagonian leaf-eared mice, Phyllotis xanthopygus. Journal of Mammalogy 82:535–544. Kyba, C., A. Hänel, and F. Hölker. 2014. Redefining efficiency for outdoor lighting. Energy & Environmental Science 7:1806–1809. La Sorte, F. A., D. Fink, J. J. Buler, A. Farnsworth, and S. A. Cabrera‐Cruz. 2017. Seasonal associations with urban light pollution for nocturnally migrating bird populations. Global Change Biology 23:4609–4619. Lack, D. 1965. The life of the robin. H. F. & G. Witherby, London. Lloyd, J. E. 2006. Stray light, fireflies, and fireflyers. Pages 345–364 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Longcore, T. 2010. Sensory ecology: night lights alter reproductive behavior of blue tits. Current Biology 20:R893–R895. Longcore, T. 2018. Hazard or hope? LEDs and wildlife. LED Professional Review 70:52–57. APPENDIX D 129 39 Longcore, T., H. Aldern, J. Eggers, S. Flores, L. Franco, E. Hirshfield-Yamanishi, L. Petrinec, W. Yan, and A. Barroso. 2015a. Tuning the white light spectrum of light emitting diode lamps to reduce attraction of nocturnal arthropods. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences 370:20140125. Longcore, T., H. L. Aldern, J. F. Eggers, S. Flores, L. Franco, E. Hirshfield-Yamanishi, L. N. Petrinec, W. A. Yan, and A. M. Barroso. 2015b. Tuning the white light spectrum of light emitting diode lamps to reduce attraction of nocturnal arthropods. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 370:20140125. Longcore, T., and C. Rich. 2004. Ecological light pollution. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2:191–198. Longcore, T., and C. Rich. 2017. Artificial Night Lighting and Protected Lands: Ecological Effects and Management Approaches (Revised August 2017). Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/NSNS/NRR—2017/1493. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. Longcore, T., C. Rich, and S. A. Gauthreaux, Jr. 2008. Height, guy wires, and steady-burning lights increase hazard of communication towers to nocturnal migrants: a review and meta-analysis. Auk 125:485–492. Longcore, T., A. Rodríguez, B. Witherington, J. F. Penniman, L. Herf, and M. Herf. 2018a. Rapid assessment of lamp spectrum to quantify ecological effects of light at night. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A: Ecological and Integrative Physiology 329:511– 521. Longcore, T., A. Rodríguez, B. Witherington, J. F. Penniman, L. Herf, and M. Herf. 2018b. Rapid assessment of lamp spectrum to quantify ecological effects of light at night. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A: Ecological and Integrative Physiology. Love, R. 2005. Daylighting Salt Lake’s City Creek. Golden Gate University Law Review 35:343–376. Luginbuhl, C. B., G. W. Lockwood, D. R. Davis, K. Pick, and J. Selders. 2009. From the ground up I: light pollution sources in Flagstaff, Arizona. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 121:185–203. Lunn, R. M., D. E. Blask, A. N. Coogan, M. G. Figueiro, M. R. Gorman, J. E. Hall, J. Hansen, R. J. Nelson, S. Panda, and M. H. Smolensky. 2017. Health consequences of electric lighting practices in the modern world: a report on the National Toxicology Program’s workshop on shift work at night, artificial light at night, and circadian disruption. Science of the Total Environment 607:1073–1084. Macgregor, C. J., D. M. Evans, R. Fox, and M. J. O. Pocock. 2017. The dark side of street lighting: impacts on moths and evidence for the disruption of nocturnal pollen transport. Global Change Biology 23:697–707. Macgregor, C. J., M. J. O. Pocock, R. Fox, and D. M. Evans. 2015. Pollination by nocturnal Lepidoptera, and the effects of light pollution: a review. Ecological Entomology 40:187– 198. Marchant, P., J. D. Hale, and J. P. Sadler. 2020. Does changing to brighter road lighting improve road safety? Multilevel longitudinal analysis of road traffic collision frequency during the relighting of a UK city. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. Massetti, L. 2018. Assessing the impact of street lighting on Platanus x acerifolia phenology. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 34:71–77. McFarlane, R. W. 1963. Disorientation of loggerhead hatchlings by artificial road lighting. Copeia 1963:153. APPENDIX E 130 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 40 McLaren, J. D., J. J. Buler, T. Schreckengost, J. A. Smolinsky, M. Boone, E. E. van Loon, D. K. Dawson, and E. L. Walters. 2018. Artificial light at night confounds broad-scale habitat use by migrating birds. Ecology Letters 21:356–364. Meyer, L. A., and S. M. P. Sullivan. 2013. Bright lights, big city: influences of ecological light pollution on reciprocal stream–riparian invertebrate fluxes. Ecological Applications 23:1322–1330. Miller, M. W. 2006. Apparent effects of light pollution on singing behavior of American Robins. Condor 108:130–139. Miller, N. J., and B. R. Kinzey. 2018. Home nighttime light exposures: how much are we really getting? IALD News. International Association of Lighting Designers. Min, J.-y., and K.-b. Min. 2018. Outdoor artificial nighttime light and use of hypnotic medications in older adults: A population-based cohort study. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine 14:1903–1910. Mukhin, A., V. Grinkevich, and B. Helm. 2009. Under cover of darkness: nocturnal life of diurnal birds. Journal of Biological Rhythms 24:225–231. Nagare, R., B. Plitnick, and M. Figueiro. 2019. Effect of exposure duration and light spectra on nighttime melatonin suppression in adolescents and adults. Lighting Research & Technology 51:530–543. O’Farrell, M. J., B. W. Miller, and W. L. Gannon. 1999. Qualitative identification of free-flying bats using the Anabat detector. Journal of Mammalogy 80:11–23. Obayashi, K., K. Saeki, J. Iwamoto, Y. Ikada, and N. Kurumatani. 2013. Exposure to light at night and risk of depression in the elderly. Journal of affective disorders 151:331–336. Obayashi, K., K. Saeki, J. Iwamoto, Y. Ikada, and N. Kurumatani. 2014. Association between light exposure at night and nighttime blood pressure in the elderly independent of nocturnal urinary melatonin excretion. Chronobiology International 31:779–786. Obayashi, K., K. Saeki, and N. Kurumatani. 2016. Ambient light exposure and changes in obesity parameters: a longitudinal study of the HEIJO-KYO cohort. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 101:3539–3547. Ohayon, M. M., and C. Milesi. 2016. Artificial outdoor nighttime lights associate with altered sleep behavior in the American general population. Sleep 39:1311–1320. Palmer, M., R. Gibbons, R. Bhagavathula, D. Davidson, and D. Holshouser. 2017. Roadway Lighting's Impact on Altering Soybean Growth: Volume 1. 0197-9191, Illinois Center for Transportation/Illinois Department of Transportation. Phillips, A. J., P. Vidafar, A. C. Burns, E. M. McGlashan, C. Anderson, S. M. Rajaratnam, S. W. Lockley, and S. W. Cain. 2019. High sensitivity and interindividual variability in the response of the human circadian system to evening light. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116:12019–12024. Polak, T., C. Korine, S. Yair, and M. W. Holderied. 2011. Differential effects of artificial lighting on flight and foraging behaivour of two sympatric bat species in a desert. Journal of Zoology 285:21–27. Poot, H., B. J. Ens, H. de Vries, M. A. H. Donners, M. R. Wernand, and J. M. Marquenie. 2008. Green light for nocturnally migrating birds. Ecology and Society 13:47. Price, M. V., N. M. Waser, and T. A. Bass. 1984. Effects of moonlight on microhabitat use by desert rodents. Journal of Mammalogy 65:353–356. Rawson, H. E. 1923. A bird’s song in relation to light. Transactions of the Hertfordshire Natural History Society and Field Club 17:363–365. APPENDIX D 131 41 Rea, M. S., J. A. Brons, and M. G. Figueiro. 2011. Measurements of light at night (LAN) for a sample of female school teachers. Chronobiology International 28:673–680. Rea, M. S., M. G. Figueiro, A. Bierman, and J. D. Bullough. 2010. Circadian light. Journal of Circadian Rhythms 8:1–10. Resco, V., J. Hartwell, and A. Hall. 2009. Ecological implications of plants’ ability to tell the time. Ecology Letters 12:583–592. Rich, C., and T. Longcore, editors. 2006. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Riou, S., and K. Hamer. 2008. Predation risk and reproductive effort: impacts of moonlight on food provisioning and chick growth in Manx Shearwaters. Animal Behaviour 76:1743– 1748. Robert, K. A., J. A. Lesku, J. Partecke, and B. Chambers. 2015. Artificial light at night desynchronizes strictly seasonal reproduction in a wild mammal. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 282:20151745. Rohweder, D. A., and P. R. Baverstock. 1996. Preliminary investigation of nocturnal habitat use by migratory waders (Order Charadriiformes) in northern New South Wales. Wildlife Research 23:169–183. Rowan, W. 1938. London starlings and seasonal reproduction in birds. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London A108:51–78. Rydell, J. 2006. Bats and their insect prey at streetlights. Pages 43–60 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C. San-Jose, L. M., R. Séchaud, K. Schalcher, C. Judes, A. Questiaux, A. Oliveira-Xavier, C. Gémard, B. Almasi, P. Béziers, A. Kelber, A. Amar, and A. Roulin. 2019. Differential fitness effects of moonlight on plumage colour morphs in barn owls. Nature Ecology & Evolution. Schmidt, T. M., and P. Kofuji. 2009. Functional and morphological differences among intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells. Journal of Neuroscience 29:476–482. Ściężor, T., M. Kubala, and W. Kaszowski. 2012. Light pollution of the mountain areas in Poland. Archives of Environmental Protection 38:59–69. Sheppard, C., and G. Phillips. 2015. Bird-Friendly Building Design, 2nd Ed., American Bird Conservancy, The Plains, Virginia. Shuboni, D., and L. Yan. 2010. Nighttime dim light exposure alters the responses of the circadian system. Neuroscience 170:1172–1178. Sick, H., and D. M. Teixeira. 1981. Nocturnal activities of Brazilian hummingbirds and flycatchers at artificial illumination. Auk 98:191–192. Simons, A. L., X. Yin, and T. Longcore. 2020. High correlation but high scale-dependent variance between satellite measured night lights and terrestrial exposure. Environmental Research Communications 2:021006. Skaf, J. R. G., E. T. Hamanishi, O. Wilkins, S. Raj, and M. M. Campbell. 2010. The impact of artificial night lighting in an urban environment on plant photosynthesis and gene expression. Plant Biology 2010. American Society of Plant Biologists and Canadian Society of Plant Physiologists, Montréal, Canada. Škvareninová, J., M. Tuhárska, J. Škvarenina, D. Babálová, L. Slobodníková, B. Slobodník, H. Středová, and J. Minďaš. 2017. Effects of light pollution on tree phenology in the urban environment. Moravian Geographical Reports 25:282–290. APPENDIX E 132 SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 1 42 Souman, J. L., T. Borra, I. de Goijer, L. J. Schlangen, B. N. Vlaskamp, and M. P. Lucassen. 2018. Spectral tuning of white light allows for strong reduction in melatonin suppression without changing illumination level or color temperature. Journal of Biological Rhythms 33:420–431. Spoelstra, K., R. H. A. van Grunsven, J. J. C. Ramakers, K. B. Ferguson, T. Raap, M. Donners, E. M. Veenendaal, and M. E. Visser. 2017. Response of bats to light with different spectra: light-shy and agile bat presence is affected by white and green, but not red light. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 284:20170075. Stone, E. L., S. Harris, and G. Jones. 2015. Impacts of artificial lighting on bats: a review of challenges and solutions. Mammalian Biology-Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 80:213– 219. Stone, E. L., G. Jones, and S. Harris. 2009. Street lighting disturbs commuting bats. Current Biology 19:1123–1127. Stone, E. L., G. Jones, and S. Harris. 2012. Conserving energy at a cost to biodiversity? Impacts of LED lighting on bats. Global Change Biology 18:2458–2465. Stracey, C. M., B. Wynn, and S. K. Robinson. 2014. Light pollution allows the Northern Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) to feed nestlings after dark. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 126:366–369. Sustek, Z. 1999. Light attraction of carabid beetles and their survival in the city centre. Biologia (Bratislava) 54:539–551. Sutherland, D. R., and M. Predavec. 1999. The effects of moonlight on microhabitat use by Antechinus agilis (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae). Australian Journal of Zoology 47:1–17. Thomas, R. J., T. Székely, I. C. Cuthill, D. G. C. Harper, S. E. Newson, T. D. Frayling, and P. D. Wallis. 2002. Eye size in birds and the timing of song at dawn. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269:831–837. Ticleanu, C., and P. Littlefair. 2015. A summary of LED lighting impacts on health. International Journal of Sustainable Lighting 17:5–11. Tillmann, J. E. 2009. Fear of the dark: night-time roosting and anti-predation behaviour in the grey partridge (Perdix perdix L.). Behaviour 146:999–1023. Titulaer, M., K. Spoelstra, C. Y. M. J. G. Lange, and M. E. Visser. 2012. Activity patterns during food provisioning are affected by artificial light in free living great tits (Parus major). PLoS ONE 7:e37377. Topping, M. G., J. S. Millar, and J. A. Goddard. 1999. The effects of moonlight on nocturnal activity in bushy-tailed wood rats (Neotoma cinerea). Canadian Journal of Zoology 77:480–485. Upham, N. S., and J. C. Hafner. 2013. Do nocturnal rodents in the Great Basin Desert avoid moonlight? Journal of Mammalogy 94:59–72. Van Doren, B. M., K. G. Horton, A. M. Dokter, H. Klinck, S. B. Elbin, and A. Farnsworth. 2017. High-intensity urban light installation dramatically alters nocturnal bird migration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114:11175–11180. van Langevelde, F., J. A. Ettema, M. Donners, M. F. WallisDeVries, and D. Groenendijk. 2011. Effect of spectral composition of artificial light on the attraction of moths. Biological Conservation 144:2274–2281. Vasquez, R. A. 1994. Assessment of predation risk via illumination level: facultative central place foraging in the cricetid rodent Phyllotis darwini. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 34:375–381. APPENDIX D 133 43 Viviani, V. R., M. Y. Rocha, and O. Hagen. 2010. Fauna de besouros bioluminescentes (Coleoptera: Elateroidea: Lampyridae; Phengodidae, Elateridae) nos municípios de Campinas, Sorocaba-Votorantim e Rio Claro-Limeira (SP, Brasil): biodiversidade e influência da urbanização. Biota Neotropica 10:103–116. Voigt, C. C., C. Azam, J. Dekker, J. Ferguson, M. Fritze, S. Gazaryan, F. Hölker, G. Jones, N. Leader, D. Lewanzik, H. J. G. A. Limpens, F. Mathews, J. Rydell, H. Schofield, K. Spoelstra, and M. Zagmajster. 2018. Guidelines for Consideration of Bats in Lighting Projects. EUROBATS Publication Series No. 8. UNEP/EUROBATS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany. Wang, T., and D. M. Shier. 2018. Effects of anthropogenic lighting on San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) foraging behavior, persistence and fitness. Revised final report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research, San Deigo, California. Wang, T. B., and D. M. Shier. 2017. Effects of anthropogenic lighting on Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris pacificus) foraging bhevior, persistence and fitness. Final Report prepared for Wildlife Management Branch Environmental Security Dept. Marine Corps, Base Camp Pendleton. San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research, San Diego. Wang, W., J. Y. Barnaby, Y. Tada, H. Li, M. Tör, D. Caldelari, D.-u. Lee, X.-D. Fu, and X. Dong. 2011. Timing of plant immune responses by a central circadian regulator. Nature 460:110–114. Williams, C. B. 1936. The influence of moonlight on the activity of certain nocturnal insects, particularly of the family Noctuidae, as indicated by a light trap. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences 266:357– 389. Xiao, Q., G. Gee, R. R. Jones, P. Jia, P. James, and L. Hale. 2020. Cross-sectional association between outdoor artificial light at night and sleep duration in middle-to-older aged adults: The NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Environmental Research 180:108823. Zhang, S., X. Chen, J. Zhang, and H. Li. 2014. Differences in the reproductive hormone rhythm of tree sparrows (Passer montanus) from urban and rural sites in Beijing: the effect of anthropogenic light sources. General and Comparative Endocrinology 206:24–29. Zubidat, A. E., R. Ben-Shlomo, and A. Haim. 2007. Thermoregulatory and endocrine responses to light pulses in short-day acclimated social voles (Microtus socialis). Chronobiology International 24:269–288. Zubidat, A. E., R. J. Nelson, and A. Haim. 2010. Differential effects of photophase irradiance on metabolic and urinary stress hormone concentrations in blind and sighted rodents. Chronobiology International 27:1–29. APPENDIX E SALT LAKE CITY, UT Street Lighting Master Plan VOLUME 2 - TECHNICAL GUIDANCE AND IMPLEMENTATION JUNE 2020 3 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSHOW TO USE THIS GUIDE ..........................................1 LUMINAIRE SUBMITTAL FORMS .................................3 PROCESS FOR EVALUATING THE LIGHTED ENVIRONMENT .........................................................3 Determine Lighting Strategy based on Site Location .......................................................................3 Establish Lighting Warrants ..............................3 Determine Street Classifications .....................5 Determine Adjacent Land Use .........................5 Determine Pedestrian Activity Levels ...........7 COMPREHENSIVE IMPROVEMENTS ...........................8 Purpose ........................................................................8 Lighting Design Process ......................................8 Lighting Applications ............................................8 MINIMAL IMPROVEMENTS ......................................51 Confirm Existing Conditions .............................51 Supplemental Improvements ...........................51 One-For-One Replacement ..............................51 LIGHTING CONTROLS AND ADAPTIVE DIMMING STRATEGIES ............................................................51 LIGHTING CALCULATIONS ......................................54 Purpose .....................................................................54 How To Set Up A Calculation .........................54 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 5 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSHOW TO USE THIS DESIGN GUIDE This section outlines the street lighting design process and the steps to developing quality street and pedestrian lighting. The criteria used is from the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America’s (IES) American National Standard Practice for Roadway Lighting (RP- 8-18). Lighting designers should evaluate each lighting installation on a block by block basis and use the criteria to identify the appropriate lighting strategy based on the information provided in the following sections. LUMINAIRE SUBMITTAL FORMS Designers and engineers will use street and pedestrian luminaire submittal forms found in Appendix E to ensure that all luminaire criteria, set forth in this chapter as well as in the Luminaire Criteria Tables, are met. These forms should be completed during the lighting design process and most of the information on the forms can be found in the luminaire specification sheet. These forms will aid the City in approving luminaire selection for construction. PROCESS FOR EVALUATING THE LIGHTED ENVIRONMENT DETERMINE LIGHTING STRATEGY BASED ON SITE LOCATION The majority of lighting installations in Salt Lake City are street and/or pedestrian lights for which the City has adopted a standard. Using the same equipment for most installations reduces inventory and makes replacements and repairs more efficient and cost effective. However, this master plan and existing lighting programs allow for areas within the city to differentiate themselves with unique lighting features. When designing street and pedestrian lighting, the designer must be aware of the area and if there are any unique influences. All new lighting in a character area should match and comply with luminaire style and criteria established in this Master Plan. Some character districts in the City, such as residential areas, may require lighting redesign, regardless of existing conditions to meet applicable criteria. Areas not included in a character district will be lighted with cobrahead style luminaires and standard pedestrian scale luminaires that meet the criteria and spacing based on road classification established in the Master Plan. ESTABLISH LIGHTING WARRANTS The Lighting Warrants Table below considers all factors and leads the designer to the appropriate lighting strategy based on street classification, adjacent land use, and pedestrian conflict. The next sections provide the user with background and guidance on the Lighting Warrants Chart to identify appropriate attributes and select the appropriate lighting strategy. The designer must use the appropriate strategy and include any character influences in their design. Not all streets in the City will warrant continuous lighting, but all streets with continuous lighting must meet the lighting criteria set forth by IES RP-8-18. LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESS 6 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 1: LIGHTING WARRANTS - ARTERIAL ARTERIAL STREET PED EXISTING CONDITIONS STREET LIGHTING PED LIGHTING PG. # COMMERCIAL HIGH Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.25, 31 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Continuous 29 MED Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.25 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Non-cont.31 LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-Cont. NA 27 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-cont. NA 27 OFFICE PARK LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-Cont. NA 27 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-cont. NA 27 DOWNTOWN HIGH Cactus Poles Continuous Cactus Pole Lighting 19 Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.25, 31 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Continuous 29 MED Cactus Poles Continuous Cactus Pole Lighting 19 Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.25 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Non-cont.31 INDUSTRIAL LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only NA 33 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only NA 33 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL MED Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.25, 31 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Non-cont.31 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.25, 31 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.25, 31 OPEN SPACE MED Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-Cont. NA 27 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-cont. NA 27 LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only NA 33 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only NA 33 * High pedestrian conflict is only found in Downtown, Sugarhouse, Trolley Square, and within one block of the University of Utah and Smith’s Ballpark 7 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 2: LIGHTING WARRANTS – COLLECTOR * High pedestrian conflict is only found in Downtown, Sugarhouse, Trolley Square, and within one block of the University of Utah and Smith’s Ballpark COLLECTOR PED EXISTING CONDITIONS STREET LIGHTING PED LIGHTING PG. # COMMERCIAL HIGH Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous OR Continuous 34 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Continuous 38 MED Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous OR Continuous 34 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Non-cont.40 LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-cont. NA 36 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-Cont. NA 36 OFFICE PARK LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-cont. NA 36 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-cont. NA 36 DOWNTOWN HIGH Cactus Poles Continuous Cactus Pole Lighting 19 Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous OR Continuous 34 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Continuous 38 MED Cactus Poles Continuous Cactus Pole Lighting 19 Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous OR Continuous 34 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Non-Cont.40 INDUSTRIAL LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only NA 44 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only NA 44 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL MED Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous Optional Non-cont.42 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Continuous &Non-cont.40 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-Cont.OR Non-cont.36,42 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only &Non-cont.44,42 OPEN SPACE MED N/A LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only NA 44 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only NA 44 8 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 3: LIGHTING WARRANTS – LOCAL * High pedestrian conflict is only found in Downtown, Sugarhouse, Trolley Square, and within one block of the University of Utah and Smith’s Ballpark LOCAL PED EXISTING CONDITIONS STREET LIGHTING PED LIGHTING PG. # COMMERCIAL HIGH Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous OR Continuous 45,50 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-cont.&Continuous 48 MED Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-Cont. OR Continuous 47, 50 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-cont.OR Continuous 47, 50 LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only OR Non-cont.36 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only OR Non-cont.36 OFFICE PARK LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only OR Non-cont.53, 52 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only OR Non-cont.53, 52 DOWNTOWN HIGH Cactus Poles Continuous Cactus Pole Lighting 19 Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Continuous OR Continuous 45,50 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-cont.&Continuous 48 MED Cactus Poles Continuous Cactus Pole Lighting 19 Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Non-Cont. OR Continuous 47, 50 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Non-Cont.OR Continuous 47, 50 INDUSTRIAL LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only NA 53 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only NA 53 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL MED Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only &Continuous 53 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only &Continuous 53 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only Optional Non-Cont.53, 52 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only Optional Non-cont.53, 52 OPEN SPACE MED N/A LOW Sidewalk Lit By Streetlight Int. Only NA 53 Sidewalk NOT Lit by Streetlight Int. Only NA 53 9 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSStreet classification is used to determine the lighting warrants for a street, along with the surrounding environment and pedestrian conflict. Figure 1 shows all street classifications throughout the city. The following street and roadway definitions are from IES RP-8-18. FREEWAY: A divided highway with full control of access. Oftentimes with great visual complexity and high traffic volumes. This roadway is usually found in major metropolitan areas in or near the central core and will operate at or near design capacity through some of the early morning or late evening hours of darkness. *Freeway, which are UDOT facilities, are not included in the scope of this Masterplan. MAJOR (ARTERIAL): That part of the roadway system that serves as the principle network for through-traffic flow. The routes connect areas of principle traffic generation and important rural roadways entering and leaving the city. These routes are often known as “arterials”. They are sometimes subdivided into primary and secondary; however, such distinctions are not necessary in roadway lighting. These routes primarily serve through traffic and secondarily provide access to abutting property. COLLECTOR: Roadways servicing traffic between major and local streets. These are streets used mainly for traffic movements within residential, commercial, and industrial areas. They do not handle long, through trips. Collector streets may be used for truck or bus movements and give direct service for abutting properties. LOCAL: Local streets are used primarily for direct access to residential, commercial, industrial, or other abutting property. They make up a sizable percentage of the total street system but carry a small proportion of vehicular traffic. INTERSECTIONS: A traffic conflict area in which two or more streets join or cross at the same grade. The outside edge of pedestrian crosswalks defines intersection limits. If there are no pedestrian crosswalks, the stop bars define the intersection. If there are no stop bars, the intersection is defined by the radius return of each intersection leg. Intersection limits may also include the area encompassing channelized areas in which traffic is directed into definite paths by islands with raised curbing. DETERMINE STREET CLASSIFICATIONS 0 1.5 30.75 Miles STREET CLASSIFICATIONS KEY LOCAL ARTERIAL COLLECTOR FREEWAY I-80 I-80 I-215I-215 I-15 HWY 154 400 S. S. TEMPLE FOOTHILL700 E.1700 S.1700 W.Figure 1: Street Classifications Map 10 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 Adjacent land use is a key factor in determining lighting strategy as it directly correlates to the number of pedestrians and vehicles in the area during nighttime hours. Areas of increased traffic volume at night warrant additional lighting, whereas areas that typically do not have much traffic after dark warrant base level lighting. Figure 2 is the Land Use Map. Adjacent land use should be evaluated according to the consolidated zoning provided in this master plan. For projects that are on the boundaries between land uses, the designer should select the lower criteria with more stringent light trespass to protect residential and open space uses. If the project includes areas that are within, or adjacent to, a Critical Wildlife Area, all luminaire installed should meet the luminaire requirements of the protected area. COMMERCIAL Commercial land use is a diverse classification encompassing high, medium and low pedestrian and traffic volumes. Areas with concentrated restaurant and retail establishments, such as the Sugarhouse Business District and 9th & 9th, typically see medium to high pedestrian and traffic volumes during nighttime hours and should have increased light levels and possibly additional pedestrian lighting. However, big box stores and strip malls do not typically see the same number of pedestrians during nighttime hours and can have reduced light levels. Designers must carefully evaluate the pedestrian and traffic volume where lighting improvements are being made and select the proper lighting criteria to create a safe and comfortable nighttime environment for pedestrians and vehicles. OFFICE PARK Office Parks are defined as areas where people tend to work during the day but are mostly vacant during nighttime hours. Establishments in this classification are generally open between 8:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. but typically close in the early evening and are not open into the night. DOWNTOWN Downtown Salt Lake City is the heart of the retail and restaurant business in the valley and attracts people at all times of the day. This area typically sees high and medium pedestrian and traffic volumes and is lighted by the historic Cactus Poles. Lighting in Downtown should focus on pedestrian safety and properly illuminating crosswalks and sidewalks. In most cases luminaire spacing has already been established so it is essential that designers select the proper distribution and lumen output INDUSTRIAL Industrial land use is defined by manufacturing and distribution within the City. This land use includes, but is not limited to, the establishments found south of the airport off of California Ave. Industrial land use has very minimal pedestrian usage, especially during nighttime hours and requires minimal lighting. Additionally, most of the industrial land use areas within Salt Lake City are also within Critical Wildlife Habitats and will require appropriate lighting to minimize environmental impacts. MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DETERMINE ADJACENT LAND USE 11 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSMultifamily residential is characterized by multiple separate housing units for residential inhabitants are contained within on building or several buildings within one complex. When designing lighting on streets adjacent to multifamily residential areas a medium pedestrian conflict should be used as there are typically higher pedestrian and vehicle volumes. Residential areas are typically on streets with lower speed limits and less traffic, however this is not always the case. Salt Lake City has residential land use on all street classifications, arterial, collector and local creating multiple lighting strategies that may be appropriate. Designers should consider the safety of pedestrian and vehicles when selecting the appropriate lighting strategy while respecting the residents by minimizing light trespass. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Single family residential is characterized by a stand-alone dwelling serving as the primary residence for one family. Single family residential areas typically have less pedestrian volume, and when designing lighting in these areas, a low pedestrian conflict should be used. Residential areas are typically on streets with lower speed limits and less traffic, however this is not always the case. Salt Lake City has residential land use on all street classifications, arterial, collector and local, creating multiple lighting strategies that may be appropriate. Designers should consider the safety of pedestrian and vehicles when selecting the appropriate lighting strategy while respecting the residents by minimizing light trespass. OPEN SPACE The purpose of the OS Open Space District is to preserve and enhance public and private open space, natural areas, and improved park and recreational areas. These areas provide opportunities for active and passive outdoor recreation, provide contrasts to the built environment, preserve scenic qualities, and protect sensitive or fragile environmental areas. Examples of Open Space within the City include City Creek Canyon, Salt Lake City Cemetery, and along the Jordan River. Any Streets bordering the foothills are considered to be along Open Space as well. These streets typically see minimal pedestrian usage and are within Critical Habitat areas requiring additional measures to ensure environmentally friendly street lights are used. ¯0 1 20.5 Miles Zones Low Density Residential Multi Family Residential Industrial Commercial Downtown Office Park Agriculture Institutional Airport Transit Service Areas Parks Open Space Public Land/Civic Figure 2: Adjacent Land Use Map 12 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 IES pedestrian volumes represent the total number of pedestrians walking in both directions on a typical block or 660 foot section. Pedestrian counts and traffic studies take precedence over other references. The following are pedestrian classification definitions per IES RP-8-18. The pedestrian counts should be taken during darkness hours when the typical peak number of pedestrians are present. This typically occurs during early morning hours if a school or similar destinations are nearby. The lighting designer should determine what the typical peak hours are for each street. HIGH: Areas with significant numbers (over 100 pedestrians an hour) of pedestrians expected to be on the sidewalks or crossing the streets during darkness. Examples are downtown retail areas, near theaters, concert halls, stadiums, and transit terminals. MEDIUM: Areas where fewer (10 to 100 pedestrians an hour) pedestrians utilize the streets at night. Typical are downtown office areas, blocks with libraries, apartments, neighborhood shopping, industrial, parks, and streets with transit lines. LOW: Areas with very low volumes (10 or fewer pedestrians per hour) of night pedestrian usage. A low pedestrian classification can occur in any street classifications but may be typified by suburban streets with single-family dwellings, very low-density residential developments, and rural or semi-rural areas. DETERMINING PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY LEVELS 13 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSPURPOSE This section applies to new installations of public street and pedestrian lighting, either standalone or on traffic signal installations, and modifications to existing street lighting installations that affect pole types or locations, excluding minor maintenance work. Refer to Volume 2: Minimal Improvements for projects involving 1-for-1 luminaire replacement and supplemental improvements. LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESS Performing a lighting design for new installations of streetlights is an iterative process. This occurs because the lighting design is altered (spacing, arrangement, mounting height) until the target goal is met, per criteria set forth in this document, for the specific street. The most efficient method is to calculate luminance for straight streets or illuminance for intersections and non-straight streets, along with sidewalks and other pedestrian areas with varying luminaire parameters. The selected luminaire must comply with the lumen output, efficacy, BUG ratings, and other luminaire requirements specified in Volume 2. Care should be taken, when selecting a luminaire to illuminate the surrounding sidewalks and public spaces without causing light trespass, or unwanted light spills onto surrounding properties and through residential windows. Instructions on setting up the lighting design calculations are found later in this volume. Lighting designers should use the Lighting Warrants Table to determine the appropriate strategy based on street classification, adjacent land use, and pedestrian conflict. Once the appropriate lighting strategy is determined, designers can find lighting and luminaire criteria and spacing guidance in the corresponding sheets below. All lighting layouts for each street classification are broken out below and should be referenced during the design process. LIGHTING APPLICATIONS The following pages describe the luminaire selection and lighting layout for each street classification as defined by the Salt Lake City Transportation Division. Designers should strive to meet the luminaire spacing that will provide the highest quality street lighting possible, but this is not always feasible. It is necessary to integrate lighting locations in correspondence to other improvements: • Clearance from driveways (10 feet commercial and 5 feet residential). • Clearance from fire hydrants (5 feet). • Trees (centered in between trees or 20 feet from the tree trunk). • Streetlight offset should be a minimum of 3’-0” and a maximum of 8’-0” from back of curb. • Pedestrian lights should be a minimum of 1’-0” and a maximum of 6’-0” from the sidewalk. • Light standards integrated into sidewalk should maintain a minimum of 5’-0” clear zone. • Light standards should be located a minimum distance of 10’-0” from trees. Place poles and luminaires near property lines wherever practical and avoid locations in front of doorways, windows, and lines of egress. COMPREHENSIVE IMPROVEMENTS 14 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 INTERSECTIONS & CROSSWALKS The same luminaires are to be used throughout the intersection. When an intersection is between two different street classifications, the higher street classification target criteria is used throughout the entire intersection. The recommended streetlight layout for an intersection also depends on whether the street classification calls for continuous or non- continuous lighting. The following requirements are recommended to guide all traffic signal mounted streetlights. The intersection design should ensure that the crosswalks are sufficiently lighted to light the vertical surface (body) of pedestrians in the crosswalk. This may require that additional streetlights be located before the intersection as shown in the Figures 3 and 4 below. Mid-block crossings and denoted crosswalks are recommended to always be lighted. Crosswalks can be denoted by striping, signage, flashing beacons, etc. Crosswalks are important parts of the streetscape and an appropriate lighting design will improve the visibility of pedestrians in the crosswalk. The lighting should be installed between the vehicle and the crosswalk (ie: half to one pole height before the crosswalk) to ensure that the body of the pedestrian is adequately lighted. If streetlights are installed above or immediately adjacent to the crosswalk, only the top of the pedestrian’s head will be lighted making it difficult for motorists to see the pedestrian. Crosswalks and mid-block crossings are recommended to be lighted to the Vertical Illuminance requirements in the table below. Vertical illuminance measurements are taken 5ft. above the roadway surface in the direction of oncoming traffic. Figure 3: Streetlight Located Before Crosswalk Figure 4: Streetlight Placement with Respect to Crosswalk 15 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 4: INTERSECTION & CROSSWALK TARGET HORIZONTAL CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 STREET CLASS PED CONFLICT AVERAGE HORIZONTAL ILLUMINANCE (FC) UNIFORMITY RATIO (FCAVG/ FCMIN) AVERAGE VERTICAL ILLUMINANCE (FC) MOUNTING HEIGHT (FEET) MAST ARM LENGTH (FT) DISTRIBUTION MAX BUG RATING LUMEN OUTPUT RANGE Arterial / Arterial High 3.4 3 1.4 35-40 10 Type 2 or 3 3-0-3 16,000-25,000 Medium 2.6 3 0.9 35-40 10 Type 2 or 3 3-0-3 10,000-16,000 Low 1.8 3 0.5 30-40 10 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 7,000-12,000 Arterial / Collector High 2.9 3 0.9 35-40 10 Type 2 or 3 3-0-3 10,000-18,000 Medium 2.2 3 0.6 35-40 10 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 8,500-13,500 Low 1.5 3 0.4 30-40 10 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 5,000-10,000 Arterial / Local High 2.6 3 0.8 30-35 10 Type 2 or 3 3-0-3 10,000-16,000 Medium 2.0 3 0.6 30-35 10 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 7,500-12,500 Low 1.3 3 0.4 30-35 10 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 4,000-8,500 Collector / Collec- tor High 2.4 4 0.7 30-35 6 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 7,500-12,000 Medium 1.8 4 0.5 30-35 6 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 4,500-7,500 Low 1.2 4 0.5 30-35 6 Type 2 or 3 1-0-2 3,500-6,000 Collector / Local High 2.1 4 0.6 30-35 6 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 6,000-10,500 Medium 1.6 4 0.5 30-35 6 Type 2 or 3 1-0-2 4,000-7,000 Low 1.0 4 0.3 30-35 6 Type 2 or 3 1-0-2 3,000-5,500 Local / Local >30mph High 1.8 6 0.5 25-30 6 Type 2 or 3 2-0-2 5,000-8,000 Medium 1.4 6 0.4 25-30 6 Type 2 or 3 1-0-1 4,000-6,000 Low 1.0 6 0.2 25-30 6 Type 2 or 3 1-0-1 3,000-5,500 Local / Local <30mph High N/A Medium N/A Low N/A * A U2 BUG rating is acceptable when using a house side shield? 1. Arterial mid block crossing shall follow the arterial/arterial intersection criteria. 2. Collector mid block crossing shall follow the collector/collector intersection criteria. 16 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 SIGNALIZED/CONTINUOUS LIGHTING For a signalized intersection with continuous lighting the typical streetlight arrangement is interrupted by placing streetlight signal poles. This is called out as “1/2 to 1 mounting height to centerline of crosswalk (Typical)” in Figure 5 below. Additional streetlights should be located on signal poles if additional lighting is needed to meet the intersection criteria. Figure 5: Typical Intersection Lighting Layout with Signals and Continuous Lighting NON- SIGNALIZED/CONTINUOUS LIGHTING For a non-signalized intersection with continuous lighting the typical streetlight arrangement is continued through the intersection (see Figure 6). The streetlights should be located along the approach to the crosswalk, if it exists, installed half to one luminaire mounting height in front of the crosswalk, between approaching vehicles and pedestrians. Figure 6: Typical Intersection Lighting Layout with No Signals and Continuous Lighting 17 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSIGNALIZED/NON-CONTINUOUS LIGHTING For signalized intersections with non-continuous lighting luminaires are located half to one luminaire mounting height in front of the crosswalk, illuminating the approach to the intersection. If these four luminaires do not provide sufficient lighting throughout the entire intersection, two more additional luminaires may be used, to be mounted on the signals as shown in Figure 7. Figure 7: Typical Intersection Lighting Layout with Signals and Non-Continuous Lighting NON-SIGNALIZED/NON-CONTINUOUS LIGHTING For streets with non-continuous lighting and no signals, one luminaire is to be placed at each intersection, as shown in Figure 8. Refer to the Local Street chapter for more information. Figure 8: Typical Intersection Lighting Layout with No Signals and Non-Continuous Lighting 18 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 MID-BLOCK CROSSWALKS The standard is a streetlight located one half to 1 mounting height in front of the crosswalk on both sides of the street for all mid-block crossings, shown in Figures 9 and 10. Figure 9: Streetlight Placement with Respect to Mid-Block Crossing Figure 10: Cactus Pole Placement with Respect to Mid-Block Crossing 19 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSCACTUS POLE LAYOUTS Cactus Poles within downtown SLC should be upgraded to fully shielded LED luminaires. The Cactus Pole locations and spacing will not change, but the lumen output and distribution of new luminaire should meet the criteria in Table 7 and 8 based on the location of the lighting improvements seen in Figure 11 and 12. Figure 11: Cactus Pole Lighting Layouts Striped Median ℄ Walk Tree Lawn Bike Street Width Parking Drive Lane Drive Lane ℄ WalkTree Lawn Bike ParkingDrive Lane Drive Lane CACTUS POLESFigure 12: Cactus Pole Sections TABLE 5: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.2 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.9 3:1 0.5 TABLE 6: COLLECTOR STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 0.8 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.6 4:1 0.5 20 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 7: RECOMMENDED CACTUS POLE LUMINAIRE CRITERIA – ARTERIAL STREETS STREET WIDTH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY STREET LIGHT LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) STREET LIGHT PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. STREET LIGHT BUG RATING PEDESTRIAN LIGHT LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) PEDESTRIAN LIGHT PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. PEDESTRIAN LIGHT BUG RATING 70-90 High 8,500-10,500 Type III or IV B3-U0-G2*3,000- 5,000 Type III or IV B1-U0-G1 Medium 5,500-9,000 Type III B3-U0-G2* 3,000- 5,000 Type III B1-U0-G1 90-110 High 6,500-9,500 Type II B3-U0-G2* 3,500- 5,500 Type III B1-U0-G1 Medium 8,000-11,500 Type III B3-U0-G2* 2,500- 5,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 TABLE 8: RECOMMENDED CACTUS POLE LUMINAIRE CRITERIA – COLLECTOR STREETS STREET WIDTH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY STREET LIGHT LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) STREET LIGHT PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. STREET LIGHT BUG RATING PEDESTRIAN LIGHT LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) PEDESTRIAN LIGHT PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. PEDESTRIAN LIGHT BUG RATING 70-90 High 5,500-8,500 Type III or IV B2-U0-G2 2,500- 4,500 Type III or IV B1-U0-G1 Medium 4,500-8,000 Type II or IV B2-U0-G2 2,500- 4,500 Type III or IV B1-U0-G1 90-110 High 9,000-11,500 Type III B3-U0-G2 3,000- 5,000 Type III or IV B1-U0-G1 Medium 4,500-7,500 Type III or IV B2-U0-G2 3,000- 5,000 Type III or IV B1-U0-G1 * These BUG Ratings apply to all Cactus Pole lights, except at intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings, which may have B3-U3-G2 Ratings to provide adequate vertical illuminance at crosswalks.” 21 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSStreet Width Walk Tree Lawn Striped Median Drive Lane Drive Lane ℄ WalkTree Lawn Drive Lane Drive Lane SUGARHOUSE TEAR DROP SUGARHOUSE POLE LAYOUT The teardrop luminaires in the Sugarhouse Business District should be upgraded to fully shielded LED luminaires. The locations and spacing will not change, but the lumen output and distribution of new luminaire should meet the criteria in Table 10. This is illustrated in Figures 13 and 14. Figure 13: Sugarhouse Pole Lighting Layouts Figure 14: Sugarhouse Pole Lighting Section 22 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 9: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.2 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.9 3:1 0.5 TABLE 10: RECOMMENDED SUGARHOUSE POLE LUMINAIRE CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY STREET LIGHT LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) STREET LIGHT PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. STREET LIGHT BUG RATING PEDESTRIAN LIGHT LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) PEDESTRIAN LIGHT PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. PEDESTRIAN LIGHT BUG RATING High 6,000-8,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 2,000-3,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 Medium 3,000-7,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G1 1,000-2,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 23 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTEAR DROP POLE LAYOUT The teardrop luminaires along South Temple and State Street should be upgraded to fully shielded LED luminaires. The locations and spacing will not change, but the lumen output and distribution of new luminaire should meet the criteria in Table 12. This is illustrated in Figures 15 and 16. Figure 15: Tear Drop Lighting Layouts Figure 16: Tear Drop Lighting Section Street Width Striped Median Drive Lane ℄ Drive Lane Drive Lane WalkBikeParking Walk Tree Lawn Tree Lawn Drive Lane Drive Lane Drive Lane Bike Parking S TEMPLE STATE ST TEAR DROP 24 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 11: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.2 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.9 3:1 0.5 Low 0.6 4:1 0.4 TABLE 12: RECOMMENDED TEAR DROP LUMINAIRE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY LUMEN OUTPUT (LM)TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 50-70 High 11,000-14,750 Type III B2-U0-G2 Medium 8,500-12,000 Type III B2-U0-G2 Low 5,500-8,500 Type III B2-U0-G2 70- 100 High 16,500-20,500 Type III B3-U0-G3 Medium 16,500-20,500 Type III B3-U0-G3 Low 11,000-16,500 Type III B2-U0-G2 25 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSARTERIAL STREET – CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing an arterial street with only street lighting. Luminaires are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection, Figures 17 and 18. Figure 17: Typical Arterial with Continuous Street Lighting Plan Figure 18: Typical Arterial with Continuous Street Lighting Cross Section 26 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 13: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.2 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.9 3:1 0.5 Low 0.6 4:1 0.4 TABLE 14: RECOMMENDED ARTERIAL (NON-MEDIAN MOUNTED) LUMINAIRE & POLE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT)POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 50-70 High 120-140 30-35 6,500-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 140-180 30-35 8,500-14,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G2 Medium 140-180 30-35 6,500-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 8,500-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Low 180-220 30-35 6,000-8,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 70-90 High 140-180 30-35 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 12,000-18,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G3 Medium 120-160 30-35 7,500-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 160-200 30-35 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G2 Low 140-180 30-35 6,500-9,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 7,500-11,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 90-110 High 120-160 30-35 11,000-18,000 Type II B3-U0-G3 Medium 140-180 30-35 10,000-18,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 15,000-19,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G3 Low 140-180 30-35 8,000-13,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 12,000-14,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 27 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSARTERIAL STREET – NON-CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing an arterial street with non-continuous street. Street luminaires are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection, Figures 19 and 20. Figure 19: Typical Arterial with Non-Continuous Street Lighting Plan Figure 20: Typical Arterial with Non-Continuous Street Lighting Cross Section 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) SIGNAL-MOUNTED LUMINAIRE (TYP) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalkTree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL STREET LIGHTING ONLY MAX SPACING TO BE DOUBLE RECOMMENDED SPACING FOR CONTINUOUS LIGHTING 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalk Tree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL NON CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING 28 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 15: RECOMMENDED ARTERIAL (NON-MEDIAN MOUNTED) LUMINAIRE & POLE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT)POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 50-70 Medium 240-280 30-35 6,500-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 280-360 30-35 8,500-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Low 360-440 30-35 6,000-8,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 70-90 Medium 240-320 30-35 7,500-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 320-400 30-35 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G2 Low 280-360 30-35 6,500-9,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 360-440 30-35 7,500-11,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 90-110 Medium 280-360 30-35 10,000-18,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 360-440 30-35 15,000-19,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G3 Low 280-360 30-35 8,000-13,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 360-440 30-35 12,000-14,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 29 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSARTERIAL STREET – CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING AND CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing an arterial street with continuous street and pedestrian lighting. Street lights are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection. Pedestrian lights should be coordinated with the landscape and street lighting layouts to maintain a consistent spacing, Figures 21 and 22. Figure 21: Typical Arterial with Continuous Street and Pedestrian Lighting Plan Figure 22: Typical Arterial with Continuous Street and Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalk Tree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL CONT STREET AND PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:29 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalkTree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL CONT STREET AND PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:29 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 30 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 16: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.2 3:1 1.0 TABLE 17: RECOMMENDED ARTERIAL (NON-MEDIAN MOUNTED) STREET LUMINAIRE & POLE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT)POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 50-70 High 120-140 30-35 6,500-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 140-180 30-35 8,500-14,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G2 70-90 High 140-180 30-35 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 12,000-18,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G3 90-110 High 120-160 30-35 11,000-18,000 Type II B3-U0-G3 TABLE 18: RECOMMENDED ARTERIAL (NON-MEDIAN MOUNTED) PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE & POLE CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT)POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING High 50-80 12-15 3,000-5,500 Type II or III B1-U2-G1 31 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSARTERIAL STREET – CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING AND NON-CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing an arterial street with continuous street lighting and non- continuous pedestrian lighting. Street luminaires are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection. Pedestrian luminaire should be located to illuminate locations shadowed by trees or at vehicle-pedestrian conflict points, Figures 23 and 24. Figure 23: Typical Arterial with Continuous Street Lighting and Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Plan Figure 24: Typical Arterial with Continuous Street Lighting and Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalk Tree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL CONT STREET AND NON CONT. PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:35 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalkTree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL CONT STREET AND NON CONT. PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:35 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 32 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 19: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.2 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.9 3:1 0.5 Low 0.6 4:1 0.4 TABLE 20: RECOMMENDED ARTERIAL (NON-MEDIAN MOUNTED) LUMINAIRE & POLE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT)POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 50-70 High 120-140 30-35 6,500-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 140-180 30-35 8,500-14,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G2 Medium 140-180 30-35 6,500-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 8,500-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Low 180-220 30-35 6,000-8,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 70-90 High 140-180 30-35 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 12,000-18,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G3 Medium 120-160 30-35 7,500-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 160-200 30-35 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G2 Low 140-180 30-35 6,500-9,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 7,500-11,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 90-110 High 120-160 30-35 11,000-18,000 Type II B3-U0-G3 Medium 140-180 30-35 10,000-18,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 15,000-19,000 Type II or III B3-U0-G3 Low 140-180 30-35 8,000-13,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30-35 12,000-14,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 TABLE 21: RECOMMENDED ARTERIAL (NON-MEDIAN MOUNTED) PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE & POLE CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT)POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM)TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING High 50-80 12-15 3,000-5,500 Type II or III B1-U2-G1 Medium 50-80 12-15 3,000-5,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 80-120 12-15 3,000-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 Low 50-80 12-15 2,000-4,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 80-120 12-15 2,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 33 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSARTERIAL STREET – INTERSECTION ONLY LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non-median lighting layout when designing an arterial street with intersection only street light- ing. Street luminaires are to be placed at the intersection with luminaire on half to one mounting height in front of any existing crosswalks, Figures 25 and 26. Figure 25: Typical Arterial with Street Lights at Intersections Only Plan Figure 26: Typical Arterial with Street Lights at Intersections Only Cross Section 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalkTree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL STREET INT. ONL 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Striped MedianDrive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive LaneWalkTree Lawn Drive Lane Bike/ Shoulder/ Parking Drive Lane WalkTree Lawn Street Width ARTERIAL STREET INT. ONL See Intersections & Crosswalks Section on page 14 for lighting criteria and luminaire recom- mendations. 34 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 COLLECTOR STREET – CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing a collector street with only street lighting. Luminaires are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection, Figures 27 and 28. Figure 27: Typical Collector Street with Continuous Street Lighting Figure 28: Typical Cross Section for Collector with Continuous Street Lighting 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Street Width Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR STREET LIGHTING ONLY 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Street Width Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR STREET LIGHTING ONLY 35 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 22: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 0.8 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.6 4:1 0.5 TABLE 23: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR STREET LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA ROADWAY WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 140-160 30 6,500-7,800 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30 7,000-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Medium 140-160 30 5,000-7,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30 6,500-8,800 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 50-70 High 140-160 30 6,500-8,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30 7,000-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Medium 140-160 30 6,000-7,700 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30 7,000-8,700 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 70-100 High 120-140 30 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Medium 140-160 30 7,000-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30 9,000-13,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 36 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 COLLECTOR STREET – NON-CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing a collector street with non-continuous street lighting. Luminaires are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection, Figures 29 and 30. Figure 29: Typical Collector Street with Non-Continuous Street Lighting Figure 30: Typical Collector Street with Non-Continuous Lighting Cross Section 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Street Width COLLECTOR NON CONTINUOUS STREETZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:40 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Street Width COLLECTOR NON CONTINUOUS STREETZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:40 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 37 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 24: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR STREET LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA ROADWAY WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 Medium 280-320 30 5,000-7,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 320-440 30 6,500-8,800 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Low 280-360 30 4,000-5,500 Type III B1-U0-G1 360-440 30 4,500-6,000 Type III B1-U0-G1 50-70 Medium 280-320 30 6,000-7,700 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 320-440 30 7,000-8,700 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Low 280-320 30 4,000-5,500 Type II or III B2-U0-G1 320-440 30 5,000-8,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 70-100 Medium 280-320 30 7,000-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 320-440 30 9,000-13,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Low 280-360 30 6,500-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 360-440 30 6,500-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 38 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 COLLECTOR STREET – CONTINUOUS STREET AND CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing a collector street with continuous street and pedestrian lighting. Street luminaires are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection. Pedestrian lights should be coordinated with the landscape and street lighting layouts to maintain a consistent spacing, Figures 31 and 32. Figure 31: Typical Collector Street with Continuous Street and Pedestrian Lighting Figure 32: Typical Collector with Continuous Street and Pedestrian Lighting 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Street Width COLLECTOR CONT STREET & PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:44 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Street Width COLLECTOR CONT STREET & PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:44 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 39 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 25: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 0.8 3:1 1.0 TABLE 26: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR STREET LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA ROADWAY WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 140-180 30 6,500-7,800 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30 7,000-10,000 B2-U0-G2 50-70 High 140-160 30 6,500-8,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 160-220 30 7,000-9,000 B2-U0-G2 70-100 High 120-140 30 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 TABLE 27: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING High 50-80 12-15 3,000-5,000 Type II or III B1-U2-G1 80-120 12-15 3,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U2-G1 40 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 COLLECTOR STREET – CONTINUOUS STREET AND NON-CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing a collector street with continuous street lighting and non- continuous pedestrian lighting. Street luminaires are to be placed in an opposite arrangement when not located at an intersection. Pedestrian luminaire should be located to illuminate locations shadowed by trees or at vehicle-pedestrian conflict points, Figures 33 and 34. Figure 33: Typical Collector Street with Continuous Street and Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Plan Figure 34: Typical Collector with Continuous Street and Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Street Width COLLECTOR CONT STREET NON CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:49 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Street Width COLLECTOR CONT STREET NON CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:49 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 41 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 28: ARTERIAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 0.8 3:1 1.0 Medium 0.6 4:1 0.5 TABLE 30: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING High 50-80 12-15 3,000-5,000 Type II or III B1-U2-G1 80-120 12-15 3,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U2-G1 Medium 50-80 12-15 2,000-4,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 80-120 12-15 2,500-5,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 TABLE 29: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR STREET LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA ROADWAY WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 140-180 30 6,500-7,800 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 180-220 30 7,000-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Medium 140-160 30 5,000-7,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 160-220 30 6,500-8,800 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 50-70 High 140-160 30 6,500-8,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 160-220 30 7,000-9,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Medium 140-160 30 6,000-7,700 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 160-220 30 7,000-8,700 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 70-100 High 120-140 30 8,500-12,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Medium 140-160 30 7,000-10,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 160-220 30 9,000-13,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 42 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 COLLECTOR STREET – CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing a collector street with continuous pedestrian lighting. Pedestrian lights should be coordinated with the landscape and street lighting layouts to maintain a consistent spacing, Figures 35 and 36. Figure 35: Typical Collector Street with Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Figure 36: Typical Collector with Continuous Pedestrian Lighting 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) 60'-0" Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median ROW Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:57 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) 60'-0" Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median ROW Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:58:57 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 See Intersection Section on page 46 for intersection lighting criteria and luminaire recommendations. 43 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 31: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING High 50-80 12-15 3,000-5,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 Medium 50-80 12-15 2,000-4,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 44 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 COLLECTOR STREET – NON-CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing a collector street with street lighting at intersections and non-continuous pedestrian lighting. Street luminaires are to be placed at the intersection with luminaire on half to one mounting height in front of any existing crosswalks. Pedestrian luminaire should be located to illuminate locations shadowed by trees or at vehicle-pedestrian conflict points. Figure 37: Typical Collector Street with Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Plan Figure 38: : Typical Collector with Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Street Width Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR NON CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:59:02 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Street Width Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR NON CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:59:02 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3See Intersections and Crosswalks section on page 14 for intersection lighting criteria and luminaire recommendations. 45 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 32: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE AND POLE SPACING CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING Medium 80-120 12-15 2,500-5,000 Type II or III B1-U2-G1 Low 80-120 12-15 2,500-4,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 46 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 COLLECTOR STREET – STREET LIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS ONLY The figures and tables below provide direction on the appropriate luminaire selection and non- median lighting layout when designing a collector street with street lighting at intersections and non-continuous pedestrian lighting. Street luminaires are to be placed at the intersection with luminaire on half to one mounting height in front of any existing crosswalks, Figures 39 and 40. Figure 39: Typical Collector with Street Lighting at Intersections Only Plan Figure 40: Typical Collector with Street Lighting at Intersections Only Cross Section See Intersections & Crosswalks Section on page 14 for intersection lighting criteria and luminaire recommendations. 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Street Width Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR STREET INT ONLY 12 TO 1 MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF CROSSWALK (TYPICAL) Travel Lane ℄ Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane Striped Median Street Width Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Travel Lane COLLECTOR STREET INT ONLY 47 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSLOCAL STREET – CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING Figure 41: Typical Local Continuous Street Lighting Layout Figure 42: Typical Local Continuous Street Lighting Cross Section Local Continuous Street Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL CONT STREET LIGHTING Local Continuous Street Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL CONT STREET LIGHTING 48 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 TABLE 33: LOCAL STREET TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ROADWAY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE LUMINANCE (CD/M2)LUMINANCE AVG:MIN RATIO AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 0.6 6:1 1.0 TABLE 34: RECOMMENDED LOCAL STREET LUMINAIRE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 140-180 30 4,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 180-220 30 4,500-7,750 Type II or III B2-U0-G1 50-80 High 120-160 30 4,500-7,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 160-200 30 5,500-8,250 Type II or III B2-U0-G1 49 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSLOCAL STREET – NON-CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING Figure 43: Typical Local Street with Non-Continuous Street Lighting Plan Figure 44: Typical Local Street with Non-Continuous Street Lighting Cross Section Local Non Continuous Street Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL NON CONT STREET LIGHTING Local Non Continuous Street Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL NON CONT STREET LIGHTING TABLE 35: RECOMMENDED LOCAL STREET LUMINAIRE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 280-360 30 4,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 360-440 30 4,500-7,750 Type II or III B2-U0-G1 Medium 320-440 30 4,000-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 50-80 High 240-320 30 4,500-7,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 320-400 30 5,500-8,250 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 Medium 300-400 30 4,500-6,000 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 50 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 LOCAL STREET – NON-CONTINUOUS STREET LIGHTING AND CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING Figure 45: Typical Local Street with Non-Continuous Street and Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Plan Figure 46: Typical Local Street with Non-Continuous Street and Continuous Ped Lighting Cross Section Local Non Continuous Street Continuous Ped Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width Sidewalk & Park Strip LOCAL NON CONT STREET CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:59:07 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 Local Non Continuous Street Continuous Ped Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width Sidewalk & Park Strip LOCAL NON CONT STREET CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:59:07 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 51 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 38: RECOMMENDED LOCAL PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 60-90 12 2,500-4,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 90-120 12 4,000-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 50-80 High 60-90 12 3,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 TABLE 36: LOCAL SIDEWALK TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.0 Medium 0.5 TABLE 37: RECOMMENDED LOCAL STREET LUMINAIRE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM) TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 280-360 30 4,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 360-440 30 4,500-7,750 Type II or III B2-U0-G1 50-80 High 240-320 30 4,500-7,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 320-400 30 5,500-8,250 Type II or III B2-U0-G2 52 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 LOCAL STREET –CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING Figure 47: Typical Local Street with Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Plan Figure 48: Typical Local Street with Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section Local Continuous Ped Lighting 36'-0" ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:59:11 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 Local Continuous Ped Lighting36'-0" ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL CONT PEDZ:\18060 Salt Lake Street Lighting Master Plan\CAD\Roadway plans for masterplan.dwg, 6/17/2020 9:59:11 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3See Intersections and Crosswalks section on page 14 for intersection lighting criteria and luminaire recommendations. 53 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 39: LOCAL SIDEWALK TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY SIDEWALKS AVERAGE ILLUMINANCE (FC) High 1.0 Medium 0.5 TABLE 40: RECOMMENDED LOCAL PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM)TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 High 60-90 12 2,500-4,000 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 90-120 12 4,000-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 Medium 60-90 12 2,500-3,500 Type II, III, or IV B1-U0-G1 90-120 12 3,500-5,500 Type II, III, or IV B1-U0-G1 50-80 High 60-90 12 3,500-5,500 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 Medium 60-90 12 4,000-5,550 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 54 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 LOCAL STREET – NON-CONTINUOUS PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING Figure 49: Typical Local Street with Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Plan Figure 50: Typical Local Street with Non-Continuous Pedestrian Lighting Cross Section TABLE 41: RECOMMENDED LOCAL PEDESTRIAN LUMINAIRE CRITERIA STREET WIDTH (FT) PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY POLE SPACING (FT) POLE HEIGHT (FT)LUMEN OUTPUT (LM)TYPICAL PHOTOMETRIC DISTRIBUTION MAX. BUG RATING 30-50 Medium 120-180 12 2,500-3,500 Type II, III, or IV B1-U0-G1 180-240 12 3,500-5,500 Type II, III, or IV B1-U0-G1 Low 120-240 12 2,000-4,000 Type II, III, or IV B1-U0-G1 50-80 Medium 120-180 12 4,000-5,550 Type II or III B1-U0-G1 Low 160-240 12 2,500-4,000 Type II, III or IV B1-U0-G1 See Intersections and Crosswalks section on page 14 for intersection lighting criteria and luminaire recommendations. Local Non Continuous Ped Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL NON CONT PED Local Non Continuous Ped Lighting ℄ Parking & Travel Lane Parking & Travel Lane Sidewalk & Park Strip Sidewalk & Park Strip Street Width LOCAL NON CONT PED 55 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSLOCAL STREET – INTERSECTION ONLY LIGHTING Figure 51: Typical Local Street Intersection Only Lighting Plan Figure 52: Typical Local Street with Intersection Only Lighting Cross Section See Intersections and Crosswalks section on page 14 for intersection lighting criteria and luminaire recommendations. 56 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 Figure 53: Uncovered Bus Stop Lighting Layout BUS STOP LIGHTING UNCOVERED BUS STOP Uncovered bus stops should be lit by a street luminaire positioned 1/2 to 1 mounting height from the bus stop in the direction of oncoming traffic. The illuminance criteria at bus stops are found in Table 42. Figure 54: Covered Bus Stop Lighting Section BUS SHELTERS Bus Shelters criteria are found in Table 42. Vertical illuminance aids in facial recognition and visible comfort and is to be measured 5 ft. above the ground. Street luminaires within 100 ft of bus shelters increase ambient light and visual comfort. TABLE 42: LOCAL SIDEWALK TARGET CRITERIA PER IES RP-8-18 BUS STOP CRITERIA HORIZONTAL ILLUMINANCE (FC) VERTICAL ILLUMINANCE (FC) Uncovered Bus Stop 1.0 0.2 Covered Bus Stop 1.0 1.0 57 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSMINIMAL IMPROVEMENTS CONFIRM EXISTING CONDITIONS Current existing conditions where improvements are being made should be evaluated prior to beginning lighting improvement design. One-for-one replacements should be done where the existing lighting strategy meets the required lighting strategy in the Lighting Warrants Table 1-3. If the existing lighting strategy is appropriate, the spacing of the existing lights should be upgraded to meet the lumen requirements for the specific type and land use and the necessary infrastructure, such as wiring, foundation, and poles are all in good condition. If the lighting strategy in the area requires additional street or pedestrian lights, supplemental improvements will need to be made. Supplemental improvements may also need to be made if the spacing is not met or there are infrastructure issues. SUPPLEMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS Supplemental improvements entail adding a limited quantity of new street or pedestrian light locations to the existing lighting system to illuminate any dark areas on the street. If any of the following conditions exist, then the improvement area should follow the comprehensive improvement methodology: • The existing lighting on the block does not meet the lighting strategy in Tables 1-3: Lighting Warrants and additional pedestrian or streetlights are necessary to comply with the appropriate lighting strategy. • Existing street or pedestrian light spacing exceeds two times the recommended value based on lighting strategy. • Lighting only exists on one side of the street and does not sufficiently light the whole street. To maintain consistency in the lighting design, all luminaires used in supplemental improvements should match the luminaires chosen for 1-for-1 replacements. ONE-FOR-ONE REPLACEMENT Salt Lake City is upgrading existing HID lights to new energy efficient LEDs. The new replacement lights should meet the lighting criteria set forth in the Luminaire Criteria Tables based on street classification, adjacent land use and pedestrian conflict. The City is also working to upgrade any previously installed LEDs that are not within the luminaire specification and are causing obtrusive glare and light trespass to a luminaire that is more appropriate to the specific location. All one- for-one replacements should match the appreciate color temperature based on adjacent land use and existing LEDs that do not meet the appropriate CCT should be considered for replacement. 58 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 As part of the lighting upgrades throughout the city, the new LED lights will be compatible with a city-wide wireless lighting control system. This lighting control system will allow Salt Lake City to have precise control over each individual light throughout the City, enabling the City to raise or lower light levels when needed or desired. Dimming strategies will vary throughout the City based on adjacent land use, pedestrian conflicts, and time of day to ensure vehicle and pedestrian safety while working to minimize light pollution and light trespass. When dimming lighting in a certain area, the lighting strategy must be considered, speed limit on the streets, and vehicle and pedestrian volumes. • When dimming continuous street or pedestrian lighting, the first strategy is to dim from high or medium pedestrian criteria to medium or low pedestrian criteria. If continuous lighting is already in a low pedestrian area, research supports that when using broad spectrum LED sources, dimming to 70% of current output or lower can still provide sufficient lighting. If the City is interested in dimming below a low pedestrian criteria for a certain continuously lighted street, the City should undergo a public engagement pilot study with residents, city council, police, fire, and the city attorney to further understand the implications of reduced lighting in the area. • Along streets with non-continuous street and pedestrian lighting, there is not a required lighting criteria and lights should be dimmed to comfortable levels while still maintaining the desired effect of the lighting design. DIMMING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS: All street classifications are found in all single-and multi-family residential areas in Salt Lake City. The Table below summarizes the recommended dimming strategies based on street classification, and pedestrian conflict. TABLE 43: RECOMMENDED DIMMING STRATEGIES FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS ARTERIAL STREET COLLECTOR STREET LOCAL STREET Multifamily Residential (Med Ped Conflict) Dim Street and Pedestrian Lights to Low Ped Conflict Dim Street and Pedestrian Lights to Low Ped Conflict Dim Street and Pedestrian Lights to Low Ped Conflict Single Family Residential (Low Ped Conflict) *Dim Street and Pedestrian Lights to Comfortable Light Levels *Dim Street and Pedestrian Lights to Comfortable Light Levels *Dim Street and Pedestrian Lights to Comfortable Light Levels * Dimming to comfortable light levels below the Low Pedestrian Criteria requires a public engagement process. LIGHTING CONTROLS AND ADAPTIVE DIMMING STRATEGIES 59 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSDIMMING IN DOWNTOWN RESTAURANT/RETAIL ENVIRONMENTS It is essential to maintain proper light levels based on pedestrian conflict when adjusting light levels in the downtown. Pedestrian traffic fluctuates based on the night of the week, as well as the time of day. If an event is happening within a public gathering space or venue, higher pedestrian volume should be expected, and the recommended dimming strategy should be overruled and the areas surrounding the event center should be lighted to criteria. The table below shows the dimming strategies based on night of the week and time of night. TABLE 44: RECOMMENDED DIMMING STRATEGIES FOR DOWNTOWN DIMMING STRATEGY Sunday Night - Wednesday Night Dusk to 10PM Light to Criteria 10PM to Midnight Reduce Criteria to a Lower Pedestrian Conflict Midnight to 2:30AM Reduce Criteria to Low Pedestrian Conflict or to Comfortable Light Levels 2:30AM to Dawn Reduce Criteria to Low Pedestrian Conflict or to Comfortable Light Levels Thursday Night - Saturday Night Dusk to 10PM Light to Criteria 10PM to Midnight Reduce Criteria to a Lower Pedestrian Conflict Midnight to 2:30AM Light to Criteria 2:30AM to Dawn Reduce Criteria to Low Pedestrian Conflict or to Comfortable Light Levels * Dimming to comfortable light levels below the Low Pedestrian Criteria requires a public engagement process DIMMING INTERSECTION AND MID-BLOCK CROSSINGS Intersections and mid-block crossing should be dimmed separately from the rest of the streetlights; however, the same strategy should be used. If the intersection or crossing has less traffic at certain times throughout the night, the criteria can be reduced to a lower pedestrian conflict criteria. If further reduction in light levels are desired, a similar public engagement process should be done to ensure the safety of pedestrians and vehicles at intersection and mid-block crossings. 60 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 LUMINAIRE SPECIFICATIONS Luminaire specifications are found in Tables 55 & 56 TABLE 55: SPECIFICATION OVERVIEW CONTROLS ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Integral 0-10V dimmable drivers to adjust light levels. All streetlights will be installed with an ANSI 7 pin photocell receptacle to be compatible with wireless controls in the future. Single phase 120/240V electrical system voltage. LIGHT STANDARD SPECIFICATION LIGHT STANDARD FOUNDATIONS The light standard - also referred to as the pole - should be tapered, round galvanized steel with a 12-inch bolt circle. Color match the head and arm of the pole. Design replacement poles, heads, and/or arms to match existing color and type of adjacent poles if appropriate and with written City approval. City approval of decorative or non-standard poles is required. Painted over galvanized is required for any pole requiring color change. All new mast arm installations are required to be 2, 6, or 10 feet. The City must approve all poles with banner arms and power receptacles. City standard design for all precast concrete or poured-in-place light standard foundations. While the City accepts poured-in-place foundations, precast concrete foundations are preferred and should be installed whenever possible. 61 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSTABLE 56: LUMINAIRE SPECIFICATIONS Correlated Color Temperature (CCT)3000K Maximum Color Rendering Index (CRI)≥65 in most areas, or > 40 in Critical Wildlife Habitat Luminaire Lumen Range The lumen output should comply with the lumen range specified in the Recommended Luminaire Criteria Tables based on street classification, adjacent land use and pedestrian conflict. Criteria for luminaire CCT are found in Volume 1 Table 5. Luminaire Finish Die cast aluminum housing with fade and abrasion resistant polyester powder coat finish. Finish should match existing color of luminaires along street. Luminaire Warranty 10 years on luminaire and components. Luminaire Warranty Period Earliest warranty period allowed starts on the date of receipt by City. Luminaire Identification Luminaire external label per ANSI C136.15, and an interior label per ANSI C136.22 required. Operation and Storage Temperature '-40°C to +40°C. Frequency Vibration 'Luminaire should withstand low and high frequency vibration, per ANSI C136.31, over the rated life of the light source. Minimum Rated Life 70,000 hours minimum at 55°C, per IES TM-21 IP rating IP65 or greater. Voltage 120/277. Control Dimmable and installed with ANSI 7 pin photo receptacle to be compatible with wireless luminaires controls in the future. Cooling System Passive utilizing heat sinks, convection, or conduction. Upper surfaces required to shed precipitation. Cooling fans are not allowed. Photocontrol Individual multi-contact 7-pin twist lock receptacle per ANSI C136.41. Or control module. Electrical Immunity Luminaire are required to meet the performance requirements specified in ANSI C136.2 for dielectric withstand, using the DC test level and configuration.LUMINAIREPower Factor (PF)Minimum of 0.9 at full input power. Total Harmonic Distortion (THD)Maximum of 20 percent at full input power. Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS)Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) compliant drivers required. Surge Protection Protection from all electrical surges with an elevated electrical immunity rating, including but not limited to lightning strikes and stray current in rebar and concrete required for all LEDs. Integral surge protection to the LED power supply required. “Elevated” (10kV/10kA) requirements per IEEE/ANSI C62.41.2 for luminaire. Manufacturer indication of failure of the electrical immunity system can possibly result in disconnect of power to luminaire required. Total Power Consumed in Off State Maximum 8 watt off-state power consumption for luminaire, including driver. Electromagnetic interference Electromagnetic interference: Compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 47 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 15 non- consumer radio frequency interference (RFI) and/or electromagnetic interference (EMI) standards.LED DRIVERS 62 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 LIGHTING CALCULATIONS PURPOSE Lighting design calculations for new installations is an iterative process. The use of lighting models to calculate the luminance along streets and illuminance on sidewalks is the most efficient and accurate way to design to criteria. Light trespass calculations should also be included to limit the amount of obtrusive light in the City. This section describes the required calculations to ensure that all criteria is met for all new installations. HOW TO SET UP A CALCULATION The following sections document the parameters and considerations when calculating street lighting levels. IES FILES The first step in running a calculation is to find and download the photometric in IES file format for the specific luminaire being considered. This file is available on the manufacturer’s website and can be downloaded into any lighting calculation simulation software. The IES file will contain all information for the luminaire, such as lumen output, color temperature, wattage, distribution, and voltage. LIGHT LOSS FACTOR FOR LED A light loss factor should be applied to every luminaire considered, to ensure that the maintained light levels will meet the target criteria. Table 57, below, lists typical light loss factors for LEDs and legacy products found throughout Salt Lake City. TABLE 57: TYPICAL LIGHT LOSS FACTORS LIGHT SOURCE LUMINAIRE DIRT DEPRECIATION (LDD) LUMINAIRE LUMEN DEPRECIATION (LLD) TOTAL LIGHT LOSS FACTOR (LLF) LED 0.9 0.97 0.818 HPS 0.9 0.9 0.81 MH 0.9 0.7 0.63 HPS: High Pressure Sodium MH: Metal Halide 7 Use 0.9 or LM value provided by the Manufacturer at 60,000 hours, if L70 is greater than 100,000 hours 8 If using an LM value provided by the Manufacturer, the Total LLF is equal to 0.9 x LM60,000hr 63 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSLUMINANCE AND ILLUMINANCE CALCULATIONS Calculations should be done in AGi32, DIALux, Visual, or comparable software, and include the following calculation grids: • ROADWAY LUMINANCE - A calculation grid is required for every lane of traffic and oriented in the direction of travel spaced 10’ OC along each lane, with two points across each lane. - Every section of roadway where criteria changes requires a separate calculation grid. • INTERSECTION ILLUMINANCE - Intersection calculations done using horizontal illuminance grids that include the whole intersection, as well as all crosswalks associated with the intersections. Calculation points placed in a 5’x5’ grid. • SIDEWALK ILLUMINANCE - Horizontal sidewalk illuminance grids placed on all sidewalks, spaced every 5’-10’ OC along the sidewalk with two points across the sidewalk. • LIGHT TRESPASS ILLUMINANCE - Light trespass grids located 5’ past the edge of ROW, into private property. Light trespass grids placed 5’ AFF, oriented toward the street with calculation points every 5’-10’ OC. - Light trespass calculation grids separated based on adjacent land use. If the project goes from a residential area to a commercial area, a separate light trespass calculation grid required for each section of the project. - If a structure is within 5’ from the property line, light trespass grid to be placed on the structure, 5’ AFF. - Light trespass values should not exceed the following: • Single Family Residential, Multifamily Residential, Industrial and Open Space properties: 0.1FC MAXIMUM. - If this criteria is not feasible with proper shielding and distribution, a variance may be considered to allow up to 0.2Fc Maximum light trespass in residential areas. Designer will be required to submit a narrative describing the efforts to control light trespass to the City Engineer. • Commercial, Restaurant/Retail/Civic, and Mixed-use Residential properties: 0.3FC MAXIMUM • CROSSWALK VERTICAL ILLUMINANCE - Vertical illuminance grids are required in all crosswalks at 5’ AFF, and oriented toward oncoming traffic (See Figure 55). Calculation points should be located along the center line of each crosswalk, placed every 5’ OC. 64 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSSALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN // VOLUME 2 Designers submissions to the City should include a calculation summary table for each calculation grid and include the average illuminance or luminance, maximum illuminance or luminance, minimum illuminance or luminance, and Avg:Min ratio. Calculated values may vary from criteria by no more than 10% above or below. Figure 55: Horizontal Intersection Illuminance Grid Figure 56: Vertical Intersection Illuminance Grid 65 LIGHTING DESIGN PROCESSFigure 57: Roadway, Sidewalk, and Light Trespass Calculation Grid Setup