01-03-1995 - Residential Light & Glare Ordinance - Amend. #262TO
FROM
suarECE .
SUMMARY:
9
City Council
City Manager
Planning Department
RESIDENTIAL -LIGHT AND GLARE
ORDINANCE (AMENDMENT NO..262)
0. 1City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
ITEM NO. A-2
DATE 01-03-95
Amendment No. 262 is a City -initiated amendment to Chapter 1 (General
Provisions) and Chapter 26 (Zoning) of the West Covina Municipal Code
relating; to light and glare on single-family residential properties. The
purpose of this amendment is to enable the facilitation of enforcement in
response to the numerous -complaints received in regards to light "spill
over" from security lights, sports court lighting, and decorative lights
placed on single-family residential properties.
BACKGROUND
At the September '7, 1993 meeting of the City Council, several neighbors of the
residence at 1520 East Norma Avenue brought to the attention of the City Council that
the resident had placed green and red neon lights in a tree, which illuminated not only
the resident's yards, but also "spilled over" onto the neighbor's yards and homes. This
particular case was eventually resolved in court, but it revealed that there is no explicit
language in the Zoning Code .regulating the amount of light and glare that may "spill
over" onto a single-family property from another single-family property. In response to
this issue, the City Council directed staff to bring the residential light and glare issue
to the attention of the Planning Commission, so that they may evaluate amending the
Zoning Code to address this issue.
i
i
At the present time, the Zoning Code has specific standards for multiple -family
residential, commercial and other non-residential uses to control light and glare "spill
over" onto nearby residential properties. However, the Zoning Code has no language
that applies to lighting produced by single-family residential properties.
At their October 25, 1994 meeting, the Planning Commission approved, by a 4-1 vote,
a resolution initiating the amendment. procedure and directed staff to proceed with
research into a proposed amendment. At their November 22, 1994 meeting, the
Planning Commission held a study session to discuss the approach that the new
amendment should I take. After a lengthy discussion on the matter, the Planning
Commission expressed the concern that.the goal of the new amendment should be to
enable the facilitation of enforcement in response to the numerous complaints received
in regards to light "spill over" while also not placing an undue burden on residents who
want. to place lighting (especially security lighting for protection purposes) on their
properties. At their December 13, 1994 meeting, the Planning Commission as
presented with specific code language to be added to the Municipal Code to address
the issue. After some discussion, the Planning Commission approved a resolution
recommending to the City Council adoption of the amendment.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the proposed code language (see .attached ordinance) is to enable the
facilitation of enforcement in response to the numerous complaints received in regards
to light "spill over" from security lights, sports court lighting, and decorative. lights placed
on single-family residential properties while also not placing an undue burden on
residents who wantto place lighting on their properties.
For these reasons, Ithe major components of the proposed ordinance are as follows:
Violations of 'light and glare "spill over" standards will be enforced on a complaint
basis by staff as authorized by the proposed modifications to .Section 1-37.2.
1021-94/C:CC/A:JAY18/A262CCRP.RP/jj/srg.
i
City Council Staff Report
Amendment No. 262: Residential Light and
January 3. 1995 - Page 2
On -site lighting on single-family residential property shall not require approval by
the. Planning Department priori to installation (except for sports court lighting).
2. In order to provide an objective standard for determining violations, Section 26-
409 (d) of the new ordinance specifies a maximum light "spill over" level from
one single-family property onto another of "1.0 foot-candles over ambient
illumination levels". Lighting shall be directed away from adjacent properties, but
no standards are established 1 controlling the amount of lighting allowed on a
resident's own property.
3. Since sports court lighting is distinct from other types of lighting and has the
potential for more intense impacts onto surrounding properties; Section 26-
409(e) of the new ordinance requires approval of plans by the Planning Director
so that methods to minimize "spill over" (e.g. landscaping, fencing) may be
required. This requirement will not apply to basketball hoops within front yard
driveways allowed by code.
4. The new ordinance has been designed to require that existing lighting (installed
prior to the effective date of the new code) comply with the new requirements.
Since the requirements are to !be enforced on a complaint basis only and most
existing lighting in single-family residential zones already meet the new
requirements, staff does not foresee a major problem with this approach.
In conclusion the ordinance identifies light ht and glare "spill over" as a problem
proposed
that may impact other properties and neighborhoods negatively. Therefore, the new
ordinance restricts the amount of "spill over'.' that may occur on an adjoining property.
Sports court lighting is identified as being distinct from other types of lighting.
Therefore, an approval by the, Planning Director for sports court lighting has been
incorporated into this code. This code will accomplish the City's objective of facilitating
enforcement to mitigate excessive ",spill over" while also not creating a burden on
residents wishing to provide lighting on their properties.
RECOMMENDATION
i
Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the recommendation of the Planning
Commission by adopting-'a_1ordinance entitled:
)/VrA of)04, &.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO CERTAIN SECTIONS OF
CHAPTER 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) AND CHAPTER 26 (ZONING) OF THE
WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL ''CODE RELATING TO LIGHT AND GLARE IN
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES. (AMENDMENT NO. 262)
REVIEWED AND APPROVED
fry W. Collier
n ina Director
94/C:CC/A:JAY78/A262CCRP.RP/jj/srg
0
CITY COUNCIL.
ORDINANCE NO.
i
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN
AMENDMENT TO CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 1
(GENERAL PROVISIONS) AND CHAPTER 26 (ZONING) OF
THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
LIGHT j AND GLARE IN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
ZONES'. (AMENDMENT NO.262)
WHEREAS, Staff has received numerous complaints about individuals regarding
the spill over of light, and glare produced onto single-family residential properties from
another one single-family residential property; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code requires that light produced by non-residential
properties and ' multiple -family residential properties be directed away from adjoining
property, but it does 'not address the issue of light produced on single-family residential
properties; and
WHEREAS, it bas been requested that the Zoning Code be amended to facilitate
enforcement in response to these complaints; and
i
WHEREAS, at the September 7, 1993 meeting of the City Council, staff was
directed to present the issue to the Planning Commission, so that they may evaluate
amending the code; and
WHEREAS, at the October 25, 1994 meeting of the Planning Commission, a
resolution initiating the amendment procedure was approved; and
i
WHEREAS, at the November 22, 1994 meeting of the Planning Commission, a
study session was held to discuss the matter and. staff received direction to draft code
language to incorporate into a final resolution for recommendation -to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this code amendment is to protect the appearance,
character, and integrity of residential neighborhoods by establishing certain restrictions on
light and glare in single-family residential zones; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, upon giving the required notice, did on the
13th day of December, 1994, conduct a duly advertised public hearing as prescribed by
law and approved Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-94-4267 recommending that
the City Council adopt Amendment No. 262; and
WHEREAS, the City. Council considered evidence presented by the Planning
Commission, Planning Department, and other interested parties at a duly advertised
' public hearing on January 3, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the oral and documentary evidence considered in connection with the
code amendment reveal the following facts:
1. The General Plan of the City of West Covina maintains as one of its goals the
preservation of the essential residential character of West Covina - a City of
beautiful homes; the . maintenance of existing residential development; and
providing an aesthetically pleasant environment for those who live, work, play and
visit in West Covina; and
1022-94/C:CC/A:JAY 18/A262CCOR. DOC/jj/srg
0
Ordinance No.
Amendment 262: Residential Light & Glare
January 3. 1995 - Page 2
2. Spill over of light and glare onto', single-family residential properties create negative
impacts that extend beyond Ithe subject property and thereby substantially
impairing the use, enjoyment, and property value of a residential neighborhood;
and
3. Adopting and implementing restrictions on light and glare in single-family
residential property will mitigate potential negative impacts of excessive light onto
other properties, but will not unduly restrict the ability to provide lighting for a
particular residential property; and
4. Lighting for sports courts on single-family residential property is distinct from other
lighting, and therefore, should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of West Covina hereby ordains
as follows:
SECTION NO. 1: Based on the evidence presented and the findings set forth,
Amendment No. 262 is hereby found to be consistent with the West Covina General Plan
and the implementation thereof.
SECTION NO. 2: Based on the evidence presented and the findings set forth,
Chapter 1 (General Provisions) and Chapter 26 (Zoning) of the West Covina Municipal
Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
I
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec.1-37.2. Authority of authorized city employees to issue citations.
The code enforcement officer, assistant code enforcement officer and business license
inspector shall have the authority to Issue citations for misdemeanors and infractions as
enumerated herein. i
Chapter 3 through 24.
[no change]
Chapter 26 - Zoning.
Sections 26-28, 26-300, 26-301(a),(6),(c), 26-303 (a), (b), - 26-304, 26-322, 26-339
(a),(b),(c),(d), 26-340(a), 26-342(a),(b),(c), 26-344(a), 26-391(c),(e)(1),(2),(4),(5),(h),
(j)(1),(2), (k).(1). 26-409, 26-412(a),(b)!(6), 26-438, 26-568(b), 26-581(g)(j), 26-597, 26-
604(a),(c),.26-609(b),(c),(d),(e), 26-6111(a),(d), 26-672(a),(b),(c),(d),(e),(f),(g),(h),(i),(j),(k).
CHAPTER 26. ZONING
ARTICLE VIII. RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL/ONE-FAMILY ZONES
Sec. 26-391. through Sec. 26-402.
Sec. 26-402.5. Maximum front yard pavement coverage.
(a).through (h) [no change]
i
1
1022-94/C:CC/A:JAY 18/A262CCOR. DOC/jj/srg
Ordinance No.
Amendment 262: Residential Light & Glare
Iani iary R 1 QAF; - PanP
fA This section shall not apply to private recreation areas al -Re
4 ``(d),
Sec. 26-405.5. Exemption from yard and setback requirements.
(a) and (b) [no change]
(c) Flagpoles, and other, similar structures, not to exceed twenty-five (25) feet in
height, shall not encroach into any required yard, except in the —fear—yaFd as
the front yard. rear yard, or street
side yards provided there is a minimum five-foot setback to adjoining properties.
(d) Swimming pools, spas, sports courts, and other similar stFwstuF% private
recreation areas shall not encroach into any required yard, except in the rear yard,
and in the front yard or street side yard
when the lot configuration, building placement, and/or street location justify its
location due to the uniqueness of the property as determined by the planning
directorprovide'there is a minimum five-foot setback to adjoining pro ep roes.
(e) through.(h) ['no change]
Sec. 26-405.7. through Sec. 26-408.
[no change]
Sec. 26-409. Mechanical equipment and lighting.
Sec. 26-410 through 26-415.
[No change]
SECTION NO, 3: The project is; Categorically Exempt as a Minor Alterations in
Land Use Limitations (Class 5) per Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended.
1022-94/C:CC/A:JAY18/A262CCOR.DOC/jj/srg
•
Ordinance No.
Amendment 262: Residential Light & Glare
January 3. 1995 - Page 4
SECTION NO, 4: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and
shall cause the same to be published as required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED this; day of 1995.
Mayor
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES)
CITY OF WEST COVINA)
I, JANET BERRY, City Clerk of the City of West Covina, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly introduced and placed upon its first
reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 1995.
That, thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of
the City Council on day �of 91995.
1W*3
NOES:
ABSENT: I
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
1022-94/C:CC/A:JAY 18/A262CCOR. DC
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
IV.
Amendment t
West Covina
residential pri
December 13, 1994
of West Covina
ity of West Covina (city wide)
). 262 is a City -initiated amendment to Chapter 26 (Zoning) of the
Municipal Code relating to light and glare on single-family
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution
recommending that the City Council adopt Amendment No. 262.
The project isl�considered a categorical exemption (Class 5-Minor Alterations in
Land Use Limitations) pursuant to Section 15305 of the California Environmental
Quality Act ('CEQA) of 1970, as amended, since it proposes a land use
regulation that will not result in any changes in land use or density.
At its last meeting, held on November . 22, 1994, the Planning Commission
conducted a study session to discuss the matter of light and glare "spill over"
onto a single-family residential property from another single-family residential
property. After some discussion, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 (with one
Commissioned absent) to direct staff to proceed with preparation of a final
resolution regarding residential light and glare for recommendation to the City
Council.
This issue arose as a result of direction from the City Council at their September
7, 1993 in response to numerous complaints by residents affected. by light and
glare produced by neighbors. On October 25, 1994, the Planning Commission
by a 4-1 vote'i approved a resolution initiating the amendment procedure and
directed staff Ito proceed with research into a proposed amendment. l
The goal of the proposed amendment is to enable the facilitation of enforcement
in response to the numerous complaints received in regards to light "spill over"
from security lights, sports court lighting, and decorative lights placed on single-
family residential properties while also not placing an undue burden on residents
who want to place lighting on their properties. At the present time, the Zoning
Code has specific standards for multiple -family residential, commercial and other
non-residential uses to prohibit light and glare "spill over" onto nearby residential
properties. Hfowever, the Zoning Code has no language that applies to lighting
produced by single-family residential properties.
0968-94/a:f ay 18/a262perp.rpfjj
•
PC Staff Report
Amendment 262: Residential Light
rlaramhar 11 1 QQd - Pana 7
0
Glare
As a result. of the Commission's November 22, 1994 study session, staff
received the following directives, which have been incorporated into the code
language in the attached resolution:
1. Establish a plan requirement for sports court lighting which shall_
require approval by the Planning Director.
On -site lighting on single-family residential property shall not require
approval by the Planning' Department prior to installation, except for sports
court lighting. Violations of code requirements will be enforced on a
complaint basis only. The requirement for sports court lighting is stated
in .Section 26-409(e) of the Zoning Code. At a minimum, plans with fixture
locations and details shall be required for sports court lighting, and, if
deemed necessary by the Planning Director, require photometric data,
height/setback restrictions, and screening materials to minimize spillover
(e.g. landscaping, fenci i g). In order to be consistent with other sections
of the code, Section 26402.5 and Section 405.5 have been modified to
permit paving for sports courts in front and street side yards, in certain
instances if deemed appropriate by the Planning Director. These sections
are not intended to regulate, in any fashion, the placement of basketball
hoops when a front yard driveway or pavement is not obstructed or
expanded beyond that which is allowed by code.
2. Set no specified restrictions on the height or setback for attached
(wall) and detached (pole) light fixtures beyond the general 25-foot
height restrictions that applies to all structures in the single-family
residential zones.
The code shall not address these issues, except to allow the Planning.
Director the discretion to apply height and setback restrictions on sports
court lighting if deemed necessary, as stated in Section 26-409(e).
3. Establish a requirement that specifies a maximum light "spill over"
level of 1.0 foot-candles over ambient illumination levels.
This requirement is stated in Section 26-409(d) and will provide an
objective standard that shall be enforced on a complaint basis and can be
upheld in court should an alleged violator challenge the City's position.
Additionally, lighting shall be arranged so direct light is reflected away
from adjoining properties. This is usually accomplished through the use
of hood and shield covers for light fixtures.
Section 26-409(e) addresses the approach the City uses to address existing
lighting which do not meet the new code language (e.g. exceeds new maximum
spill over). This section does not "grandfather" all existing lighting installed prior
to the effective date of the new code (as is done with .some amendments).
Instead, this section will be enforced as complaints arise. .
This approach was chosen because it is impossible to verify the date when a
light fixture was installed and because lighting does not establish any
grandfathered or vested right. Since most existing lighting in single-family
residential zones already meet the new requirements, this approach is not
0968-94/a:fjay 18/a262perp.rpTj
PC Staff Report
Amendment 262: Residential Light & Glare
IUFZI IQ. 1 VU—C - f QLiC J
expected to create a multitude of non -conforming situations while at the same
time allowingl,';he City to remedy a problem when it arises. Therefore, staff does
not foresee a major problem with this approach.
In conclusion, the proposed code identifies light and glare "spill over" as a
problem, restricts the amount of "spill over" that may occur on an adjoining
property. SpI court lighting is identified as being distinct from other types of
lighting. Therefore, an approval by the Planning Director for sports court lighting
has been incorporated into this code. This code will accomplish the City's
objective of facilitating enforcement to mitigate excessive "spill over" while also
not creating a; burden on residents wishing to provide lighting on their properties.
VI. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
AN AMENDMENT TO CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 1 (GENERAL
PROVISIONS) AND CHAPTER 26 (ZONING) OF THE WEST COVINA
MUNICIPAL (CODE RELATING TO LIGHT AND GLARE IN SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONES. (AMENDMENT NO. 262)
REVIEWED AND APPROVED
A
l W. Collier
ng Director
�I
i
IJI
,i
0968-94/a:fjay l 8/a262 perp. rpfj
I
f
Jay Jarrin
Planning
A RESOLUTION
COVINA, . CALIFOF
AMENDMENT TO
AND CHAPTER 26
TO LIGHT AND GL
NO. 262)
I
q,
1:PLANNING COMMISSION
,RESOLUTION NO. 12-94-4267
F THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WEST
M, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS)
EONING) OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
kRE IN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES. (AMENDMENT
qi
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
APPLICANT: City of West Covina
LOCATION: City wide
i
WHEREAS, Staff has received numerous complaints about individuals regarding
the spill over of light and glare produced onto single-family residential properties from
another one single-family residential property; and
WHEREAS, G4the Zoning Code requires that light produced by non-residential
properties and multiple -family residential properties be directed away from adjoining
property, but it does not address the issue of light produced on single-family residential
properties; and I,
WHEREAS, it has been requested that the Zoning Code be amended to facilitate
enforcement in response to these complaints; and
WHEREAS, I'at the September 7, 1993 meeting of the City Council, staff was
directed to present the issue to the Planning Commission, so that they may evaluate
amending the code; and
WHEREAS, at the October 25, 1994 meeting of the Planning Commission, a
resolution initiating „the amendment procedure was approved; and
WHEREAS, at the November 22, 1994 meeting of the Planning Commission, a
study session was held to discuss the matter and staff received direction to draft code
language to incorporate into a final resolution for recommendation to the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this code amendment is to protect the appearance,
character, and integrity of residential neighborhoods by establishing certain restrictions
on light and glare in single-family residential zones; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, upon giving the required notice, did on
the 13th day of -December, 1994, conduct a duly advertised public hearing as
prescribed by law; °and
WHEREAS, jIstudies and investigations made by this. Commission and in its
behalf reveal the following facts:
0967-94/c.1mosin2apm,"m
u
6
PC Resolution No. 12-94-4267
Amendment 262: Residential Light &
ne..o..,1%nr 1'A 1 QQd - PsIna 2
1. The General Plan of the City of West Covina maintains as one of its goals the
preservation of the essential iresidential character of West Covina - a City of
- beautiful homes; the maintenance of existing residential development, and
providing an aesthetically pleasant environment for those who live, work, play
and visit in West Covina; and'
2. Spill over of light and glare onto single-family residential properties create
negative impacts that extend beyond the subject property and thereby
substantially impairing the use, enjoyment, and property value of a residential
neighborhood; and
3. Adopting and implementing restrictions on light and glare in single-family
residential property will mitigate potential negative impacts of excessive light onto
other properties, but will not unduly restrict the ability to provide lighting for a
particular residential property; and
4. Lighting for sports courts on single-family residential property is distinct from
other lighting, and therefore, ishould be reviewed on a case -by -case basis.
5. The 'project is Categorically] Exempt as a Minor Alterations in Land Use
Limitations (Class 5) per Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the
City of West Covina does hereby resolve as follows:
SECTION NO. 1: Based on the evidence presented and the findings set forth,
Amendment No. 262 is hereby found to be consistent with the West Covina General
Plan and the implementation thereof.
SECTION NO. 2: Based on the evidence presented and the findings set forth,
the Planning Commission of the City of West Covina hereby recommends to the City
Council of the City of West Covina that it amend Chapter 26 (Zoning) of the West
Covina Municipal Code to read as follows:
CHAPTER 26. ZONING
ARTICLE VIII. RESIDENTIAL
Sec. 26-391. through Sec.
Sec. 26-402.5. Maximum front
(a) through (h) [no change]
This section
26-405.5(d).
Sec. 26-405.5. Exemption from
(a) and (b) [no change]
(c) Flagpoles, and other simil
height, shall not encroach
side yards provided there is
TURAUONE-FAMILY ZONES
pavement coverage.
and setback requirements.
structures, not to exceed twenty-five (25) feet in
to any required yard, except in the
As artia-le and- On the front yard, rear yard, or street
minimum five-foot setback to adjoining properties:
09e7-Ws:.w.§8tu.2Pw..,..w
PC Resolution No. 12-94-4267
Amendment 262: Residential Light & Glare
rlorumhar 1 Z 9 QQd - P.ana 3
(d) Swimming pools, spas, sports courts, and other similar s� private
recreation areas shall not encroach into any required yard, except in the rear
yards and in the front yard or street
side yard when the lot configuration, building placement, and/or street location
justify its location due to the uniqueness of the property as determined by the
planning director. provided there is a minimum five-foot setback to adjoinin4
properties. j
(e) through (h) no change]
Sec. 26-405.7. throlugh Sec. 26-408.
no change] ,
Sec. 26-409. Mechanical equipment and liahtinct.
(a) thn
(d)
Sec. 2
[No change]
SECTION NO: 3: The Planning Commission of the City of West Covina also
hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of West Covina that it amend
Chapter 1 (General (;;Provisions) of the West Covina Municipal Code to add Sections 26-
391(k), 26-391(1) and 26-409 to those sections listed under Section 1-37.2, Chapter 26.
•
PC Resolution No.. 12-94-4267
Amendment 262: Residential Light & Glare
December 13. 1994 - Pa-ge 4
SECTION NO. 4: The Sel
Resolution to the City Council for th
I HEREBY CERTIFY, that the
Commission of the City of West Coi
December, 1994, by the following v
AYES: Commissioners Reiner
NOES: None
ABSENT: Chairman Melendez
ary is instructed to forward a copy of this
attention in the manner as prescribed by law.
.going Resolution was adopted by the Planning
i., at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of
Solinger, Zeller and Chairman Connolly
Edward
o,qpo y, airman
Plannin
mission
y W. Collier, Secretary
ing Commission
09e7-84 awaviM262morsda"
• City of West Covina
Memorandum
To Planning Commission
AGENDA
FROM Planning Department C-2
ITEM NO.
suarECr. STUDY SESSION FOR RESIDENTIAL LIGHT DATE 1 1-22-94
AND GLARE ORDINANCE
(AMENDMENT NO. 262)
Summary: Amendment No. 262 is a proposed amendment to Chapter 26 (Zoning)
to address the issue of light and glare in single-family residential zones.
Staff is requesting that the. Planning Commission review and comment
on the materials provided and direct staff to proceed with preparation of
a final resolution for Amendment No. 262 for recommendation to the
City Council.
BACKGROUND
On September 7, 1994, the City Council directed staff to prepare a. code amendment
to deal with the issue of light and glare produced by single-family residential properties
onto other single-family residential properties. The City Council acted in response to
numerous complaints by neighbors affected by light and glare issues. The Zoning
Code has specific standards for multiple -family residential, commercial and other non-
residential uses to prohibit light and glare "spill over" onto nearby residential
properties. However, the Zoning Code has no language that applies to lighting
produced by single-family residential properties. On October 25, 1994, the Planning
Commission by a 4-1 vote approved a resolution initiating the amendment procedure
and directed staff to proceed with research into a proposed amendment.
• •9
The goal of the proposed amendment is to enable the facilitation of enforcement in
response to the numerous complaints received in regards to light "spillover" from
security lights, sports court lighting, and decorative lights placed on single-family
residential properties.
To fully understand how light "spill over" can be addressed by the City, the following
is an overview of how the light "spill over" standards for outdoor lighting for
commercial projects are implemented. Currently, outdoor lighting for commercial
projects are required to comply with standards contained in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2513 (see Exhibit A). This resolution contains specific standards for
commercial projects located next to residential property. First, direct lighting on the,
commercial site is required to reflected away from residential property. Additionally,
"spill over" of indirect lighting cannot exceed 0.1 foot-candles (the standard by which
lighting is measured) at any point on the residential property.
The builder is required to submit lighting plans showing the location, type, and height
of wall -mounted (attached) and/or pole -mounted (detached) light fixtures. Included
with this plan, the builder also submits a computer -generated "photometric" plan
which shows the illumination (foot-candle) levels produced by the on -site lighting onto
adjacent residential properties, which is then reviewed by the Engineering Department
for compliance with City standards. Usually illumination on adjacent properties are
brought within acceptable levels by providing. light fixtures with hoods and shields.
Although these procedures are necessary in order to verify that outdoor lighting
complies with standards before installation of fixtures, staff understands that the
Planning Commission may find applying this procedure for single-family residential
projects unreasonable given the relation between the cost and detail involved with
providing plans.
0844-94/C:PLANC01V1/A:JAY18/A262PCSS.SS
Amendment No. 262: Study Session
Residential Light and Glare
November 22. 1994 - Pane 2
During the research of this issue, staff has found that most cities do not regulate the
issue of residential -to -residential lighting "spill over" at all (like in West Covina) or they
address it with a broad policy statement that "All lighting shall be directed away from
adjoining properties" with no specific standards. Other cities go further by specifying
location and height restrictions for light fixtures. Some cities require a Board or
Commission review for all additions to single-family homes (regardless of size) and
incorporate review of lighting into this -procedure. Most cities, however, address
sports court lighting by requiring a conditional use permit approval from the Planning
Commission. Currently, the West Covina Municipal Code does not address this issue
either and inevitably, the proposed amendment will need to address sports courts in
order to cover all sources of possible light and glare problems.
Each of these procedures has its benefits and drawbacks, and the intent of this study
session is to identify the approach to, regulation that is appropriate for West Covina
in order to protect residents from overflow of light and glare while also allowing
reasonable lighting levels without overburdening residents with regulations. In light
of this, staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the following three
alternatives. Each alternatives. is based on the codes of three cities that do address
the issue of residential -to -residential lighting. These range from Alternative A (based
on Arcadia) with height restrictions and general requirements to Alternative B (based
on Cerritos) with specified illumination level requirements to Alternative C (based on
Claremont) with a cumulative approach that adds a plan requirement.
ALTERNATIVE
PERFORMANCE
DEVELOPMENT
PROCEDURE
STANDARDS
STANDARDS
ALTERNATIVE A
direct/indirect:
detached: 15 ft.
field check in
(ARCADIA)
reflect away from
max. height
response to
adj. properties at
attached: 15 ft.
complaints by
lot line (no specific
max. height above
neighbors
foot-candle max.)
grade
ALTERNATIVE B
direct/indirect:
none
field check in
(CERRITOS)
max. 1.0 foot-
response to
candles above
complaints by
ambient
neighbors
illumination level at
lot line
ALTERNATIVE C
direct: not visible at
detached: 8 ft.
approval.of plans
(CLAREMONT)
any point 5 feet
max. height
with fixture
above grade on
attached: 14 ft.
location and
adjacent lots
max. height above
details required
indirect: max. 0.5
grade (except for
by Director of
foot-candles at lot
2nd story
Community
line (exemptions for
balconies: 8 ft.
Development
hillside lots)
above 2nd story
level)
The three areas of regulations -that need to be addressed are the following:
1. Performance Standards.
Alternative A, like most cities, requires thatdirec light be arranged away from
adjoining properties, which is possible for adjusting the direction of light with
swivel heads, hoods, and shields. However, most codes do not specify a
0944-94/C:PLANCOM/A:JAY1 8/A262PCSS.SS
0
Amendment No. 262: Study Session
Residential Light and Glare
November 22. 1994 - Pace 3
maximum illumination' (foot-candle) level that. is not acceptable for indirect
(reflected) light, therefore, enforcement is left to the judgement of the particular
officer investigating a compliant.
This method of using a subjective standard creates problems when having a
court uphold the enforcement action should the alleged violator challenge the
City's position. Because of this problem, some cities do quantify a maximum
acceptable foot-candle level. Alternative B specifies 1.0 foot candles over the
ambient illumination levels, while Alternative C specifies 0.5 foot candles of
indirect (reflected) light. As stated earlier, West Covina's current standards are
very restrictive and limit the "spill over" from commercial projects onto
residential property to 0.1 foot candles.
No restrictions on the illumination level on a resident's own property are
required by these alternatives and, therefore, this will not adversely affect
proposals for security lighting which illuminate portions of or an entire property.
However, these restrictions will mitigating the impact of these lights onto other
residents' property.
2. Development. Standards.
Some cities also regulate the height and location.of light fixtures. It has been
found that spillover may be decreased or increased by adjusting the height of
a light fixture from grade, and the proximity of the light fixture to lot lines.
As shown on Alternative C, a distinction can be made for light fixtures :when
affixed to a building ("attached") or affixed to a pole/support structure
("detached"). Alternative C limits the height of attached (wall) light fixtures to
14 feet and detached (pole) light fixtures to 8 feet, which seem reasonable with
the exception that sports courts may require light poles higher than 8 feet.
Alternative A limits both attached and detached fixtures to a maximum height
of 15 feet. Alternative B has no standards,. which theoretically translates into
a maximum height of 25 feet, the cap for all structures in single-family
residential zone.
Most cities restrict light fixtures to the same setback requirements as buildings.
However, in order to be consistent with existing sections within the West
Covina Zoning Code, the following is suggested. Setbacks for detached (pole)
light fixtures should be similar to those for similar. monopole structures (e.g.
flagpoles). These monopoles are subject to building setbacks but are allowed
to encroach into the front yard provided a minimum 5-foot setback is provided.
to adjacent residential property. On the other hand, attached light fixtures
should be permitted on any building wall or save, even if this encroaches in a
yard setback. These setbacks would, in effect, determine the location of any
sports court lighting.
3. Procedure'
As stated earlier, detailed lighting plans and photometric data are required for
outdoor lighting for commercial projects in order to verify compliance with
codes. Alternatives A and B, similar to most cities, do not require the approval
of plans or photometric data for the issuance of an electrical permit for the
installation of exterior lighting, other than sports courts, for single-family
residences. Instead, verification is performed through field checks in response r
to a complaint by neighbors.
0944-94/C:PLANC0M/A:JAY18/A262PCSS.SS
Amendment No. 262: Study Session
Residential Light and Glare
November 22, 1,994 - Pape 4
These two alternatives, by not requiring plans to be reviewed prior to
installation, benefit residents due to the substantial savings in not having to
draw plans. The major drawback of not -requiring a plan, however, is the
possibility that residents who allegedly violate code regulationswill have no
approved plan for fall back on.. For example, the City may often investigate
"spill over" onto a neighboring dot created because the light fixture a resident
is installed too high, too close to the lot line, or produces excessive glare.
When this is found, the resident may be required to relocate or otherwise
modify the fixture, which in the long run, may cost the resident more than if
a plan was drawn up and verified by City staff.
Due to these problems, Alternative C requires the submittal of plans showing
the location, height, type, design, size, and wattage of proposed lighting. A
computer -generated photometric data sheet (with actual foot-candle
measurements) is not mandatory since these are quite expensive. However,
this alternative allows the. Planning Director to require photometric data if it is
found to be necessary (e.g. for sports courts lights). Other cities require sports
court lighting proposal to go before the Planning Commission at a public hearing
via a conditional use permit process..
In conclusion, staff wishes to receive input regarding this matter in regards to the
preceding so that it may incorporated into proposed text language. Specifically, if the
Planning Commission directs staff to do so, the code amendment would add a section
relating to lighting to Article Vill (Residential-Agricultural/One-Family Zone) of the
Zoning Code to address the performance standards and procedure standards.
Development standards (height and setback restrictions) for light fixtures and sports
courts could be addressed through the existing sections which permit structures to
encroach into required yards.
Staff suggests that the following approach be taken with the proposed ordinance:,
1. Establish a specified maximum light "spill over" level (e.g. 1.0 foot-candles over
ambient illumination levels) in order to have a reasonable objective standard
which can be upheld in court should an alleged violator challenge the City's
position.
2. Set restrictions on height for attached (wall) and detached (pole) light fixtures
in order to minimize the possibility of light "spill over".
3. Set a procedure for sports court lighting by which plans with fixture locations
and details are reviewed and approved by the Planning Director, who may, if
deemed necessary, require photometric data and additionally screening
materials to minimize spillover (e.g. landscaping, fencing).
4. All other light installations will be field checked by response to complaints; no
pre -installation Planning Department review will be required.
0944-94/C: PLANCOM/A:JAY 18/A262PC SS. SS
Amendment No. 262: Study Session
Residential Light and Glare
November 22, 1994 - Pane 5
RECOMMENDATION'
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and comment on the
materials provided and direct staff to proceed with preparation of a final resolution for
Amendment No. 262 for recommendation to the City Council.
i
Jay cUrrin
Planning Assistant
REVIEWED AND APPROVED
Try W. Collier
ng Director
•
�J
cn
c,
rr
o
p• p. _.
../
tJ
•S t:� rJ
N _ Wnn lP
m
In
to
O
a \1 a
n
..in nr .
in
in
m Fi v
ii�
i.i
.J P
t,n
y1
s
Nvt
At Tpp
cli
f•
t!r •a
UI)7
i
w
al tn`•
nr
�r
N it
it
U
U NS
({'
U
m
r
V
(./
if
Q`
RJ
t^
P,
1 A
m
my
a
P
r
•5
l�� �.A
1`m11
�,►)
V
it
.p
r tT
�
ti
m
((to
(./
T
In
A26z*
!;A M
PH07
�7
N N N N d O
RI U1
o c,
_ � 1 WuN1 ,_• A
NP i "
•o r� a L
W m
c� a it
•J � n o �
tD O 6
O .... a y C
{.1 U W O _
o it
-- o 0
U pr. `��j•
lJ .p ► P U t7 �I n O
R/ In
W u
O
r
N W .p m V � •O ... ... W O O
^1 p o
•O V . iw C2
o �+! o p
WW (N� NN A• � 6
N P j f0 N
o
i,l iD a iJ i4 d !' • a y
N • U O o 6 0
00M•O a m o
a
a 6 6 y O
v In o o N a ,a � c o
o 0
.O o
((1//•11• / IUJ W Wa P • _ a p� 0 0
!w 0A
O t7 Ir
• i '� (J r0 .D N a p C
.. ► o N P N .p iu u o
O
33
o
� }`U�'
iA
IZVSy-')
PIW
ID
r
s
O
.14
Ooso.�o�
fTie/c OAT,�
Chapter 5 Part 3 Environmental Protective Standards
4. Dust or oche I airborne particulate matter.
5. Toxic or noxi us matter.
533 OUTDOOR LIGHTING AND GLARE
Excessive light and glare shall be limited by the use of appropriate light fixtures, shielding
devices and directional lighting methods.
A. General Requir
1. Outdoor light fixtures shall be designed, installed. and maintained so as to direct
light only onto the property on which the light source is- located. All outdoor
lighting fixtures shall have appropriate shielding so the. light source is .cut off at
the point where neither the light source nor its image from a reflecting surface
of the light fixture is directly visible from any point above five (5) feet measured
outside the lot line in neighboring residential'properdes.
No mercury vapor utility yard lights or other light fixtures .with high intensity
discharge lamps or bulbs, which are not designed .to limit or control where light
is directed and/or which. do not shield the light source from view from
neighboring residential properties, shall be permitted.
2. No industrial or commercial operation, activity or lighting shall be permitted
which resultsin the direct illumination of residential properties or uses.
3. Any indirect illumination of neighboring residential properties or uses shall not
exceed .5 fooicandles at the property line as measured horizontally and vertically
frbm adjacent grade to a height of fourteen (14) feet.
B. New Development and Remodeling
Plans for such development or remodeling as is subject, to Architectural Commission
review per Chapter 6, Part 1, shall show outdoor lighting.
(Rev.Ord.89-5, 2/28/89; 5/3 - 11
Ord.89.7, 4/25/89; Ord.89-22, 10/30/89
Post-V brand tax transmittal memo 7671 0 o1 P69we '
LUI A_=r aye Jp__ �s.��a-Later
A26Z. CGA
REI�►oKT d�0,
• i
Chapter S Part 3 Environmental Protective Standanis
C. Single Family Residential Development
1. No outdoor lighting fixtures for a single family home or in any Single Family
Residential Districts shall be mounted more than fourteen (14) feet above
adjacent grade on any wall or structure except when used to illuminate a second
story entryway, balcony or outside stairway,.in which case the fixture shall not be
higher than eight (8) feet above the floor of the second story.
2. No outdoor lighting fixture in any Single Family Residential Development shall
be mounted more than eight (8) feet above adjacent grade on any pole.
3. Outdoor lighting for properties located within the RR (Rural Residential)
Districts shall conform to the lighting requirements set forth in Chapter 1, Part
2 of this Code and in the - Rural Claremont Architectural and Landscape
Standards.
4. No building permit shall be issued for outdoor lighting for a single family home
or in a Single Family Residential District until a lighting proposal, submitted by
the applicant, has been reviewed by the Director of Community Development for
compliance with the standards of this section. The lighting proposal shall include
the following information:
a. Site plan with proposed location of exterior lights.
b. Type, design, and size of light fixture.
c. Height of light fixture.
d. Type and total wattage of lamps.
e. Any additional information the Director deems necessary to determine
compliance with the provisions of this section.
D. Multiple Family Development
Outdoor lighting for properties loa
be designed, installed and train
downward into the interior of the
(Rev.Ord.89-5, 2/28/89;
Ord,89-7, 4/25/89; Ord.89-22, 10/30
'4262 .
within the RM (Multiple Family) Districts shall
:d so that direct rays of light are directed
5/3 - 12
�oNT
elQ49
PC"o Z of 3
0
Chapter 5 Part 3 Environmental Protective Standards
1= Parking Areas
0
Lighting for parking areas newly constructed with six (6) or more spaces shall be
subject to the lighting standards set forth in Chapter 4, Part 3.
F. Sign illumination
All illumination of signs shall be reviewed and approved per the provisions of Chapter
4, Part 4.
G. Automobile Service Station Lighting
All outdoor lighting for automobile service stations shall be subject to the lighting
requirements set'' forth in Chapter 2, Part 3.
H. Exemptions
1. The following outdoor light fixtures shall be exempt from the provisions of
Subsections III 533-A.1, 533-C.1 and 533-D:
a. Light fixtures with incandescent lamps or bulbs of 100 watts or less, provided
that there are no more than two (2) lamps or bulbs, or 200 watts per light
fixture.', nsidered
(Quartz or tungsten halogen lamps shall not be co
incandescent lamps for purposes of this Code.)
b. Light fixtures with fluorescent- lamps, bulbs or tubes of 20 watts
or less,, provided that there are no more than two (2) lamps, bulbs or tubes,
or 40 watts per light fixture.
e. All producing t Jig l�l fixtures light directly by the combustion of fossil fuels,
�
such as kerosene lanterns or gas lamps.
2. All existing' outdoor lighting that was approved by the Architectural Commission
prior to May 25, 1989, shall be exempt from the provisions of this section.
(Rev.Ord.89-5, 2/28/1
Ord.89-7, 4/25/89, O
AZ62.
s
5/3 • 13
-d.89-22, 10/30/89
ARCMear
a
(Space below f use of County Clerk only)
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE
1210 N. Azusa Canyon Road
West Covina, CA 91790
RECEIVED
JAN 0 6 1995
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
CITY OF WEST COVINA
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Proof of Publication of
County of Los Angeles
I am a citizen of the United States, and a resident
of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of
eighteen years, and not a party to or interested
in the above -entitled matter. I am the principal
clerk of the printer of SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE,
a newspaper of general circulation printed and
published daily in the City of West Covina, County
of Los Angeles, and which newspaper has been
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation
by the Superior Court of the County of
Los Angeles, State of California, on the
date of September 10, 1957, Case Number
684801. The notice, of which the annexed
is a true printed copy, has been published
in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement thereof
on the following dates, to wit:
12/23/94
I declare under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at West Covina. LA Co. California
this _day off nF.C'F.MRF.R 19_!
✓vIx
Signature
Paste Clipping of Notice
SECURELY in this space.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PURSUANT -TO THE LAW AND IN
CONFORMANCE, WITH THE MUNICIPAL '
CODE YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED OFA_
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE WEST COVINA { .
CITY COUNCIL ..*
APPLICA
LOCATIO'
REQUES
certain sei
the issue
residentia
In acc!
procedure
case is cor
„nd nn A
you, wisn TO cnaiienge ine ac uvn�bi; luPan y�
request(s),Zvou may:be:.limit.W to,raisin4 only
those issues which you (or someone else) raised
orally at -this public hearing or in writter `
correspondence received by the City at or before'I, , !
the hearing. ,
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL . :
PLACE: WEST COVINA CITY HALL 1
r1444 West Garvey Avenue South
City Council Chambers -.Level
DATE: Tuesday, January 3, 1995. r:
TIME: 7:30 p.m.
if you have any questions, we urge You to .
contact Jay Jarrin at (818) 814-8422 or Room 208,
at City Hall. Only through citizen participation
can your government build a better City.
ORDER OF THE COF ITY OF WEST COVINA
Publish: Dec: 23, 1994
San Gabriel Val IeY TribuneAd No:16597