In addition to people sending emails to the City Council, as of March 15th almost 1,200 Ivins residents, all adults, added their names to a Letter of Support to preserve and protect our night sky, objecting to some of the proposed changes to the Ivins Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. (Note: The list of names will be sent separately to the City Recorder.)
If you agree with the Letter of Support, please add your name (click here). A few weeks ago we had close to 600 names, but that did not impress the Planning Commission. You would think that would have been meaningful. Apparently not. So we need your help.
The map shows there is broad-based support throughout the city for the statements made in the Letter of Support.
The map understates the level of support because it makes only one plot when: (a) two or more adults live at one address, (b) when supporters list only a street name, HOA name, or neighborhood name, and (c) more people have signed since we did the map and more sign every day.
A Planning Commissioner suggested that the ordinance doesn’t matter to people living in HOAs because HOAs can have more restrictive lighting requirements. However, this broad-based support shows people are more community minded. They care about the whole community, not just their own back yard.
And any legitimate concerns about safety can be addressed in other ways, as discussed in the posts, Shedding light on crime trends in Ivins and Talking about color temperature raises everyone’s temperature.
LETTER OF SUPPORT
If you agree with the Letter of Support, please add your name (click here).
I support a strong lighting ordinance that:
- “Protect(s) the night sky by carefully regulating lighting while also promoting safety for residents” as stated in the Ivins General Plan;
- maintains all references to “preserve, protect and enhance the night sky” in the Ordinance.
I support these proposed changes:
- Prohibiting the use of electronic message boards;
- lowering the max. output on lighting of our national and state flag from 6000 to 1500 lumens;
- grandfathering existing lighting;
- new and revised definitions and minor clean-up language.
I DO NOT support these proposed changes:
- Increasing the color temperature to 4000K for all outdoor lights (up from 2200K for commercial properties and streetlights and 2700K for residential);
- allowing no upper limit on color temperature as long as they are motion activated with timers;
- eliminating the use of amber filters to lower color temperature for streetlights and commercial;
I DO NOT support ANY of the other proposed changes to the ordinance because they weaken protections for neighbors, increase the risk of glare and light trespass, are contrary to the vision and goals in the General Plan, weaken enforceability, and create ambiguity.