Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Outdoor Lighting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission weighs citywide outdoor-lighting standards and 'dark skies' guidance
Summary
Commission members and staff discussed creating comprehensive outdoor-lighting standards for public rights-of-way and private properties, citing safety, neighborhood preferences and dark-sky model codes; they directed staff to research options and outreach but took no formal vote.
La Crosse’s Neighborhood Revitalization Commission on March 5, 2025, discussed a possible citywide outdoor-lighting ordinance (agenda item 25-0272) that would cover public pedestrian lighting and private-property fixtures. The discussion followed neighborhood requests and prior pedestrian-lighting projects funded through a capital allotment and aimed to address safety, nuisance light trespass and consistency across neighborhoods.
Councilmember Lesnicko provided background on earlier pedestrian-lighting projects funded during Mayor Cabot’s administration and said the city lacked a comprehensive ordinance for both public-right-of-way and private-property lighting. “We don't have an ordinance for that,” Lesnicko said, describing how earlier projects had followed an external standard rather than a city code and produced different visual outcomes in different neighborhoods.
Planning staff (Jenna) said she compiled examples from Wisconsin municipalities and supplied articles and the Dark Sky International model code as reference materials. Staff described a range of regulatory options: standards for fixture shielding and directionality to limit light trespass, photometric requirements for new commercial and multifamily developments (which the city already enforces), and potential flexibility to reflect differing neighborhood character. Staff also said pedestrian kickoff lighting and private-property regulations would both be considered if the commission pursues a uniform code.
Commissioners and attendees raised practical concerns: neighborhoods differ in preference for close “landing strip” lighting versus more widely spaced historic-style fixtures; costs for full street or pedestrian lighting can be substantial (one neighborhood project cited engineering allocations of $600,000 and $700,000 in successive years); solar lighting and motion-sensor options were suggested; and some commissioners urged flexibility so neighborhoods can select styles that fit their area.
Multiple commissioners expressed support for the commission taking on the project. No formal motion or vote was recorded; staff was asked to research options, cost implications, and durability (including energy and maintenance) and to involve neighborhoods in developing standards.
