Consultant: Clear Lake underlit at night; audit and partial acquisition of fixtures could add lights and cut costs

A municipal lighting consultant told the Clear Lake City Council the city is ‘‘underlit’’ and recommended a lighting audit, a formal inventory and a study of options that could add prioritized fixtures while lowering operating costs.

Neil Tolley of Tango Lighting, engaged to review the city’s street-lighting system, told the council Clear Lake has about 262 PG&E-owned fixtures (69 percent already converted to LEDs) plus roughly 13 city-owned fixtures. ‘‘We felt the city might be extremely underlit. Clear Lake is actually closer to about 60 to 1 [residents per streetlight],’’ Tolley said, noting the typical ratio the firm sees is about 15 residents per fixture. He estimated the city might need up to 700 additional fixtures in targeted locations — intersections, crosswalks, schools, commercial corridors and nightlife areas — depending on council priorities.

Tolley presented cost comparisons showing the economics of acquiring fixtures versus leaving them under utility ownership. The city currently pays approximately $43,000 per year in lighting costs. If PG&E installed and retained ownership of 700 additional fixtures, the annual operating cost could increase by about $88,000 (roughly $131,000 total). If instead the city owned the additional fixtures and acquired its existing fixtures, the consultant estimated annual operating costs of roughly $65,000 — an overall increase in cost but a much larger increase in fixtures and a potential long-term savings compared to utility-owned rates. Tolley used a common 30-watt LED fixture as an example: at the utility’s company-owned LS1 tariff the city is now paying about $10.47 per month per 30W LED, and shifting to a city-owned LS2 rate could cut the per-fixture cost by roughly half.

Tolley emphasized that fixture ownership typically means the city owns the fixture and arm while distribution poles usually remain with the utility; the city would not typically take on wooden distribution-pole ownership. He recommended next steps: a billing audit and reconciliation, a GIS-based lighting inventory, and a lighting-deficiency analysis that prioritizes public-safety locations. Tolley also discussed dark-sky compliance and design approaches to minimize light trespass while improving roadway illumination.

Council members asked about dark-sky ordinance compliance, undergrounding, and solar or off-grid solutions; several members asked staff to include solar options in further work. The council signaled consensus to pursue the audit and next-phase work; there was no formal vote to acquire fixtures at this meeting.

Ending: Staff will return with an audit scope, inventory and cost options for council consideration; the consultant advised the city that fixture acquisition could unlock smart-lighting and maintenance-control options while stretching the city’s lighting dollars.