Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Lighting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clovis committee reviews plan to target residential solar street lights after capital outlay award
Summary
City staff showed a GIS analysis of intersections lacking street lights, reported 301 unlit intersections citywide, and asked commissioners for guidance on prioritizing distribution of solar lights funded via capital outlay; no formal action was taken.
City of Clovis staff presented a planning briefing on a residential street-lighting project and asked the committee for guidance on how to prioritize installations funded through recent capital outlay awards.
Staff said the city previously used capital funds to install 22 solar street lights and is preparing to plan a next round once a funding agreement is in place.
Justin, a city staff member presenting the item, said the city’s GIS team mapped existing lights, showing lights owned by Xcel Energy (blue on the handout) and Farmers Electric (pink/red). He reported the counts of intersections lacking a street light within 100 feet by district: District 1 — 68; District 2 — 89; District 3 — 78; District 4 — 66, a total of 301 intersections without residential street lights. Justin said the distribution was “surprising” because it was more even across districts than staff had expected.
Justin said the city installed 22 solar lights in a recent project and has completed foundation designs and procurement work for additional solar poles. He noted one capital-outlay example figure discussed during the meeting: roughly $200,000 would fund about 10 lights at about $20,000 per light, and that prior work cost about $300,000 to install 22 lights. He described solar fixtures as the preferred option because paying a utility to install conventional lights could trigger anti-donation concerns when public funds go to a private company.
On prioritization, staff recommended a systematic, area-by-area approach rather than placing individual lights across multiple districts. Commissioners discussed alternatives: focusing one year on a single district (District 3 was the initial focus last year), concentrating on “hot spots” identified by staff or commissioners, or using crime data as a selection factor. Justin said he has crime layers that can be displayed in the GIS but that an overlay of crime data did not produce a simple correlation: “when you actually plotted that on the maps, that didn't necessarily sell to it,” he said.
Commissioners asked about technical constraints. Staff explained that many dark areas have underground power (transformers in alleys) and few overhead poles, which makes conventional (utility-powered) lighting installations more challenging; solar lights avoid the need for new power runs. Staff also noted coordination with Xcel Energy and Farmers Electric because both utilities own existing street-light inventories.
No formal motion or vote was taken. Staff said it will return with a proposal and recommendation once the funding agreement is finalized and after further GIS and hotspot analysis.
Ending: Staff asked for direction and time to prepare a formal recommendation at a future meeting; commissioners expressed support for either a district-focused round-robin approach or a hybrid that addresses hot spots in each district.
