Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lighting Code Revision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Midway council allows string lights and gas-flame simulation bulbs; defers soffit-light exception
Summary
Council voted to approve code edits allowing string lights in commercial zones with no hour limits and to permit gas or realistic flame bulbs under defined limits, but deferred a final decision on soffit lighting until the applicant can appear. The vote applied only to the parts of the draft presented tonight.
Midway City Council on Dec. 17 voted to partially adopt changes to the city lighting code: the council approved edits allowing string lights in commercial and resort zones without a set hour limit and approved rules permitting gas lights and realistic flame-simulation bulbs under specified limits, but it postponed a decision on an applicant-driven soffit-light exception until the applicant can attend.
Michael, planning staff, presented tailored code language intended to balance aesthetics and enforceability. The proposal treated soffit/recessed lighting differently from decorative string lights and seasonal holiday lighting; staff recommended avoiding broad lumen-count limits because they are difficult to enforce without property access. For gas lighting, staff proposed a per-unit limit of 5,000 BTUs for actual gas lamps and a cap of 100 lumens per bulb for simulated realistic flame bulbs.
Councilmembers debated whether allowing an applicant’s soffit lights would reward a party that installed fixtures despite prior redlines on building plans. Some members said soffit lighting detracts from Midway’s desired aesthetic and would prefer not to change the code to accommodate a single noncompliant property; others said the lighting contributes to downtown charm. Ultimately the council voted to approve the string-light and gas/realistic-flame provisions and to defer the soffit-light matter to a future meeting when the applicant can appear.
The motion was presented and seconded on the floor and carried with members present voting in favor. Staff was directed to place the soffit-light item on the Jan. 21 agenda for further consideration.
Background: The ordinance discussion resumed from a Nov. 5 meeting after an applicant requested an exception for soffit lighting. The proposed changes aim to clarify when commercial soft lighting can be on, differentiate seasonal vs. permanent string lighting, and add an enforceable pathway for simulated flame decorative bulbs.
