1. STREET DESIGN POLICY AND RIGHT-OF-WAY LIGHTING POLICY

POLITIQUE SUR LA CONCEPTION DES RUES ET POLITIQUE SUR L’ÉCLAIRAGE DES EMPRISES

JOINT commITTEES RECOMMENDATIONS

That Council:

1. Receive this report for information.

2. Approve that the Department of Planning and Growth Management (PGM) work with the Department of Public Works and Services (PWS) to develop policy with respect to the following:

· Standards for Street Design, including the burial of hydro within City rights-of-way, to achieve Urban Design objectives of the Official Plan, the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy and other area-specific plans.

· A City-wide Right-of-way Lighting Policy.

RecommandationS Des COMITÉS conjoints

Que le Conseil municipal :

1. Reçoive le présent rapport à titre d’information.

2. Approuve que le Service de l’urbanisme et de la gestion de la croissance (UGC) travaille avec Services et Travaux publics (STP) à élaborer :

· des normes relatives à la conception des rues, y compris en ce qui a trait à l’enfouissement des fils électriques dans les emprises municipales, de manière à atteindre les objectifs énoncés en matière de conception urbaine dans le Plan officiel, la Stratégie de conception urbaine du centre-ville d'Ottawa et d’autres plans visant des secteurs définis;

· une politique sur l’éclairage des emprises devant s’appliquer à l’ensemble du territoire municipal.

Documentation

1. Planning and Environment Committee report dated 7 March 2006
(ACS2006-PGM-POL-0003)

2. Extract of Minutes, 5 April 2006.

Report to/Rapport au:

Transportation Committee / Comité des transports

and / et

Planning and Environment Committee / Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnment

and Council / et au Conseil

7 March 2006 / le 7 mars 2006

Submitted by/Soumis par : Ned Lathrop, Deputy City Manager/Directeur municipal adjoint,

Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Dennis Jacobs, MCIP, RPP, Director

Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy/Politiques d’urbanisme, d’environnement et d’infrastructure

(613) 580-2424 x25521, dennis.jacobs@ottawa.ca

City-wide / De portée générale

Ref N°: ACS2006-PGM-POL-0003

SUBJECT:	STREET DESIGN POLICY AND RIGHT-OF-WAY LIGHTING POLICY

OBJET :	POLITIQUE SUR LA CONCEPTION DES RUES ET POLITIQUE SUR L’ÉCLAIRAGE DES EMPRISES

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That Transportation Committee and Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council receive this report for information.

2. That the Department of Planning and Growth Management (PGM) work with the Department of Public Works and Services (PWS) to develop policy with respect to the following:

· A City-wide Right-of-way Lighting Policy.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

1. Que le Comité des transports et le Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement recommandent au Conseil de recevoir le présent rapport à titre d’information.

2. Que le Service de l’urbanisme et de la gestion de la croissance (UGC) travaille avec Services et Travaux publics (STP) à élaborer :

· une politique sur l’éclairage des emprises devant s’appliquer à l’ensemble du territoire municipal.

BACKGROUND

In the years since amalgamation of the new City of Ottawa there have been ongoing discussions amongst the various stakeholders in the City’s rights-of-way (ROW) with respect to the general quality of street design and maintenance. Issues related to the burial of hydro wires have been prominent on the public agenda as business improvement associations, chambers of commerce and the general public have consistently requested removal of hydro poles and overhead wires as the primary improvement when right-of-way rehabilitation projects are undertaken in their areas. Street and sidewalk lighting, is another key issue for the public, as the style of fixtures and intensity of lighting within the road right-of-way have been addressed within the context of developing areas of the city and street improvement projects. Other related concerns include street tree planting, the width and treatment of sidewalks, and the quality and placement of street furnishings, such as benches, trash receptacles, bollards and bike racks. All of these elements combine to create the street environment that is recognized as important to the quality of life for residents. They collectively fall within the heading of Street Design Policy as applied to the reconstruction of special streets within the city.

The rebuilding of City streets and the need to bury the overhead utility lines was addressed differently in the former municipalities. Most suburban and rural municipalities did not deal with many issues associated with moving the electrical services underground for existing streets being rebuilt. They did, however require it as part of the subdivision or site plan approval in “green-field” development. None except the former City of Ottawa and RMOC had programs for burying utility lines for major reconstruction of city streets. The former City of Ottawa utilized shared funding programmes with the federal and provincial governments for high profile areas like Sparks Street Mall, Rideau Street and Bank Street. These were tied into major reconstruction and streetscape projects. The RMOC would address safety issues created by overhead wires and utility poles within the right-of-way by burying these services when streets were reconstructed. This occurred most recently on Bank Street in Old Ottawa South in the 1990s when funding was shared between Hydro Ottawa, the RMOC and the former City of Ottawa. These cost-sharing programs ceased at that time and there has been no burial of hydro wires as part of street reconstruction projects since. Recent street reconstruction and streetscape projects for Richmond Road in Westboro and streetscape plans for St. Joseph Boulevard, Preston Street and Bank Street have not included the burial of hydro, primarily due to the cost of undertaking such improvements.

Shortly after amalgamation in 2002, a street lighting policy that harmonized street lighting methods used by the former municipalities was approved. Since that time the need to address a broader range of lighting approaches specific to community context and to provide further opportunity for innovation within the policy has become evident. Public Works and Services (PWS) staff began a comprehensive update to the harmonized street lighting policy in 2003. A considerable amount of inventory work and formulation of criteria necessary to evaluate possible approaches to city-wide street lighting was completed under PWS direction. This project was paused to provide opportunity to re-examine the range of lighting opportunities that should be addressed in the formulation of the policy. In the spring of 2005, interdepartmental discussions with Public Works and Services resulted in an agreement to have the Planning and Growth Management Department participate as an equal partner in the formulation of the new Right-of-way Lighting Policy so that it could be dovetailed with the Street Design project.

The intent of the new Right-of-way Lighting Policy will be to clarify the range of permitted types of lighting, determine appropriate lighting levels in various city contexts and establish areas where changes to the existing street light system are warranted. It will also examine and provide direction for specific circumstances or geographic areas in which specialty lighting is appropriate. Document 1 to this report sets out the basic assumptions and background information that will be used in the formulation of the new Right-of-way Lighting Policy. As part of the Right-of-way Lighting Policy project, the possibility of implementing “lighting zones”, which would limit the maximum light level on development sites adjacent to the roadway in selected locations of the City, will be reviewed and recommendations on the scope and cost to undertake this work will be provided to Committee in an interim report.

The above-noted policy updates related to hydro burial and right-of-way lighting are part of the larger street design policy that incorporates all other aspects of surface treatments including sidewalks, benches, trash receptacles, bollards, bike racks etc.. This policy will refer to the base surface treatment of streets within the city and then expand that treatment for certain special locations and designations of streets. In the former City of Ottawa the majority of streetscape enhancements were undertaken in association with the business improvement associations (BIA) that were established under provincial legislation to coordinate merchants and businesses along the major retail streets of the city. The BIAs became partners with the City in streetscape improvements within their areas. A cost-sharing formula of 1/3 City and 2/3 BIA with respect to improvements beyond the standard street treatment was established in 1964 in association with the construction of the Sparks Street Mall as a permanent pedestrian mall. The policy update will review this formula in consultation with the BIAs to determine its appropriateness in the current economic environment. Alternatives to this arrangement will be explored, as well as cases where a street is being reconstructed but no BIA exists.

DISCUSSION

Generally the Right-of-way Lighting Policy will apply citywide and the Street Design Policy will apply only to “special” streets and areas within the City. Appendix “A” to Document 1 sets out a list of “special” areas (Group 2 list), including, for example, the Downtown, Town Centres, Mixed-Use Centres, Main Streets and Villages where both policies may apply. This list is preliminary at this time. The final list will be formulated as a result of the study process.

The street environment is probably the most used and most visible of any public facility the City has. It is also the subject of many competing issues both above and below grade. The policy report will address these issues related to the design and construction of special streets bearing in mind the requirements of the various utilities that all have a place within the right-of-way. By its nature this study focuses on the landscape architecture of the street environment. It is not a superficial look at only the surface of the street in isolation, which has been referred to as the “streetscape”. It considers the design and construction of the total cross section, including the pedestrian and vehicle space on the surface, as well as the utilities overhead and below the surface. The following issues will be addressed in this policy review:

Burial of Hydro and Telecommunication Cables

– Safety concerns when poles are located within a travelled roadway and when overhead lines are less than five metres from a building.

– Additional building setbacks for overhead line clearance, which impacts the development potential of lots and the streetscape objectives for Downtown and Mainstreets (which is a consistent setback close to property line).

– Interference between overhead lines and street trees.

– Conflict between overhead lines and pedestrian street lighting.

– Public demand for burial of hydro lines due to perceived benefits of uncluttered streetscape.

– Cost-sharing with utilities due to benefits of replacing utilities that are near to their life-cycle replacement timeframe.

– Burial of hydro unnecessary due to adequate space above grade to mitigate visual impact and conflicts within the right-of-way.

– Robustness of underground versus above ground service.

– Priorities for the burial of hydro and telecommunication cables and planning for the cost of those improvements.

– Costs to property owners to connect to newly installed underground services.

Right-of-way Lighting Policy

– Inventory and analysis of existing lighting approaches in different contexts within the city, including urban, suburban and rural areas to determine how they should be treated as distinct areas in the community.

– Formulation of criteria and recommendations on warrants for lighting of existing unlit and partially lit streets and sidewalks, for lighting new streets and sidewalks in new communities, and for lighting new and reconstructed streets and sidewalks in “special areas”, including, for example, Town Centres, Mixed-Use Centres and Main Streets as they relate to Official Plan designations, Community Design Plans and urban design strategies.

– The optimum spacing of lighting within the right-of-way for special areas.

– The need for lighting design consistency in the completion of development of new neighbourhoods by determining the circumstances under which the rights-of-way in future phases of subdivision development should be lit in a way that is consistent with the balance of the (existing) neighbourhood.

– Cost savings to be achieved by outlining a range of lighting fixtures and poles to be used as “standards” for both functional and decorative lighting purposes.

– Cost saving options for new rights-of-way including changing light source colour, reducing the number of fixtures and/or reducing the brightness of light fixtures while maintaining an acceptable level of nighttime visibility.

– The cost implications of various recommended right-of-way lighting approaches where they differ from existing standards with respect to installation costs, on-going maintenance and energy efficiency.

– The relationship between the desire to reduce lighting system costs and potential for liability issues.

– Reduce night sky light pollution as expressed by the Royal Astronomical Society.

Street Design Policy

– The merits of standard streetscape treatments where roads are being newly constructed in developing areas and rebuilt in existing neighbourhoods, with a focus on designated mainstreets and other identified special areas.

– The influence of urban design on setting priorities for street reconstruction.

– The success level of past streetscape projects, and the best practices from other municipalities.

– Criteria for determining which streets should receive upgraded streetscape treatment and the range of streetscape elements that may be needed in various locations.

– Standard cost-sharing arrangements versus alternatives for business improvement areas and developing areas of the city with respect to streetscape improvements and streetlights.

– The costs of streetscape upgrades relative to standard surface treatments.

– The needs of pedestrians (including crosswalks) versus the demands of vehicular traffic within the ROW with consideration of existing ROW widths and how to build in traffic calming features where required.

– The optimum location of streetscape elements (trees, benches, trash receptacles, bike racks, vending boxes, etc. within the ROW.

– The competition of surface streetscape improvements, such as trees versus below-grade utility pipes and cables; are there options that will allow both to coexist.

– The place of regulatory signage within the right-of-way.

– The Percent for Art program.

– A city-wide funding system for the capital, maintenance and operational costs of upgraded streetscape construction.

CONSULTATION

The various stakeholders in the street ROW will be consulted with respect to their perspective on standards for street design treatment, including the burial of hydro lines and right-of-way lighting. In particular, the business improvement associations or chambers of commerce which have had direct experience in streetscape plans and capital improvements can provide insight to the relative success of the many projects that have been built in recent decades. They have also been financial partners in many of these projects, which will also be reviewed. The other major stakeholders in street design issues are the community associations who are directly affected by streetscape improvements along streets that pass through or bound their neighbourhoods. Community associations within inner-city neighbourhoods have direct experience with streetscape improvements and can provide their views on past projects. These groups will represent the general public on issues related to the street design policy.

Given the broader city-wide implications of the Right-of-way Lighting Policy project, one public open house meeting will be held in the urban area and a second one will be held in the rural area to provide opportunity for input from community associations and the general public. The public at large will also be able to participate in the formulation of the Right-of-way Lighting Policy through a project web site. Stakeholders and advisory committees affected by, and that have an interest in, right-of-way lighting issues within various neighbourhood contexts in the City will be consulted directly at key junctures in the formulation of the Right-of-way Lighting Policy.

STUDY TIMETABLE

Winter / Spring 2006

- Inventory, research and best practices review.

- Consultation with Technical Agencies.

- Formulation of draft Right-of-way Lighting Policy.

- Formulation of draft Street Design and Hydro Burial Policy.

Spring / Summer 2006

- Technical Agency review of draft Right-of-way Lighting Policy.

- Technical Agency review of draft Street Design and Hydro Burial Policy.

- Stakeholder participation.

Fall 2006

- Road reconstruction policies for right-of-way lighting, streetscape and hydro burial.

- Formulation of a range of street design treatments prioritized roads.

- Consultation with Stakeholders and Technical Agencies.

Winter 2007

- Stakeholder participation and public open house meetings.

- Preparation of interim report to Committee.

Spring 2007

- Final draft Right-of-way Lighting, Street Design and Hydro Burial Policies.

- Formulation of draft “lighting zone” recommendations if project terms and budget are approved as part of interim report to Committee.

- Consultation with Stakeholders and Technical Agencies.

- Report to Committee and Council regarding proposed policies.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The consultant cost for the preparation of the Right-of-way Lighting Policy will be covered by an existing Public Works and Services Department budget. The Street Design Policy will be carried out entirely by City staff. The policy for right-of-way lighting is expected to result in more cost-effective and uniform illumination installations throughout the City. A prioritized summary of right-of-way lighting requirements will be prepared, and the improvements identified for existing rights-of-way can be undertaken as budget permits. For “special” areas, including for example, Downtown, Town Centres, Mixed Use Centres, Main Streets and Villages, the street design study will provide recommendations for establishing a fair-share system of paying for the capital and on-going maintenance costs for the upgraded components of improved street design construction.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 – Approach for the Right-of-way Lighting Policy

DISPOSITION

The Department of Planning and Growth Management will lead this study in consultation with the Department of Public Works and Services.

1.0 Introduction

The amalgamation of the former eleven municipalities and the Regional Municipality of Ottawa Carleton into the City of Ottawa has resulted in the need to standardize the varying levels of services among the municipalities for right of way lighting. The development of a policy for lighting streets and sidewalks located adjacent to those streets within the City will achieve;

i) A common set of equipment standards and material specifications

ii) Criteria and regulations for street and pedestrian lighting in various parts of the City

iii) Warrants for defining the conditions and prioritization for the installation of lighting within the City’s Rights of Way and

iv) Guidelines to minimize environmental impacts of lighting including the use of more energy efficient light sources and obtrusive lighting

1.1 Purpose of Right of Way Lighting

The principle purpose of lighting the City’s Rights of Way is to provide improved visibility at night. For vehicles, visibility at night is reduced significantly and the level of lighting provided by headlights is only adequate at low speeds. At higher speeds a typical driver must be able to respond quickly, accurately and comfortably to road hazards ahead including pedestrians, cyclists, animals or even debris. For pedestrians, lighting of sidewalks provides for increased visibility and perception of safety. In addition to improved visibility, right of way lighting also provides social and economic benefits such as:

i) Reduced night time accidents for both vehicles and pedestrians

ii) Acts as a deterrent to criminal activity promoting an increased sense of security,

iii) Increased activity at night for business and public facilities and

iv) Expedition of pedestrian and vehicular traffic

1.2 Purpose of the Right of Way Lighting Policy

The policy will represent the basis of all City right of way illumination designs within the City of Ottawa and will be presented in a user friendly format that will clearly define the lighting policy for each roadway classification including sidewalks. The policy will deal with both roadway and sidewalk lighting design criteria and equipment standards. The policy will serve as a guideline for lighting design of right of way illumination systems. The application of this policy will not apply to existing lighting systems with the exception of those systems being upgraded. The Right of Way Lighting Policy will apply to the following roadway classifications;

i) Provincial Highway/City Freeway

ii) Arterial Road

iii) Major Collector Road

iv) Collector Road and

v) Local Road

The policy will strive to provide a level of service at night time that is environmentally responsible, economically acceptable and appropriate for all right of way users.

1.3 Project Background

The development of the policy initiated with an inventory of the existing illumination equipment in each former municipality. The inventory was documented in the Existing Streetlighting Conditions Summary Report, dated September 18, 2003. In conjunction with the inventory, the street lighting policies of the eleven municipalities and RMOC were sought and obtained as follows;

i) City of Kanata, dated June 1987

ii) City of Nepean, dated July 1999

iii) City of Ottawa, dated November 1978

iv) City of Vanier, dated November 1978 (included in the City of Ottawa policy)

v) RMOC, dated April 1983

vi) City of Ottawa – Harmonization of Residential Street Light Policies, December 2001

A Summary of the existing street lighting policies is contained in Appendix B.

2.0 Right of way Lighting Policy

2.1 Illumination Design Criteria for Roadways

There are three accepted criteria currently defined by IESNA for roadway illumination designs and are as follows:

i) Illuminance

ii) Small Target Visibility and

iii) Luminance

Each criterion can be employed on its own or in combination with others to best address the requirements of the specific roadway to be illuminated.

The former municipalities that had formal documentation on street lighting design criteria utilized the illuminance method only (refer to Appendix B for the existing lighting design criteria). Illuminance is one of the earliest methods of roadway lighting design and although it is regarded as ‘old school’, it is still widely used. The Small Target Visibility (STV) criterion is relatively new to roadway lighting and still somewhat in its infancy. Calculations for STV are complex and not yet supported by all commercial software. At this time it does not appear that the policy will be recommending this criterion for street lighting designs. Although Luminance is an improved means of calculating roadway lighting levels, there are certain instances where its use is limited for example in designing partial lighting. The policy will therefore be recommending the Illuminance and Luminance criteria for street lighting design in the City of Ottawa.

All recommendations for illumination design criteria will use as a base-line reference internationally accepted methods as documented by the IESNA. The development of the policy will also make reference to national standards as outlined in the TAC Guide for the Design of Roadway Lighting.

2.1.1 Illuminance Criteria

This technique of roadway lighting design determines the amount of light incident on the roadway surface. Roadway surfaces have varying degrees of reflectance and fall within three categories;

i) R1 - A concrete surface. An asphalt road surface with a minimum of 12% aggregates composed of artificial brightener

ii) R2 - Asphalt road surface with an aggregate composed of a minimum of 60% gravel. Not normally used in North America, and

iii) R3 - Asphalt road surface with dark aggregates; rough texture after some months of use (typical highways)

The reflectance properties of the different roadway surfaces affect the illuminance criteria. The criteria suggest an average maintained illuminance level measured in Lux for the various roadway surfaces. Hence each pavement classification has its own recommended average maintained illuminance level for the criteria.

2.1.2 Small Target Visibility (STV) Criteria

This form of street lighting design determines the degree of visibility of targets placed on the roadway. Small Target Visibility (STV) is a weighted average of the values of target Visibility Level over a grid of points on an area of roadway for one direction of traffic flow¹.

2.1.3 Luminance Criteria

Luminance is becoming the preferred method of street lighting because it measures what the driver or observer sees and not what the light fixture emits (Illuminance method).

Reflected light of any surface, horizontal or vertical is what an observer (pedestrian or driver) will see. The brightness or contrast from the reflected light off the pavement can become a potential hazard by distracting the driver. However, if the roadway is properly lit it can provide depth in the environment thereby improving visibility and providing a sense of security.

The luminance method of roadway lighting design measures the amount of reflected light from the pavement in the direction of an observer (a driver or pedestrian). It is essentially a measure of the ‘brightness’ of the roadway due to the street lighting. The unit of measure is candela per metre square (cd/m²).

2.2 Illumination Design Criteria for Sidewalks

In addition to the roadway lighting design calculations, calculations are required for the sidewalks within the roadway right of way (adjacent to or setback from the roadway). For sidewalks only illuminance values are considered for both horizontal levels (ground level) and vertical levels (eye level of typical pedestrian; height of 1.5 metres) in all directions of pedestrian movement. All recommendations for illumination design criteria will use as a base-line reference internationally accepted methods as documented by the IESNA.

2.3 Illumination Design Considerations

Apart from the illumination design criteria, the policy will also deal with an issue of increasing public concern; Obtrusive Lighting. Obtrusive lighting takes on three distinct forms: glare, light trespass and light pollution. Glare is the visual discomfort resulting from a light source in the observer’s field of view. Glare can be discomforting or disabling or both to an observer. Light trespass is the encroachment of light from its intended purpose causing annoyance, loss of privacy or other nuisance¹. Light pollution is the reflection and/or scatter of light into the sky. A common phenomenon known as ‘sky glow’ is directly associated to light pollution.

Obtrusive lighting has become an increasing concern by the general public. It not only wastes energy but it also poses social and safety issues. The policy for street lighting will take a look at each type of obtrusive lighting and make recommendations to minimize the impact such as the use of luminaires with full cut-off optics.

The colour of light is also a common issue encountered by lighting designers. The benefits, if any, of better colour rendering associated with “white light” are not yet defined. The development of the policy will include a review of the cost implications associated with the use of “white light” (metal halide) instead of high pressure sodium.

2.4 Illumination Equipment

In preparing background data in support of preparation of the policy, a large inventory of lighting equipment was recorded throughout the amalgamated city. A review of the existing lighting equipment revealed several different types of luminaires including cobra-heads, ‘shoeboxes’, ‘premium’ and post tops. There were also several different types of poles including concrete (round, octagonal and decorative), sectional steel, aluminum and steel (both octagonal and round). The installation of poles included direct buried, base mounted and frangible base mounted.

The policy will make recommendations on the type of equipment to be used and its application on the different roadway classifications. The recommendations will reduce the inventory of lighting equipment in terms of variety to better facilitate maintenance and uniformity throughout the City and hence reduce cost. In addition, the option of allowing for a reduction in lighting levels for certain areas will be considered in the formulation of the policy.

2.5 Areas of Special Illumination Consideration

The City of Ottawa contains a number of special areas where the policy for street lighting may not apply. These areas may have unique historical background, be a designated tourist attraction, town centre or village, be identified as a BIA (Business Improvement Area) or have federal (NCC) control. Appendix A includes a detailed list of Special Areas. The policy will address areas of Special Illumination Consideration in two groupings:

i) Group 1 includes areas under the control of the NCC, the Federal Government, the Province and the City, in the heritage zones. Street lighting should be reviewed by the City, on a project by project basis, in coordination with each of the relevant agencies.

ii) In Group 2, including BIA’s, town centres, and villages, street and sidewalk lighting will follow the Right of Way Lighting Policy. There will be a selection of various styles, traditional, modern, lantern, etc., so that the interest groups will have a choice for their area. The policy will explore various options for street lighting including exclusive use of decorative lighting and/or a combination of decorative and standard street lighting equipment. The lighting options will be financed in accordance with the approved policy.

2.6 Prioritization for Upgrading Existing Non Illuminated Rights of Way

The policy for right of way lighting will also be used for analyzing the illumination requirements for existing roadway sections without lighting. All road segments within the City that presently do not have illumination will be assessed to determine lighting requirements as defined by the policy. The requirements can be ‘no lighting’, ‘marker lighting’, ‘partial lighting’ or ‘full lighting’.

Illumination requirements for each roadway section will be prioritized based on certain factors such as traffic and pedestrian volumes, presence of sidewalks, schools, businesses and recreational facilities to name a few. The prioritization of the lighting will also be based on the City’s anticipated capital construction program to determine which sections will be illuminated under this program. For other sections, the construction cost will be calculated for each section to create an illumination upgrade plan over a period of time based on the City’s projected budget expenditure.

The prioritization for upgrading an existing sidewalk without illumination will be based on the prioritization of the roadway lighting. As a result, sidewalks will only be considered for lighting under the right of way policy if the adjacent roadway is being lit based on the prioritization scheme for upgrading existing non illuminated roadways.

2.7 Public Consultation

The draft policy for street lighting will be made available to the general public through a two Public Information Forums; one in the urban area (possibly City Hall) and one in the rural area. The information presented will include lighting criteria and proposed equipment standards. The policy will also be made available to the public via the World Wide Web. The public will have an opportunity to review the policy and provide feedback. All comments made by the public at the information forums and electronically on the Web will be considered and addressed appropriately.

3.0 Future Considerations

The following considerations are provided solely as an example of other issues that can be addressed in the future. These will not be addressed as part of the Right of Way Lighting Policy currently being developed.

3.1 Brightness Ratios

Depending on the intensity of the surrounding illumination for a project site, the city may reconsider how the street lighting will be achieved. The city can choose to either provide the minimum levels of lighting as prescribed by the policy or increase the levels to improve the contrast between the roadway and its surroundings.

3.2 Lighting Zones

Some areas within the City have higher levels of adjacent illumination because of the surrounding infrastructures. Not to be mistaken for the minimum design criteria for roadway lighting levels based on the roadway classification, lighting zones deals with the adjacent surrounding illumination.

The Right of Way lighting policy can create, if approved as a separate but related project, various lighting zones throughout the City. Based on the individual lighting zone, developers will be restricted on the levels of illumination they install. This will ensure that the adjacent illumination does not adversely affect the roadway illumination due to the higher lighting levels of the adjacent lighting which can be distracting and disabling to approaching vehicles.

4.0 Conclusion

The development of a policy for right of way lighting is vital in the operation, maintenance and performance of street and sidewalk lighting within the City. The policy will:

o Facilitate uniformity with regards to the lighting equipment and lighting levels for similar road classifications,

o Provide avenues for cost savings in terms of electrical maintenance due to the standardization of equipment and the reduction in the variety of inventory required by the City. Savings will also be realised through reduced energy consumption,

o Demonstrate safety and consistency of the City to its residents in recognizing the need to standardize equipment and design criteria throughout the municipal limits,

o Show a proactive and responsible City in responding to issues such as light trespass and light pollution, and

o Develop warranting conditions for street and sidewalk lighting and a strategic plan for illumination installation for existing unlit rights of way within specific City contexts and based on a prioritized scheme as may be approved in the policy.

The policy will also address the requirements and procedures that are to be followed when amendments to it are required.

5.0 Glossary

ANSI _ American National Standard Institute

CANDELA (Cd) _ SI unit for luminous intensity.

HPS – High Pressure Sodium

MH – Metal Halide

IESNA – Illuminating Engineering Society of North America

RTAC – Roads and Transportation Association of Canada

RMOC – Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton

6.0 REFERENCES

1. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, TM-10-00

2. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America ANSI / IESNA RP-8-00

3. Guide for the Design of Roadway Lighting – Roads and Transportation Association of Canada.

4. Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Roadway Lighting Information Booklet.

GROUP 1

Street lighting will be developed on a project-by-project basis in coordination with each of the relevant agencies.

CITY OF OTTAWA

Heritage Conservation Districts

Sandy Hill

Minto Park

Byward Market

Cathedral Hill

Lowertown West

Sandy Hill West

Centretown

Rockcliffe

New Edinburgh

Sparks Street

Bank Street

Bridges

Chaudière

Portage

Alexandria

MacDonald-Cartier

Billings

Cummings

Pretoria

Bank Street

MacKenzie King

Laurier Avenue

Union Street

Dunbar

NATIONAL CAPITOL COMMISSION

Federally owned roads

(first group)

Confederation Boulevard

Parkways,

Queen Elizabeth Drive

Colonel By Drive

Ottawa River Parkway

Rockcliffe Parkway

Federally owned roads

(second group)

Island Park Drive

Riverside Drive

Aviation Parkway

Airport Parkway

Greenbelt Boundary

Undeveloped area surrounding centre city, forest/marsh natural zone

Central Experimental Farm

PROVINCIAL

Highways

417

416

174 City Freeway

(others)

GROUP 2

Lighting will follow the Right of Way Lighting Policy

CITY OF OTTAWA

Central Area

City centre mostly north of Laurier and west of King Edward

Town Centres

Kanata

Barrhaven

Orleans

Mixed Use Areas

‘Core’ Areas

Villages

Galetta

Kinburn

Fitzroy Harbour

Constance Bay

Dunrobin

Carp

Ashton

Munster

Richmond

Fallowfield

Manotick

North Gower

Kars

Osgoode

Greely

Metcalfe

Kenmore

Vernon

Marionville

Vars

Carlsbad Springs

Navan

Notre-Dame-des Champs

Sarsfield

Cumberland

Burritt's Rapids

Traditional Main Streets

Stittsville Main

Richmond

Scott

Wellington

Somerset

Merivale

Preston

Gladstone

Bronson

Bank

Main

Elgin

Rideau

Dalhousie

Beechwood

McArthur

Montreal

Arterial Main Streets

Eagleson

Hazeldean

Robertson

Richmond

Carling

Merivale

Bank

Montreal

St-Laurent

St-Joseph

Innes

BIAs

Westboro

Manotick

Barrhaven

Carp

Rideau Street

Preston Street

Somerset Heights

Byward Market

Sparks Street

Vanier

Somerset Village

Somerset Chinatown

Bank Street Promenade

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of Right of Way Lighting

1.2 Purpose of the Right of Way Lighting Policy

1.3 Project Background

2.0 Right of way Lighting Policy

2.1 Illumination Design Criteria for Roadways

2.1.1 Illuminance Criteria

2.1.2 Small Target Visibility (STV) Criteria

2.1.3 Luminance Criteria

2.2 Illumination Design Criteria for Sidewalks

2.3 Illumination Design Considerations

2.4 Illumination Equipment

2.5 Areas of Special Illumination Consideration

2.6 Prioritization for Upgrading Existing Non Illuminated Rights of Way

2.7 Public Consultation

3.0 Future Considerations

3.1 Brightness Ratios

3.2 Lighting Zones

4.0 Conclusion

5.0 Glossary

6.0 REFERENCES

1.0 Existing Illumination Criteria

1.1 Harmonization of Residential Street Light Policies

1.2 International Design Criteria

1.3 National Design Criteria