Moderate increases to operational risks would be encountered in the initial stages with the number of infractions noted on the map in Appendix B. This will become less as awareness increases that such use of lights is prohibited.

Reputational risks would also be moderate as seen with comments from BIAs that feel that the City is overreaching its authority. The City must also endeavour to comply to this prohibition as well.

Financial Matters:

Option #1: Do Nothing

There are no immediate financial implications from the ‘do nothing’ approach to this issue. However as identified in the Risk Analysis Section, as this has been addressed through Council, a do nothing approach may open the City up to litigation should it be cited that the glare from a nuisance light caused a severe health and safety issue.

Option #2: Regulation

There will be additional enforcement operating costs with the adoption of a by-law to merely regulate nuisance lighting. Increases in staff costs, particularly overtime costs associated with having to enforce the regulations at night, would become routine. Specialized equipment will be necessary to conduct inspections in the field. Such equipment will require on going specialized training for current and new staff to ensure; appropriate calibration, use of the equipment, as well as an informed understanding of how to interpret and apply the data collected.

Option #3: Prohibition

There will be some additional operational demands associated with enforcement of a nuisance lighting by-law that prohibits the use of non-full cut-off lighting. However, in comparison to regulation, these would be minor as there would be no need for specialized equipment or training. For the most part, the types of lights being prohibited are not full cut-off and are readily discernable in daylight hours. Inspections would be conducted primarily within the daylight hours as supplemental to regular Property Standards By-law investigations.

Whether Council endorses regulated or prohibited approaches, additional operational costs for enforcement may be necessary.

Consultations:

Adam Coates – Sr. Urban Designer

Barry Horrobin – Director of Planning & Physical Resources, Windsor Police Service

Rob Vani – Manager of Inspections (Building Inspections Enforcement)

Pam LeButte – Manger Community Development

BIA’s - Debi Croucher (DWBIA), Filip Rocca (Via Italia – Erie Street BIA), Shane Potvin (Ford City BIA), Greg Hanaka (Olde Sandwich Town BIA), Etorre Bonato (Ottawa Street BIA), Bridget Scheuerman (Pillette, & Riverside BIAs) , Wade Griffith (WTC), Lisa Malec & Jake Rondot (Walkerville BIA)