Purpose

The
report seeks Cabinet approval to implement adaptive lighting policy
that allows the Council to adapt lighting levels to minimise the
amount of energy used whilst also providing sufficient light across
the borough’s Public Highway Network.
 
The
policy is being proposed following a trial carried out between
February and May 2024, of several sites across the borough. The
proposal will allow for a reduction in energy consumption where the
policy is implemented. The added benefit would be that the Councils
Carbon Footprint would also be reduced, as the amount of energy
consumption goes down.
 

Decision

Decision
 
For the reasons set
out in the report and its appendices Cabinet RESOLVED to Agree
to:
 

i) 
Approve the proposed Adaptive Lighting Policy, as set out in
Appendix A.

ii) 
Grant delegated authority to the Corporate Director of Environment
& Sustainable Transport, in consultation with the Statutory
Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Environment, Sustainable
Transport, Children Services and Education to make alterations to
the policy, as required to maintain the highways to an acceptable
standard, in line with Para 4.16 and 4.17.
 
Alternatives
Considered
 

a) 
The first alternative is to do nothing, leaving the current
lighting levels as they are, lighting areas to a different
specification that is outlined in BS 5489. This would mean the
Council has failed in its goal in reducing its energy consumption
and its carbon footprint. It is expected that within the next year,
energy unit rates 11 will reduce further, but this reduction is not
likely to be sufficient to meet the needs of the budget setting for
2024/25, or ongoing savings targets.

b) 
The Council could consider whether to adapt light levels further
from what has been proposed. This would potentially fall outside of
the current guidance and best practice. This could raise a
potential risk to road users during peak hours, that is not
warranted. There is also a limitation on the lanterns adaptability,
which allows the maximum amount it can be adjusted without
affecting its performance. Although the proposed policy does not go
as far as the limitations, increasing it further may do so.

c) 
The Council could consider trimming the lighting illumination
times. Trimming is reducing the operating hours of the lighting, so
that lights go on and off when it’s darker (typically to come
on an hour later and go off an hour earlier). However, only minimum
energy and carbon savings are achieved, and the option is not cost
effective, unless combined with an additional option. This also
raises the potential higher risk to road users during peak hours
during the shorter days of winter.

d) 
The Council could also consider completely switching off street
lighting columns between certain periods, such as midnight to 5am.
This is classed as part nigh lighting, as has been adopted by
several County Councils in rural areas. However, switching off of
street lights requires a robust independent risk assessment for
each lighting column. This risk assessment process will incur
significant revenue costs. Also, switching off is more noticeable
and visible for residents, which may lead to fears for safety and
issues with anti-social behaviour and traffic safety. Part night
lighting is also not generally considered appropriate for densely
populated London Boroughs.

e) 
All of options above have been discounted as they do require
additional funding to implement and maintain, and are not
considered appropriate for urban areas. It is worth noting that
there are highway authorities across the country that have
implemented some of the measures above. Some of these in the south
east of England include, Surrey and Essex, who operate part nigh
lighting, on some of their networks.