ayton

Mayor Bob J Stevenson

City Manager Alex R. Jensen

----

Community Prosperity' Choice

Council Members
Joyce F. Brown
Bruce Davis
Tom Day
Scott Freitag
Joy Petro

January I I, 2017

Mr. Ryan Andreason

2222 Snoqualmie Drive

Layton, UT 84040

RE: GRAMA Request - December 20, 2016

Dear Mr. Andreason,
This letter is written in reply to your GRAMA request dated December 20, 2016, which you amended on
January 3, 2017, and again on January 9, 2017, regarding the street light in your neighborhood.
I have included copies of documentation pertaining to the adoption of the street light ordinance and
standards. I have also included copies of documents pertaining to the RFP (request for proposal) for
purchase of the street lights, and documentation provided by the supplier relative to the brightness and
heat produced by the light. Layton City did not perform an impact study relative to impacts of blue light.
YOLI might obtain that type of information directly from the manufacturer.
The cost to provide this documentation is $75; $15 for copies and $60 for research and compilation of the
documents. Please forward a check for $75 payable to Layton City, to my attention, at the address listed
below.
I f you have any questions regard ing the information prov ided, p lease contact Woody Woodruff, City
Engi neer, at 801-336-3700, or wwoodruff@laytoncity.org.

--=re~
Thieda Wellman

City Recorder

Municipal Offices' 437 N. Wasatch Dr. Layton, Utah 84041 (801) 336-3800 Fax: (801) 336-3811

RESOLUTION 12-53

A
RESOLUTION
ADOPTING
THE
REWRlTTEN
DEVELOPVIENT
GUfDELu\'ES AND DESGN STA1,(1)ARDSFOR LA YTO;\l CiTY
WHEREAS, the Lnyton City Engineering Department currently maintains Development and
Design Stnndards (hereinafter "Guidelines") for the purpose of nssisting developers in meeting the cutTent
engineering standnrds required by the City; and
\VHEREAS, the Guidelines change or need to be updated from time and time; and
WHEREAS, Section 19.01.240 of the by ton Municip<il Code authorizes the City Engineer to
drafr, approve, <ldopt, interpret and amend the Guidelines from time to time ns determined necessnl)'; and
\VHEREAS, the City Engineer and the engineering slaff have reviewed the current Guidelines and
have detemlined that the cutTent Guidelines need to be updated; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has detemlined, pursuant to the above referenced ordinance, that it
is in the best interest of the City to rewrite the Guidelines; and
\VITEREAS, the City Council has detennined that it is in the best interest of the City to adopt the
rewritten Guidelines.
NOW, TfIE.REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAYTON,
UTAH:
I.

That the Development Guidelines and Design Standards for Lnyton City nre hereby

adopted.

2012.

ATTEST.

THfEDA 'WELLMAN, City Recorder

A NED

P 1 1 2911
ORDJNANCE 11-11
AMEl\TJ)ING THE CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE BY ADDING A STREET
LIGHTING SYSTEM FEE PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE 11-02 (ADOPTED
FEBRUARY 17, 2011)
WHEREAS, Layton City enacted ordinance 11-02 that requires developers and subdividers to
install a street lighting system within the development or subdi vision ; and
WHEREAS, the system must meet City standards and be uniform with other developments; and
WHEREAS, the City also enacted a lighting system fee to be charged to developers and
subdividers; and
WHEREAS, the fee was to be included in the Consolidated Fee Schedule; and
WHEREAS, the fee will be used by the City to purchase and provide light fixtures which the
developer or subdivider shall install as part of the lighting system; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the Consolidated Fee Schedule be amended to add the
lighting system fee.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAJNED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAYTON CITY:

SECTION I: Enactment. Title 3, Chapter 3.15, Section 3.15 .010, Consolidated Fee Schedule of
the Layton Municipal Code is hereby amended with regard to the street lighting system fee to read as
follows :
Street Lighting System Fixture Fee:
For street right of ways 66 feet and wider:
Tear drop pole and fi xture
Single light fiuted pole and fixture
Double light fiuted pole and fixture

$4,000 each
$2,300 each
$5,100 each

For street right of ways less than 66 feet:

Street light fixture (standard)
Street light fixture (option 1)
Street light fixture (option 2)

$1,800 each
$2,000 each
$2,200 each

SECTION II: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
is declared invalid or unconstihltional by a court of competent jurisdiction, said portion shall be severed and
such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance.
SECTION III:
February, 2011.

Effective Date. This ordinance of the City shaH be effective the 17th day of

THIEDA WELLMAN, City Recorder

"

---

SCAN

EB 222011
ORDlNANCE 11-02
AN ORDINANCE Al"\1ENDlNG TITLE 18 OF THE LAYTON MUNCIPAL CODE
BY INCLUDING STREET LIGHTlNG AS A REQUIRED DWPROVEMENT IN
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS; AMENDING TITLE 18, SECTIONS 18.04.010
ENTITLED "DEFlNITIONS"; ADDING 18.12.022 ENTITLED "STREET
LIGHTS"; AMENDING 18.12.060 ENTITLED "REQUIREMENTS"; AMENDING
18.18.010 ENTITLED "PRELIMINARY PLA T APPROVAL"; AMENDING
18.36.070
ENTITLED
"OFF-SITE";
ADDlNG
18.36.190
ENTITLED
"INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTlNG"; ADDING 18.50.075 ENTITLED
"STREET LIGHTING"; PROVIDlNG FOR REPEALER; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, historically the City has paid for the installation and maintenance of street lights and
poles in commercial and residential subdivisions; and
WHEREAS, in light of the City' s philosophy of having development pay for itself and avoiding
the imposition of the impacts of development on existing residents, the City has determined that those
improvements are directly connected to new development, thus should be paid thereby; and
WHEREAS, after study, the City has found it most economical to have uniform poles and lights
and has adopted and designated that standard, and based thereon has established a fee to be assessed upon
new developments for these improvements; and
WHEREAS, once the street light system is installed, paid for, and released from the one (1) year
warranty period, the City will have the responsibility to maintain the sh-eet light system; except for private
subdivisions and planned residential unit developments, wherein a homemvners association will be required
to maintain their own street light system; and
WHEREAS, by providing improved and uniform street lighting in subdivisions and commercial
developments with lighting systems that are effective, efficient, and unifOlm for both ease of maintenance
and improved aesthetics, the public ' s health, safety and welfare will be protected and enhanced.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LAYTON, UTAH:

SECTION 1: Repealer. If any provisions of the City's Code heretofore adopted are inconsistent
herewith, they are hereby repealed.
SECTION II: Enactment. Title 18, Chapter 18.04, Section 18.04.010 is amended to read as
follows:

18.04.010 Definitions

(29)
"Street Lighting" means uniform designed lighting and installation of street light
systems for residential and commercial streets. All street light systems shall meet Layton City
standards in the current Development Guidelines and Standards. The street light system fee is to
be paid by and the designated structures and facilities are to be installed by the land developer
and / or subdivider.
~
"Subdivider" means any person who subdivides land or who applies to
the Plamring Commission for approval of a subdivision plat usually synonymous with developer.
~
"Subdivision" means any land that is divided, resubdivided, or proposed
to be divided into two (2) or more lots, parcels, sites, units, plots, or other division of land for the

purpose, whether immediate or future, for offer, sale, lease, or development either on the
installment plan or upon any and all other plans, terms, and conditions.
"Subdivision" includes:
(a)
The division or development of land whether by deed, metes and bounds
description, devise and testacy, lease, map, plat, or other recorded instrument; and
(b)
Divisions ofland for all residential and non-residential uses including land
used or to be used for commercial, agricultural, and industrial purposes.
~
"Subdivision construction permit" means the permit required to be
obtained for each separate off-site improvement. The developer or his contractor shall be
responsible to obtain such pen11it prior to beginning the construction of any off-site
improvement.
~
"Subdivision final acceptance" means the City will "finally accept" the
subdivision one (I) year after all off-site improvements are completed and "initially accepted" if
no problems occur with any of the improvements. If problems occur, the provisions of the
developer's agreement and escrow agreement shall apply. A written letter of final acceptance
shall be issued to the developer. During the one (1) year guarantee period the City is not
responsible for any maintenance or construction problems connected with the off-site
improvements. Where a problem occurs with an off-site improvement which needs either repair
or replacement of that improvement, the City shall give the developer the most practicable,
reasonable notice possible. The City shall also give the developer a period of time to COlTect the
improvement problem. If the developer does not have the problem corrected within that period of
time then the City is authorized to correct the problem by doing the work themselves or
contracting the work out or a combination of both. Payment shall be govemed by the terms of the
developer's agreement and the escrow agreement. In the situation where the improvement
problem is of an emergency nature, the City is authorized to take immediate action to correct the
problem without giving notice to the developer. The City may correct the problem in the manner
specified above and have payment made according to the terms of the developer's agreement and
escrow agreement. At1er "initial acceptance" of all improvements, if an improvement needs
repair or replacement, the City shall notify the developer when that improvement has again been
accepted by the City. A one (1) year guarantee period shall then apply to that particular
improvement. The amount held pursuant to the escrow agreement as a guarantee shall be
retained unless a lesser amount is approved by the Layton building official in writing, or until the
one (1) year guarantee period for the last improvement repaired or replaced has expired.
SECTION III: Enactment. Title 18, Chapter 18.12, Section 18.12.022 is added to read as follows:

18.12.022.
Street Lights
The subdivider or land developer shall pay a street light system fee and shall install all
street light systems within any subdivision, including a p11vate subdivision or a planned
residential unit development (PRUD). Street light systems shall meet Layton City's current
design standards as outlined in the Development Guidelines and Design Standards. The amount
of the street light system fee is based upon the adopted Layton City Consolidated Fee Schedule.

SECTION N: Enactment. Title 18, Chapter 18.12, Section 18.12.060 is amended to read as
follows:

Ordinance 11-02

18.12.060 Requirements

(1)

The preliminary plat shall:

(a)
contain ten (10) sets of drawings;
(b)
be drawn to scale large enough to clearly show all details, In no case
smaller than one inch (1 ") to one hundred feet (100');
(c)
show north point, scale, and date;
(d)
show the name of the proposed subdivision;
(e)
show the names, addresses, and phone numbers of the subdivider, and of
the engineer or surveyor for the subdivision, and show the names of owners of the land
immediately adjoining the land to be subdivided;
(f)
have contour lines at five foot (5') intervals;
(g)
show the slope of each lot and buildable area;
(h)
show the location of cuts and fills in excess of five.fee.t feet (5');
(i)
show the boundary lines of the subdivision;
(j)
show the location, width, and other dimensions of all existing or
previously platted streets, including intersections, and other important features such as railroad
lines, natural watercourses, irrigation ditches and other structures, exceptional topography and
buildings within the subdivision or within two hundred feet (200') of the boundary thereof;
(k)
show existing sanitary sewers, storm drainage systems, water supply
mains and culverts within the subdivision or within one hundred feet (100') of the boundary
thereof;
(1)
show the location width and other dimensions of proposed streets, alleys,
wa1l0Nays, easements, parks, and other open spaces or lots with proper labeling of the spaces
proposed to be dedicated to the public;
(m)
show an estimate of the slopes of proposed streets;
(n)
show a cross-section of proposed streets and the width thereof and the
location of sidewalks;
(0)
show the separation of intersections which are not to exceed one thousand
three hundred feet (1300');
(P)
show such additional information as may be necessary to locate accurately
the property shown on the plat;
(q)
include a legal description of the land included in the subdivision, which
description shall run to and include the land to the centerline of existing streets;
(r)
show the square footage and the acreage of each lot indicated;
(s)
show the proposed method of handling sanitary sewers, culinary water and
storm drains within the subdivision, and the interconnection of such systems with the major
street plan and the City storm drainage system;
(t)
show where the plat submitted covers only a part of the subdivider's tract,
a sketch showing the location of the proposed subdivision in relation to the larger tract. Such
sketch shaH show the prospective future street system for the adjacent areas;
(u)
show written approval of the proposal for handling irrigation or
wastewater from the irrigation or ditch company or other right-of-way holder through whose
ditch or facilities wastewater or irrigation water will flow, in accordance with the requirements
of Section 18.36.090. Such statement, sketch and written approval shall be deemed to be a part of
the preliminary plat;
(v)
show written approval by the fee simple owner(s) in the affidavit which
gives the subdivider the authority to act for and in behalf of the fee simple owner to make all
decisions on any requirements set by the Planning Commission or City Council;
3

Ordinance 11-02

(w)
submit three (3) copies of the geotechnical report;
(x)
submit a preliminary title report;
(y)
submit a letter from Davis County Flood Control for approval of alteration
of streams or discharge into streams;
(z)
submit written approval from adjacent property owner(s) agreeing to grant
an easement for utility line extension if the line crosses private property;
(aa)
show boundaries of the flood plain as defined by FEMA and include the
map number; aOO
(bb)
include a landscaping plan for landscape buffer along arterial street where
required; and
(cc)
submit a street lighting plan indicating the location for street lights, the
lumen coverage and street pole design according to Layton City's current Development
Guidelines and Design Standards.
(2)
In addition, the preliminary plat shall have attached to it on separate sheets:
(a)
a statement, outlining the proposed method of handling sanitary sewers
and storm drains within the subdivision, and the interconnection of such system with the major
street plan and the City storm drainage system;
(b)
where the plat submitted covers only a part of the subdivider's tract, a
sketch showing the location of the proposed subdivision in relation to the larger tract. Such
sketch shall show the prospective future street system for the adjacent areas;
(c)
written approval of the proposal for handling irrigation or wastewater from
the irrigation or ditch company or other right-of-way holder through whose ditch or facilities
wastewater or irrigation water will flow, in accordance with the requirements of Section
18.36.090.
Such statement, sketch, and written approval shall be deemed to be a pari of the
preliminary plat; and
(d)
written approval by the fee simple owner(s) in the affidavit which gives
the subdivider the authority to act for and in behalf of the fee simple owner to make all decisions
on any requirements set by the Planning Commission or City Council.
SECTION V: Enactment. Title 18, Chapter 18.18, Section 18.18.010 is amended to read as
follows:
18.18.010 Preliminary Plat Approval

(1)
In commerciallindustrial subdivisions ofless than ten (10) lots, the Planning Commission
and City Council shall review the preliminary subdivision plat in accordance with the
requirements of Chapter 18.12 of this Title. After review and approval of a preliminary overall
plat, the applicant shall record a dedication plat of the subject property showing streets to be
dedicated, all appropriate easements and cross easements, and a legal description of the boundary
of the proposed subdivision.
(2)
Individual lots may be created by metes and bounds within the
commercia !industrial subdivision upon recordation of an appropriate deed if:
(a)
the proposed lot conforms to the approved overall preliminary plat;
(b)
the new lot does not result in the violation of applicable zoning
requirements; and
(c)
the deed contains the stamp or mark indicating that the lot has been
approved by the City.
(3)
If the proposed lot is not in keeping with the approved overall preliminary plat,
the overall preliminary plat must be amended to allow for the proposed lot. The Planning

Ordinance 11-02

Commission and City Council must review and approve the proposed amendment and lot before

recordation of a deed.

(Ord . No. 97-59, Enacted, 10116/97)

(4)
The subdivider or developer shall pay a street light system fee and shall install all
street light systems within its development. Street light designs shall meet the standards as
outlined in the current Layton City Development Guidelines and Design Standards. The amount
of the street light system fee is based upon the adopted Layton City Consolidated Fee Schedule.
SECTION VI: Enactment. Title 18, Chapter 18.36, Section 18.36.070 is amended to read as
follows :
18.36.070 Off Site

The subdivider shall construct and install the following improvements, in accordance with City
standards and specifications:
(1)
Street grading and surfacing;
(2)
Sidewalks and, where required, walkways;
(3)
Curbs and gutters;
(4)
Sanitary sewers, including laterals to each lot line;
(5)
Street drainage structures;
(6)
Foundation drainage system, where required;
(7)
Water tines, including laterals and meters to each lot line;
(8)
Fire hydrants;
(9)
Stonn sewers;
(10)
Secondary water lines, including laterals to each lot line;
(a)
This requirement shall apply to those properties east of the Main Street,
SR-126 right-of-way, to which secondary water is appurtenant, based on topography, existing
development, and the location of existing transmission lines.
(b)
This requirement shall apply to all properties west of the Main Sheet, SR
126 right-of-way.
(c)
Exception. The City Council, upon a recommendation by the Planning
Commission, may waive this requirement only upon a showing that it is not foreseeable that the
subject area will have secondary water available at any time in the future. The Planning
Commission's recommendation shaII be based on infonnation from the City Engineer, respective
suppliers of secondary water, and the applicant.
(11)
Underground utilities;
(12)

Street Lighting; and

All other improvements deemed necessary by the City.
These requirements shall apply to all property within the subdivision and to property
from which the subdivision was divided, regardless of the existence of structures or dwellings.
The City shall be responsible for the seal coat of the public roadways. A deposit shaII be
made with the City by the subdivider as approved by the City Engineer. The City may from time
to time require that tests be taken by an independent laboratory to determine the quality and
safety of off-site improvements. Such testing shall be done at the subdivider's expense. The City
may also require that the subdivider's land surveyor or engineer provide written verification that
surface improvements were installed as per the approved plans.
~(13)

Ordinance 11-02

SECTION VII: Enactment. Title 18, Chapter 18.36, Section 18.36.190 is added to read as
follows:

18.36.190 Installation of Street Lighting

(1)
Street lights shall be installed at the time when the park strips are graded and
when curb and gutter, sidewalks and the electrical utility has been installed.
(2)
Extensions. Extensions to the tinle set forth in Subsection (1) above may be
granted by the City Engineer in limited circumstances. In requesting an extension an applicant
must give good cause as to why the lighting cannot be installed at the time required. Further, no
extension will be granted unless the applicant posts a bond in an amount sufficient to install the
required street light systems. If an extension is granted, a specific time period shall be
established. However, no building permit shall be released for the development until the street
lighting system has been installed and operating.

SECTION VIII: Enactment. Title 18, Chapter 18.50, Section 18.50.075 is added to read as
follows:

18.50.075 Street Lighting

The subdivider or land developer shall pay a street light system fee and shall install all street
light systems within its development for a private subdivision or planned residential unit
development (PRUD). Street light systems shall meet the current design standards as outlined in
Layton City's Development Guidelines and Design Standards. The amount of the street light
system fee is based upon the adopted Layton City Consolidated Fee Schedule.
SECTION IX: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is declared invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, said portion shall be
severed and such declaration shall not affect the validity ofthe remainder of this ordinance.
SECTION X: Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of the 20th day
after publication or posting, or the 30th day after final passage as noted below, or whichever of said days is
the most remote from the date of passage thereof.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of Layton, Utah, this 17th of February, 2011.

ATTEST:

~L'

~nv~

THIEDA WELLMAN, City Recorder

Ordinance Il-02

Ms. Ramirez said there was one other company.

Councilmember Brown said she didn't think the City could support one supplier over another, unless it
was actually put out to bid . She said information about all suppliers could be provided to residents
through the newsletter.
Steve Garside, Assistant City Attorney, said that was correct. He said if there was competition, it would
need to be put out to bid.
Mayor Curtis explained the recycling program available at the Burn Plant. He thanked Ms. Ramirez for
her time and indicated that the City would get back with her.
Douglas Thompson, 417 North Fort Lane, said there wouldn't be an extreme amount of support from his
neighborhood for a recycling program because most of the residents were retired or low income. He said
he liked an opt-out program so that people were not forced into the program . Mr. Thompson said
recycling needed to stand on its own.
DISCUSSION - AME ND TITLE 18 REGARDING STREET LIGHTIt'lG - ORDiNANCE 11-02

Bi ll Wright Community and Economic Development Director, said at tbe October 27th Strategic
Planning Meeting, the Council had spent some time discussing street lighting. He said discussion
suggested that street lighting should become part of the infrastructure, similar to water lines, streets, etc.
Bill said Staff was continuing to work with Rocky Mountain Power to move toward the City o\-vning
existing street lighting infrastructure.
Bill said this amendment would address street lighting in subdivisions, as new subdivisions went through
the platting process. He said Title 18 would be amended to add street lighting to infrastructure and there
\vould be standards established. Bill said there would be a fee structure that would determine the cost of
the infrastructure, which would be a part of the subdivision fees. He said the City would purchase the
poles and have an inventory, similar to water meters, and contractors would get the poles from the City at
the time of construction.
Mayor Curtis asked what the estimated cost savings would be.
Bill said it was fairly substantial. He said per pole, per month, tbe cost would go from approximately $12
for pole rental and electricity to approximately $2 for the cost of electricity only . He said Staff suggested
keeping the current budget in place and use the fUJ1ds to purchase the asset from Rocky Mountain Pow'er
and eventually replace existing poLes with the new standard; in the future, contractors would be
purchasing the poles, and the City would have the expense of electricity and maintenance.
Mayor CUl1is said there could also be additional savings based on the type of lights used , such as LED
lights.
Council and Staff discussed the cost of electricity, and the savings of various tixtures such as the LED
fixtures on Main Street.
Bill said currently, the major cost was the lease of the poles from Rocky Mountain Power. He indicated
that poles with e1cctrica'I 'lines on them would not be purchased.
Councilmember Brown asked about the fees that would be assessed on new development.
Councilmember Bouwhuis said earlier the discussion was that the City would purchase the poles and the
City would become the vendor selling the poles to the contractors, who would then install them.
Bill said the fees would provide for the pole to be purchased; the pole would be purchased by the City and
Minutes of Layton

ity

o uncil Work Meeting, .January 20. 2011

installed by the contractor that was building the subdivision. Bill said the City Engineer, Woody
Woodruff, was in the process of putting an RFP (request for proposal) out for the poles and for services to
create a master lighting plan for the City. He said the RFP should be back the first part of February.
Councilmember Bouwhuis asked if the poles in the neighborhoods would be similar to the decorative
poles on Layton Parkway. He said one of the objectives was to get uniformity throughout the City.
Examples of poles were displayed and discussed.
Steve Garside said for clarification, the City would not become a vendor; the contractor would only be
charged the cost of the poles.
Councilmember Brown asked if the City would purchase the existing poles from Rocky Mountain Power,
and then as funding pennitted , change those poles for the new decorative poles.
Bill said yes. He explained implementation of the new system.
Councilmember Flitton asked if there would be a standard for the number of poles required in a given
area.
Bill said there ,-,vould be a standard. He said it might not be an exact footage amount; it would look at a
combination of distance and intersections.
Councilmember Freitag said he was looking at the clock, and had a number of questions about an item
that was on the agenda. He suggested moving to the next item, but he asked who would approve the new
design standards.
Bill said the design would be approved through the Engineering and Planning Departments. He said Staff
was suggesting that the standard for the poles would be what was included in the packet.
Councilmember Freitag asked if there was a standard for the actual light fixture . He said the cost of an
LED fixture would be more expensive up front, but ,-,vould be cheaper to operate, last longer and they
would cast more light.
Bill said Staff was looking at a plug-and-play type of fixture that could easily be changed ; a part of the
RFP was to include master planning and analysis of the efficiency of various types of fixtures. He said the
studies that were done on Layton Parkway versus downtown Main Street SllO\Ved that it was more
efficient and a better cost benefit analysis to not put the LED fixture on the tear-drop poles. Bill said it
had to do a lot with the height and spread, and the size of the road. He said it was difficult to state that the
City would want al I LED I ights; the consultants had a hard time professionally recommend ing that
because that was not the best approach. He said some people were getting caught up in the "green"
approach of LED, when research showed that that was not always the best approach .
Bill said the standard in the ordinance would be based on the research provided ; it could be brought back
for approval but it was a little more of a science than a decision for what it might look like. He said the
trade-off would be cost. Bill said annually, the Council approved a fee schedule, which would include this
new fee. lie said Staff wanted to set the cost on a yearly basis; if LED prices dropped and it made sense
from a sc icntitic standpoint, they could be included in the standard. Bill said Staff could provide more
information about that to the Co unci I.
Councilmcmber Freitag said the infol1l1ation in the packet included a cost for the pole and an induction
lighting fixture. He asked if the consultant indicated that that was the best approach right now.
Bill said it was.
Coul1cill11ember Freitag said he would be curious to see the science of that. If the Council was approving
Minutes of Layton City Council Work Meeting, January 20, 20 II

11

a change and requiring people to buy the lights from the City, he would like to see all of the information .
Bill said Woody could provide more detailed information to the Council about why induction versus
LED; what the cost differential was. He said Staff wanted to make sure the City wasn't putt,ing too much
of a burden on the development community as the infrastructure was brought in.
Bill displayed a lighting layout of an existing subdivision that showed how the poles would be placed. He
explained the various upgrades to the light fixtures that would be available.

Councilmember Flitton asked if the poles were manufactured locally.

Bill said some of them \vere. He said the ones used downtown were manufactured in the Wasatch Front.

Bill said Staff would recommend introducing this into the subdivision ordinance and get the fee set. He

said Staff would continue to work with Rocky Mountain Power on the existing lighting system; through

the RFP, get the fee set and hire someone to assist with the master planning: and develop a transition plan

to fill-in and then replace existing street lights.

CounciJmember Freitag asked if Staff wanted the Council to approve the ordinance establishing the

standard, before there was a plan in place.

Bill said yes, for new subdivisions. He said subdivisions vested from the preliminary approval point. and

sometimes it was years before they were built. Bill said it was important to get the standard in place for

new subdivisions.

Councilmember F litton asked how it would affect subdivisions that had already been approved, but not

yet under construction.

Bill said they were vested under the old system and would not be subject to this requirement.

Council member Bouwhuis asked if Staff could offer them the new system.

Bill said Staff would do that if the subdivision hadn't been built.

Couneilmember Knowlton asked if thi s would be brought back at the next meeting.

Bill said Staff was planning on bringing it back next month. If Council had specific questions they wanted

answered, Staff could work on that prior to adoption.

Counei Imem ber Freitag said he appreciated that StatY wanted standards estab I ished before another
subdivision came in, but it seemed to him that this was just a portion of the process. He said it seemed
backwards to establish the requirement for a pole type, and cost for the fee schedule, without having a
plan in place.
Bill said there were two approaches; one was to deal with what was already on the ground and transition
that into a new lighting program. He said the other piece was that as new subdivisions were developed,
establish the standard for the new infrastructure.
Councilmcmbel' Freitag said he got that. He asked if things such as spacing had been established.

Bill said yes: spacing was already known .

Councilmember Freitag said if a new subdivision came in after this was adopted, Staff would be able to

provide specifications for the poles and identify the location.

Bi II said those req uirements were al ready establ ished. He displayed a su bd ivision plat, that was currently

Minutes of Layton City Council Work Meeting, January 20, 2011

under review, that identified the number of poles required and their locations. Bill said the standards
would be included in a book of standards that the Engineering Department already used.
Councilillember Freitag asked if the standards were already included in the book.
Bill said they would be included in the book when this ordinance was adopted.
Councilmember Freitag asked if that had to be discu ssed or approved by the Council.
Bill said the Council didn't have to approve that; they were referenced in the ordinance.
Councilillember Freitag asked if it took into consideration landscaping, if someone wanted to plant a large
bushy tree next to a light pole that would eventually block the light. He asked if the goal was to have
street lights or was the goal to have lit streets.
Bi ll aid there was already a standard in the subdivision ordinance that required a distance from poles to
plant street trees. He said it was based on the type of tree.
Councilmember Freitag asked if the standard should be for the amount of light on the street, in addition to
the type of pole and design.
Bill said that was part of the analysis done when picking the wattage of the bulb and the size of the
fixture.
C uncilmember Bouwhuis said the lumens and the footprint of the lumens were defined.
Bill sa id that was correct.
Co uncil member Knowlton said there had to be flexibility because that \-vas hard to quantify; every
subdivision was different.
Bill said that was correct. He said the RFP would include the need for the consultant to analyze the
lighting requirements in a subdivision layout.

REZONE REQUEST - NSC WEST LLC - A (AGRICULTURE) TO R-1-8 (SINGLE FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL) - APPROXIMATELY 800 WEST WEAVER LANE - ORDINANCE 11-04
Peter Matson Long Range Planner, said this rezone proposal was for property on Weaver Lane and
contained approximately 16.5 acres. He said the property was triangular shaped and was bounded on the
east by the old D & RG railroad line; on the west by the Greenbriar Subdivision; and on the south by
Weaver Lane.
Peter said there were issues associated with development of the property including the closure of Weaver
Lane, the crossing of the tracks and a Chevron pipeline easement that ran along the railroad tracks. He
said the R-I-8 zone was consistent with the General Plan recommendation, which was 2 to 4 dwelling
units per acre in this area. Peter said the subdivisions to the south and west were the same zoning
designation. He said the conceptual plan included in the packet contained 52 lots and would yield 3.16
units per acre. Peter said they wcre working on a plat, and would move forward with submitting
preliminary drawings once the rezone was approved. He said there would be a half cul-de-sac at Weaver
Lane and at the railroad tracks. Peter said once Layton Parkway went through and was connected to
Angel Street, the existing railroad crossing would be closed as required by UTA.
Petcr said there was a Chevron pipeline easement that ran along the edge of the tracks that would impact
the backyards of the lots in that area.
COllnci I and Staff discussed the impact of th e easement.
Minutes of Layton City Council Work Meeting, January 20, 2011

37

MINUTES OF LAYTON CITY

COUNCIL WORK MEETING

MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS
PRESENT:

STAFF PRESENT:

FEBRUARY 17,2011; 6:01 P.M.

MAYOR J. STEPHEN CURTIS, MICHAEL

BOUWHUIS, JOYCE BROWN, BARRY FLITTON,
SCOTT FREITAG AND RENNY KNOWLTON

ALEX JENSEN, GARY CRANE, STEVE ASHBY,

PETER MATSON, BEN HART, JAMES (WOODY)
WOODRUFF, ANDREW KING AND TillEDA
WELLMAN

The meeting was held in the Council Conference Room of the Layton City Center.

Mayor Cmtis opened the meeting and turned the time over to Alex Jensen, City Manager.

AGENDA:
AMEND DEBT SERVICE FUND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 - RESOLUTION 11-04
Steve Ashby, Finance Director, gave Council corrected schedules to replace the ones that were attached to
the resolution in the packet. Steve said when the current year budget was done, Staff made the assumption
that when the City started doing replenishments for the withdrawals that would come out of the Debt
Service Reserve Fund, which started January 20 II, that there would be Y2 of a year that would have to be
budgeted for. Steve said in working with the auditors, after the end of the last fiscal year, it was
discovered that those funds had to be budgeted starting when tbe money was \-vithdra\vn, not when the
City replenished it.
Steve said during the current year, the City only budgeted for Y2 of a year, but in reality it should have
been budgeted for the entire year. He said this amendment would correct that error. Steve said $1,453,420
would be transferred from the General Fund, and $609,823 would be used from the prior year fund
balance.
Councilmember FliUon said there was $37,392 for UIA dues, and $343,428 for UlA assessments. He said
he thought that UIA was not going to cost the City additional funds.
Steve said the intent was to use funds from the bonding; when that was done there would be operating
capital. He said all of the cities were supporting UIA until the bonding was completed.

AMEND TITLE 18 - STREET LrGHTfNG - ORDINANCE 11-02

Alex said this was the proposal to amend Title 18 having to do with street lights. He said Council and
Staff had been discussing this for some time.
James (Woody) Woodruft~ City Engineer, presented information about developing street lighting
standards for the City. He said Ordinance 11-02 would adopt standards for lights required in conjunction
with development. He displayed slides 'of examples of light poles and fixtures; he displayed photos of
some existing poles in the City.
Woody displayed a map of an existing subdivision and identifi ed where existing poles were located. He
said currently, Rocky Mountain Power (RMP) provided the poles and the City leased the poles from RMP
at a cost of $10 per pole per month.

Minutes of Lay tun C ity Council Work Meeting, Febr uary 17,20 11

Woody displayed photos of the new poles on Main Street and Layton Parkway. He explained that on the
new poles, the City only had to pay the cost of the electricity, which was less than $1 per month for LED
fixtures. Woody indicated that the new light fixtures had a warranty of 8 years on the poles and 10 years
on the fixtures.
Woody said RFPs (Request for Proposal) were sent out on February 7th for proposals on supplying the
poles and fixtures, and assisting with a street lighting Master Plan; Mountain States Lighting was the
lowest responsible bidder. He said Mountain States Lighting would prepare a complete Master Plan for
the City, which would include design services for subdivisions and commercial development; they would
help establish lighting standards and specifications; they \-vould assist with construction coordination and
lighting inspections; they would store poles, arms and accessories for knock downs; and they would assist
the City in evaluating t11c existing street lighting system and the value of the existing infrastructure.
Woody said Mountain States Lighting also provided these same services for other cities including
Brigham City, Willard, West Valley, Santaquin, Saratoga Springs, and Herriman.
Woody said one of the City's goals was to take ownership of the newer existing infrastructure, which
were the town and country poles. He said at that point the City would be responsible for maintenance, and
would only purchase power from RM P. He said part of evaluating the value of the current infrastructure
included underground infrastructure. Woody said Mountain States Lighting would help the City establish
a value for that infrastructure.
Woody displayed a new subdivision plat and identified where new lights would be required. He said the
City didn't want to over-light a subdivision. Lights would be installed at intersections, bends or curves in
the roads, and a distance standard would be established.
Woody said 12 developers that were currently developing in the City were invited to a discussion about
the new lighting standards. He said si-x developers came and were generally very appreciative that the
City was letting them know that this was coming. Woody said several of the developers were familiar
with lighting requirements from other communities. He said there were a few concerns expressed about
having to front the cost. but generally the meeting went very well.
Woody displayed drawings of poles and fixtures that Staff was recommending as the standards for
adoption . He indicated that there would be a concrete ring around the base of the light pole to protect the
base of the pole alld provide a mowing strip for residents. Woody said the cost of poles for residential
development would be $1800; there were several optional features, including fluted poles, developers
could choose to install, which would increase the cost up to $2200.
Woody displayed drawings of collector-street lighting standards; light poles would be installed on a
concrete base and they would have a heaver base. He said these would be used on streets that were 60 feet
wide or wider. Woody said they were 14-foot poles; subdivision poles would be 12 feet.
Woody said in summary, the City's goals were to establish standards; get competitive prices; and have
suppliers provide additional services relative to a Master Plan and evaluate existing infrastructure. He said
adoption of the ordinance would establish lighting requirements for all new development, including
commercial development if it fronted along an arterial or collector street.
Council and Staff discussed the cost of lighting in a typical subdivision, and the impact that would have
on the cost of a home.
Councilmember Flitton asked if the $1,800 for a pole included installation.
Woody said no . He said poles would be strategically located so that they were near power pedestals to
limit the length of the power line, which would reduce costs. He said from a maintenance perspective, the
City would have to Blue Stake those lines and would want to minimize the wiring in subdivisions.
Councilmember Flitton asked what the average installation price would be.
Minutes of Layton City Council Work Meeting, February 17,2011

39

Woody said developer's subcontractors would run the electrical as part of their work iJ1 a subdivision. He
said he would guess that it would be no more than $300 to $400 more. Woody said the cost for the lights
would be a lot less with the City purchasing the fixtures directly from the supplier; there wouldn't be the
markup there would be if the subcontractor purchased them. He said maintenance costs for the City would
also be less with only one type of fixture.
Council member Flilton asked how contractors were reacting to the idea of lighting standards.
Woody said generally speaking, they were happy with it. He said they recogni zed the enhancement it
would be to their subdivisions.
Council member Freitag asked how many poles, besides the 560 town and country poles, did the City
lease.
Woody said all the fixtures in the City were leased except the new ooes on Main Street and Layton
Parkway. He said there were 834 wood poles with cobra heads, and there were 180 that were just cobra
heads. Woody said on a wood pole with a cobra head, the City paid the same lease price as it did for a
town and country fixture.
Woody explained the City' plan to replace the existing wood poles in the future using funds that would
be saved from the lease with RMP.
Council and Staff discussed the services Mountain States Lighting would provide relative to layout design
in subdivisions and replacing current infrastructure.
Woody said the City wanted to establish a Master Plan for the entire City. He said any damaged
infrastructure would be replaced with the new standard . Woody said part of evaluating the existing
infrastructure would be to determine a fee to purchase the town and country poles, and convel1 those to
power only. He said instead of paying the lease payment to RMP, the City would take ownership of those
poles and start maintaining them. Woody said over time, the City would replace damaged poles with the
new standard. He said with the money that would be saved from not leasing the poles, the City would be
able to replace the fixtures.
Alex said Staff was looking at this as a phased approach . He said tonight Staff wanted Counci I to put the
standards in place, which would stop any additional subdivisions from bcing built with inadequate
lighting, and with the belp of Mountain States Lighting, establish design standards. Alex said, in addition,
the City would have a plan to evaluate the entire existing street lighting system to establish a deprec iated
value whereby RMP could be approached about purchasing their assets.
Councilmember Bouwhuis asked if Staff had an idea of the depreciated value of the existing
infrastructure.
Alex said Mountain States Lighting probably had an idea of the value, but that was something that \vo uld
be negotiated . He said RMP was not the bad guy in this; they were involved in street lighting because
they felt I ike they had to, but RMP always subcontracted the work to a third party contractor. Alex said
usually when RMP was approached, they were generally willing to do that, but they wanted to get the
higbest possible price. He said they would value everything as being shiny and new, and the City would
look at a 30 year old pole as being wOl1h nothing. Alex said a value would be established somewhere in
the middle.
Alex said working with Mountain States Lighting, Staff would put together a recommended plan about
how the City would establish a standard and a priority for existing areas, which would be brought back to
the Council for approval. He said there would be a significant amount of savings on power costs, that was
currently being paid to RMP, that without increasing the budget could be put toward new lights every
year.
Minutes of Layton City Council Work Meeting, February 17,20 II

Councilmember BOll\vhuis said there "vould be lease savings and power savings ,
Alex said the power savings would be more than six digits a year. He said Staff was confident that this
would significantly improve the lighting standard across the City, and save the City a significant amount
of money,

The meeting suspended at 6:55 p.m. for the regular meeting.

The meeting reconvened at 8:03 p.m.

CLOSED DOOR:
MOTION:

Councilmember Freitag moved to close the meeting at 8:03 p,m, to discuss pending or
reasonably imminent litigation. Council member Bouwhuis seconded the motion, which passed
unanimously.

MOTION:

Councill11ember Knowlton moved to open the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Councilmember

BOllwhuis seconded the motion , ",.hich passed unanimously.

The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

Thieda Wellman, City Recorder

SWORN' STATEMENT
The undersigned hereby swears and affirms, pursuant to Section 52-4-205( I) of the Utah Code
Annotated, that the sole purpose for the closed meeting of the Lay10n City Council on the 17th day of
February, 2011, was to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation.
Dated this 7th day of April, 2011.
ATTEST:

1. STEPHEN CURTIS, Mayor

THffiDA WELLMAN, City Recorder

Minutes of Layton City Council Work Meeting. February 17,2011

44
Ben said this was not an action item this evening; the public hearing would provide an opportunity for the
Council to hear from interested citizens or other vested stakeholders about \vhat should be included in this
year' s plan.
Councilmember Flitton asked if the COBG required matching fund_so
Ben said no; it came with very heavy restrictions, but it was a full grant.

Mayor Curtis opened the meeting for public input.

Scott Quinny, 21 13 North 1450 East, urged the Council to adopt the plan and carty on with the COBG
program. He said through the Layton Community Action Council, he was involved with the Layton Cares
Program, and COBG funds were used to protect the youth, identify risk and help them gro\V into healthy,
caring, productive adults.
Megan Maughn, with the Road Home, thanked the Council for their past support through COBG funding.
She said the Road Home was requesting a $5,000 grant this year, which was the same amount they received
last year. Ms. Maughn indicated that the Road Home was located in Salt Lake City, but they provided
services for the entire Wasatch Front. She indicated that approximately 30 people from Layton City received
services from the Road Home last year, for a cost of approximately $ I 8,000.

MOTION: Council member Brown moved to close the public hearing. Councilmember Knowlton seconded
the motion , which passed unanimously.
AMEND TITLF: 18 REGARDING STREET LIGHTfNG - ORDfNANCE 11-02
Woody Woodruff, City Engineer, said Layton City had been working on establishing a utility system to
improve the street lighting system within the City. He said currently, all of the street lighting was owned and
operated by Rocky Mountain Power (RMP).
Woody said the City wanted to establish and develop new lighting standards for future development in the
City, and through an RFP (Request for Proposal) process, the City received bids from lighting supply
companies to not only supply lights, but to assist the City with improving lighting throughout the City. He
said the City would own and operate the new lighting system, and would only pay RMP for electricity,
which would save the City a substantial amount of money.
Woody displayed photos of some existing poles in the City that were owned by RMP, and drawings of the
new proposed poles and light fixtures. He displayed photos of the new fixtures on Main Street and Layton
Parkway.
Woody said Staff met with local developers to introduce them to the concept of Layton City having new
development install the lighting and utility infrastructure associated with lighting. He said in general, it was
a fairly positive meeting. Woody said the developers had concerns about the additional costs in their
developments, particularly in small developments. He said the new fixtures and poles would be purchased
by the City and made available to developers for a fee. Woody said the developer would be responsible for
installing the new lights in their developments. He said currently, street lights were installed by RMP, but
the City paid a fee to lease the poles and fixtures, in addition to the electricity.
Woody said Ordinance 1 I -02 would set the standards for the spacing, type, height of poles and fixtures for
residential and commercial development, and require developers to install the infrastructure and lights.
Councilmember Flitton asked if there was any advantage to a fluted pole, other than cosmetic.
Woody said from a structural standpoint, a fluted pole had more strength. He said the City would like to
have the fluted poles on higher traffic streets, and they would be on a concrete base.

Minu tes of L ilY ton Ci ty Cou ncil Meeti ng, Feb ruary 17, 2011

4S

Councilmember Freitag said the packet information indicated that metered lights would be required on
wider streets. He asked if that ,vould be an additional cost.
Woody said collector streets could vary from 66 feet wide up to 84 feet. He said originally, discussion was
that LED lights would be required on collector streets, but it was later determined that a standard induction
light would be better. Woody said it was cost prohibitive to put those on a meter, and on a case by case
basis, unless LED lighting was used, it would be determined if a meter should be installed. He said meters
on LED fixtures made sense because the electricity usage was much lower. Woody said all of the lights on
Main Street and Layton Parkway were on meters. He said in a subdivision, RMP would charge a monthly
fee for the po\-ver based on the wattage.
Councilmember Freitag asked \-\hich fixture used thc most electricity.
Woody said an induction fixture used more power than an LED fixture. He introduced Mr. Ted Maestas,
with Mountain States Lighting,
Counci Imcmber Freitag said he was confused as to why the fixture with the lowest amount of power usage
wou Id be metered .
Mr. Ted Maestas said the metered systems were only on arterial and collector streets. He said it would be
too costly to install meters in a subdivision.
Mr. Maestas said under the current plan with RMP, the City paid approximately $12 per month per pole.
With the City owning and maintaining the system, the City would pay approximately $1.48 per pole for
electricity only. Mr. Maestas said full maintenance with RMP for the fixtures that were on Main Street
would be approximately $28 per month per light fixture, or $56 per pole. He said with the LED light and
electricity only, the City was paying less than $1 per month per pole.
Mr. Maestas said metering the lights allowed the City flexibility for maintenance. He said if the City needed
to work on the lights on Main Street, it would cost the City $250 to have RMP disconnect the power and
$250 to reconnect the power without a separate meter. With the meter, the maintenance worker would be
able to turn the power off and on at the meter.
Councilmember Freitag asked if the meter also metered electricity, and who read the meter.
Mr. Maestas said the mcter wa s owned by RMP.
Councilmember Brown asked if RMP read those meters just like they read the meter at her home.
Mr. Maestas said yes.
There was discussion about the various types of fixtures and the electricity costs associated with them.
Mr. Maestas explained the Master Plan that would be developed for the City and how it would help identify
the areas that wou Id have metered lights.
Councilmember Brown said the City would be installing the lights on 1110St of the streets that would have
meters because they would be bigger streets like Layton Parkway.
Alex Jensen, City Manager, said most of the collector streets in the City were already built; Layton Parkway
was an exception to that. He said if a developer was building a subdivision in advance of when the City
would install a major road, they may be required to put in meters based on the subdivision frontage along an
alterial street. Alex said the meters were being installed not to necessarily track the energy costs, but more
for an operational maintenance convenience.

Minutes of Layton City Council Meeting February 17,2011

Mayor Curtis opened the meeting for public input. None was given.
MOTION: Councilmember Knowlton moved to close the public hearing and approve the amendments to
Title 18 regarding street lighting, Ordinance 11-02. Councilmember Flitton seconded the motion, which
passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:03 p.m.

Thieda Wellman, City Recorder

Minutes of La)'ton City Council Meeting, February 17, 2011

;:

would be a preconstruction meeting on April 6th and construction of the trail would be completed by May
15th. He said Staff recommended approval of Resolution 11-13 approving the agreement.
Councilmember Freitag asked if there would be a raised median on Hill Field Road .
Brock said there would be a raised median in the center turning lane.
Mayor Curtis expressed appreciation for Staff working to bring this project to the City.
Brock said by the end of May all sections of the trail would be completed from Weber County to the Legacy
Parkway trail.

AMEN DMENT TO THE CONSOLl])ATED FEE SCHEDULE - STREET LIGHTI NG SYSTEM

FEE - ORDINANCE 11-11
Terry Coburn. Public Works Director, said Ordinance I I-II would amend Ordinance 11-02, adopted
February 17, 20 II, to include a lighting system fee to be charged to developers and subdividers, and to
include the fees in the Consolidated Fee Schedule. He said the fees would be used to purchase and provide
light fixtures to be installed by the developers and subdividers. Terry said Staff recommended approval.

BID AWARD - STAKER & PARSON COMPANIES INC. - LAYTON PARKWAY

CONSTRUCTION PROJECT; FLINT STREET TO ANGEL STREET - RESOLUTION 11-14
Terry Coburn said Resolution 11-14 authorized an agreement with Staker & Parson Companies, 1nc., for the
Layton Parkway construction project. He said the project included the construction of 5,000 lineal feet of
road: construction of curb, gutter, and sidewalk; installation of culinary waterline, storm drain, sanitary
sewer, land drain, secondary water, and fiber optic conduit; and other associated work items. Terry said the
project also included the construction of a new traffic signal at Angel Street, and the installation of street
lighting. He said the project was a continuation of the City's Master Street Plan and would provide
transportation access from Flint Street to Angel Street on La)10n Parkway. Terry said seven bids were
received with Staker & Parson Companies submitting the lowest responsive, responsible bid of
$3,380,265.3 5; the engineer' s estimate was $3,500,000 . He said Staff recommended approval.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - ADC CORPORATION -INSTALLATION OF PRE-CAST

WALLS FOR LAYTON PARKWAY BETWEENFLlNT STREET AND 700 WEST
RESOLUTION 11-15
Terry Coburn said Resolution 11-15 authorized the execution of an agreement with ADC Corporation for
the installation of pre-cast walls on Layton Parkway. He said the project included the construction of 3,447
lineal feet of 8-foot high and 300 lineal feet of 3-foot high decorative pre-cast wall along Layton Parbvay.
Terry said two bids were received with ADC Corporation submitting the lowest responsive, responsible bid
of $297,692. He said Staff recommcnded approval.
Councilmember Freitag asked where the 3-foot high wall would be installed.
Terry said it would be installed anywhere there would be a clear-view problem.
Counciirnember Freitag asked if the City had any flooding concerns.
Terry said the major channels were the respol1sibil ity of the County. He said the City always checked areas
whether they were the County's or the City's responsibility. Terry said the money the City had invested in
the storm se\ver system, in the past, paid off in times of high water runoff. He said he was confident that the
City was prepared.

Minutes of Lay ton

ity Co uncil Meet ing. April 7,20 11

23 0

Main Street; it would be a kind gesture to the merchants of the City's support.
Consensus was to move forward with purchasing the lights and making it an ongoing event.
Councilmember Freitag asked about the ribbon cutting ceremony for the new interchange and what the
City's involvement would be.
Bill indicated that the ribbon cutting ceremony was scheduled for November 20th, and the construction
company and UDOT were planning on Ilaving a parade.
Alex said Staff would contact Wadsworth Construction so that the City could have some input on the
ceremony . He said it needed to be professional and nice because of the dignitaries that would be there ; the
City should be involved.
DISC USS IO N O F TREET LIGHTING PROG RAM
Alex said for some time Staff had been looking at the City's street lighting; some areas were dark and
were not up to the City's standards. Alex said Staff had done a great job developing a plan and working
with Utah Power; and Mountain States Lighting, to resolve some of the issues. He said he was excited
about this; it would provide a tremendous benefit to the community and it would do so at substantial
savings compared to what tbe City was currently paying for street lighting.
Woody Woodruft~ City Engineer, explained some of the goals in evaluating the street lighting program,
which included evaluating the existing lighting system; looking at the costs of Rocky Mountain Power
services to see if the City could save money; implementing lighting standards; developing a lighting
master plan; providing lighting in conjunction with new development; and the City eventually owning
and operating the lighting system.
Woody indicated that Staff surveyed the existing Iighting system. Currently there were approximately
1,440 fixtures that were owned by Rocky Mountain Power. He explained how the City was billed for tbe
poles and fixtures in addition to the actual power usage. Woody displayed photos of fixtures in various
locations in the City. He said the City was paying approximately $10 a month for the pole and fixture,
which didn't include power usage costs.
Councilmember Freitag asked if that was $10 a month per pole, every month.
Woody said yes; it was similar to a lease. He said the City "vas leasing a very expensive lighting system
from Rocky Mountain Power.
Councilmel11ber Bouwhuis asked who paid for the electricity.
Woody said the City paid for the electricity.
Alex said the City paid a bulk rate every month for street lighting. He said Staff should have looked at
this cost sooner. Alex said Woody had experience coming from West Jordan \vhere they had gone
through this type of analysis. Alex said the City was getting taken advantage of; Rocky Mountain Power
was making a lot of money off the City. He said the service was poor; it was managed out of POltland
with third-party contractors who ran the system. Alex explained the difficulties the City faced in getting
outages repaired.
Councilmel11ber Flitton said if there were approximately 1,400 poles, was the City paying $14,000 a
month for the poles.
Woody said the City'S bill was approximately $23,000 a month for the poles and the electricity.
Bill said the cost was approximately $5,000 for power and $18,000 for the poles.
M inu tes of Layton City

ou ncil Strategic Planning Work i\'leeting, October 27, 2010

231

Woody displayed a map of the City showing the locations of the light poles. He explained that there was
not very good lighting on arterial streets.
Council and Staff discussed the possibility of replacing ex,isting fixtures with new, brighter fixtures, but
using existing poles.
Woody sa id Rocky Mountain Power had a program where the City could o\vn the poles and fixtures and
only purchase the power. He said the new fixtures on Layton Parkway and Main Street were owned by
the City; there \vas a meter and the City would only be paying for power. Woody said the lights on Main
Street were LED lights and the cost savings were substantial; the fixtures were a 20-year fixture and had a
warranty period . He said as soon as Rocky Mountain Power installed a pole, you started paying for
maintenance.
Woody said Staff would like to look at opportunities to go to power only; there was an opportunity to
evaluate the ex isting infrastructure, with the help of Mountain States Lighting, and identify the actual cost
of existing infrastructure. He said the City could then negotiate with Rocky Mountain Power to purchase
the infrastructure and take over maintenance of the poles and fixture s. Woody said several other cities in
the State had done this. He said the estimated savings would be approximately $220,000 to $260,000
annually, vvithout the cost of Staff to maintain the infrastructure.
Alex explained that existing Staff would maintain the infrastructure. He said Rocky Mountain Power
would not allow the City to purchase poles that also had power lines on them, but the City could purchase
the stand alone light poles. Alex said it would probably cost approximately $300,000 to $500,000 to
purchase the infrastructure . He said with the $200,000 being saved each year, the City could use general
fund money to purchase the existing infrastructure. Alex said after the infrastructure was purchased , the
City could use the savings to upgrade the system based on a master plan.
Councilmember Freitag said it would be interesting to look at putting additional lighting in higher crime
areas to see if that would reduce crime.
There was discussion about the City having to pay for poles that Rocky Mountain Power also used as
power poles. rf there was a street light on the pole, the City paid for the use of the pole. Discussion
suggested that the City would eve ntually want to replace those light poles with a stand alone light pole.
Alex said Staff would put together a master plan for the entire City; there would be consistency standards
across the City and developers would have to hold to that standard. He said the City would save a lot of
money in the process.
Woody displayed drawings of various fixtures, and photos of the poles installed with the new
construction of Main Street and Layton Parkway. He said lighting was a great way to enhance the
community.
Discussion suggested that this was a great direction for the City.
Bill said with the proposal to add street lighting to the infrastructure, it would be added as a requirement
for new development. He said right now a developer didn't do anything in a new subdivision for street
lighting. Bill said street lighting could be structured as a development fee, which would allow for
consistency throughout the City. He said the City could do it cheaper and better because the middleman
would be cut out. Bill said this would be brought back to Council for implementation.
Alex said it would be similar to how the City handled water meters. The City had an inventory of meters
that were installed as a part of new construction; the developer paid a fee for the meter and installation.
Council and Staff discussed getting the fee in place by the first of the year.

Minutes of Layton City Council Strategic Planning Work Meeting. October 27, 2010

Alex said Staff would like to have the master plan and discussions with Rocky Mountain Power
completed so that information could be given to the Council as palt of next year' s budget discussions in
February. He said it would be a multi-year phased process, but he felt the City could make some pretty
significant impacts in terms of the feel and cost of lighting.
The meeting adjoumed at 8:16 p.m.

Thieda Wellman, City Recorder

Minutes of Layton City Council Strategic Planning Work Meeting, October 27, 2010

MOUNTAIN STATES
LIGHTING
P.O. BOX 13358
Ogden, UT 84412-1358
PH 801-605-9057
FX 801-605-9058

Layton City
Public Works
Engineering
RFP 201 Street Lights
Product & Consulting
Services

Ted Maestas
Mountain States Lighting

- - - - - - -

- -

Qualifications
Mountain States Lighting was founded in 1984 to focus our expertise only on outdoor lighting and streetscape
applications. Specializing in decorative and non-decorative outdoor lighting, pole accessories, traffic signal
poles high-mast lighting and all exterior lighting applications. Mountain States Lighting serves seven states,
including Utah, Colorado, Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana and Minnesota with offices in Salt Lake City,
Minneapolis and Denver. We currently provide product and services for hundreds of cities in the seven states
we cover. We manufacture poles and decorative bases, brackets and decorative parts out of our own facility in
West Jordan, Utah, and represent manufacturers ofthe highest quality products available for these market
segments today.
Mountain States Lighting Corporate Office is located in Ogden, Utah with Divisions in Murray, Utah, Conifer,
Colorado and Minneapolis, Minnesota.
President: Paul Plasha, Conifer, Colorado Office- 303-838-4430
Utah Regional Manager: Ted Maestas, Murray, Utah Office- 801-268-4879
Corporate Office Manager; Tod Spendlove, Ogden, Utah Office- 801-605-9057
The staff members who will be involved in providing the services requested herein are as follows;
Ted Maestas - Utah Regional Manager with over thirty years experience in the electrical and lighting industry
with twenty of those years focusing in the outdoor lighting design and construction administration. Ted will be
responsible to oversee and coordinate all outdoor lighting projects between the City and developers on behalf of
the City, as the City' s Lighting Consultant for outdoor lighting.
Tod Spendlove - Office Manager with over twenty years experience in quotations will be responsible for
pricing to make sure all pricing stays in line for yearly periods along with parts for maintenance.
Cecelia Maestas - Inside offi ce assistant with over fifteen years experience in the lighting industry will be
responsible for checking status of orders in shop and coordinate delivery dates on projects.
Xavi Maestas - Auto Cad operator will be responsible to keep drawings updated.

Mountain States Lighting will provide design services such as lighting layouts, design drawings, master
planning, specifications, ordinance writing, and construction coordination at no additional cost of the
product to the end user and act as Layton City Outdoor Lighting Consultant, under the direction of Ted
Maestas.
With the above qualifications Mountain States Lighting is a complimentary addition to any city pursuing
exceptional lighting and energy saving tactics for all outdoor lighting needs.

,
The following is a partial list of cities currently utilizing our services (more cities available upon request):

Brigham City - Dave Burnett Brigham City Public Power Director

20 North Main, Brigham City, Utah 84320, Office Phone - 435-734-2001

Santaquin City - Dennis Marker, City Planner

45 West 100 South Santaquin, Utah 84655, Office Phone - 801-754-3211

Saratoga Springs - Mark Edwards, Capital Facilities Manager

1307 N. Commerce Dr. Ste 200, Saratoga Springs, Utah 84043, Office Phone - 801-766-9793

Herriman - Gordon Haight, City Engineer

1301 1 S. Pioneer Street, Herriman, Utah 84096, Office Phone - 801 -446-5323

West Valley City - Erik Brondum, Transportation Engineer

3600 Constitution Blvd. West Valley City, Utah 84119, Office Phone - 801-966-3600

Willard - Jay Aguilar, City Planner

80 West 50 South, Willard, Utah 84340, Office Phone - 435-734-9881

Proposed Approach to Project

Evaluate Layton City's existing street lighting system and provide the value ofthe existing
infrastructure.
Prepare, design, and submit a Master Street Lighting Plan in AutoCAD format.
Manufacture poles, anns and accessories at our West Jordan, Utah facility.
Light fixtures will be manufactured at Philips Hadco Lighting in Littlestown, Pa.
Provide Street Light Assemblies and Parts; make arrangements for delivery of product to Layton City
and coordinate with individuals assigned at the City.
Provide replacement for knock-downs and other situations where the pole may need to be replaced or
repaired. Supply the pole and or parts, make arrangements for delivery of product and the pole, and
maintain a small inventory of the City selected standard poles used by the City at our West Jordan
facility per our agreement with Layton City.
The number and types of poles for stock at our West Jordan facility would be mutually determined by
Mountain States Lighting and Layton City.
Inspection of new poles and lighting fixtures and document whether they meet City standards prior to
shipping. Also inspect pole replacement for knock-downs and other situations requiring pole
replacements.
Plan review and document whether street lighting meet City standards and specifications on developer
proje 18 prior to start of construction.
Review and coordinate proposed lighting plans from developer projects and City projects. Provide
feedback to City and/or developer.
Coordinate with City and/or developer during construction phase to facilitate proper installation of
lighting system.

Streetlight Product Prices

11 item below meet the specified drawing

Main Arterial Standard SL-01

$3425.00 each
Teardrop and Pole Assembly
MSL Pole #20T S-7.8/4.411 4S-5'USAlI8"R-22"MAD(LOGO)-BK
Pole with upsweep fixture ann and 120 volt receptacle
Lower strap-on modular banner ann.
Hadco Teardrop Fixture #C6549A 165 WQL-4K 240 Volt with plumbizer mount & photocell
Residential Street Standard SL-02
$1565.00 each
Acorn Fixture and Pole Assembly
MSL Pole #1 6' OHlI2' AG RTS-I7" WASH(LOGO)-BK & Concrete Mow Ring
Hadco Acorn Fixture #C6549E 55 WQL-4K 120 Volt, PCR
Residential Street Standard SL-02A
$1680.00 each
Acorn witb Cage and Pole Assembly
MSL Pole #1 6'OHI12 ' AG RTS-I7" WASH(LOGO)-BK & Concrete Mow Ring
Hadco Acorn Fixture #C6549F 55 WQL-4K 120 Volt, PCR, w/A Cage
Residential Street Standard SL-02B
$1890.00 each
Acorn with Cage and Pole Assembly
MSL Pole #1 6EFA-5-IT/3X3 -17" WASH(LOGO)-BK & Concrete Mow Ring
Hadco Acorn Fixture #C6549F 55 WQL-4K 120 Volt, PCR, w /A Cage
Main Street Standard SL-03
$4455.00 each
Twin Acorn with Cage and Pole Assembly
MSL Pole #1 4EFA-5-TT/3X3-17" FRANK(LOGO)-BK
With Double Flute Arm, 120 Volt Receptacle in Hub
Includes Banner Arm, Flag Holder and Tether Hook on Modular Hub
Hadco Acorn Fixture #C6549G-40 LED wiA Cage
Main CoUector Standard SL-04
$1990.00 each
Acorn with Cage and Pole Assembly
MSL Pole #1 4EFA-5-TT/3X3-17" FRANK(LOGO)-BK
Hadco Acorn Fixture #C6549G 165 WQL-4K 240 Volt w/A Cage, peR & Internal 120v Receptacle
All prices good until December 31, 2011
WARRANTY FOR ALL PRODUCTS ABOVE:
Fixture Housing Components - 3 Year
Photocells - 8 Year
QL Lamp Modules - 7 Year
LED Lamp Modules - 7 Year
Acrylic Globes -10 Year Non-YeHowing
Pole Assembly Paint Finish - 5 Year

- Layton City Public Works Engineering

Request for Proposal , RFP No _201, Page 4

Layton C"rty Corporation

TO:

The undersigned, having carefully read and considered the Request for" IProposal to provide
STREETLIGHT PRODUCTS AND LIGHTING CONSULTATION perUre Cit(s standard, does hereby
offer to perform such services on behalf of the City, in the manner desai1bed ami subject to the terms
and conditions set forth in the attached proposal. Services will be perfommed at e rates set forth in
said proposal. MANUFACTURERS LOCAL REPRESENTATIVE
Doing business as.: [ ] an i ndividual [ ] a partnership [ ] a corporation
a limited liability
company (mark appropriate box), duly organized under the laws of the State of

BY.-

t.
___
o nature of authorized representative)

,~~~&--L~~~~

(Please Print orTWJ)e

alme)

PRINCIPAL OFFICE ADDRESS:

Street Address ~l)
,1:::.12/37"/J

City

M {/~ A-1

State

!JIll /I

BIN,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OR Social Security Noo_ _ _ _ _ __

(Corporation or Partnership)
(Individual))

ALL PROPOSALS MUST INCLUDE THIS COVER SHEET & THE PRmpa:iA.t CON TENT &

EVA LUTION REQUIREMENTS LISTED ON NEXT PAGES

Layton City Public Works Engineering

Request for Proposal, RFP No. 201, Page 5
PROPOSAL CONTENT & EVALUATION CRITERIA STREETLIGHTS
Instructions: When preparing proposals, reply to each of the following proposal content & evaluation
criteria in the order listed. Please restate each numbered point listed below followed by your response
in full, narrative sentences and provide any requested materials.
I. QUAL/FICA TlONS
A. A statement of the firm' s experience and qualifications to meet the requirements ofthe
City as outlined herein. Include a general overview and history of your company,
number of years in business, number of employees, corporate headquarters location,
type of business, names of the firm's chief officers, and whe(e you do business.
B. Identify proposed staff mem bers who would be involved in providing the services
requested herein and submit statements or resumes detailing their qualifications. Your
proposal should include information on levels of training received by each staff member
and detailed descriptions of their involvement with projects of similar or identical scopes.
C. Detail your firm's experience in providing the services requested herein for similar
customers of similar size, w ith dates of performance and/or completion, customer name,
contact person , and telephone number(s).
D. Is your company currently involved in arbitration and/or litigation for any reason? If so,
please elaborate.
E. In addition to the information and qualifications specified above, identify any special
knowledge or skills provided by your firm that may be related or helpful to the services
requested herein .
II. PROPOSED APPROACH TO PROJECT
A. A statement of your understanding of the project and a general description of your
proposed approach to project scope of services for both the Streetlight and for all
services that you intend to offer.
B. Identify all services that you are offering.
C. Describe how you would monitor the streetlight system and keep a record of all repair
and replacement work performed under this project. Add ress how you would provide
updated information to the City regarding such work on an on-going basis.
D. Identify the location from w hich you would base your operations for work under this RFP
and generally describe its access to the City area to be covered.
E. Describe your current warehousing and inventory capabilities for streetlights and aLI
related materials. Indicate whether such yards are fenced and describe your security
measures for such facilities.
F. Identify any of the work that you intend to sub-contract to others and identify the
proposed sub-Manufacturers Local Representatives including names, address and
phone numbers, specific assignments, and the qualifications of the sub-contracting firm
and its key personnel.

,
Layton City Public Works Engineering
Request for Proposal , RFP No. 201, Page 6
III. PROPOSED FEES
Note: Proposed prices must include all costs associated with the performance of the services
specified, including materials, supervision , labor, insurance.1frans~rta tio n , delivery, storage ,
fuel or other surcharges, and related costs. Charges not Ii Ed in the RFP response wi ll not be
allowed . All prices and fees must be in U.S. dollars.
A. State an offered price per pole/streetlight that will befioced for the first year of the
contract.
B. State and describe you r pricing for each Optional Service that you are offering that will
be fixed for the first 3 years of the contract
AWARD BY WRITTEN AGREEMENT
A. Signature on the Proposal Cover Sheet acknowledges that the Manufacturers Local
Representative is wi lli ng to enter into the agreemenl ' awarded the contract.
Manufacturers Local Representatives are advised to read the RFP thoroughly.
Selected Manufacturers Local Representative will be required to comply with its
requirements.
B. If Manufacturers Local Representative has any exceptions 10 t he RFP, the
Manufacturers Local Representative must follow the procedures stated under
Paragraph IV, Exceptions.
II. PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS
A. Failure to Read. Failure to read the Request for Proposal and these instructions will be
at the Manufacturers Local Representative's own risk..
B. Cost of Developing Proposals. All costs related to the preparation of the proposals and
any related activities are the sole responsibility of the anufacturers Local
Representative . The City assumes no liability for any costs incurred by Manufacturers
Local Representatives throughout the entire selection process.

Layton City Public Works Engineering

Request for Proposal, RFP No. 201 , Page 7
II. PROPOSAL INFORMATION
A. Discussions with Manufacturers Local Representatives. The City reserves the right to
enter into discussions with the Manufacturers local Representative(s) determined to be
reason ably suscepti ble of being selected for award. or to enter into exclusive
discussions with the Manufacturers Local Representative whose proposal is deemed
most advantageous, whichever is in the City's best interest. fo r the purpose of
negotiation. In the event that exclusive negotiations are conducted and an agreement is
not reached , the City reserves the right to enter into negotiations with the next highest
ranked Manufacturers Local Representative witho the need to repeat the formal
solicitation process.
B. Equal Opportunity. The City will make every effort to ensure that all Manufacturers Local
Representatives are treated fairly and equally throughout the entire advertisement,
review, and selection process. The procedures established herein are designed to give
all parties reasonable access to the same basic information.
C. Proposal Ownership. All proposals, including attachments, supplementary materials,
addenda, etc., shall become the property of the City and will not be returned to the
Manufacturers Local Representative.
D. Rejection of Proposals .
The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received. Furthermore, the City
shall have the right to waive any informality or technical defect in proposals received
when in the best interest of the City.
IV.

EXCEPTIONS TO PROPOSAL & SAMPLE AG REEME

If Manufacturers Local Representative takes exception to any tenn or condition set forth in this
proposal and any of its Attachments, said exceptions must be clearly identified in the response
to this RFP. Exceptions or deviations to any of the terms and conditions must not be added to
the proposal pages but must be submitted in a separate document accompanying
Manufacturers Local Representative's proposal identified as "Exce ptions. Such exceptions
shall be considered in the evaluation and the award proces ses. The City shall be the sole
determiner of the acceptability of any exception.
II

V.

CONFIDENTIALITY
All responses , inquiries, and correspondence relating 0 Ihis RFP and all reports, charts,
displays, schedules, exhibits, and other documentation produced by the Manufacturers Local
Representative that are submitted to the City, as part of the proposal or otherwise, shall
become the property of the City when received by the City

VI.

WARRANTY
Manufacturers Local Representative warrants that the workmanship and/or merchandise will
conform to its description and any applicable specifications and shall be of good, merchantable
quality and for the known purpose for which it is sold. This warranty is in addition to any
standard warranty of service guarantee given by Manufacrurers local Representative to the
City.

...-.-.....- ..---.-.--..-

- --.---

--.------.--.--

---.-.-.-.- --.---.------.- --.-----.-.-.----.--.--.--.- ...--.------ ------

A s se Mb ly Color :
B lack

5' - 8"

POL YURATHA NE F' IN IAL

- - -------------- - l

LIGHT FI XTURE

I
I

165\0/ QL 4K 240V

UPPER BANNER AR ~
I ' OIA X 30' STEEL
~ I POL Y BALL CAP

120 V OLT
DUPLE X RECEPTACLE
~ITH ~P COVER

I
I

PHOTOCELL-COLOR BLACK
8 YEAR F'ULL ~A R ~AN TY
HORIZONT At.. ARM AIlAPTOR:
CAST ALUMINUM ~3 56 HM ALLOY
VI TVIST-LOCK PHUTO CONTROL
RECEPTACLE
~~------

BANNER
BY OTHERS

NECK:
CAST ALUMINUM ~3 56 HM ALLOY,
VELDEO TU HOUSI N~
SNAP LATCH: TOOL-ilESS
STAINLESS STEEL
HOUSING:
DIE -CAST ALUMINUM 3360 ALLOY ,
GENERA H1q: FACTOR'':f
PREVIRED AND TES TED
165 VATT INDUCTIDIN, 240 V

37.84

REFLECTOR:
HYDROFORMD ALUM1NUM
OPTIC CHAMBER IP66 RATED

20'-0"
LO~ER

BANNER
I' DIA X 30' ST
BAND ON TYPE
V I POLY BALL CAP

GLOBE:
VERTICALLY RIBBELl
LONG ACRYLIC

16'-6"

1 - - - 18.36 - - - 1

11f--F'DLE: 20'

SHAFT: TAPERED FLUTED STEEL

MINIMUM 16 EPA @ 80 MPH, 1.3 GF

20' D HIGH DENSITY ELASTOMER

BASE, DENSITY OF 71 LBS PER CUBIC FT.
112' MIN. THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK VITH A MODIFIED
URETHANE COATING. LOGO PAINTED GOLD

fLAYTO~~l

FIXTURE DETAIL

36' H x

r "

f'

~ j

I
,I
3' - 0"

l '\
3' X 7'
HANDHOLE

{
1 - - - 22'

---II

DECORATIVE BASE DETAIL

ANCHOR BASE DETAIL
12" BOLT CIRCLE
ANCHOR BOLTS, I" w 36"
GALVAIZED

-' 37 N. Wasatch Dove

L.l)-to n. UlM UlJ4 l
Ph<> !O IJJG-J 70

F&l: ~iJ l -3J6 -J71 3

Ii
I
i
I
I
II
I
I

I
iI

i!
i

!
______ ._____________ ____________________________.__._.______________________________________________________ _____________________________~ ________ ___ ______
. _
_____________________________ ___

__ __ ___Ji

FINISHj
BLACK

CA ST ALUMINUM
FINIAL

LIGHT FIXTURE

SPUN ALUMINUM
ROOF

55 V QL 120V

PRISMATIC ACRYLIC
REFRACTOR GLOBE
(TYPE III>

LAMP MODULE
55 VATT INDUCTION

DIE -CAST ALUMINUM

BALLAST COVER,
TOOLESS ENTRY

12'-0"

GENERATOR:
THERMALLY TESTED
8. CERTIFIED 85 VATT
INDUCTION LAMP GENERATOR
120 VOLT

POLE: 12' ABOVE GRADE (16' OVERALU

SHAF~ TAPERED STEEL
MIN 8 EPA, DIRECT BURIAL TYPE
COLD TAR EPOXY COATING
UNDERGROUND PORTION OF POLE
4' MINIMUM

CAST ALUMINUM
GLOBE HOLDER

23" H x

17" D HIGH DENSITY ELASTOMER

BALLAST ENCLOSURE
IJIHINGED ACCESS
DOOR 8. INTERNAL
RECEPTACLE

BASE, DENSITY OF 71 LBS PER CUBIC FT.

1/2" MIN. THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK IJITH A MODIFIED
URETHANE COATING. LOGO PAINTED GOLD

TVIST-LOCK PHOTO
CONTROL RECEPTACLE
8 YR VARRANTY
' - - - - 3" I.D. SLIP

FITTER
STAINLESS STEEL
FASTENERS
(ALLEN HEAD>

CONCRETE MOIJ STRIP

H---IJIREIJAY

23"

4'-0"

117N.W.... c.;"
~L1U1I41

Pbo1Io 801ll6.l700
Fu 801JJ6-17ll

I.

17"

BASE DETAIL
L

.1

.ll5N.1l1B:

uytoo City - Residentiu Street Light StsndMd

DIAWlNG IlUMBI!l:

SL-02RFP
_ .. _ . . --.J

't-------

FINISHj
BLACK

CAST ALUMINUM
FINIAL

~---

LIGHT FIXTURE
55 IJ QL 120V

SPUN ALUMINUM
ROOF

CAST ALUMINUM
FLOIJER BLOCKS
AND BAND
PRISMA TIC ACRYliC

REFRAC TOR GLOBE

<TYPE lI[)

POLE: 12' ABOVE GRADE ([6' OVERALL)

SHAFT: TAPERED STEEL
MIN B EPA, DIRECT BURIAL TYPE
COLD TAR EPO XY COATING
UNDE RGR OUND PORTION OF POLE
4' MI NIMUM

~--

CAST ALUMINUM
CAGE ARMS

r--

LAMP MODULE

55 IJATT INDUCTION

DIE-CAST ALUMINUM

BALLAST COVER .

TOOLESS ENTRY

GENERATOR:
THERMALLY TESTED

12'-0'

&. CERTIFIED 55 VA TT

INDUCTION LAMP GENERATOR

120 VOL T
CAST ALUMINUM
GLOBE HOLDER

23'H x 17'0 HIGH DENSITY ELASTOMER DECORA

BASE, DENSITY OF 71 LBS PER CUBIC FOOT.
112 MINIMUM THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK IJITH A MODIFIED
URETHANE COATING, LOGO PAINTED GOLD

BALLAST ENCLOSURE
V IHINGED ACCESS
DOOR So INTERNAL
120 V RECEPTACLE
-----

TVIST-LoCK PHOTO

CONTROL RECEPTACLE

B YR IJARRANTY

" - - - - - 3' LD. SliP

FITTER
" - - - - - - STAINLESS STEEL
FASTENERS

CONCRETE MOIJ STRIP

(ALLEN HEAD)

4'-0'

IJ IREIJA Y

IlnUI_DIM
~u..14041

Pbooo 8011J6.11oo
F.. 801-1J6.17ll

17'

BASE DETAIL
L

.1

Q IWoII:

Uymn City . Re:riIbtW SI1et:t Ligbl SmIrIIWd Option A

SCALE:

NTS

DlAVIIlIHtlIIBI!I:

SL-02ARFP

~-------

FINIS Hj
BL ACK

.., -

LIGHT FIXTURE
55 '" QL 120 V

CAST ALUMINUM
FINIAL

SPUN ALUMINUM
ROOF
CAST ALUMINUM
FLO'WER BLOCKS
AND BAND
PRISMA TIC ACRYLIC

REFRACTOR GLOBE

(TYPE lID

,--

CAST ALUMINUM
CAGE ARMS

r----LAMP MODULE
55 'WATT INDUCTION

POLE: 12' ABOVE GRADE (16' OVERALl)

SHAFT: FLUTED ALUMINUM 0.25' IJALL
MIN 10 EPA, DIRECT BURIAL TYPE
COL D TAR EPOXY COATING
UNDERGROUND PORTION OF POLE
4' MINIMUM

DIE -CAST ALUMINUM

BALLAST COVER,

TOOLESS ENTRY

GENERATOR,
THERMALLY TESTED
8. CERTIFIED 55 VA TT
INDUCTION LAMP GENERATOR
120 VOLT

12'-0'

CAST ALUMINUM
GLOBE HOLDER

23'H x 17'D HIGH DENSITY ELASTOMER DECORATIVE ;L..I!!!!::!:::o:::E~!:=!!!!:"--~

BASE, DENSITY OF 71 LBS PER CUBIC FOOT.
1/2' MINIMUM THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK 'WITH A MODIFIED
URETHANE COATING, LOGO PAINTED GOLD

BALLAST ENCLOSURE

VIHINGED ACCESS

DOOR 8. INTERNAL

RECEPTACLE
-----

'---

'----

CONCRETE MoIJ STRIP

TVIST-LOCK PHOTO
CONTROL RECEPTACLE
8 YR 'WARRANTY
3' l.D . SLIP
FITTER
STAINLESS STEEL
FASTENERS
(ALLEN HEAD>

23'
4'-0'

IJIREIJAY

ll1N.w..... om.
~L'IIIIHIII

PI.- 801.))6.)700
Fa 101))6.17lJ

17'

BASE DETAIL
L .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _

-I

IOIIW11!:
u.ytotJ City RcsidCfltiaJ Slz=t Ligbt SlMJdW Optioa B
D1AMlIOlJIIII!I:

SL-02BRFP

..

t---- - - 3 ' - to ~' -

1-1.......

_ '. _ '. _ " \

- -.....-11

FIN ISHj
BLAC K

Fi XTU RE
SEE SHEET SL-03A RFP

T\lIN ARM BRACKET:

CAST ALUMINUM
2-L[TE @ 180
\I/CENTER HUB TO
ACCoMoDATE 4'
POLE TENON
\1/ DUPLEX
120V RECEPTACLE

FLAG
BY OTHERS

BANNER
BY OTHERS

HUB STYLE TOP BANNER ARM

\I!FLAG HOLDER
8. BOTTOM CUP

19'-0~'
14 ' FLUTED ALUMINUM ,25' \lALL THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK \11TH FIRST 16'
OF POLE AND BASE PLATE TO BE
COATED \11TH INDUSTRIAL COLD GALV
MIN EPA OF 20 IN 80 MPH ZONE
(1.3 GUST FACTOR)

ILAYTO~!t

14 ' -0'

3' )( 7' HANDHoLE LOCATED

BEHIND 2-PIECE BASE

40'H )( 17'D HIGH DENSITY ELASTOMER DECORA TIv

BASE. DENSITY OF 71 LBS PER CUBIC FOOT.
112' MINIMUM THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK \11TH A MODIFIED
URETHANE COATING, LOGO PAINTED GoL D
GALVANIZED ANCHOR PLATE
4' 0 .0. TRANSITION PIPE SUO
UP INSIDE ALUMINUM EXTRUSION
\11TH A COMPRESSION FIT &.
BOL TED TOGETHER.

E~

40

.-/

..

............

.1

17'

BASE DETAIL
Ill N.W_~

~1lIIi1lO41

Pf>oao iOI-JJ6.J700
Fa 101-)J6.J7tJ

ANCHOR BASE DETAIL

12' BOL T CIRCLE
ANCHOR BOLTS: 3/4' )( IS'
GALVANIZED

RFP

Color:

BLACK

1-- - ----17.87

LED HIlD\.l SPECifiCATIONS,

- 120-277 v Al. INPUT (Quto senSing).
- 60,000 tflJRS @ 70- LUHN HAINTEN.W:E.
- ~o TOTAl LEOS (90 IUI'Il.>ns/wCltt eQ).
- 4 CAST AlLl4INUH flAT SINKS. IP66 RATED.
- LED EFF ItAC Y: 68 OCLIVERED LUHENSNATT.
- >70 CRI ISImC CCT NOMINAl.
- COLilR TIJflERATIM: SOOOK.
- APPROX. 5OJ. EN[RGY SAVINGS VS. CO HPARABLE HID.

------~

TOP V[[IJ

LED MODULE ASSEMBLY

lJilVERSAl BRACKET ASS1. - - - - - _.,/
HJI EITHER SYMMETRIC [II
ASYMMETRIC DISTRIBUTlIlt
FINiAl: BLACK COLOR
DIE CAST AlL'HI~H
1356HH ALLLOY
CAGE;
CAST AlUHIOOM
1356HH ALLOY
LED HIlIlLlE ASSY:
TYPE 3 OP TICS
ftf=:l---- GlOBE. CLEAR

PRISMA TIC ACRYLIC

10 YEAR t(JH-YElUl'JING VARRANTY
IJRIVER COVER:
DIE -CAST ALlMI~M
1360 AlLOY
TOOL-LESS ENTRY

(LOBE C(liAR: 2-PC.

CAST AU.MIHIJI1
1356ft! AlLOY, SECURED
TO GLOBE HECK IJI
4 HEX HEAD SCREIJS

DRIVER ENCLOSURE:
DIE -CAST AlUHI~H
1360 AlLOY.
ilEA HRPRI!Ilr II I
Hill -LESS ENTRY
ACCESS Il!XR
~---

MHO CONTROL:
TVISTLOCK RECEPT Al.LE
8 YR IIARRANTY
SLIP FITTER: 3' 1.0.

FASTENERS:
STAINLESS STEEL
HEX IOD 8Il. TS

Il7~W_1lrin

"""",lhIIoHllI
Pbooo 101))lS-l700
Pu 101lllS-lm

.. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .

_ .. _ . . _ . . _

. --l

_.-.,
~-------

CAST ALUMINUM
>INIAL

FINISH;

BLACK

LIGHT FI XTURE
165 ''/ QL 240 V

_ -

SPUN ALUMINUM
ROOF

(AS T ALUMINUM
.FLOWER BLOCKS
AND BAND
f'RISMA TIC ACRYUC
REFRACTOR GLOBE
<TYPE V)
14' FLUTED ALUMINUM .25' VALL THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK VITH FIRST 16'
ar POLE AND BASE PLATE TO BE
COATED VITH INDUSTRIAL COLD GALV
MIN EPA OF 20 IN 80 MPH ZONE
(t. 3 GUST FACTOR)

r--

CAST ALUMINUM
tAGE ARMS

r----LAMP MODULE
165 WATT INDUCnON

mE -CAST ALUMINUM
"BALLAST COVER.
100LESS ENTRY
GALVANIZED ANCHOR PLATE
4' 0.0. TRANSITION PIPE SUD
UP INSIDE ALUMINUM EXTRUSION
VITH A COMPRESSION FIT 8.
BOL TED TOGETHER.

{jENERA TOR:
THERMALLY TESTED
~

CERTIFIED 165 WATT

INDUCTION LAMP GENERATOR

240 VOLT

14' - 0'

40' H x 1r D HIGH DENSITY ELAS TOMER

BASE. DENSITY OF 71
LBS PER CUBIC
112' MIN. THICKNESS

PAINTED BLACK WITH A MODIFIED

URETHANE COATING. LOGO PAINTED GOLD

CAST ALUMINUM
GLOBE HOL DER
BALLAST ENCLOSURE
\J/HINGED ACCESS
DOOR 8. INTERNAL
RECEPTACLE
----

"---

TVIST-LOCK PHOTO
CONTROL RECEPTACLE
B YR VARRANTY
3' l.D. SUP
FITTER

" - - - - - - STAINLESS STEEL

40'

fASTENERS
(ALLEN HEAD)

mllw.... ~
~\iOii4041

l'IloIIo 101-336-J1oo
Pu 101JJ6-J1lJ

ANCHOR BASE DETAIL

12' BOLT CIRCLE

ANCHOR BOLTS : 3/4' x IS'

'- .

- " - " - '

-i ..

..i

17'

BASE DETAIL
'. _ ..

"

"

'

RFP

Layton City'2011 .Lightip,g Fee (Revised)

'I;

I.

Description
Tear Drop Pole & Fixture
Single Light Fluted Pole & Fixture

Double Light Fluted Pole & Fixture

"

Detail
Fee/Unit
Right of Way 80' ~d Greater
SL-01
4,000.00
2,300.00

SL-04

SL-03
5,100.00
Right of Way less than 80'

-~~

Type

"

QL Induction Lighting
QL Induction

Lightin~

LED
'.

Standard Residential Pole & Fixture

Standard Residential (Optional)

1,800.00
2,000.00 .

SL-02
SL-02A

QL Induction Lighting
QL Induction LightinE

Standard Residential (Optional)

2,200.00

SL02B

QL Induction Lighting

.- ';...

.. -

.. - "

_ _.. - " _.. _.. _

..

-"

.. - "

_.. - .. _ .. _ .. _.. -"

_ -" _
..

.. -

.. - " -" - ..

-",

FINISHj
BLACK
HADCO FIXTURE
#C6549E

MOUNTAIN STATES POLE #

16'OHJ12' AG RTS/3-5.25/17" WASH)NAME-HH-GL-BK

POLE: 12' ABOVE GRADE (16' OVERALL)

SHAFf: TAPERED STEEL

MIN 8 EPA. DIRECT BURIAL TYPE

MOUNTAIN STATES DECORATIVE BASE

22" H x 17" WWASHILAYTON CITYIHHIGUBK
POLYURETHANE 112" MlN. TIllCKNESS

BASE DETAIL

CONCRETE MOW STRIP

117N.W.-lImo
u"o.,lftIII140n
_101-3*,3700
FlO 801-)3",3713

WIREWAY HOLE
COLD TAR EPOXY COATING
UNDERGROUND PORTION OF POLE
4'MINIMUM
QUOIU

_"_ " _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ . . _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _ ., _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. -.J

,. " - ,' _ .. _.' -" _ .. -" _ . . - .. _ .. _ .. _ .. - , . _ .. -" -" _ . , - .. _ .' -" _ ., -" -

" - " _., I

FINISHj
BLACK
HADeO FIXTURE
#C6549F

MOUNTAIN STATES POLE #

16'OHl12' AG RTS/3-5.2SJI7"WASH)NAME-Iffi-GL-BK
POLE: 12' ABOVE GRADE (16' OVERALL)
SHAFI': TAPERED STEEL
MIN 8 EPA. DIRECT BURIAL TYPE

MOUNTAIN STATES DECORATIVE BASE

22" H x 17" WWASHILAYTON CITYIHHIGUBK
POLYURETIIANE 1/2" MIN. THICKNESS

BASE DETAIL

CONCRETE MOW STRIP

Gfll.W_1mo
~UlaI4llll

_
801-33'-1100
PDt SOI..]]'-3?!]

COLD TAR EPOXY COATING

UNDERGROUND PORTION OF POLE
4' MINIMUM

_"_.,_ ,, _ , ._,,_ .. _,, _" _ . . _ . . _., _ ., _ ,,_., _"_" _ ,, _ , '_ .. _ . . _., _ ,, _., _" _ .. _ ,._., _ ., -..-J

.. - " - " - " -

" -

" -

" -

" _

.. _

.. -

.. _

.. -

.. -

.. -

" -

"' -

" -

" -

" -"-"- "j

FINISHj

BLACK

HADCO FIXTURE
#C6549F

MOUNTAIN STATES POLE #

16'OHl12' EFAl17" WASH)NAME-HH-GL-BK
POLE: 12' ABOVE GRADE (16' OVERALL)
SHAFf: FLUTED ALUMINUM
MIN 10 EPA, DIRECT BURIAL TYPE

MOUNTAIN STATES DECORATIVE BASE

22" Hx 17" WWASHiLAYTON CITYIHHIGUBK
POLYURETHANE 112" MIN. TIllCKNESS

BASE DETAIL

CONCRETE MOW STRIP

4l1!lW_Imo
_

r.,too,~l4OIl

iOl.JJ6-J700

fIX iOl-JJ6.J711

COLD TAR EPOXY COATING

UNDERGROUND PORTION OF POLE
4'MINIMUM

LC-SL-02B
DlSt:

_ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ . . _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _. " _ . . _ . . _ .. _ . . _ . . _ .. --.l

"

- .. ..

_.. _.. _.. _ .. _ - .. _ .. _.. _.. - ..

-

"

..

"

_ .. _ ., _ .. - ..

_.. _ .. _ .. -

.. -

"

-",

FINISHj
BLACK

HADCO FIXTURE
It C6S49A

/LAYTO?]:,'

I,

POLE BY MOUNTAIN STATES LIGHTING

PARTit 14EFA-S/14S-TT13x30D-HANC(LOGo)-BK
(PART II IS FOR POLE &. DECORATIVE BASE>
14' FLUTED ALUMINUM .2S" IJALL THICKNESS
PAINTED BLACK \11TH FIRST 16"
OF POLE AND BASE PLATE TO BE
COA TE D IJITH j 'NDUSTRIAL COLD GALV
MIN EPA OF 20 IN 80 MPH ZONE
(1.3 GUST FACmR)

U
I

,
/""

............

BASE DETAIL
DECORA TlVE BASE BY MOUNTAIN STATES LIGHTING
PARTit 17" FRANK(LOGD>-HDEB-BK (BASE ONLY)
4S" H x 14" SQUARE HIGH DENSITY ELASTOMER DECORATIVE
BASE, DENSITY IJF 71 LBS PER CUBIC FOOT.
PAINTED BLACK IJITH A MODIFIED
URETHANE COATING
(STAYS FLEXIBLE OVER TIME IJ/MAX ADHESION)

4l7!1.~1l!iJI

!.rpII,II,U4IH1
PboooIGl.Jl6-3700
PuIOJ-J36.l7Il

ANCHOR BASE DETAIL

12" BOLT CIRCLE
ANCHOR BOLTS. 3/4" x IB"

_ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ . . _ " _ , , _ ,, _ .. _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _ .. _,,_ ,, _ . . _., _ . . _ .. _ .. _ .. - .. _ .. _ .. -.-1

" -

"

-"-"- "

_.. _ .. _.. _.. _.. -

..

_..- .. - .. - ..

- ..

_ .. -

.. -

_.. _.. _.. _ .. -"---'

" _ .. _ . '

FINISHj
BLACK

HADCO FIXTURE

n C6549A

TWIN ARM BRACKET,

CAST ALUMINUM

2-L1TE Ii! 180

IJICENTER HUB TO

ACCOMODATE 4"

POLE TENON

IJI DUPLEX
120V RECEPTACLE

ILAYTO~J

OPTION:
HUB STYLE TOP BANNER ARM

W/FLAG HOLDER

8. BOTTOM CLIP

1
1

III

POLE BY MOUNTAIN STA TES LIGHTING

PART~ 14EFA-S/14S-TT/3x30D-HANCCLOGO)-BK
(PART ~ IS FOR POLE 8. DECORATIVE BASE>

14' FLUTED ALUMINUM .2S" WALL THICKNESS

PAINTED BLACK WITH FIRST 16"

OF POLE AND BASE PLATE TO BE

COATED WITH INDUSTRIAL COLD GAL V

MIN EPA OF 20 IN 80 MPH ZONE
(1.3 GUST FACTOR)

\ ...........,

BASE DETAIL
DECORATIVE BASE BY MOUNTAIN STATES LIGHTING
PARTit 17" FRANK(LOGD>-HDEB-BK (BASE ONLY)
45" H x 14" SQUARE HIGH DENSITY ELASTOMER DECORATIVE
BASE, DENSITY OF 71 LBS PER CUBIC FOOT.
PAINTED BLACK WITH A MODIFIED
URETHANE COATING
(STAYS FLEXIBLE OVER TIME IJIMAX ADHESION)

4l1l1.W_Drm
l.I)U!,UlK14OI1
Pbomo 801.Jl~3700
Fa. 801-ll~713

ANCHOR BASE DETAIL

12" BOL T CIRCLE
ANCHOR BOLTS: 3/4" x 18"

LC-SL-03
RJIP;

DI!IT.:

MoUDillHlSbJtes

_ .. _ . . _ . . _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ . . _ . . _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _ . . _ .. _ .. _ . . _ . . _ .. ---1

120 VOLT

PLUG-IN RECEPTACLE
POLYURETHANE FINIAL

HADCo
C6549B/CA6549

Colo...
Black

RIPlEY PHOTOCELL
It 6390B-BLACK

!..---~~If------

HORIZoNT AL ARM ADAPTOR:

CAST ALUMINUM I*356HM ALLOY
VI TVIST-LoCK PHOTO CONTROL
RECEPTACLE
NECK:
CAST ALUMINUM I*356HM ALLOY,
VELDED TO HOUSING
SNAP LATCH: TOOL -LESS
STAINLESS STEEL
HOUSING:

DIE-CAST ALUMINUM 1*360 ALLOY,

GENERATOR: FACTORY

PREVIRED AND TESTED

165 VATT INDUCTION, 240 V

REFLECTOR:

HYDRoFoRMED ALUMINUM

OPTIC CHAMBER IP66 RATED

GLOBE:

VERTICALLY RIBBED

LONG ACRYLIC

20'
SHAFT: TAPERED FLUTED STEEL
MINIMUM 16 EPA @ 80 MPH, 1.3 fiF

20' D1A

X 36' HIGH BASE

DECORATIVE HIGH DENSITY
ELASTOMER 112' MIN. THICKNESS
WITH 'LAYTON CITY LOGO"
CAST INTO TOP RING

4J1 II. Vosotdt II-iv!

lAyton. Utollll4G41
Pnon. 801-336-37011
'ax 801-336-3713

Simple Retrofit

and Upgrade Installation

Upgrading a luminaire from a traditional lamp source to LED

doesn't have to mean a replacement of an entire luminaire.

Philips Hadco's LumiLock provides a quick retrofit solution.

Just twist out the existing LumiLock two part assembly and
replace it with the GX2 LED system. That's it. QUick-disconnects
on wire assemblies help simplify the replacement process.

Asymmetric or Symmetric?

When you have the GX2 LED, you have both.

The design of the Opt-Adjust system offers the

ultimate in versatility. With this design one GX2
LED system can be quickly converted from symmetric
to asymmetric distribution or vice-versa.
Simply remove four screws, move two LED bars to the
open locations and replace the screws. Tabs lock the
light bars at their proper position to ensure optimum
optical performance. For more deuiled information,
download the instruction sheet from www.hadco.com.

LumiLock GX2 LED Specifications

LUXEON Rebel ES LEDs on aluminum core PCB

Smart Select electronic driver 120 - 277V or

3017 - 480V; 50 - 60 Hz; auto-sensing

Sealed, acrylic lens; IP66 rated

ETL and cETL listed

Symmetric and asymmetric distribution patterns

(field adjustable)

5 year extended warranty

3000K, ofOOOK or 5700K color temperatures (CCT)

10kV 110kA surge suppression built in

Minimum 65 color rendering index (CRi)

Dimming integral to driver (9 options available)

m~m

IiilIaiI! WII
!

Lower Output (40 LfPs)

I '

I II
I

'

mm

PHILIPS

Higher Output (80 LEOs)

(
www.hadco.com

For full specification sheets and OI"der-ing guide

information go to www.hadco.com.

100 Cnftway Drive. P.O. 80" H9.littlestown. PA 17HO

Phone:

1 - 966~1316S9

Fl)(: 717-3590619

Printed in U.SA

PHl067 12071SH

LUMILOCK LED ENGINE

Jave energy and

easily upgrade
post tops to LED

GX3
OUTDOOR URBAN

PHIUPS HADCD, LUMILOCK LED ENGINE GX3

The Philips Hadco LumiLock LED Engine GX3 will help you
to beautify and add a sense of well-being and security to your
outdoor space while at the same time offering energy savings and
sustainability. Philips Hadco's LumiLock LED Engine GX3 is an
ideal alternative to HID sources and will provide significant energy
savings. It provides a quick and simple retrofit solution while
maintaining excellent light levels.

Project:
Location:

Catalog No:

Fixture Type:

Mig:

Qty:

Notcs:

Ordering Example: RPTLD RL32 N 32 A DA

O rdering Guide

IRPTLO I I
Series

Model Number

Color
Temperature

LED
Count

Voltage

Dimming'

RPTLD'
Replacement
LED Engine

RU1' Narrow
Body Type 3

3000K
4000K

31' 32 LEOs
6-4 64 LEOs

A 120-277

RL51' Narrow
Body Type 5

5000K

DA
DB
DC
DO
DE
OF
DG
DH
OJ
DZ

RL1""

Wide Body
Type 3

RL5""

Wide Body
Type 5

VAC

B''347-480
VAC

1. Cannot be used wjU, F or J Pod.

2. Canoot be used with C, D, F. G or J pods.
3. Use RPTLD Engine with RSZ. R34. RS-I. md C52 products.

4 Hrs. 25% reduction

4 Hrs. 50% reduction
4 Hrs. 75% reductio n
6 Hrs. 25% reduction
6 Hrs. 50% reduction
6 Hr. 75% reduction
8 Hrs. 25% reduction
8 Hrs. 50% reduction
8 Hrs. 75% reduction
Custom Dimming
Schedule
N None

~.

32 lED configurations .re nat available with Ji7-iaO VAC.

5. Dimming not available with 347.... 80 VAC.

e 20H Koninklijke Phllips N.Y. All rights reserved.

PHILIPS

Specifications are subject to change without notice.

www.philips.comllumin.ires

RPTLD 03/H

HA

pagel 012

--

------------

- ---- -- --

LUMILOCK LED ENGINE

GX3
OUTDOOR URBAN
Specifications
Total Philips System

ThermaJ management:

Vibration Resistance

Total end-to-end, vertically integrated Philips System

- Philips Lumlleds LEOs, Philips lighting Electronics
Advance driver, Integral Philips dimming 1 controls,
Philips lumlnalre. Our comprehensive extended warranty
covers the entire ,Iuminalre as shipped from factory.
GX3 Engines can be used with the following luminaires as
an LED retrofit solution: R52, RJ-4, R5-4, C52 Refractive
Globe Families

LED Engine construction consists of four 6063-T5

Vibration tested to ANSI C136.31 for

Bridge Applications.

aluminum heatslnks mounted on galvanized steel

brackets. Heatslnks are machined to maximum surface

roughness of 63f1m and clear anodized to MIL-A-8625

to provide corrosion resistance and superior thermal

contact with Lumileds LEDs. Heatsink fin geometry is

designed to mmmize natural convection cooling for
thermal loads experienced during operation. This helps
to ensure proper junction temperature control, lumen

LED Specifications
Approximate ly 80,000 hours of 1.." life (at 25 C ambient
temperature & 70% lumen maintenance). Universal
optics bracket design. IP66 Sealed, clear glass lens.
3000K(warm), -4000K(neutral) & 5000K(cool) color
temperature (CCT). Power factor 0.99 at nOVAC input.
3000K and -4000K have CRI of 70. 5000K has CRI of 80.

Umlted Warranty

Optical Assembly

5 Yellr extended limited warranty.

LEOs are sealed and protected from the environment

with 100% silicone gasket and clear, heat and Impact
tempered, low-iron glass. This design ensures reliability

Max Weight

through environmental protection while maintaining

guarantees construction rigidity and vibration reslst2nce.

There are 9 standard factory set dimming schedules

available. See specification sheet for details. A custom
dimming schedule I. available by contacting the factory.
Built in DynaDlmmer does not allow for dimming
override features . Consult factory for override.

Light Souyce
Four Lumilods Luxeon K light sources provide high
efficacy and light output with the reliability and lumen
maintenance that Luxeon LEDs are renowned for. Hetal

core printed circuit boards (MCPBs) provide lower

LED-to-heat,!ink thermal resistance, allOWing for high
light output without sacrificing reliability.

cETLus Classified LED retrofit kit manufactured to ISO

9001 : 2008 standards, evaluated to ANSIIUL 1598C
1 CAN/CSA Cn .2 No. 250.0, suitable to be used as
retrofit kit in the following luminaires: R52, RH, R5-4,
and C52.

maintenance, and system reliability.

good light transmittance. 8-32 UNC hardware

Control.!

Certifications

11 Lbs

fESNA Classifications:
See .Ies flies. Deprecated: Refer to BUG Ratings.

Type 3 and Type 5 distributions available.

Electronic Driver
The driver Included Is the Phlhps Advance XITANIUM
LED driver and Is available In 350mA (6-4 LED) and 530
mA (32 LED) drive currents. Universal voltage Input
from 120-277VAC or H7--480VAC. Input frequency is
50-60Hz and all XITANIUM drivers are RoHS compliant.
A separate 10kV/10kA surge suppression module is
automatically included. Programmable dimming 0-10V .
is optional.

Dimensions
Type III

Type V

' - 715"- '

18.42cm

' -

7.1],,--'
18.09 em

20S '

5207 em

20104 Koninklijke Philips N.V. All righu reserved.

Specifications are subject to change without notice.
www.philips.coml1uminaires

RPTLD 03/104

page 2 of 2

Philips lighting
North America Corporation
200 Franklin Square Drive
Somerset, NJ 08873
Phone: 855--486-2216

Philips lighting Company

281 Hillmount Road
M>rkham ON, Canada L6C 2SJ
Phone: 800-668-9008

Save energy and

easily upgrade

post tops to LED

...

---- .......
.

,,

... ...

.. ..

,,

,
,,
I

,,

LUMILOCK LED
ENGINE GX3

OUTDOOR URBAN

Lighting can play an important role in

transforming the look of an outdoor
space. Whether you are looking to
create a unique identity for your town,
school campus, or shopping area, Philips
Hadco has an energy efficient solution
for you. Retrofitting post top luminaires
to the LumiLock lED Engine GX3 will
help you to beautify and add a sense of
well-being and security to your outdoor
space while at the same time offering
energy savings and sustainability. Philips
Hadco's LumiLock LED Engine GX3 is
an ideal alternative to HID sources and
will provide significant energy savings .
It provides a qUick and simple retrofit
solution while maintaining excellent
light levels. This solution also creates
a maintenance friendly fixture that
provides up to 80,000 hours of life
The LumiLock LED Engine GX3 with
Refractive Globe luminaires offers two
optical distributions and a range of style
choices to suit any application.

<"0)'

Features

Symmetric and asymmetric distribution patterns

(field adjustable)

,,
,

AIII. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . .

3000K, ""OOOK or 5000K color temperatures

(CCT) available
Sealed. glass lens; IP66 rated
Minimum 70 color rendering index {CRi}
Nine integral dimming options available
Qualified by Design Lights Consortium
(""OOOK only)
Built in surge suppression (1 OkV 11 OkA)
Smart Select electronic driver 120 - 277V or
3"17 - "'SOV; 50 - 60 Hz; auto-sensing
Five year extended warranty
ETL and cETL listed

PHILIPS

LUMILOCK LED
ENGINE GX3

OUTDOOR URBAN

Simple Retrofit
and Upgrade Installation
Upgrading a Philips Hadco luminaire from a traditional lamp source
to LED doesn't have to mean a replacement of an entire luminaire.
Philips Hadco's LumiLock provides a quick retrofit solution.
Just twist out the existing LumiLock two part assembly and
replace it with the LumiLock LED GX3 system. That's it.
Quick-disconnects on wire assemblies help simplify the
replacement process.

Asymmetric or Symmetric?

With LumiLock LED, you have both.

The Opt-Adjust system design offers ultimate versatility.

With this design one LumiLock LED GX3 system can
be quickly converted from symmetric to asymmetric
distribution or vice-versa.
Simply remove the two acorn nuts and threaded rods, lift
up the bracket and reposition the light bars onto the new
studs. Replace the bracket and rods and tighten the acorn
nuts. The studs lock the light bars in their proper position
to ensure optimum optical performance.
Dimensions
Ordering Guide

Ordering Example: RPTLD RL32 N 32 A DA

IRPTLO I I
Series

Model Number Color

Temperature

RPTLD'
Replacement
LED Engine

RL32'
RLS2'

Type V

Type III

Narrow
Body Type III

3000K

4000K

Narrow
Body Type V

5000K

LED
Count

Voltage

Dimming'

32' 32 LEDs
6464 LEDs

A 120-277
VAC

DA
DB
DC
DO
DE
OF
DG
DH
OJ
DZ

B"'347-480
VAC

RL34 ' Wide Body

Type III
RLS4 ' Wide Body
Type V

1. Cannot be used with F or J Pod.

2 Cannot be used wrth C. D. F, G or J pods.
3. Use FtPnD Engine with Ft52, Ft3-4. R54.nd C52 products.

0-4IH

725"

'

4 Hrs, 25% reduction

4 Hrs, 50% reduction
4 Hrs, 75% reduction
6 Hrs, 25% reduction
6 Hrs, 50% reduction
lOS'
6 Hrs, 75% reduction 52.07
an
8 Hrs, 25% reduction

8 Hrs, 50% reduction

B Hrs, 75% reduction

Custom Dimming

Schedule

N None

'_ _ 7.13"_ _'

:

18.09 em

lOS'

52.07 an

.... 32 LED configurations are not available with 347-480 VAC.

5. Dimming not available with 347-"'80 VAC.

20104 Konlnklijke Philips N.v. All rigOO reserved.

Specificatkms are sub/ect to change without notIce.
www.philip.s.comlluminaIres
PHc-H06BN

,'--18.~1 cm--',

Philips Lighting
North America CorporatIon
200 Franklin Square Drive
Somerset, NJ 08873
Phone: 855--486-2216

Philips Lighting Comp&ny

281 Hillmount Road
Markham ON, Canada L6C 2SJ
Phone: 800-668-9008

:ON

l~Vd

THIS PAGE IS ONLY A COVER SHEET

SEE THE FOLLOWING PAGES FOR

ACTUAL INSTRUCTION SHEET

PHILIPS

100 Craflway. P.O . Box 128

Uttlestown. Pennsylvania 17340-0128
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED:

"ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

"ALL THREADS ARE UNC-2B OR UNF-2B

AFTER COATING.
.
"ALL THREADS ARE TO BE VERIAED
WITH A THREAD GAGE.

* DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING *

CONFIDENTIAL: This drawing is confidential and

proprietary to Philips and may not be reproduced in

whole or in part without the express written consent of

Philips. 2014 Koninklijke Phifips

N.V. (Royal Philips).

All rights reserved.

TITLE: INST.LED.GX2.INSTALLATION

DRW SIZE:
A
MATERIAL:

DRAWN BY:
D. NAVICKAS
DATE: 04/01/2014 11.0 X 17.0 WHITE PAPER STOCK FOLDED
I-------------t---~~~ IN HALF. THEN IN THIRDS
APPR BY:
J. METZLER DATE: 04/11/2014
EF-04-0l-11 Rev.09

SHEET 1 OF 6

PART NO:

32002041

Philips Lighting Company

200 Franklin Square Drive
Somerset. NJ 08873
Phone (US): 855--486-2216
Phone (CAN): 800-668-9008

INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS:
GX3 LUMILOCK LED INSTALLATION
AND RETROFIT

,-------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE INSTALLING THIS FIXTUREI

ATTENTION:

A.

WARNING:

All wiring must be done by a qualified

electrician.

Install, operate and maintain to meet all

applicable codes.

A.

A.

WARNING:

Make sure that power is disconnected before

performing installation and maintenance on
this fixture.

WARNING:

This fixture is intended to be wired in

accordance with the National Electrical Code
and local code specifications. Failure to
adhere to these codes may result in serious
personal injury.

page 1 of 4

32002041, revision A

PHILIPS

-lX3 LumiLock with LED Installation and Retrofit Instructions

, Remove Globe

(HID/GX1/GX2~GX3)

2 Remove Ballast/LED Assembly

-Loosen but do not remove

four (4) screws as shown.

-Pull spring clip to release ballast module, twist ballast

module counter-clockwise, and lift to remove.

-Lift globe from fixture.

-Disconnect blue power quick disconnect.

NOTE: Do not remove or

loosen cage, if present.

3 Remove TwistLock Ring

(HID/GX1o+GX3 Retrofits Only)

4 Install Adapter Ring

(HID/GX1o+ GX3 Retrofits Only)

-Remove two (2) eXisting

screws as shown
(if applicable).

-Fasten with two (2) provided

screws as shown.

-Lift ring from fixture.

5 Mount the Fixture

(if applicable)

6 Connect Supply Wiring

(if applicable)

-Route supply wires through

post fitter.

-Open pod access door.

-Connect supply wires to terminal
block. (l oosen screws and
remove terminal block per picture
at right if necessary for easier
wiring. Replace terminal block.)

-Place luminaire on pole

or tennon .
-Orient door and/or photocell
window (if present) to
desired location.

-Install photoeye (by others) if

equipped with twistlock photocell
receptacle.
~

Supply wires must be

routed through supplied wire tie.

-Do not tighten post fitter

screws until optics have
been correctly oriented.

page 2 of 4

32002041, revision A

--

--

--==---

--

~~--

iX3 LumiLock with LED Installation and Retrofit Instructions

Install GX3 LumiLock with LED

(HID/GX1/GX2~GX3)

8 Replace Globe

-Connect blue power quick disconnect

on the LED module.

-Carefully lower globe onto fixture.

-Ensure that wiring is not pinched.

NOTE: Take care not to hit the

LumiLock module.

-Install as shown at right and twist

into place.

-Tighten the four (4) screws

that secure the globe.

-Spring will snap in place where

indicated when module is properly
engaged.
NOTE: For asymmetric modules,
loosen the post fitter set screws
and rotate to orient 'Street Side'
label toward the street.
-Torque post fitter set screws as follows:
-Hex bolts (132 in-Ibs.)

-Set screws (127 in-Ibs.)

Changing Distributilon for GX3 LumlLock with LED, Type III to Type V
Change Distribution

1a

Asymmetric

Top View

1 Indicated light bars must

be moved to new postion.

2 Remove nuts and threaded

rods as shown. Lift up bracket.

3 Lift light bars off of studs (3) and place

on studs for correct orientation (3a).

4 Align studs on top bracket with

all light bars and secure using
acom nuts and threaded rods.
Torque acom nuts to 17 in-Ibs.
NOTE: Be sure to move correct
light bars. Orient street side
per Step 7 above,
(if applicable).

3a

J
Symmetric
32002041 , revision A

page 3 of 4

Changing Distribution for GX3 LumiLock with LED, Type V to Type III
,flange Distribution
1 Indicated light bars must be moved to new postion.

2 Remove nuts and threaded rods as shown. Lift up bracket.

3 Lift light bars off of studs (3) and place on studs for correct orientation (3a).

4 Align studs on top bracket with all light bars and secure us ing acorn nuts and threaded rods.
Torque acorn nuts to 17 in-Ibs.
NOTE: Be sure to move correct
light bars. Orient street side
per Step 7 above,
(if applicable).

1a

Symmetric
3

Top View
3a

Asymmetric

pag e 4 of 4

ILayton LED Wattages For SL-02, SL-03, And SL-04

Delivered

IES File Name

rnA

Rl32 3V 4K l 80 3 CN-l l

350

RL32 3V 4K L80 3 SN-ll

350

Wattage
I

lumens

lPW

BUG Rating

85

6838

80.44706

4000K

Bl- U5-G5

85.8

5753

67.05128

4000K

B2-U3-G5

RL32 3V 4K L40 3 CN-ll

350

43.6

3656

83.85321

RL32 3V 4K L40 3 SN -l l

350

43.7

2979

68.16934

RL52 5V 4K L80 3 ON-ll

350

84.7

6716

IRL52 5V 4K L80 3 SN-ll

350

85.1

RL52 5V 4K L40 3 CN-ll

350

43 .6

IRL52 5V 4K L40 3 SN-ll

350

43 .6

RL34 3V 4K L80 3 CN-ll

350

85.5

6883

'I

RL34 3V 4K L80 3 SN -l l

350

85.7

RL34 3V 4K L40 3 CN-ll

350

RL34 3V 4K L40 3 SN-ll

350

Color
; Temperature

4000K

Bl- U4-G3

4000K

Bl-U3-G3

79.29162

4000K

B3-U5-G4

5733

67.3678

4000K

B3-U3-G4

3642

I 83.53211

4000K

B2-U4-G3

2958

67.84404

4000K

B2-U3-G3

80.50292

4000K

4707

I 54.92415

4000K

B2-U3-G3

43.7

3648

I 83.47826

4000K

I Bl-U5-G2

43.7

2440

55.83524

4000K

Bl-U3-Gl

84.8

6771

79.8467

4000K

B3-U5-G2

RL54 5V 4K L803 SN-l1.

I
350 I
350

85 .1

4561

53 .59577

4000K

B3-U3-G2

RL54 5V 4K L40 3 CN-ll

350

43.8

3703

84.54338

4000K

B2-U5-Gl

RLS4 5V 4K L40 3 SN-ll.

350

2395

54.80549

4000K

B2-U3-Gl

CL32 3V 4K L80 3 SN-ll

350

85.8

5753

B2-U3-G5

350

43.7

2979

67.05128 I
' 68.16934

4000K

CL32 3V 4K L40 3 SN-ll

4000K

Bl-U3-G3

CL52 5V 4K L80 3 SN-ll

350

85.1

5733

67 .3678

4000K

CL52 5V 4K L40 3 SN-ll

350

43.6

2958

67.84404

4000K

I
RL54 5V 4K L80 3 CN-ll

I
I

43..7

B2-U5-G3

I
B3-U3-G4

B2-U3-G3

ILayton LED Wattage For SL-01

Delivered

IES File Name

mA

Wattage

TXF932-2HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

35.2

3578

TXF932-3H NA3KL -R-12 .IES

350mA

35.7

3597

TXF932-4HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

36

3603

TXF932-5H NA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

35.2

TXF932-2HNA5KL-LM79-R-12.IES

530mA

TXF932-3HNA5KL-R-12.IES

530mA

TXF932-4HNA5KL-R-12.IES
TXF932-5HNA5KL-R-12.IES

LPW

Color Temp.

BUG Rating

LED Count

101.65

4000K

Bl-U2-Gl

32

100.76

4000K

Bl-U2-Gl

32

100.08

4000K

Bl-U2-Gl

32

3572

101.48

4000K

B2-U2-Gl

32

51.8

4970

95.95

4000K

B2-U2-G2

32

52

5019

96.52

4000K

Bl-U2-Gl

32

530mA

52.9

4998

94.48

4000K

Bl-U2-Gl

32

530mA

51.7

4961

95.96

4000K

B3-U2-Gl

32

TXF948-2H NA3KL-R-12.1 ES

350mA

51.7

5223

101.03

4000K

Bl-Ul-Gl

48

TXF948-3HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

51.7

5413

104.70

4000K

B2-U2-G2

48

TXF948-4HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

52.2

5446

104.33

4000K

Bl-U2-G2

48

TXF948-5HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

53.6

5462

101.90

4000K

B3-U2-Gl

48

TXF948-2HNA5KL-R-12.IES

530mA

75.9

7254

95.57

4000K

B2-Ul-G2

48

TXF948-3HNA5KL-R-12.IES

530mA

75.9

7517

99 .04

4000K

B2-U3-G2

48

TXF948-4H NA5KL-R-12.IES

530mA

76.8

7557

98.40

4000K

B2-U2-G2

48

TXF948-5HNA5KL-R-12.IES

530mA

78.7

7586

96.39

4000K

B3-U2-G2

48

6842

98.73

4000K

B2 -Ul-G2

64

Lumens

Optic

4
5

TXF964-2HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

69.3

TXF964-3HNA3KL-R-12 .IES

350mA

69.1

6970

100.87

4000K

B2-U2-G2

64

TXF964-4H NA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

69.4

7023

101.20

4000K

B2-U2-G2

64

TXF964-5H NA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

69.3

6974

100.63

4000K

B3-U2-G2

64

TXF964-2HNA5KL-R-12.IES

530mA

101.8

9503

93.35

4000K

B2-Ul-G2

64

3
I

TXF964-3HNA5KL-LM79-R-12.IES

530mA

101.5

9680

95.37

4000K

B2-U2-G2

64

TXF964-4HNA5KL-R-12.I ES

530mA

101.8

9753

95.81

4000K

B2-U3-G2

64

TXF964-5HNA5KL-R-12 .IES

530mA

101.8

9686

95.15

4000K

B4-U3-G2

64

TXF980-2H NA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

85.7

8657

101.02

4000K

B2-U2-G2

80

TXF980-3H NA3KL-R-12.1 ES

350mA

85.7

8690

101.40

4000K

B2-U3-G2

80

TXF980-4HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

85 .7

8734

101.91

4000K

B2-U3-G2

80

TXF980-5HNA3KL-R-12.IES

350mA

85.8

8727

101.71

4000K

B3-U3-G2

80

TXF980-2HNA5KL-R-12 .IES

530mA

125.8

12024

95.58

4000K

B3-U2-G3

80

TXF980-3H~A5KL-R-12 . IES

S30mA

125.9

12069

95. 86

4000K

B3-U3-G3

80

TXF980-4H NA5KL-R-12.IES

530mA

125.9

12130

96.35

4000K

B2-U3-G2

80

TXF980-5H NA5KL-R-12.1 ES

530mA

125.9
- -

12121

96.27

4000K

B4-U3-G2

80

----