Outdoor lighting standards so restrictive that Alamosa couldn’t buy fixtures for its own parks may soon be eased. The Alamosa City Council held a work session Wednesday, April 8, to consider scaling back brightness rules adopted two years ago after the standards proved unworkable in practice. Development Services Director Rachel James presented recommendations to raise the outdoor lumen limit, remove brightness caps on enclosed business signs, and establish a new standard for parks and street lighting. The 3,000 Kelvin color temperature limit — which governs light warmth — would stay in place under the proposal. Staff is targeting May 6 for formal code amendments.
Why the Rules Are Being Revisited
The existing code caps continuously operating outdoor lighting at 500 lumens — the equivalent of a 30-watt bulb. James P. Billings of Alamosa flagged the limit as unworkable after the Alamosa Housing Authority installed security lights and found commercially available fixtures don’t come close to that threshold. Parks staff hit the same wall replacing lights at Cole Park. The lowest available fixture they could find ran just under 10,000 lumens.
The cap also landed on business signs, which James said was never the intent. The Spring Hill Suites hotel was the first case where staff enforced the 500-lumen limit on signage, exposing the problem. Staff moved it to council’s agenda as soon as they identified it.
Staff Recommendations
Staff asked council to consider three changes. The first raises the continuous outdoor lighting limit to 1,100 lumens — roughly a 75-watt bulb equivalent. The current cap is 500. Lights on motion sensors, dimmers, or timers may exceed the new threshold.
The second sets a 10,000-lumen standard for parks and street lighting. Dark Sky International updated its public lighting guidance after Alamosa adopted its original regulations. City staff noted that Xcel Energy’s streetlights on Edison and Ross already operate near that level.
The third removes lumen limits entirely on internally lit enclosed sign cabinets. James said those signs are self-shielded by design, making any brightness cap unnecessary. The 3,000 Kelvin color limit would remain for all other lighting.
Staff is not recommending changes to the existing ban on electronic message center signs mounted on building walls. That prohibition predates the dark sky regulations and sits in a separate section of the sign code, James said. Staff plans to bring the question to council as part of a sign code housekeeping session, likely sometime between June and August.
Public Comment
A physics professor from Adams State University told council the San Luis Valley’s dark skies are a genuine regional asset, drawing visitors who travel specifically to view the night sky. He runs public night sky viewing events at the university and said community interest is real. He warned that light pollution, once established, is nearly impossible to reverse — pointing to the visible glow from Pueblo and Colorado Springs on the eastern horizon as an example of how growth changes skies over time.
Levi Willner, owner of Alamosa sign company Extreme Graphics, said he supports dark skies but argued that applying decorative lighting standards to business identification signs is a category error. He brought light-box displays to council chambers showing the visual difference between 3,000 Kelvin warm-toned output and a cooler alternative and argued the lower limit makes white signs appear yellow and may conflict with federally protected trademark colors. He also challenged a dark sky tourism study that had been cited in earlier discussions, calling it poorly designed. Willner and staff agreed on the underlying principle: light should be directed where it is needed, and glare and spillage minimized.
Council Discussion
Council members broadly supported the staff direction but divided on Kelvin limits.
Councilor Michael Carson said he supported the rollback but would go further, suggesting the Kelvin cap be raised to 6,000 or 7,000. He argued that dark sky regulations inside city limits don’t meaningfully drive tourism — visitors travel outside town to stargaze regardless of what downtown looks like. He said Alamosa’s modest population growth over three census cycles reduces the urgency of sky-glow concerns and that the economic costs to businesses outweigh the benefits.
Councilor Dawn Krebs said she supported removing lumen limits on enclosed signs, noting the difference in light output between internal and external signage is substantial. She said the electronic message center question should be handled as its own agenda item rather than folded into the dark sky discussion.
Councilor Liz Hensley asked staff to clarify how the timer and dimmer exemptions work. Staff confirmed the proposal sets no mandatory shutoff hour — the higher-brightness exception applies as long as a qualifying control is installed.
Councilor Mark Martinez noted that Adams State University’s planetarium had to be relocated from its original campus site to a storage area behind the baseball fields because of light pollution around the college. He also observed that during peak summer tourist season, darkness doesn’t arrive until after 8:30 p.m. — after most businesses have closed — which limits how much sign lighting actually affects nighttime sky conditions.
Councilor Jackie Vigil expressed support for the staff recommendations, saying raising the limit to 1,100 lumens was a reasonable middle ground.
Next Steps
City Manager Heather Sanchez said staff is preparing two separate agenda items. The first — covering the lumen increase, parks lighting standard, and sign lighting corrections — is tentatively scheduled for the May 6 regular council meeting. The second, addressing whether to allow electronic message center signs on building walls and under what conditions, is expected to come before council between June and August as part of a broader sign code revision. Citizen comment will be open at both meetings.
Support Independent Local Journalism — High Country Advocate was created as a real alternative to regional media that too often silences dissenting voices while taking sides in the political struggle. Producing in-depth, unflinching reporting like this series and others is expensive: servers, editing, research time, and legal review all add up quickly. If these articles have informed you or given you new perspective, please consider supporting HCA with a paid subscription — every subscriber helps keep this reporting strong and independent. 