Dark Sky By-law: Public Consultation

Share Dark Sky By-law: Public Consultation on Facebook Share Dark Sky By-law: Public Consultation on Twitter Share Dark Sky By-law: Public Consultation on Linkedin Email Dark Sky By-law: Public Consultation link

April 20, 2026 - May 12, 2026 Public Consultation

The community is encouraged to review the draft dark sky by-law and share questions through this website or via email to Sean Carroll.


April 20, 2026 - Draft By-law Presented to Council.

Staff presented a draft dark sky by-law to Council. Watch the meeting on YouTube (28:15 min mark).


Background

The Township of Seguin is committed to "prioritizing the environment while providing an exceptional quality of life for all who live here."

Dark sky regulations can help to achieve this strategic objective by:

  • Improving residents’ enjoyment of the night sky and rural character
  • Reducing glare and visual nuisance
  • Improving safety for people using roads and waterways
  • Protecting ecosystems and nocturnal animal behaviours. Read more


April 20, 2026 - May 12, 2026 Public Consultation

The community is encouraged to review the draft dark sky by-law and share questions through this website or via email to Sean Carroll.


April 20, 2026 - Draft By-law Presented to Council.

Staff presented a draft dark sky by-law to Council. Watch the meeting on YouTube (28:15 min mark).


Background

The Township of Seguin is committed to "prioritizing the environment while providing an exceptional quality of life for all who live here."

Dark sky regulations can help to achieve this strategic objective by:

  • Improving residents’ enjoyment of the night sky and rural character
  • Reducing glare and visual nuisance
  • Improving safety for people using roads and waterways
  • Protecting ecosystems and nocturnal animal behaviours. Read more


CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

We encourage you to share your feedback or questions about the draft dark sky by-law.

  • Share Lights are on all night on lake joseph road at newly constructed used car dealership on lake joseph road. No tree planting has occurred either which is required. Plant the native trees snd turn off the lights. on Facebook Share Lights are on all night on lake joseph road at newly constructed used car dealership on lake joseph road. No tree planting has occurred either which is required. Plant the native trees snd turn off the lights. on Twitter Share Lights are on all night on lake joseph road at newly constructed used car dealership on lake joseph road. No tree planting has occurred either which is required. Plant the native trees snd turn off the lights. on Linkedin Email Lights are on all night on lake joseph road at newly constructed used car dealership on lake joseph road. No tree planting has occurred either which is required. Plant the native trees snd turn off the lights. link

    Lights are on all night on lake joseph road at newly constructed used car dealership on lake joseph road. No tree planting has occurred either which is required. Plant the native trees snd turn off the lights.

    Carole burden asked 14 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law.  

  • Share I applaud Seguin council’s efforts in moving forward with the proposed Dark Sky By-law. Our house is right on the shores of Rosseau Bay. I have two main comments: 1. LED lighting is a tremendous technological advancement, as it is much more efficient and durable, reducing energy consumption by a factor of 7 to 10 times. Unfortunately, when people replace older lighting with LEDs, they don’t sufficiently factor in the increased efficiency, and the result is often very much brighter. We can see this everywhere – from streets to parking lots to homes – and it has caused a noticeable increase in light pollution. In section 3.12.2 (f) of the by-law, the LED equivalent of a 60W incandescent should be 7-9W, not 10W. This is an example of how LEDs are often replacing older lights inadvertently with more brightness (lumens). 2. We are neighbours of the new Rosseau Bay Marine, which is an example of architects designing a building’s lighting based on pre-LED rules of thumb. Their new LED lights illuminate the periphery of the building like a used-car lot. We are sympathetic to the marina’s concerns about crime (as they have been targeted in the past), but the result is that the night sky has been completely washed out. Nighttime in city is darker! My suggestion would be to have the marina’s lights off, but connected to motion detectors and cameras in order to provide the required security. I would just like to add that the marina’s management has generally been a good neighbour, and has been listening to our concerns. We look forward to council putting this new by-law into effect and allowing us to enjoy the natural beauty and darkness of the nights in Seguin. Thank you and best regards… Peter Trinz, B.A.Sc., M.Eng. on Facebook Share I applaud Seguin council’s efforts in moving forward with the proposed Dark Sky By-law. Our house is right on the shores of Rosseau Bay. I have two main comments: 1. LED lighting is a tremendous technological advancement, as it is much more efficient and durable, reducing energy consumption by a factor of 7 to 10 times. Unfortunately, when people replace older lighting with LEDs, they don’t sufficiently factor in the increased efficiency, and the result is often very much brighter. We can see this everywhere – from streets to parking lots to homes – and it has caused a noticeable increase in light pollution. In section 3.12.2 (f) of the by-law, the LED equivalent of a 60W incandescent should be 7-9W, not 10W. This is an example of how LEDs are often replacing older lights inadvertently with more brightness (lumens). 2. We are neighbours of the new Rosseau Bay Marine, which is an example of architects designing a building’s lighting based on pre-LED rules of thumb. Their new LED lights illuminate the periphery of the building like a used-car lot. We are sympathetic to the marina’s concerns about crime (as they have been targeted in the past), but the result is that the night sky has been completely washed out. Nighttime in city is darker! My suggestion would be to have the marina’s lights off, but connected to motion detectors and cameras in order to provide the required security. I would just like to add that the marina’s management has generally been a good neighbour, and has been listening to our concerns. We look forward to council putting this new by-law into effect and allowing us to enjoy the natural beauty and darkness of the nights in Seguin. Thank you and best regards… Peter Trinz, B.A.Sc., M.Eng. on Twitter Share I applaud Seguin council’s efforts in moving forward with the proposed Dark Sky By-law. Our house is right on the shores of Rosseau Bay. I have two main comments: 1. LED lighting is a tremendous technological advancement, as it is much more efficient and durable, reducing energy consumption by a factor of 7 to 10 times. Unfortunately, when people replace older lighting with LEDs, they don’t sufficiently factor in the increased efficiency, and the result is often very much brighter. We can see this everywhere – from streets to parking lots to homes – and it has caused a noticeable increase in light pollution. In section 3.12.2 (f) of the by-law, the LED equivalent of a 60W incandescent should be 7-9W, not 10W. This is an example of how LEDs are often replacing older lights inadvertently with more brightness (lumens). 2. We are neighbours of the new Rosseau Bay Marine, which is an example of architects designing a building’s lighting based on pre-LED rules of thumb. Their new LED lights illuminate the periphery of the building like a used-car lot. We are sympathetic to the marina’s concerns about crime (as they have been targeted in the past), but the result is that the night sky has been completely washed out. Nighttime in city is darker! My suggestion would be to have the marina’s lights off, but connected to motion detectors and cameras in order to provide the required security. I would just like to add that the marina’s management has generally been a good neighbour, and has been listening to our concerns. We look forward to council putting this new by-law into effect and allowing us to enjoy the natural beauty and darkness of the nights in Seguin. Thank you and best regards… Peter Trinz, B.A.Sc., M.Eng. on Linkedin Email I applaud Seguin council’s efforts in moving forward with the proposed Dark Sky By-law. Our house is right on the shores of Rosseau Bay. I have two main comments: 1. LED lighting is a tremendous technological advancement, as it is much more efficient and durable, reducing energy consumption by a factor of 7 to 10 times. Unfortunately, when people replace older lighting with LEDs, they don’t sufficiently factor in the increased efficiency, and the result is often very much brighter. We can see this everywhere – from streets to parking lots to homes – and it has caused a noticeable increase in light pollution. In section 3.12.2 (f) of the by-law, the LED equivalent of a 60W incandescent should be 7-9W, not 10W. This is an example of how LEDs are often replacing older lights inadvertently with more brightness (lumens). 2. We are neighbours of the new Rosseau Bay Marine, which is an example of architects designing a building’s lighting based on pre-LED rules of thumb. Their new LED lights illuminate the periphery of the building like a used-car lot. We are sympathetic to the marina’s concerns about crime (as they have been targeted in the past), but the result is that the night sky has been completely washed out. Nighttime in city is darker! My suggestion would be to have the marina’s lights off, but connected to motion detectors and cameras in order to provide the required security. I would just like to add that the marina’s management has generally been a good neighbour, and has been listening to our concerns. We look forward to council putting this new by-law into effect and allowing us to enjoy the natural beauty and darkness of the nights in Seguin. Thank you and best regards… Peter Trinz, B.A.Sc., M.Eng. link

    I applaud Seguin council’s efforts in moving forward with the proposed Dark Sky By-law. Our house is right on the shores of Rosseau Bay. I have two main comments: 1. LED lighting is a tremendous technological advancement, as it is much more efficient and durable, reducing energy consumption by a factor of 7 to 10 times. Unfortunately, when people replace older lighting with LEDs, they don’t sufficiently factor in the increased efficiency, and the result is often very much brighter. We can see this everywhere – from streets to parking lots to homes – and it has caused a noticeable increase in light pollution. In section 3.12.2 (f) of the by-law, the LED equivalent of a 60W incandescent should be 7-9W, not 10W. This is an example of how LEDs are often replacing older lights inadvertently with more brightness (lumens). 2. We are neighbours of the new Rosseau Bay Marine, which is an example of architects designing a building’s lighting based on pre-LED rules of thumb. Their new LED lights illuminate the periphery of the building like a used-car lot. We are sympathetic to the marina’s concerns about crime (as they have been targeted in the past), but the result is that the night sky has been completely washed out. Nighttime in city is darker! My suggestion would be to have the marina’s lights off, but connected to motion detectors and cameras in order to provide the required security. I would just like to add that the marina’s management has generally been a good neighbour, and has been listening to our concerns. We look forward to council putting this new by-law into effect and allowing us to enjoy the natural beauty and darkness of the nights in Seguin. Thank you and best regards… Peter Trinz, B.A.Sc., M.Eng.

    ptrinz asked 12 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law.  

  • Share Oh, absolutely, who wouldn’t want to spend their nights gazing at an incredible sky? But really, the township should probably ignore such trivialities and focus on the far more crucial issues, like actually caring about the environment while genuinely improving everyone’s quality of life—because that’s clearly what you’re all about. I mean, noise disturbances from boats, shoreline destruction, wake boats wrecking lakes’ ecosystems, the shortage of affordable housing, closing dump sites, unpaved roads leading to those dumps, seasonal rentals causing chaos—those are just little problems, right? They’ve been lingering forever and are not getting better, but getting worse. Clearly, the real priority isn’t addressing these ongoing concerns that have a real impact on daily life. Township would be more affective and appreciated if it kept its eyes on the ground for now. The sky can wait. on Facebook Share Oh, absolutely, who wouldn’t want to spend their nights gazing at an incredible sky? But really, the township should probably ignore such trivialities and focus on the far more crucial issues, like actually caring about the environment while genuinely improving everyone’s quality of life—because that’s clearly what you’re all about. I mean, noise disturbances from boats, shoreline destruction, wake boats wrecking lakes’ ecosystems, the shortage of affordable housing, closing dump sites, unpaved roads leading to those dumps, seasonal rentals causing chaos—those are just little problems, right? They’ve been lingering forever and are not getting better, but getting worse. Clearly, the real priority isn’t addressing these ongoing concerns that have a real impact on daily life. Township would be more affective and appreciated if it kept its eyes on the ground for now. The sky can wait. on Twitter Share Oh, absolutely, who wouldn’t want to spend their nights gazing at an incredible sky? But really, the township should probably ignore such trivialities and focus on the far more crucial issues, like actually caring about the environment while genuinely improving everyone’s quality of life—because that’s clearly what you’re all about. I mean, noise disturbances from boats, shoreline destruction, wake boats wrecking lakes’ ecosystems, the shortage of affordable housing, closing dump sites, unpaved roads leading to those dumps, seasonal rentals causing chaos—those are just little problems, right? They’ve been lingering forever and are not getting better, but getting worse. Clearly, the real priority isn’t addressing these ongoing concerns that have a real impact on daily life. Township would be more affective and appreciated if it kept its eyes on the ground for now. The sky can wait. on Linkedin Email Oh, absolutely, who wouldn’t want to spend their nights gazing at an incredible sky? But really, the township should probably ignore such trivialities and focus on the far more crucial issues, like actually caring about the environment while genuinely improving everyone’s quality of life—because that’s clearly what you’re all about. I mean, noise disturbances from boats, shoreline destruction, wake boats wrecking lakes’ ecosystems, the shortage of affordable housing, closing dump sites, unpaved roads leading to those dumps, seasonal rentals causing chaos—those are just little problems, right? They’ve been lingering forever and are not getting better, but getting worse. Clearly, the real priority isn’t addressing these ongoing concerns that have a real impact on daily life. Township would be more affective and appreciated if it kept its eyes on the ground for now. The sky can wait. link

    Oh, absolutely, who wouldn’t want to spend their nights gazing at an incredible sky? But really, the township should probably ignore such trivialities and focus on the far more crucial issues, like actually caring about the environment while genuinely improving everyone’s quality of life—because that’s clearly what you’re all about. I mean, noise disturbances from boats, shoreline destruction, wake boats wrecking lakes’ ecosystems, the shortage of affordable housing, closing dump sites, unpaved roads leading to those dumps, seasonal rentals causing chaos—those are just little problems, right? They’ve been lingering forever and are not getting better, but getting worse. Clearly, the real priority isn’t addressing these ongoing concerns that have a real impact on daily life. Township would be more affective and appreciated if it kept its eyes on the ground for now. The sky can wait.

    nancyreicher asked 9 days ago

    Thank you for sharing your opinion

  • Share Thank you for this bylaw. I live beyond Orrville where we are fortunate to have a dark sky. However even from our here we can see the impact of the village lighting. I wonder if the parking area lighting at the community centre needs to be on all night - can it not be turned off when there are no activities at the centre, and turned off every evening at say 10 pm. As well the new billboard is very bright and again could be turned off overnight. It must impact those who live in the village. Thanks for this bylaw on Facebook Share Thank you for this bylaw. I live beyond Orrville where we are fortunate to have a dark sky. However even from our here we can see the impact of the village lighting. I wonder if the parking area lighting at the community centre needs to be on all night - can it not be turned off when there are no activities at the centre, and turned off every evening at say 10 pm. As well the new billboard is very bright and again could be turned off overnight. It must impact those who live in the village. Thanks for this bylaw on Twitter Share Thank you for this bylaw. I live beyond Orrville where we are fortunate to have a dark sky. However even from our here we can see the impact of the village lighting. I wonder if the parking area lighting at the community centre needs to be on all night - can it not be turned off when there are no activities at the centre, and turned off every evening at say 10 pm. As well the new billboard is very bright and again could be turned off overnight. It must impact those who live in the village. Thanks for this bylaw on Linkedin Email Thank you for this bylaw. I live beyond Orrville where we are fortunate to have a dark sky. However even from our here we can see the impact of the village lighting. I wonder if the parking area lighting at the community centre needs to be on all night - can it not be turned off when there are no activities at the centre, and turned off every evening at say 10 pm. As well the new billboard is very bright and again could be turned off overnight. It must impact those who live in the village. Thanks for this bylaw link

    Thank you for this bylaw. I live beyond Orrville where we are fortunate to have a dark sky. However even from our here we can see the impact of the village lighting. I wonder if the parking area lighting at the community centre needs to be on all night - can it not be turned off when there are no activities at the centre, and turned off every evening at say 10 pm. As well the new billboard is very bright and again could be turned off overnight. It must impact those who live in the village. Thanks for this bylaw

    Pam W asked 8 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law. Your comments will be considered when staff draft the next version of the by-law for Council review. Thank you for your feedback on the Township digital signs. These are relatively new tools, and we can certainly connect with our vendor about brightness levels and reconsider the hours they run. Lighting best practices for municipal buildings and assets would be included in the by-law should Council move forward with it.  

  • Share Excellent idea. I hope it passes! on Facebook Share Excellent idea. I hope it passes! on Twitter Share Excellent idea. I hope it passes! on Linkedin Email Excellent idea. I hope it passes! link

    Excellent idea. I hope it passes!

    Sean Warren asked 22 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law. Our goal is to find a solution that protects the environment and enhances quality of life in our community. 

  • Share Yes! Yes! Yes! Multiple businesses in Rosseau village leave their Xmas lights up and ON - ALL night long. The village is lit up like an Xmas tree. I moved into my house a year and a half ago - in the village - and never would have bought it had I known I was going to need black out curtains at night just to have a dark room - never mind seeing a night sky. I miss living in Muskoka lakes township where dark nights and bright skies was a thing. I would love if we could make the village feel less like a city. on Facebook Share Yes! Yes! Yes! Multiple businesses in Rosseau village leave their Xmas lights up and ON - ALL night long. The village is lit up like an Xmas tree. I moved into my house a year and a half ago - in the village - and never would have bought it had I known I was going to need black out curtains at night just to have a dark room - never mind seeing a night sky. I miss living in Muskoka lakes township where dark nights and bright skies was a thing. I would love if we could make the village feel less like a city. on Twitter Share Yes! Yes! Yes! Multiple businesses in Rosseau village leave their Xmas lights up and ON - ALL night long. The village is lit up like an Xmas tree. I moved into my house a year and a half ago - in the village - and never would have bought it had I known I was going to need black out curtains at night just to have a dark room - never mind seeing a night sky. I miss living in Muskoka lakes township where dark nights and bright skies was a thing. I would love if we could make the village feel less like a city. on Linkedin Email Yes! Yes! Yes! Multiple businesses in Rosseau village leave their Xmas lights up and ON - ALL night long. The village is lit up like an Xmas tree. I moved into my house a year and a half ago - in the village - and never would have bought it had I known I was going to need black out curtains at night just to have a dark room - never mind seeing a night sky. I miss living in Muskoka lakes township where dark nights and bright skies was a thing. I would love if we could make the village feel less like a city. link

    Yes! Yes! Yes! Multiple businesses in Rosseau village leave their Xmas lights up and ON - ALL night long. The village is lit up like an Xmas tree. I moved into my house a year and a half ago - in the village - and never would have bought it had I known I was going to need black out curtains at night just to have a dark room - never mind seeing a night sky. I miss living in Muskoka lakes township where dark nights and bright skies was a thing. I would love if we could make the village feel less like a city.

    Leigh asked 21 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law. Our goal is to find a solution that protects the environment and enhances quality of life in our community. 

  • Share 100% approve of a dark sky by-law. Does it apply to fireworks, which we know are harmful to the environment? on Facebook Share 100% approve of a dark sky by-law. Does it apply to fireworks, which we know are harmful to the environment? on Twitter Share 100% approve of a dark sky by-law. Does it apply to fireworks, which we know are harmful to the environment? on Linkedin Email 100% approve of a dark sky by-law. Does it apply to fireworks, which we know are harmful to the environment? link

    100% approve of a dark sky by-law. Does it apply to fireworks, which we know are harmful to the environment?

    Dr LD asked 21 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law. The Township has a fireworks by-law. You can review it online and direct any questions about its enforcement and rationale to bylaw@seguin.ca .

  • Share Great idea. I support this initiative on Facebook Share Great idea. I support this initiative on Twitter Share Great idea. I support this initiative on Linkedin Email Great idea. I support this initiative link

    Great idea. I support this initiative

    Ralph asked 21 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law. Your comments will be considered when staff draft the next version of the by-law for Council review.


  • Share Good morning, I am concerned that the wording of the draft by-law unfairly prohibits previously existing architectural lighting that complies with the spirit of the law (ie. architectural gable lighting that shines upward into a decorative gable, that is shielded from above by the roof). These lights, which many residents have, do not cause light pollution as they do not shine "up into the sky", however they do shine vertically into the gable peak, where the light is prevented from travelling any further upward. I personally have these lights and installed them with the dual intent of having them to provide lighting onto my driveway and front walkway, while also providing tasteful and decorative gable lighting. I intentionally chose lights with a "warmer" appearance that is less visually disturbing, have these lights on timers, and ensured they were shrouded from above by the peak of the gable; however, the light does extend vertically above 90 degrees from the base of the fixture. My suggestion would be to amend the wording to allow architectural lighting that is shielded from above and does not shine any light vertically past the roofline of a structure. On a similar note, the Seguin Township sign located at the corner of Highway 141 and Humphrey Drive is extremely bright and visually distracting/blinding at night to drivers on Highway 141. I hope the Township understands their bylaw will also apply to them and this sign will have to be amended to rectify the glaring light caused by this sign at night. on Facebook Share Good morning, I am concerned that the wording of the draft by-law unfairly prohibits previously existing architectural lighting that complies with the spirit of the law (ie. architectural gable lighting that shines upward into a decorative gable, that is shielded from above by the roof). These lights, which many residents have, do not cause light pollution as they do not shine "up into the sky", however they do shine vertically into the gable peak, where the light is prevented from travelling any further upward. I personally have these lights and installed them with the dual intent of having them to provide lighting onto my driveway and front walkway, while also providing tasteful and decorative gable lighting. I intentionally chose lights with a "warmer" appearance that is less visually disturbing, have these lights on timers, and ensured they were shrouded from above by the peak of the gable; however, the light does extend vertically above 90 degrees from the base of the fixture. My suggestion would be to amend the wording to allow architectural lighting that is shielded from above and does not shine any light vertically past the roofline of a structure. On a similar note, the Seguin Township sign located at the corner of Highway 141 and Humphrey Drive is extremely bright and visually distracting/blinding at night to drivers on Highway 141. I hope the Township understands their bylaw will also apply to them and this sign will have to be amended to rectify the glaring light caused by this sign at night. on Twitter Share Good morning, I am concerned that the wording of the draft by-law unfairly prohibits previously existing architectural lighting that complies with the spirit of the law (ie. architectural gable lighting that shines upward into a decorative gable, that is shielded from above by the roof). These lights, which many residents have, do not cause light pollution as they do not shine "up into the sky", however they do shine vertically into the gable peak, where the light is prevented from travelling any further upward. I personally have these lights and installed them with the dual intent of having them to provide lighting onto my driveway and front walkway, while also providing tasteful and decorative gable lighting. I intentionally chose lights with a "warmer" appearance that is less visually disturbing, have these lights on timers, and ensured they were shrouded from above by the peak of the gable; however, the light does extend vertically above 90 degrees from the base of the fixture. My suggestion would be to amend the wording to allow architectural lighting that is shielded from above and does not shine any light vertically past the roofline of a structure. On a similar note, the Seguin Township sign located at the corner of Highway 141 and Humphrey Drive is extremely bright and visually distracting/blinding at night to drivers on Highway 141. I hope the Township understands their bylaw will also apply to them and this sign will have to be amended to rectify the glaring light caused by this sign at night. on Linkedin Email Good morning, I am concerned that the wording of the draft by-law unfairly prohibits previously existing architectural lighting that complies with the spirit of the law (ie. architectural gable lighting that shines upward into a decorative gable, that is shielded from above by the roof). These lights, which many residents have, do not cause light pollution as they do not shine "up into the sky", however they do shine vertically into the gable peak, where the light is prevented from travelling any further upward. I personally have these lights and installed them with the dual intent of having them to provide lighting onto my driveway and front walkway, while also providing tasteful and decorative gable lighting. I intentionally chose lights with a "warmer" appearance that is less visually disturbing, have these lights on timers, and ensured they were shrouded from above by the peak of the gable; however, the light does extend vertically above 90 degrees from the base of the fixture. My suggestion would be to amend the wording to allow architectural lighting that is shielded from above and does not shine any light vertically past the roofline of a structure. On a similar note, the Seguin Township sign located at the corner of Highway 141 and Humphrey Drive is extremely bright and visually distracting/blinding at night to drivers on Highway 141. I hope the Township understands their bylaw will also apply to them and this sign will have to be amended to rectify the glaring light caused by this sign at night. link

    Good morning, I am concerned that the wording of the draft by-law unfairly prohibits previously existing architectural lighting that complies with the spirit of the law (ie. architectural gable lighting that shines upward into a decorative gable, that is shielded from above by the roof). These lights, which many residents have, do not cause light pollution as they do not shine "up into the sky", however they do shine vertically into the gable peak, where the light is prevented from travelling any further upward. I personally have these lights and installed them with the dual intent of having them to provide lighting onto my driveway and front walkway, while also providing tasteful and decorative gable lighting. I intentionally chose lights with a "warmer" appearance that is less visually disturbing, have these lights on timers, and ensured they were shrouded from above by the peak of the gable; however, the light does extend vertically above 90 degrees from the base of the fixture. My suggestion would be to amend the wording to allow architectural lighting that is shielded from above and does not shine any light vertically past the roofline of a structure. On a similar note, the Seguin Township sign located at the corner of Highway 141 and Humphrey Drive is extremely bright and visually distracting/blinding at night to drivers on Highway 141. I hope the Township understands their bylaw will also apply to them and this sign will have to be amended to rectify the glaring light caused by this sign at night.

    Mike Allen asked 21 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law. Your comments will be considered when staff draft the next version of the by-law for Council review. Thank you for your feedback on the Municipal Office digital sign. This is a relatively new tool, and we can certainly connect with our vendor about brightness levels and reconsider the hours it is running. Lighting best practices for municipal buildings and assets would be included in the by-law should Council move forward with it.  

  • Share Overall, I am not in favour of this bylaw and would ask council to reject it in its current form. I believe people move to Seguin in part so that they can have the freedom to enjoy their property. While I can understand how in some cases that enjoyment might be impinged by a neighbour's excessive lighting, I think a much greater violation would occur when a bylaw officer enters your property unannounced to inspect and penalise your lighting choices. In other words, the potential benefit is not worth the cost of turning seguin into a place of excessive government intrusion. There are valid points to be made about the issues with light pollution. These should be furthered through public education, not bylaw enforcement. Educate the people, and then respect their decision. If Council proceeds with this bylaw, it should be revised to alleviate certain safety concerns raised by the current form. Full cut-off lights illuminate a much more limited span. This may be acceptable on smaller properties in more densely settled areas, but is unnecessary and in fact creates safety and security concerns on larger rural properties where flood lighting is required to illuminate the span between out-buildings, or illuminate the way forward down long and winding laneways. Aside from safety, the inability of rural property owners to illuminate vast areas around outbuildings creates security concerns: it would be easier for criminals to find dark areas to conceal their breaching of an outbuilding during the night. These concerns could potentially be mitigated by including in the current bylaw an exemption based on property size and/or distance to neighbours. For example, properties over 1 acre could be exempt. Or you could confine the bylaw to the acknowledged "Settled" areas of seguin, e.g. humphrey village, rosseau village, etc. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, on Facebook Share Overall, I am not in favour of this bylaw and would ask council to reject it in its current form. I believe people move to Seguin in part so that they can have the freedom to enjoy their property. While I can understand how in some cases that enjoyment might be impinged by a neighbour's excessive lighting, I think a much greater violation would occur when a bylaw officer enters your property unannounced to inspect and penalise your lighting choices. In other words, the potential benefit is not worth the cost of turning seguin into a place of excessive government intrusion. There are valid points to be made about the issues with light pollution. These should be furthered through public education, not bylaw enforcement. Educate the people, and then respect their decision. If Council proceeds with this bylaw, it should be revised to alleviate certain safety concerns raised by the current form. Full cut-off lights illuminate a much more limited span. This may be acceptable on smaller properties in more densely settled areas, but is unnecessary and in fact creates safety and security concerns on larger rural properties where flood lighting is required to illuminate the span between out-buildings, or illuminate the way forward down long and winding laneways. Aside from safety, the inability of rural property owners to illuminate vast areas around outbuildings creates security concerns: it would be easier for criminals to find dark areas to conceal their breaching of an outbuilding during the night. These concerns could potentially be mitigated by including in the current bylaw an exemption based on property size and/or distance to neighbours. For example, properties over 1 acre could be exempt. Or you could confine the bylaw to the acknowledged "Settled" areas of seguin, e.g. humphrey village, rosseau village, etc. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, on Twitter Share Overall, I am not in favour of this bylaw and would ask council to reject it in its current form. I believe people move to Seguin in part so that they can have the freedom to enjoy their property. While I can understand how in some cases that enjoyment might be impinged by a neighbour's excessive lighting, I think a much greater violation would occur when a bylaw officer enters your property unannounced to inspect and penalise your lighting choices. In other words, the potential benefit is not worth the cost of turning seguin into a place of excessive government intrusion. There are valid points to be made about the issues with light pollution. These should be furthered through public education, not bylaw enforcement. Educate the people, and then respect their decision. If Council proceeds with this bylaw, it should be revised to alleviate certain safety concerns raised by the current form. Full cut-off lights illuminate a much more limited span. This may be acceptable on smaller properties in more densely settled areas, but is unnecessary and in fact creates safety and security concerns on larger rural properties where flood lighting is required to illuminate the span between out-buildings, or illuminate the way forward down long and winding laneways. Aside from safety, the inability of rural property owners to illuminate vast areas around outbuildings creates security concerns: it would be easier for criminals to find dark areas to conceal their breaching of an outbuilding during the night. These concerns could potentially be mitigated by including in the current bylaw an exemption based on property size and/or distance to neighbours. For example, properties over 1 acre could be exempt. Or you could confine the bylaw to the acknowledged "Settled" areas of seguin, e.g. humphrey village, rosseau village, etc. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, on Linkedin Email Overall, I am not in favour of this bylaw and would ask council to reject it in its current form. I believe people move to Seguin in part so that they can have the freedom to enjoy their property. While I can understand how in some cases that enjoyment might be impinged by a neighbour's excessive lighting, I think a much greater violation would occur when a bylaw officer enters your property unannounced to inspect and penalise your lighting choices. In other words, the potential benefit is not worth the cost of turning seguin into a place of excessive government intrusion. There are valid points to be made about the issues with light pollution. These should be furthered through public education, not bylaw enforcement. Educate the people, and then respect their decision. If Council proceeds with this bylaw, it should be revised to alleviate certain safety concerns raised by the current form. Full cut-off lights illuminate a much more limited span. This may be acceptable on smaller properties in more densely settled areas, but is unnecessary and in fact creates safety and security concerns on larger rural properties where flood lighting is required to illuminate the span between out-buildings, or illuminate the way forward down long and winding laneways. Aside from safety, the inability of rural property owners to illuminate vast areas around outbuildings creates security concerns: it would be easier for criminals to find dark areas to conceal their breaching of an outbuilding during the night. These concerns could potentially be mitigated by including in the current bylaw an exemption based on property size and/or distance to neighbours. For example, properties over 1 acre could be exempt. Or you could confine the bylaw to the acknowledged "Settled" areas of seguin, e.g. humphrey village, rosseau village, etc. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, link

    Overall, I am not in favour of this bylaw and would ask council to reject it in its current form. I believe people move to Seguin in part so that they can have the freedom to enjoy their property. While I can understand how in some cases that enjoyment might be impinged by a neighbour's excessive lighting, I think a much greater violation would occur when a bylaw officer enters your property unannounced to inspect and penalise your lighting choices. In other words, the potential benefit is not worth the cost of turning seguin into a place of excessive government intrusion. There are valid points to be made about the issues with light pollution. These should be furthered through public education, not bylaw enforcement. Educate the people, and then respect their decision. If Council proceeds with this bylaw, it should be revised to alleviate certain safety concerns raised by the current form. Full cut-off lights illuminate a much more limited span. This may be acceptable on smaller properties in more densely settled areas, but is unnecessary and in fact creates safety and security concerns on larger rural properties where flood lighting is required to illuminate the span between out-buildings, or illuminate the way forward down long and winding laneways. Aside from safety, the inability of rural property owners to illuminate vast areas around outbuildings creates security concerns: it would be easier for criminals to find dark areas to conceal their breaching of an outbuilding during the night. These concerns could potentially be mitigated by including in the current bylaw an exemption based on property size and/or distance to neighbours. For example, properties over 1 acre could be exempt. Or you could confine the bylaw to the acknowledged "Settled" areas of seguin, e.g. humphrey village, rosseau village, etc. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns,

    Ryan Wettlaufer asked 21 days ago

    Thank you for your interest in and feedback on The Township of Seguin’s Draft Dark Sky By-law. Your comments will be considered when staff draft the next version of the by-law for Council review. We agree that education is a vital component of any quality-of-life by-law. Safety and security are also priorities for the Township. Please note that should a Dark Sky By-law be adopted by Council, this by-law, like most Township by-laws, would be enforced based on complaints; by-law staff do not and would not patrol private property. 

Page last updated: 19 May 2026, 10:58 AM