I have issues with a lot of the compliant lighting out there so I got a recommendation from the lighting forum to Walters Wholesale Electric's showroom. Once there, I decided to hire one of their lighting designers. The central fixture was my GC's and my idea, but the designer made it workable for me, and added in so I wouldn't have shadows.

I have a large fluorescent fixture in the center with fluorescent indirect around it, low wattage halogens around the edges and in the butler's pantry area, and multicolor LED's undercounter. There's also a little swag light in the doorway, and incancescents over the sink. The real trick, since my eyes are sensitive to fluorescents, is the narrow bars with gel sleeves over them to reduce the color temperature. It's still washy light, which is blurrier than incandescent, but it works.

I do think I turn on a lot more total watttage of lighting now (and I'm not even moved into the kitchen yet) than I did with incandescents. That's the flaw in the law. It should be about total wattage used at once, or per square foot, rather than percentage of wattage installed.

I have CFLs (screw-ins) all over my house and have few complaints about them. But I don't have any specific experience with the GU24s. Right now my kitchen, plus the hallway and scullery that are going to be combined into the new kitchen have three fixtures with a grand total of maybe 53 watts of CFLs. The new kitchen will have 150 W of incandescent and more than that of high efficiency lighting in order to comply. It's kinda crazy.

T24 for non-residential specifies lighting efficiency in terms of watts/sq ft. I definitely agree it makes more sense and is more difficult to "game."

If I were you, I probably go all GU24, since you don't want to go the overlighting route. I don't konw if that's "best."

Thanks! cawaps, do you find you get enough light in general from the three fixtures? My biggest concern is that we are moving from a huge fluorescent fixture that is awesome at light but pretty ugly to more traditional---and much smaller---schoolhouse fixtures, which just seem like they'll give less light overall...but maybe that's just in my head? (And I'm not so sure incandescent v. CFL makes much difference there.) GU24 fixtures should be basically identical to a regular light with a CFL in it (which is also what we have throughout the house except for the odd fixture that can't take them). We have had lousy luck with dimmable CFLs lasting very long or performing well, though---seems like the technology's not quite there yet---and do use the dimmer option a lot at night, so that's the idea behind doing at least some incandescent light with dimmers. I guess we might be able to get a comparable effect by having a smattering of pendants that could be turned on one or two at a time, though.

It's so hard to tell without actually seeing the lights installed---plllog, your idea to go to the lighting designer is a good one. I'll see if we have a similar place in NorCal somewhere....there must be one!

I had this conversation with my contractor on Saturday. One recommended putting in eight cans with four pin flourescents. This would give me the wattage headroom I need. The other recommended installing huge and tacky undercounter flourescents. He suggested that I could rewire them easily for whatever I needed later. My solution will probably be none of the above. I'm looking for some LED pendants. Unfortunately, I am afraid that the extra lights necessary will make my kitchen *too* bright. The whole thing will cost htousands of dollars. Welcome to the People's Republic of California.

Undercounter lights don't need to be huge and tacky :-) Ours are about an inch high and actually give pretty good quality light. We also have some above the cabs and find we actually use them (they're on a separate switch from the undercabs). They were enough to offset the recessed incandescent (halogens) in the kitchen (we don't have pendants).

We opened up a wall and now our kitchen/dining nook/family room is one big room. But the way our architect presented it to our town (Woodside, in Nor Cal near SF) was that each space was still a separate room. So the Title 24 just applied to the *kitchen*. (?)

I'm still amazed that they basically make you put in lights that you won't use...such an energy waste. We have everything (except the fluorescents) on dimmers and rarely have them turned up. We couldn't justify the cost of dimmable fluorescent cans and this works for us.

Good luck!

I have to say that my current, pre-remodel kitchen with it's circa 1920 lighting plan, should not be held up as a model for any modern lighting kitchen. It's based on the one-ceiling-fixture-per-room lighting model, which offends modern lighting designers delicate sensibilities. But I've never had anything else, and it's fine. The main room in the space that will eventually be a united kitchen is 12x13, and has one semi-flushmount ceiling fixture. With a 60 W (or equivalent) lamp, it is definitely too dim, but we did okay with 75 or 100 W (we have a CFL in there now, but I don't remember the wattage). The scullery has a single wall-mount fixture that we've got a 15 W CFL in. Also fine, but the space is only 6'x6'. Lighting is the least of my frustrations with my current kitchen.

@jmm76, I think I put this in a reply on your other thread too, but definitely shop around for another electrician. Our entire budget for our electrical work is $1500 and that includes both the fixtures and labor to install. (Doesn't include drywall/plaster patching but that's a line item for the whole kitchen that's not very big either.) A bid in the thousands is nuts!

@julie, yep, our breakfast room will be counted as kitchen once the wall comes down (but that seems fair); everything else stays on its own, so that's a bit easier. But yeah, the whole thing is a little nuts---I do like the nonresidential version (by square footage and area) a lot better. We have recessed fluorescent cans in the living room that I used to hate (very out of keeping with the house, though they were nicely done as those things go), but they're actually growing on me....still, really want to do the traditional fixtures in the kitchen!

We'll see! Adding under or overcabinet lights does help a lot just because you pick up wattage and can then opt not to turn them on, but we're just not really sold on the aesthetic or need. Maybe the best plan is just to go all high efficacy for now and then add or adjust afterwards if it turns out to be a problem.

We live in the SF Bay Area and while it was challenging to meet Title 24, we were able to do it by lots of looking around the web for reasonably priced fixtures.

You have to dig for it but FL is available in track lighting as well as the previously types of fixtures. Many websites have a filter that lists Title 24 compatible lights. I also recommend checking out Lamps Plus. They had quite a few fixtures in a wide range of styles that met Title 24. There are also independent lighting stores in the Bay Area that are more than willing to help you meet Title 24. We worked with the Lighthouse in San Carlos for our new fixtures.

Thanks all! So I realized that I had missed something obvious: the range hood will have a light, and it doesn't count in the Title 24 calculations at all. So I think this would work:

- Two semi-flush GU24 150W equivalent schoolhouse fixtures for general lighting (=~84W HE)
- One pendant over the sink, GU24 100W equivalent (=~25W HE)
- One matching pendant over the table area, 100W non-GU24 so it can be on a dimmer (=100W LE)
- Plus the light in the range hood for use as a nightlight if needed. (The main thing we use the dimmer for now is to leave a soft light on for someone coming home late, etc., without blasting the full light; seems like between these two, that should work fine.)

So if my math is right, we're T24 compliant with this set of fixtures, right?

If in the end we need undercabinet lights or any lighting near the mudroom area (I think the general lighting will hit that space pretty well, but hard to say) we would just go with something T24-compliant and not worry about it....but this would likely be after inspection anyway since we'd want to use the kitchen a bit first and see how the initial lighting works.

Thanks!

I purchased my lighting from Rejuvenation and they'll do gu24 substitutions for most fixtures at no additional charge (Schoolhouse electric will do it too, for a very small charge). Not wanting to think much, I just bought the bulbs they sold and the color is fine. (Whew.)

I don't have any incandescent lighting in my kitchen, except the fridge bulb.

The table area might not have to be incorporated into the T24 calculations if it's on a separate switch and kinda sorta in a different area.

Thanks---we're planning on Schoolhouse Electric's Westmont right now for the ceiling fixtures, and either there or Rejuvenation for the pendants, so that's good to hear. I figured buying their bulbs too might be smart, since I imagine they are pretty careful about what they sell color-wise.

I live in Sonoma County and I'm just getting my kitchen plans together. What are the Title 24 requirements for a residential kitchen? I was planning on keeping most of the lighting that I already have. I was going to add just a couple of lights to the dining area otherwise everything was going to be the same. I won't be changing the footprint of the house. All of the work will be on the interior. Do I need to get permits and will I have to change my lighting?

Hi carecooks---if you do the remodel with permits, you will probably need to change the lighting. (The rules are that once you start working on a space, you have to bring everything there up to code, which can be a little frustrating!)

UC Davis has the best guide for Title 24, I think---linked below. It explains the law clearly and then describes different kitchen plans that will meet it. They should have an update soon for the new guidelines that kicked in last month, but they haven't changed dramatically for residential.

Basically, you need to have half of your total watts coming from "high-efficacy" (dedicated CFL, fluorescent, or LED) lights. So if you have one 150W incandescent fixture, you need to have enough energy-efficient fixtures to add up to 150 (which might mean you need three pendants or four recessed cans, etc.).

I think the easiest way to do it is to figure out what lighting if any that you need that isn't high-efficacy, and then work out a plan to put in the right amount of high-efficacy light to counter it. The major complaint the law gets is that a lot of people end up putting in lots of extra undercabinet lights, pendants, etc. just to get up to the right number of watts. There are some little rules---like if you use a dimmer on any incandescent fixtures, you get some free watts---and they only count lighting that's within your kitchen, so if your dining room is a separate space, it's not included.

It may also depend on what lights you have now, too---for instance, our kitchen is likely T24 compliant as-is since the major light source is an overhead fluorescent fixture. So technically we could probably leave the lights alone for the inspection and just do them afterwards, but it seemed like too much hassle since we have to open the ceiling for other things.

Hope that helps!

Here is a link that might be useful: UC Davis Title 24 Guide

I think low wattage halogens also count. But that title 24 doesn't take into account is that people are putting in that much more "high-efficacy" lighting to offset their beloved incandescents. The law may force lower end developers to put more expensive high-efficacy lights in, but it's having a weird effect on remodellers, getting them to use more total wattage. Of course, owners are also changing them out for incandescents after inspection. Like they change out the shower heads and even the toilets. But the customizers are probably a small percentage compared with the folks who live with whatever they bought.

And old fluorescents don't count I believe--need electronic ballasts instead of the old school magnetic.

Thanks for the info. I just came home from being out all day and I'm coming down with a cold to boot so I'll have to go over the info when my head is clear. Also when we start bidding the project out, I'll talk to the contractors to find the best way to handle it.

Carecooks,

doublecheck the existing lighting requirements in your town. I know there are some variances on that but we were able to keep existing light in a part of our ceiling that wasn't being changed.

Earthpal,

Thanks. That would be great if I could do it. One more question for the contractor.

Yes, should have noted that our fluorescents only count b/c the PO put them in three years ago, so they're the new style. Old ones wouldn't make the grade.

@carecooks, most cities and counties publish their modifications to the building code online, so you can actually look it up if you want to---but contractors in this area who do any permitted work are intimately familiar with Title 24, so they're your best resource. Together with the inspectors, they'll be able to help you sort it out. (And honestly, I've found that the bigger varying factor is not changes to the code itself, but different approaches to how to interpret it, so for that you definitely have to work directly with your city/county to see.)