Turning out the lights

[Paul Drawmer]

I'm very sorry that I can't remember the name of the gentleman who proposed turning out the street lights when no one is about.

I'd support this. There were some reservations expressed at the meeting, but on analysis, most of them seemed to be not about turning lights of when not needed, but making sure there was adequate lighting when it is needed. Different subject.

Yes, let's press for turning off street lights in the middle of the night.

AND as someone stood up and said later, let's get OCC to turn off their depot lights during the day!

[B.Ritchie]

Can someone please explain to me the "health & safety" issues and the "turning out the lights" issues for the streetlamps in The Stile??  They are a real AMENITY to people who actually live in The Stile!!!!!   They were put there for a number of very good reasons:  pre-streetlights, The Stile was very noisy late at night with drunken pub-goers, loud "yoofs" congregating (because it was dark and "cosy") in it and etc.  It was also full of doggy-doo (colloquially known as "Dog**** Alley") as people felt unobserved using it for the "night run" with their doggies (as it was so dark and cosy.......).    These problems completely disappearred once the streetlights were installed in The Stile.  They also provide a sense of security to those living in The Stile returning to their homes after dark (you KNOW that noone is "lurking" because you can SEE that noone is lurking.... and because of this, "lurkers" do not do it here!!!

The toopic of the streetlights in The Stile is surely a matter for the residents of The Stile (yes--people DO live in it!!!!!) and not "nosey-parkers" who, in this respect, are "outsiders".

[B.Ritchie]

p.s.

Also...what are the "nuisance" issues about the streetlamps in The Stile?   There were certainly "nuisance issues" BEFORE these lamps were installed, but the presence of the lamps eradicated these.

Many thanks.

[B.Ritchie]

Hi Parish Council!

I have to thank whomever it was who decided that the lights in The Stile constitute "light pollution"!!  (Reading this in the Deddington News has turned my grey hair blonde/brown again and is better than "Revitalift"!  I haven't had such a good laugh in years!!!!  I feel 10 years younger!!!)

The lights in The Stile were put there by the Parish because not having them constituted a safety/security hazzard to the residents of The Stile (in addition to their providing a  fabulously effective "doggie-doo" deterent--this was an ever-present problem pre-light installation).  They are a much needed and highly valued safety/security measure for residents.   Giant fluorescent billboard-type lights such as those people in  NY City and Los Angeles have to contend with 24 hours per day do fit the definition of "light pollution" ; these two paltry little ones don't! (and there are, also in Deddington several "light eyesores of the Christmas Tree variety which noone has yet thought to complain about--these, possibly might fall into the same category??)

 However, lowering the height  of the lights in The Stile IS a good idea because it would light The Stile MORE effectively than do those there at present.  The Parish COULD, also, to good effect, install a third lamp in The Stile, all three equipped with  photosensitive "thingamabobs" in them so that they switch on when someone  enters The Stile---that would be an added security/safety amenity because it would call attention to potential "late night dog walkers" , pub-leavers, canoodlers, and so forth when lights automatically switch on calling attention to their presence AND it would provide safe walking up The Stile very late at night for those who live there.  You might consider this also as an option.

Many thanks,
Barbara Ritchie

[rob forsyth]

Barbara

As chair of the DOL website group - can I firstly say how pleased I am to see the Forum being used for local issues. Just what it is for.

As your neighbour - and having been partly involved in the issues - perhaps I can reply with some facts related to the several issues that are involved.

1. Stile lights or no lights? I think we are all agreed that we do need lights in the Stile and that the present ones suit the conservation area we are in and - Yes - do help with all the points you made. Incidentally, they also stop us stumbling over your bins in the dark! However I believe  you have it in hand to arrange for them to be kept in your garden (as we all do) and to be put out for you so that we no longer have to dodge round them. Thanks for that.

2. Should they be off at night? Your suggestion that they have a 'detector' switch is a practical one. I wonder though if their coming on and off might be quite distracting in itself? You, of course, dont have any windows looking onto the Stile so this might not have occurred to you.

It has also been suggested (By Charles Barker) that all street lights are off for part of the night in the very silent hours (1 to 5 am?) to save power and the planet. I personally would have no problem with this. This may be what you have confused with having the lights off. i.e. it was never a suggestion that they should be off full time.

4. Why are they so high up? They were put high up (a) because no one wanted them fixed to the walls of the houses - perhaps tho' this might be a better solution i.e. lower and less light into everybodies property? and (b) partly because we asked for them to be that height so that their light did not intrude into our windows - higher up the light is partially blanked off by trees. Recently the Barkers asked for them to be lowered because the one that 'looks' into their house shone directly into their windows. NB: the compromise for us was to ask for black glass on the side facing our (and any other property that they intrude into) side. However lowering them became a necessity anyway because....

5. ...Health and Safety - They are too tall to put someone up a ladder under current H & S rules and you cannot get a cherry picker up the Stile. The cost of special scaffolding just to change a light bulb is, of course, not on. So lower they will be - by a meter I think.

I hope this answers some of the questions you raised.

Rob Forsyth

[B.Ritchie]

Hi Mr. Forsyth.

This information, interesting as it is, completely misses the point of WHY these lights were placed there in the first place:  they were placed there because, previous to their having been put in, The Stile was full of "doggie-doo";it was noisy later at night--post 1 a.m.--,a nice route either "home" or to linger because it was so dark and "cosy" for innebriates and "other types".It's very  darkness made it it such that we always had to keep a torch in car/handbag merely to walk up it after dark --AND especially very late at night when one never knew who just might be "lurking" and also because, when it was wet there was the possibility of slipping on the "doggie-doo" and the wet leaves.

  The lights deter the late-night dog-walkers, the drunks, the loud teenagers, and so forth who used to use  The Stile late at night;  they are a proven SECURITY amenity (since these WERE problems previously, which, since the installation of those lights, have ceased).  They discourage "the lurkers" and potential others "up to go good", as it were.     They are also, similarly, a SAFETY amenity for people who live in The Stile. (walking home, up a dark passage at 2 or 3 a.m. for a small, lone lady can be quite intimidating, for example--even in Deddington). 

I actually DO have windows on to The Stile and find these lights do not really interfere at night (because I have curtains on the windows).  They are there for the SAFETY and SECURITY of the small cottages whose entrances are in The Stile because for us, it functions as our "main road" and we need to use it at night and we are pleased that these lights deter others who formerly chose to use this passage for less "savoury" purposes.  They keep our persons and property SECURE and they keep us SAFE from slipping and breaking (now ostereoporotic,sigh!) bones when it is wet, since we park some distance from our cottages, cannot just drive "up to the house" and must walk up a (formerly distressingly dark) passage when returning home late at night or early in the a.m.  For residents of The Stile, whose "main road" it is, adequate late night street lighting is an amenity providing SAFETY and SECURITY and they are rather fundamental in these respects.

Many thanks,
B. Ritchie

[Paul Drawmer]

It seems reasonable to me that the lights are on when people are usually out and about; and wasteful to keep them on when very few people are about.

[B.Ritchie]

Hi Mr. Drawmer,

It may augment your understanding of this topic were you to re-read my earlier comments.  The point, precisely, is that the effectiveness as a SAFETY and SECURITY  amenity  (to residents of The  Stile--who are also council taxpayers and who perhaps don't plan their timetables so that they may only need to be walking to their homes from cars necessarily parked some distance away during "out and about hours") of these lights is that they are kept on during what are NOT "out and about" hours.

 They provide SECURITY to residents of Stile in that they DETER "unsavoury types" from BEING IN The Stile in what are NOT "out and about hours".  They are a SAFETY measure in that, when it is wet, especially during "leaf drop season", residents may safely walk to their homes very late (AFTER "out and about hours") without fear of slipping and potentially breaking bones  or encountering "after-out-and-about hours lurkers".

 They may cost "the planet" a few "carbon pennies" each night, but to residents of The Stile, they are "nightlight guides", sleeping policemen" and "neighbourhood watch" all rolled into a couple of lightbulbs and their effectiveness in providing this SAFETY and SECURITY  far outweighs their cost.  They are thus exceedingly  cost-effective and the definition of "wasteful" is, in this respect, relative.

Best regards,
Barbara Ritchie

[Paul Drawmer]

Barbara,

You may find this hard to believe; but I had read and understood your previous posts on the matter.

I think we''ll just have to disagree on what is reasonable.

Paul Drawmer

[B.Ritchie]

Hi again, Mr. Drawmer,
Yes, of course.  One may  certainly disagree on the logic and substance underlying various issues while  always respecting  and upholding others' rights to hold other views on these.

Best regards again,
Barbara Ritchie