The Observation Deck

Thanks to the entire city of Lakewood for footing a portion of the current costs and all of the future maintenance costs and upkeep of the new decorative lights on Arthur Avenue (between Detroit and Hilliard). The beautification project was approved by council this week. I understood that any cost increases would be put in front of the residents who are paying (initially) for this beautification effort, but apparently council voted to increase the per-home cost by $47 without that notification. If my math is correct (and nothing else changed), this amounts to $1878 per household (if the assessment is paid upfront--if it is spread out over a 10 year period, interest will accrue so the payment will be increased); $40,000 paid for by CVS; and approximately $3350 kicked in by the city. If you add it up, it amounts to $13,158 PER LAMP POST. The entire project (again, for 13 lights) is $171,054 with no documented return on investment except to the city (in energy reduction costs) after a payback period of about 10 years. Just beware. This could happen on your street if 100% (or even 75%) of the residents are not in favor of it. Our city charter makes this possible........

While I agree this is setting a scary precedent, how is this different than 50.01% of the voters (that even know about the stealth campaign) raising the taxes on people that don't have kids in the school system?

Bright enough or what?!


.

The lights look very nice during the day and then turn into a squadron of invading alien ships at night. They are way too bright and amazingly would make me long for the old "pole lights" if I lived on Arthur.

I really hope these aren't coming to other streets on Lakewood until they can fix the brightness of them.

When landing at Hopkins at night i used to use the Winton Place W to spot Lakewood. Now I can look for the Arthur Avenue Landing Strip.

Such a lovely cold icy glare. Will make winter nights seem about 20 degrees colder. Color temperature? What's that?

So much for the progress in architectural lighting and the movement in other parts of the country and world towards "night sky" or "dark sky" preservation.

http://www.darksky.org/

Measure of glare-

http://www.darksky.org/component/conten ... n-research

There's a reason post lamps like that became obsolete. GLARE. And that glare subordinates everything, making objects that one would want illuminated, oh, say, homes, walkways, parked automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians less visible.

I have a very old book from about 1920 on overhead lighting systems that discusses this subject at length, and how the goal is visibility of the environment you want illuminated. For beauty AND safety. Beautiful fixtures and beautiful lighting are not mutually exclusive.

I have no idea how the actual goal of good lighting gets lost in the course of making these decisions. Unless, of course, it was never considered at all.

Those do look great in daytime, and the drive to beautify the street is laudable.

But anyone who's lived near commercial development in Lakewood knows about controlling light leakage. In those situations, keeping light focused where you want it and shielded from where you don't is a common point of discussion with effective solutions that everyone seems to understand.

Yes, it is the color not the amount of light. As I look at Arthur vs. other blocks it isn't that it's brighter just whiter.
I had this problem in my dining room after we redecorated, the new florescent bulbs in the new fixture made the warm inviting colors of the room green and pukey. Changed the bulbs warm and inviting was back.
We are talking about that section of Arthur, warm and inviting isn't traditionally on their list.

Bill

Bill Trentel wrote:We are talking about that section of Arthur, warm and inviting isn't traditionally on their list.

Well, it's not like the Ward 2 side of Belle Avenue, Bill.

You can actually see Ward 3, from your dad's front porch, here on the Ward 2 side of Belle Avenue.

Your father and I have enjoyed many an evening inviting our Ward 3 neighbors to cross the road over to Ward 2 and enjoy a warm (and sometimes cold) beverage.



Matt

And here I thought that maybe it was just me. Driving down that portion of Arthur at night for the first time since the "upgrade", I was almost blinded. I seriously had a hard time making my way down the street safely. I wasn't sure if it was the height or brightness or design or what, but as much as I agree with their pleasant appearance during the day, I wouldn't want these on my street at night. I'm guessing the residents have more direct light if not brighter light coming in. (Or am I wrong that these are quite a bit shorter?) And I don't want to overstate the issue, but as I said it seemed to me that the glare was at such a level to be potentially unsafe. Maybe others disagree - maybe the majority of Arthur residents prefer them? Pretty or not, still unsure about the cost/benefit.

And here I thought that maybe it was just me. Driving down that portion of Arthur at night for the first time since the "upgrade", I was almost blinded. I seriously had a hard time making my way down the street safely. I wasn't sure if it was the height or brightness or design or what, but as much as I agree with their pleasant appearance during the day, I wouldn't want these on my street at night. I'm guessing the residents have more direct light if not brighter light coming in. (Or am I wrong that these are quite a bit shorter?) And I don't want to overstate the issue, but as I said it seemed to me that the glare was at such a level to be potentially unsafe. Maybe others disagree - maybe the majority of Arthur residents prefer them? Pretty or not, still unsure about the cost/benefit.

I know numerous families on that section of Arthur and they are all very nice. I'm sure most of them are neighborly to one another as on most Lakewood blocks.

My issue is their insistence of traffic restrictions preventing south bound traffic from the commercial lots that have drives on their street. Is it fare to their neighbors east and west to have to take all of the burden of the commercial traffic? Or should we all seek similar restrictions in an effort to make our block exclusive and special? Matt, think of all the additional enjoy you and my dad would receive if you just forced all that south bound traffic from the hospital onto St. Charles and Marlowe.

Personally I see it as a small price I need to pay to live in a community/neighborhood where my family and I have the ability to walk to the corner commercial areas to meet many of our daily needs. I understand that reasonable access to the commercial essential for commercial business to exist and succeed so that they will be there when I need them. I'll put up with the book-worn traffic and a-hole Domino's drivers.

Bill

Bill Trentel wrote:I know numerous families on that section of Arthur and they are all very nice. I'm sure most of them are neighborly to one another as on most Lakewood blocks.

My issue is their insistence of traffic restrictions preventing south bound traffic from the commercial lots that have drives on their street. Is it fare to their neighbors east and west to have to take all of the burden of the commercial traffic? Or should we all seek similar restrictions in an effort to make our block exclusive and special? Matt, think of all the additional enjoy you and my dad would receive if you just forced all that south bound traffic from the hospital onto St. Charles and Marlowe.

Personally I see it as a small price I need to pay to live in a community/neighborhood where my family and I have the ability to walk to the corner commercial areas to meet many of our daily needs. I understand that reasonable access to the commercial essential for commercial business to exist and succeed so that they will be there when I need them. I'll put up with the book-worn traffic and a-hole Domino's drivers.

Bill

Bill


All good points.

Recently Crest Lane a street with 4 addresses on it was made one way, as there had been two
accidents with death involved. Both were heart attacks before the accident happened! So with
no regards to the streets around this "alley" which provided access to 50 homes on other streets
and the Beck Center back lot was made one way.

Instantly Franklin with tons of parked cars, tons of kids, and tons of traffic already noticed a large
increase in traffic. So the 4 addresses without any kids on the street basically gets a cul-de-sac
no traffic, Franklin gets twice as much with kids, and 50 homes are inconvenienced. Of course the
reason it was done, is someone with good ties to the mayor's office asked for it.

All the neighbors know it, and are circulating a petition.

No fore thought, no planning, just taking care of their friends and businesses.

It's getting old.

.

Jim,

City Hall has no traffic plan.

It doesn’t matter how often the folks at City Hall watch us from their desktop computer monitors.

It doesn’t matter how often the folks at City Hall sit in front of stores on Detroit Avenue and count cars.

There is no plan.

Folks speed on Belle Avenue 24/7.

There are constant accidents at the Belle and Franklin intersection.

Our neighbors complain to City Hall.

The response from City Hall … silence.

Is everyone treated the same?

I think you already answered it.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:No forethought, no planning, just taking care of their friends and businesses.

It's getting old.

Matt

It occurred to me that the good folks on Arthur Avenue should find out who that alleged good old boy is who allegedly received his own private, taxpayer subsidized cul-de-sac that’s being discussed over at http://www.lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12267 … and get him to move to Arthur Avenue.

Come to think of it … Belle Avenue could use some speed bumps …