[Vision2020] Outdoor lights
Jim Meyer
m1e2y3e4 at moscow.com
Mon Jan 31 07:24:00 PST 2005
All,
Part of living in a community is being at least a little tolerant of your
neighbors. That means we all should exhibit some courtesy to one another.
For instance, if my neighbors have a party until 2:00 in the morning and
there was more light and noise than I would like, then I would let it go
unless the light and noise was beyond merely irritating and crossed over to
being extreme. In a similar manner, I hope that if I had a broken car, and
could only fix it at night when I wasn't working, and I used two 150 watt
halogen lights to see what I was doing, then I hope my neighbors would be
tolerant of that as well.
Jeff-- I didn't see any differentiation between stationary and movable
lights in your law excerpt. That in mind, I can see a big difference between
a 150 watt halogen permanently mounted on a garage, and my temporary usage
of a mobile halogen fixture totaling 300 watts that I might use to fix my
car. Like you, I don't think it should be illegal to fix my car. However, I
don't mind having my permanent fixtures be somewhat restricted.
Donovan--You have some points but you need to get your facts straight,
because truly wrong facts tend to dilute your message.
The following is a comparison between the wattage of commonly available
incandescent lamps and the wattage of a CFL that will provide similar light
levels:
25 Watt Incandescent = 5 Watt CFL
(http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumerinfo/factsheets/ef2.html)
50 = 9
60 = 15
75 = 20
100 = 25
120 = 28
150 = 39
Donovan, your comment that ".....In fact, if you had one soft light energy
saving bulb at
60 watts it would be so bright (650 watts of an incandescent) you would.."
is obviously wrong and dilutes your argument. .
In summary, to be fair, the law should address the difference between
stationary permanent lights and temporary movable lights.
Jim Meyer
----- Original Message -----
From: <vision2020-request at moscow.com>
To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 11:21 PM
Subject: Vision2020 Digest, Vol 8, Issue 190
> Send Vision2020 mailing list submissions to
> vision2020 at moscow.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/vision2020
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> vision2020-request at moscow.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> vision2020-owner at moscow.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Vision2020 digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land Ordinance
> (Jeff Harkins)
> 2. Re: inclusive justice (Donovan Arnold)
> 3. Re: The Auntie Establishment and Brother Carl Show forJanuary
> 30, 2 (Joan Opyr)
> 4. RE: Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land Ordinance
> (Donovan Arnold)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 21:04:53 -0800
> From: Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com>
> Subject: [Vision2020] Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land
> Ordinance
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050130180507.057f4190 at mail.uidaho.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I am dedicating this post to Section 9.03 of the Proposed Ordinance. This
> section is entitled "Design Standards for all Outdoor Lighting". I am
> moving over Sections 3. 02 to 8 because I have exhausted all the hours
> available to me for preparing commentary before the Tuesday Planning
> Commission Meeting.
>
> I will return to the skipped Sections after that meeting.
>
> Section 9.03 is rather short and may best be digested if read in full - so
> here it is:
>
> SECTION 9.03 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING
> 9.03.01 APPLICABILITY
> In order to conserve energy and reduce light pollution, all outdoor
lights,
> including lights
> attached to any type of building or structure shall be:
>
> * 1. Equipped with a photo-sensor so they are automatically turned off
> during daylight hours; and
> * 2. Of a design that does not allow light to travel up or
> horizontally; and
> * 3. Lamped with high pressure sodium, metal halide, or compact
> fluorescent lamps, or incandescent bulbs of 60 watts or less.
>
> 9.03.02 CHANGE IN USE
> When application for a change of use or for a conditional use permit is
> made, all existing lighting
> must be brought into compliance with Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance.
>
> 9.03.03 QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS
> The Zoning Commission or the Board of Latah County Commissioners may set
> stricter
> conditions than are set in Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance for any type
> of permit that comes
> before them.
>
> Now just sit back and reflect on this proposed County Wide
> standard. Imagine changing a tire or repairing a combine or field
tractor,
> installing your snow blower under a 60 watt incandescent bulb. I can see
> the next line of jokes about Idaho - How many 60 watt bulbs does it take
to
> change a tire in Idaho? OR In Idaho, to save energy - residents are
> required to purchase 60 watt luminaire fixtures (as many as it takes) to
> get the light they need for a task. Or try this - In Idaho, apparently
> folks there aren't smart enough to know to turn off their lights in the
> daytime because County Officials have required everyone to install photo
> sensor lights to turn them off during daylight.
>
> I can also imagine the headlines later this summer. Remember the "breast
> exposure" issue raised in Moscow a few summers ago. Well apparently all
> those folks who geared up with their protractors and compasses to
determine
> whether or not the breast was legally or illegally exposed will now have a
> new task for their investment in equipment - then can go out and find
> lights that are beaming rays out between 90 degrees and 270 degrees.
Sigh!!!
>
> Come on folks - we have a lot of serious issues to be resolved in this
> county. The last thing we need is designation of the "Illumination
Police".
>
> Just so that you are fully informed, here are some price quotes for
> replacement bulbs using the various options required by the proposed
> ordinance - the price of the fixtures varies considerably.
>
> Price is cost per each
>
> 23W outdoor flood flourescent BR 38 $ 28.04
> 12W NanoLux Spot $ 21.20
> 50W High Pressure Sodium $ 10.88
> 50W Mercury Vapor $ 10.50
> 50W Metal Halide $ 10.88
> 50W BR 30 Flood Incandescent $ 3.74
>
> I guess I trust the price system and the judgment of Latah's citizens to
be
> able to decide for themselves how much candlepower and lumens they need
and
> the means by which they provide it.
>
> Again, please keep your comments coming - they have been helpful.
>
> And try to attend the next meeting of the Latah Planning Commission on
> Tuesday, February 1 at the Latah Courthouse at 5:30 pm,'
>
> While no public testimony is scheduled to be allowed, the Commissioners
are
> expected to discuss their findings following the previous public hearing.
>
> I urge you to draft a short letter to the Planning Commission requesting
> that they table this ordinance until the public has had a chance to
provide
> full comment on the draft.
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050130/d86c1aae/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:06:16 -0800
> From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] inclusive justice
> To: london at moscow.com, citizenx at rock.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> Message-ID: <BAY101-F272DB74232860297A7B54CA67C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
> How do we know that NSA or the owner of the building didn't apply for the
> permit?
>
> And second, unless it was a great hindrance to the public health, why on
> God's Earth would anyone give a damn if the zoning administrator gave him
a
> piece of paper?
>
> I am more concerned about snow removal and dog poo at the park.
>
> Donovan J Arnold
>
> >From: "Bill London" <london at moscow.com>
> >To: "stigmatta x" <citizenx at rock.com>, <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] inclusive justice
> >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:36:45 -0800
> >
> >I think your example is off the mark. In this downtown Moscow zoning
case,
> >the NSA did not apply for the necessary permit. And as I understand the
> >law, the city is not responsible for making sure the NSA gets that
permit.
> >It is NSA's responsibility.
> >BL
> >
> >
> >
> >If you wanted to build a nice wooded fence in your yard And applied for a
> >permit and it was granted. would you, should you, Have to tear it down
> >after it was built. Just because someone in the city goofed.
> >_____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:10:22 -0800
> From: "Joan Opyr" <auntiestablishment at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Auntie Establishment and Brother Carl
> Show forJanuary 30, 2
> To: "Vision2020 Moscow" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Message-ID: <BAY10-DAV22A9A8E1A9BD87FFC980F4C57C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Oh, come on, Tom -- weren't you even remotely interested in my theory that
Colfax doesn't actually exist? It's a Potemkin Village made entirely of
cardboard; just two miles of empty, pointless road with a cop stationed at
either end. The speed limit is 25 for no reason other than to enrich the
Whitman County coffers at the expense of drivers who happen to have Idaho
plates.
>
> BTW, I would like to take this opportunity to thank those listeners who
bore with us tonight during our plague of technical difficulties. Nothing
was working right -- for the first five minutes, neither Carl's mic nor his
headphones were functional -- and later, well, I wasn't functional. We had
a run of CD screw-ups, all of which were entirely my fault. Carl is hereby
completely exonerated. He had nothing to do with it; in fact, he was in
Colfax.
>
> We're still ironing out the wrinkles on the show, but it's getting to be
quite fun. For me, and Carl, and Tom, anyway. Viva Intoleristas!
>
> (Intolerista. Why does that word make me want to sing the Nicaraguan
national anthem? Does anybody here know the lyrics? Doug, Stigmatta -- do
one you have a copy of the 'Little Red Songbook?' I feel sure you must; so
many of your public pronouncements of late seem to have "borrowed" from it
freely. That and 'Civilization and Its Discontents.')
>
> Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
> www.auntie-establishment.com
>
> PS: Let me explain what I mean by "borrowed." To quote from the great Tom
Lehrer, "Plagiarize, plagiarize, let no one's work escape your eyes, but
please . . . call it research."
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tom Hansen
> Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 7:56 PM
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: [Vision2020] The Auntie Establishment and Brother Carl Show
forJanuary 30, 2005
>
> Greetings Visionaires -
>
> If you were unable to tune in to the "Auntie Establishment and Brother
Carl
> Show" today, you missed out on a major treat.
>
> Although it may have started out somewhat slow, centering on a discussion
> concerning Auntie Establishment's (mis)adventures in Spokane on Saturday
> night, it quickly go into gear as they blasted away at:
>
> 1) Our two new trolls on the V2020 listserve (Faul Ottomaticks and
> Stigmatta X)
>
> 2) Ben Merkle and his article in Volume 16, Issue 2 of the Credenda
Agenda,
> "Arrows in the Hand of a Limp-Wristed Man"
> (http://www.credenda.org/issues/16-2recipio.php)
>
> 3) The religious right's attack on the cartoon series "Sponge Bob Square
> Pants".
>
> One item of interest that caught my attention was that Carl Westberg Jr.
was
> a DJ in the Haight-Ashbury district of San Francisco during the summer of
> '69.
>
> So, in closing I would like to state that although this group that I am
> proud to call friends may be referred to as Intoleristas, liberal
elitists,
> and wackos (among a multitude of other labels) we have all come from a
> rather diverse range of backgrounds and have experienced an even more
> diverse range of cultures, more so than the dark corners of Moscow, Idaho
> and the dark underbelly of Monroe, Louisiana.
>
> Take care, Moscow.
>
> Tom Hansen
> Just Doing What Comes Natural
>
> We could learn a lot from crayons: some are sharp, some are pretty, some
are
> dull, some have weird names, and all are different colors....but they all
> exist very nicely in the same box.
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////Get more from the
Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050130/b2799e4a/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:20:01 -0800
> From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold at hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land
> Ordinance
> To: jeffh at moscow.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> Message-ID: <BAY101-F73FE30D164AE61537E64EA67C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
> Jeff,
>
> I want to thank you for illustrating to the public and surrounding
counties
> your incompetence in such matters as reviewing laws concerning land use.
>
> First let me start by saying, "SECTION 9.03 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL
OUTDOOR
> LIGHTING In order to conserve energy and reduce light pollution" Is a very
> GOOD idea for several reasons.
>
> It reduces usage of energy. You want to know why your utility bill is so
> damn high? It is because people are doing things like using incandescent
> light bulbs. I know T. Edison was a smart man, but we have made some
> improvements to the light bulb since the 1901 Pan-American World Fair
> Exhibit in Buffalo.
>
> A smart government would outlaw incandescent light bulbs completely. 90%
of
> the energy produced from a incandescent light bulb is wasted on heat. Less
> than 10% of electricity you are using is being used for light. An energy
> saving light bulb, which costs about $2.50 at your local friendly thrift
> store and lasts 5 years, versus 6 months or less with a incandescent, can
> produce the same amount of light as the $1 light bulb at about one tenth
the
> wattage and cost. So this idea is saving money for land users and helping
> the environment. I replaced all the lights in my place and my utility bill
> has gone down on average $20 a month and I never have to change the bulb
> except once every 5 years. Sure, the extra $1.50 per bulb is expensive at
> first, but I made up the difference in about a month on the utility bill.
>
> You write,
>
> "In Idaho, to save energy residents are required to purchase 60 watt
> luminaire fixtures (as many as it takes) to get the light they need for a
> task."
>
> Yes, it does take a great deal of bulbs when you use incandescent. Not to
> mention they break easily, are really hot and can burn you, waste energy,
> have a high malfunction rate, easily start fires, and are not very bright.
> It would take 11 incandescent bulbs to do what just one 60 watt energy
> saving bulb can do. In fact, if you had one soft light energy saving bulb
at
> 60 watts it would be so bright (650 watts of an incandescent) you would
> probably go blind if you looked right at it, or at least cause some
> permenent eye damage.
>
> You continue with speculation about others will say,
>
> "In Idaho, apparently folks there aren't smart enough to know to turn off
> their lights in the daytime because County Officials have required
everyone
> to install photo sensor lights to turn them off during daylight."
>
> I doubt this. Part of the reason that our utility bills are so high is
> because people leave their lights on, increasing demand for lighting. Much
> of this lighting is wasted on nothing other than letting the cows see the
> grass or the rocks see the trees. People should not be forced to pay
higher
> utility bills because someone forgot to turn their lights off. Further,
not
> all people are stupid for leaving their light on during the day. Some
cannot
> turn them off because they are gone for the weekend, and don't want anyone
> thinking they are not home. Others forget to turn them off at night when
> they go to bed. Still others turn the light on in the afternoon so they
can
> see when they get home in the dark. You add all this up, and it increases
> energy usage significantly.
>
> As for light population. This is mostly because many animals get confused
by
> the lights. They use the sun and/or stars for navigation. The light
confuses
> them and their mating, eating, and sleeping patterns. It may seem silly,
but
> it is impacting the environment negatively, and we know that farmers very
> much need to have a strong environment because they rely on the land. It
is
> needless to have lights shining brightly upward. I suggest to the farmer
or
> land owner trying to install a snow blower, or fix a tractor tire, to do
it
> in the morning, not at midnight. But I am willing to bet that most Farmers
> are smarter than Mr. Harkins and could figure that one out.
>
> Mr. Harkins, if anymore light bulbs go off in your head, please make sure
> they are efficient ones that save the farmer and land owner money. Because
> so far, they have all been pretty dim or malfunctioning only leaving
people
> burned.
>
> Take care,
>
> Donovan J Arnold
>
>
>
> >From: Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com>
> >To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> >Subject: [Vision2020] Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land
Ordinance
> >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 21:04:53 -0800
> >
> >I am dedicating this post to Section 9.03 of the Proposed Ordinance.
This
> >section is entitled "Design Standards for all Outdoor Lighting". I am
> >moving over Sections 3. 02 to 8 because I have exhausted all the hours
> >available to me for preparing commentary before the Tuesday Planning
> >Commission Meeting.
> >
> >I will return to the skipped Sections after that meeting.
> >
> >Section 9.03 is rather short and may best be digested if read in full -
so
> >here it is:
> >
> >SECTION 9.03 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING
> >9.03.01 APPLICABILITY
> >In order to conserve energy and reduce light pollution, all outdoor
lights,
> >including lights
> >attached to any type of building or structure shall be:
> >
> > * 1. Equipped with a photo-sensor so they are automatically turned
off
> >during daylight hours; and
> > * 2. Of a design that does not allow light to travel up or
> >horizontally; and
> > * 3. Lamped with high pressure sodium, metal halide, or compact
> >fluorescent lamps, or incandescent bulbs of 60 watts or less.
> >
> >9.03.02 CHANGE IN USE
> >When application for a change of use or for a conditional use permit is
> >made, all existing lighting
> >must be brought into compliance with Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance.
> >
> >9.03.03 QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS
> >The Zoning Commission or the Board of Latah County Commissioners may set
> >stricter
> >conditions than are set in Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance for any type
> >of permit that comes
> >before them.
> >
> >Now just sit back and reflect on this proposed County Wide standard.
> >Imagine changing a tire or repairing a combine or field tractor,
installing
> >your snow blower under a 60 watt incandescent bulb. I can see the next
> >line of jokes about Idaho - How many 60 watt bulbs does it take to change
a
> >tire in Idaho? OR In Idaho, to save energy - residents are required to
> >purchase 60 watt luminaire fixtures (as many as it takes) to get the
light
> >they need for a task. Or try this - In Idaho, apparently folks there
> >aren't smart enough to know to turn off their lights in the daytime
because
> >County Officials have required everyone to install photo sensor lights to
> >turn them off during daylight.
> >
> >I can also imagine the headlines later this summer. Remember the "breast
> >exposure" issue raised in Moscow a few summers ago. Well apparently all
> >those folks who geared up with their protractors and compasses to
determine
> >whether or not the breast was legally or illegally exposed will now have
a
> >new task for their investment in equipment - then can go out and find
> >lights that are beaming rays out between 90 degrees and 270 degrees.
> >Sigh!!!
> >
> >Come on folks - we have a lot of serious issues to be resolved in this
> >county. The last thing we need is designation of the "Illumination
> >Police".
> >
> >Just so that you are fully informed, here are some price quotes for
> >replacement bulbs using the various options required by the proposed
> >ordinance - the price of the fixtures varies considerably.
> >
> >Price is cost per each
> >
> >23W outdoor flood flourescent BR 38 $ 28.04
> >12W NanoLux Spot $ 21.20
> >50W High Pressure Sodium $ 10.88
> >50W Mercury Vapor $ 10.50
> >50W Metal Halide $ 10.88
> >50W BR 30 Flood Incandescent $ 3.74
> >
> >I guess I trust the price system and the judgment of Latah's citizens to
be
> >able to decide for themselves how much candlepower and lumens they need
and
> >the means by which they provide it.
> >
> >Again, please keep your comments coming - they have been helpful.
> >
> >And try to attend the next meeting of the Latah Planning Commission on
> >Tuesday, February 1 at the Latah Courthouse at 5:30 pm,'
> >
> >While no public testimony is scheduled to be allowed, the Commissioners
are
> >expected to discuss their findings following the previous public hearing.
> >
> >I urge you to draft a short letter to the Planning Commission requesting
> >that they table this ordinance until the public has had a chance to
provide
> >full comment on the draft.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
> End of Vision2020 Digest, Vol 8, Issue 190
> ******************************************
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list