As I was driving on North Oakland the other night, I suddenly realized that even though the Village has torn out half of the streetlights --- there was more than enough light for driving and pedestrian purposes.

Even though the lights on the west side of the street are gone - the ones on the east side do more than an adequate job. The question I have therefore is  -- why do we need so many lights ?

In an earlier posting to Shorelines, I had questioned whether "light pollution" had been considered in the Streetscaping plans --- and I would guess probably not !

Another question that I have about the  proposed lights is whether  new technology was considered ?  Why are we going with the same old electrically hard wired lights --- is there a solar alternative ?

Doing a little research on the internet, I came across a plethora of manufacturers, distributors and information on solar powered street lights.  I have copied one of the pages below as an example of the information that is out there.

Is it too late to reconsider the streetlights ?  Since we have only starting tearing things up, and it appears that no work will be done before Spring 08 at the earliest --- why not do a study on solar lighting.

Just think - no electric bills to keep them running.  No burning of fossil fuels.  No trenching or wiring needed.  In a Power Outage --- the street lights will still be on !

Wouldn't Shorewood be proud to light the way for other villages, towns and cities in the Progressive use of Solar Power for Streetlights  ---  or do we just talk a good talk ?

What are your thoughts on whether we have enough light or need more, and whether solar should be in the equation.

 FOLLOWING IS WEB PAGE FROM INTERNET

SOL's products have historically withstood high wind conditions in hurricanes and typhoons around the world. NOW Independent structural engineers have certified that SOL's SLH series far exceed the 150 MPH, Schedule D wind event requirements as per Chapter 6 of the ASCE 7-05 specifications. The patented SL product series uses a flat panel design. Not only is the solar lighting system certified to this high standard, but the attachment to the pole has also been certified, eliminating any weak points that may cause the system to not withstand the high winds.   Click here for Product PDF Click here for Press Release Founded in 1990 as Solar Outdoor Lighting, SOL INC. is the world's leading manufacturer of commercial grade solar powered lighting products and systems. All of our commercial grade solar powered systems are customized to ensure they meet the needs of each project. SOL develops and markets the most efficient and reliable solar powered systems for lighting applications including parking lot, street lighting, security lighting, general area lighting, trail and pathway lighting, outdoor advertising, billboard and sign lighting, and transit applications. Solar powered systems help people feel safe, lighting up dark areas with dependable off-grid solar power. The systems install easily with no trenching or wiring. SOL's systems have the longest warranty, the most reliable service and the best prices in the industry. SOL INC. customers have enjoyed millions of hours of trouble-free service. We have an international website for solar powered projects outside of the continental United States. This website addresses the special needs of projects outside of the continental USA. International Representatives and Distributors are welcome. Please visit http://www.solarlighting.com/international/ or click on the link provided on this page. Headquartered in Palm City, Florida, SOL's patented products are installed in over 50 countries on 6 continents world-wide.

 

At its last meeting the Village Board voted to authorize bids for the new Streetscape Plan. Preliminary estimates for the first phase are in the $3 million range.

Many of Shorewood’s residents probably remember the last time Shorewood had a major renovation project, It was the streetscaping of North Oakland Avenue in 1996. That renovation replaced the street, sidewalks and all the streetlights. Also installed were sidewalk pavers, benches, planters and trash receptacles.

We now find, barely more than 10 years after spending all that money on North Oakland Avenue, that all those nice new street lights, pavers, benches and trash receptacles are obsolete !

Apparently everybody involved failed to notice that we have winters in Shorewood, we use salt on our streets, and all those nice new fixtures, made of cast iron, are prone to rust. Reportedly, they have rusted to the point that they need to be replaced.

Our weather has not been especially kind to all of those pavers that were installed along the sidewalks either. Walking on what is left of the pavers, is taking a risk to breaking an ankle ! Patterned cement, in hindsight, would have been much more economical to install and maintain, while achieving the same decorative look.

The average taxpayer probably imagines that when the Village Board was informed that all the tax money that was spent 10 years ago has rusted away --- literally --- the Board was upset, and determined to find out how and why such a major mistake was made, and that the Board decided to get those answers and to thoroughly examine the new proposals, before committing to any new multi million dollar projects.

Unfortunately, the average taxpayer would be wrong !

The only Board Member who dared to rock the boat during the discussion to approve the bid process was Jeff Hanewall. He brought up concerns about the designs that were being proposed for the new streetscaping, and asked questions as to whether they were appropriate for Shorewood. It is noteworthy that Trustee Hanewall is an architect and is well versed in such matters, albeit that design is always of a subjective nature.

In the following discussion, it appeared that all the other trustees and village management considered the plan, as presented, to be a “done deal”, with no room for discussion or dissent.

When the slide show presentation of the plan was made to the board (you can view the same presentation on the Village’s website), there was a heavy emphasis on the fact that the CDA conducted a number of public meetings, and that Shorewood citizens in study groups, actually voted in favor of the plan that was presented.

That story, however, quickly changed upon questioning.

Trustee Hanewall questioned how the process was actually run. He questioned whether the design firm involved limited the selections available to the participants of the groups, and whether the selections were made without the context of viewing the elements as a whole. He pointed out that a popular vote of approximately 20 volunteers was going to be the deciding factor for a multi million dollar project for a village of 13,000 plus residents.

This was when a whole new description of the process by the CDA was quickly offered.

The new line given was that although there was a popular vote of citizen volunteers, the CDA and designers didn’t “really” let that be a deciding factor. They said that they had actually limited the information available to the volunteers, and that they never intended to, nor did they, abide by the consensus of the study groups.

Going on the appearances and actions at the Board meeting, it would be a good guess that the project is pretty much a “done deal”. There does not seem to be any appetite on the Board to study what went wrong with the North Oakland project --- nor to examine in any depth, the proposed elements for the new project.

And that begs the question of whether we in a rush to more obsolescence ? Are all those street light and poles rusted beyond redemption ? Have any restoration experts been contacted to examine the existing poles and assess whether there are any methods which can restore them --- and how that would compare in cost to replacing them with new ones ?

It has been said that we live in a “throw away” society. And perhaps all those nice “10 year old new” light poles are destined to our landfills.

But shouldn’t we expect better in Shorewood --- shouldn’t the Village Board examine this issue much more carefully before actually committing the millions of dollars it will cost --- with at least a minimal expectation that the new streetscape will have a useful life of more than 10 years before it is obsolete ?