Got problems with new floodlights?

[JOC]

4 hours ago, nightfisher said:

Well, i should find out this week if any action is to be taken on these lights

What ever the result Jules at least you will know that you tried to do as much as you could. 

If the retrospective application is actioned, don't forget to object.  I took the approach of what I'll call a 'constructive objection' and the company went along with it.  I said that I recognised that the organisation could have a safety/security aspect in terms of wanting to light their yard at night and of course they were within their rights to light their own property, but IMO that didn't include lighting the surrounding 20 acres or the houses 1/2 a mile away therefore I felt it was reasonable that they should be obliged to shield the output of the lights to concentrate it on their own property only.  This was actually done!  Sometime constructive criticism is more acceptable and indeed helpful than a plain 'can't stand those lights - shouldn't be allowed' approach.

[Alfian]

Fingers crossed, Jules.

[nightfisher]

The silence is deafening, i contacted planning at the relevant council on the 8th June, lodged a complaint regarding this lighting, got a reply back saying an enforcement officer would be appointed and a visit would be conducted within 10 days, still not heard any thing back

[happy-kat]

Well done for keeping on top of it. Could check your council's website for how long they say they take to process different things.

[coatesg]

On 2017-6-20 at 11:01, JOC said:

What ever the result Jules at least you will know that you tried to do as much as you could. 

If the retrospective application is actioned, don't forget to object.  I took the approach of what I'll call a 'constructive objection' and the company went along with it. 

Exactly the approach I used, and probably got the best result I was likely to get.

[Stu]

On 20/06/2017 at 11:01, JOC said:

I took the approach of what I'll call a 'constructive objection' and the company went along with it.

That sounds like a very sensible approach and I'm glad to hear good sense prevailed. Shielding is the answer, not expecting the lights to be turned off or removed.

[nightfisher]

21 minutes ago, Stu said:

That sounds like a very sensible approach and I'm glad to hear good sense prevailed. Shielding is the answer, not expecting the lights to be turned off or removed.

Yes shielding is all i can hope for, i fully understand the company in question have a responsibility to members of staff so lights are going to be required...................just not so annoyingly bright, just putting lower power lamps would help 

[happy-kat]

Still worth keeping an eye out on your council's and the other council's planning portals checking for any retrospective planning application so you can get to send in a constructive objection with as you mention requesting lighting shielding so the lightening is appropriate and only lights the area necessary and that they manage and contain light spill intrusion.

[nightfisher]

I did get a reply back from council yesterday, its worded much as i expected it to be, telling me that companies dont always have to seek planning for things like adding extra  security lights blah blah 

TBH i have been at loggerheads with both local councils since march, life is to short to have this on going, i have more important issues ongoing like mine and Claires wedding that is looming up fast.

I can still do my favourite aspect of astronomy, Luna observing and imaging, but my astro kit is going to reflect this 

[happy-kat]

I'm sorry that the council has ignored the issue of light intrusion but can understand your thought now to direct your energy back to living.

[Alfian]

Not the best news Jules, but there is a certain cynical expectation that this might happen, whilst hoping for the opposite. At least for now it gives a resolve to focus on what you know will work for you.

[nightfisher]

I have received another email from said council planning department, instead of going out to the site and checking on things as outlined on the website, they have now forwarded the case to Enviromental health dep. yes the same dep. that i have been battling with for the last 5 months, and getting absolutely no where with, pushed from pillar to post and back again, either the council is corrupt or just incompetent maybe both, and as a side, the factory involved are having 2 new building erected that are even larger, and WILL have even more flood lights fitted, my guess is a further 8 or 10 lights will go up illuminating the greenbelt for miles in all directions, i feel the only course of action is to email the MD in a rather polite and begging manner (not my style) and ask that when it comes to installation of lighting on new buildings maybe he will arrange for shielding and or pointing dowward 

[happy-kat]

Your local MP should be working for you on this matter. 

[nightfisher]

Got a call from the council that are MEANT to be looking into the planning issue telling me they are forwarding the case to the other council....again, have to say i started to lose the plot a little , explained how this is just bouncing back and forward from each council and various departments, but just getting now where. Wish i never started this now!

[Mr Spock]

Bureaucracy gets in the way of most processes with these organisations. Don't be disheartened and don't give up - you'll get there eventually.

[scarp15]

On ‎05‎/‎07‎/‎2017 at 20:33, happy-kat said:

Your local MP should be working for you on this matter. 

Yes and your local councillor. Some can be proactive in representing people and their issues directly concerning their constituency others clearly are plain useless. Very frustrating and a simple thing to fix really, just shear ignorance by the company concerned. If you had a local residents association, then they will act on this, not least as there is slowly an increase in awareness on offensive light pollution as a mainstream concern, doesn't look like you do - these bodies do tend to come and go.

Plan B, correspond direct with someone in authority representing the company, as said it is after all just plain ignorance, modifying the lighting might be in theirs as well as everyone else's interest.

Plan C, Contact your local press officer / radio station.

For your own sake and because this is a problem in one form or another many on here can relate to, keep up the activist intent and battle on,

[nightfisher]

12 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

Bureaucracy gets in the way of most processes with these organisations. Don't be disheartened and don't give up - you'll get there eventually.

No, i have had enough of this, the word corruption leaps out at me, i wont be fighting this any more, i have re shuffled my astro kit to concentrate on Luna imaging so leaving it at this point

[scarp15]

Not unlike elsewhere, the UK would benefit with having an ambassador to raise the profile of the blight of light pollution, someone with enough celebrity status such as Tim Peake, but that is unlikely to happen. Areas awarded dark sky status is probably a start, not really beneficial for addressing local concerns in outlying Towns or Cities. I still think that getting the local press involved could become a - no harm in trying, way foreword.

[JeremyS]

3 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

Not unlike elsewhere, the UK would benefit with having an ambassador to raise the profile of the blight of light pollution, someone with enough celebrity status such as Tim Peake, but that is unlikely to happen. Areas awarded dark sky status is probably a start, not really beneficial for addressing local concerns in outlying Towns or Cities. I still think that getting the local press involved could become a - no harm in trying, way foreword.

One of the best organised bodies for raising the profile of light pollution is the BAA Commission for Dark Skies: http://britastro.org/dark-skies/

Supporting the CfDS is one thing we can all do.

Jeremy

[nightfisher]

We have an important update to this thread...................after all these months i still have no further help from the councils..............and i see the offending factory has installed 4 more floodlights..........looks like i have lost this one 

[Beulah]

Aw, I was hoping for some good news when I saw this thread in my feed.  

[SteveNickolls]

Perhaps the last word-Ombudsman.

Best Regards,
Steve

[nightfisher]

2 hours ago, SteveNickolls said:

Perhaps the last word-Ombudsman.

Best Regards,
Steve

No, i am not going to get stressed over this any more, i had a strong feeling this would be the outcome, for reasons i best not put into print and this is why i altered my kit line up, going mainly luna and planet

[scarp15]

Very bad news and sheer ignorance. The overriding concerning is whether this additional light source will increase impact and become invasive to yours and your neighbours properties, in which case collective action ought to be taken. 

[Timebandit]

13 minutes ago, nightfisher said:

No, i am not going to get stressed over this any more, i had a strong feeling this would be the outcome, for reasons i best not put into print and this is why i altered my kit line up, going mainly luna and planet

 

Unfortunately when it comes to big organisations, they seems to be able to write there own rules at times. And fairness and consideration does not seem to be a priority.

You tried your best and that's all you can do. There is no point keep banging your head against a brick wall time and time again? when there is no glimmer of hope or progress on the matter.

As you seem to of accepted you can still do your lunar and planet to which light pollution is not such a factor as DSO. And maybe it is time you find a local dark site that is not to far from you. And instead of getting frustrated and spending time on a fight that seems to be going nowhere. The time could be better used going to a dark site and a stress free time of observing the universe, in a non light polluted  , stress free environment ?

Good luck