Shield for a Streetlamp

[Caz]

Oh well, you can oversee the installation of it, making sure they do their job right!! After all you are paying for the privilege..

[The Warthog]

Just a thought, but would it be illegal to put up a shield yourself? I mean putting one close as possible to the lamp, but with it still being on your property???

I have talked to people who have made frames out of tubing and cloth to stand between their scopes and various light sources. I have used objects, such as my patio umbrella, as temporary light pollution reduction filters. It doesn't have to be close to the lamp, just has to put your scope in shadow. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. the only way you could get into a problem would be if you were on a corner and your screen blocked the view of oncoming traffic for motorists.

[daz]

Kai

Found this on the CfDS site:

<quote>

On the face of it, the new law is welcome news for the thousands of sufferers of light nuisance. However, the Act provides for major exclusions listed in section 102(4), which exempts a wide range of public transport buildings (airports, harbour, railway or tram premises, bus stations, public service/goods vehicle operating centres), as well as lighthouses and prisons. Sports facilities are not excluded, however. Nuisance floodlights from neighbours are now most definitely covered. However, there has been confusion as to whether street lighting (a significant source of light nuisance) is covered. DEFRA certainly intended to exclude street lighting from the new law's remit (Full Regulatory Impact Assessment of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Bill, DEFRA, December, 2004 p. 67). Even so, the Daily Telegraph considered that street lighting would be covered (Switch That Light off or Face a Fine, Charles Clover, Daily Telegraph, 9th December 2004, p1.) Moreover, a member of DEFRA's bill team remarked "(a) nuisance can also only be caused by the emission of light from premises, and will therefore only apply to street lighting in exceptional circumstances." (House of Commons Library Research Paper 05/01, p. 68, from personal communication, Wildy, DEFRA Bill Team, 21 December 2004),

The Minister of State, Alun Michael, commented on the unsuccessful amendment 57, tabled expressly to include street lighting in Committee:

"Rather than giving local authorities the theoretical ability to issue abatement notices on themselves, it is better to deal with light pollution from street lighting by other means. Modern lighting design can already provide street lighting that does not waste energy and directs light only where it is wanted. That is used increasingly when lighting is replaced and is common for new lighting schemes." (Alun Michael, Standing Committee G 1, Feb 05, FN 42.)

However, local authority lighting such as that in car parks will most definitely be covered as "premises", so it is unclear as to why this justification has been used when it does not apply across to board to all local authority lighting. Perhaps the answer is that street lighting continues to be a major source of light pollution and nuisance. This is borne out by the large number of complainants suffering from new higher-powered street lighting. Whilst good schemes may be common, not all new schemes are good ones. The following sentiments of a Leicester resident, though choleric, echo across the country:

"My local council last week installed new street lighting along my road. My front bedroom is now bathed in permanent light and the shadows cast by my driveway gate reach the back of the house with light right into my back garden! I'm going to write to the council ... though I doubt whether it will achieve anything, as councils these days seem to be able to do anything they like with MY money, with no accountability".

The statutory definition does not expressly include streetlights, but neither does it expressly exclude such lighting. It is possible that a court may deem such lights to be covered, however, the path to such a judgment would be subject to a long and expensive appeal as to whether street lighting amounts to "premises".

The provisions are further diluted by the availability of the defence of "best practical means" to light emitted from "industrial, trade or business premises, or "the purpose only of illuminating an outdoor relevant sports facility". (Section 103 (2 inserting a new section 80(8) (as amended) to the Environmental Protection Act 1990.) This archaic phrase means that the utility of such lighting trumps the nuisance if, and only if, all reasonable steps have been taken to abate it. This will involve consideration of location and the cost involved in reducing the nuisance. However, the question is, of course, where the line will be drawn in practice.

The result is that all consumer lighting is covered, but the inclusion of street lighting is dubious, and there is a general defence open to all business premises and sports facilities.

</quote>

[removed word]!

[Kai]

Thanks Daz

I think after a day of chasing around yesterday i had pretty much came to the same conclusion.

Ie:- Its universally agreed that the light spill from street lighting could be better directed,its just whos going to pay :x

I think the way im going to go is to make sure that by fitting a shield it stops the light spill into my garden so at least i can look west,also looking at where i observe from in the garden so i can make best use of natural shielding,and if the shield does what i expext it to then stump up the £50 and get on with my hobby.

If i get a chance i might post some pictures to show what i mean.

[geppetto]

stump up the £50 and get on with my hobby

Sadly, I have to agree with you Kai.

Its a sort of blackmail but worth it to get rid of the main source of orange light.

The law seems to be open to interpretation regarding street light nuisance so I

dought you or I will make much headway against a powerful council.

If you did, it could take years of paper shuffling and probably some cost to you.

Now please Bolsover District Council, pop down to Geppetto Towers and fit my light

shroud and I will cross your palm with £50 of silver

[Kai]

The offending Lampost

The view towards Polaris

[SteelRat]

A giant lolly pop stuck in the ground'd block that one. I use a peice of corrigated card on a clothes line pole - massive improvement to my viewing. Personally I like Steves £50 gun idea best - but I guess if you shot yours out now they'd KNOW whos door to knock on