As we have mentioned before, the County Council are planning to introduce ?part night? street lighting in Rochford District from January 2014. ?Part Night? lighting means that the lights are switched off between midnight and 5am,
The County’s viewpoint is that ?part night? lighting brings benefits in the form of energy consumption and carbon emissions and a reduction in light pollution.
However the County propose that lights in areas meeting one of the following criteria will continue to be lit throughout the night. This amounts to around 30% of streetlights.
The criteria are
? Sites where there are a large number of conflicting traffic movements eg roundabouts which are on significant routes (generally where light columns are 6m or more);
– Sites where lights have been installed as a result of accident remedial measures;
– Town Centres where there is one or more of the following features
? i) publically maintained CCTV;
– ii)a high proportion of high security premises (eg banks,jewellers);
– iii) areas of high crime risk;
– iv)Areas where there is a high concentration of people at night e.g. Transport interchanges, nightclubs;
-Main approaches to town centres where there is a mix of development between residential and commercial/industrial;
– Sites where the police can demonstrate that there is likely to be an increase in crime;
– remote footpaths and alleys linking residential streets; where there is a statutory requirement to provide lighting.
The County?s consultation seeks views and particularly suggestions as to those areas which meet the exception criteria, advising of the location of the lights including street and settlement names and the reason for meeting these criteria. As part of the consultation exercise the Parishes and emergency services have been contacted and asked for their views direct.
To sum it up – the County Council is planning to do this, but will listen to suggestions as to which lights should be left on. If you can think of any locations that meet one of the criteria above, please let us know by the end of the month.
I still do not understand how the council believe this will reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions. The only saving here is for the council only as many residents will just go out to the local diy store and purchase more lighting to keep their homes safe! Install Led solar lighting or just turn every other light off and if the council goes ahead with this regardless, change the times from 2-7 am as the lights do not need to go back on due to the morninglight. Some residents will not be too pleased that their streets will be plunged into darkness yet another street nearby will be nicely lit! Especially more irritating as we still all have to pay the same amount of council tax. How many’accidents’ will occur as a result and will the council receive lots of compensation claims and complaints. Then again, MPs and higher paid councillors do not actually live amongst the common people so their large houses with plenty of land will be lit like beacons no doubt and, seriously, they will never turn off the streetlights in London where most of their 2nd homes are! Move with the times councils…..install Solar.
Do you know what the statutory requirement to provide street lighting in alleyways is?
We only have three streetlights here anyway and without them it is going to be pitch dark. The pavement, such as it is, is a disgrace, litter, overgrown, breaking up with weeds coming through in places, humps and bumps all over it. Because of the Carpenters and the Chichester there is more foot traffic late at night than you would think – hope the Council have some money put aside for injury compensation.
Sean, to answer your question.
There is no statutory requirement on local authorities in the UK to provide public lighting, the law states that:
The Highways Act empowers local authorities to light roads but does not place a duty to do so
The Council has a duty of care to road users and has an obligation to light obstructions on the highway
The Council has a statutory duty under the Highways Act to ensure the safety of the highway and this includes any lighting equipment placed on the highway
The Electricity at Work Regulations impose a duty on owners and operators of electrical equipment to ensure its safety
Cjav, thanks for answering Sean’s question!
Ruthie, the point you are making about residents providing lighting themselves and negating the reduction in carbon emissions is a good one. Regarding accidents , I was recently driving through Kent at 1:30 am in a residential area with mo street lighting. I felt comfortable driving like that BUT it certainly becomes awkward when there’s enough oncoming traffic to make you keep dipping your headlight and also its harder to see potholes. Seriously, perhaps there should be a policy that lights should be kept on as soon as a pothole appears. That might give County an incentive to deal with things more quickly.
I would have thought that as the Council have a duty under the Highways Act to ensure the safety of the highway, a pothole would come as a contravention of this and as such ECC are in serious breach of the law!
In the initial post the point is made that lighting will be kept on ‘iii) areas of high crime risk;’ and also ‘Sites where the police can demostrate that there is likely to be an increase in crime’, surely by plunging large areas of the district in to darkness during the early hours of the day means that most areas are going to be prime for crime to take place? Surely the criminal element of society are going to be scouting out areas that will have the lights switched off and target those in the future as the risk of detection is going to be lower.
Has anybody investigated the possibility / availability of solar powered lighting that could run during those hours of no external power? Surely in this day and ages there must be the technology to have a light charge up with a combination of solar energy and grid energy during certain times of the day (i.e. sunlight hours for the solar part and then grid energy for the darkness to ‘light outs’ hour), then be powered solely by stored energy for the relevant hours.
To answer my question above, yes the tech does exist. A google search with the words ‘Sola Powere Street Lighting’ returns several results of companies that offer such a solution.So the other part of my question (Has any investigation in to this been done?) still stands.
Yes I appreciate here will be an initial investment, but in the long term it should reap benefits, such as selling power back to the national grid, that could be a source of income and negate the initial cost over time.
Actually the words “Solar Powered” not “Sola Powere”!
Mike, the Lib Dems at County level are asking for ECC to ECC should consider new-style, low-energy LED lights, lights controlled by movement sensors and similar technology. Solar power certainly seems to be another technology worth looking at.
Somewhere it was claimed that the lighting being off led to a full in the crime rate. Perhaps it makes it harder for thieves to operate. Maybe admin has the statistics on this but I am certain the validity of the statistics will be questioned.
I think the claim was that the areas where they trialed having the lights off enjoyed a similar drop in crime as other parts of Essex.
I’ve been told by members of my family that crime has fallen in Witham since the lights were switched off there – apparently burglars can’t see anything either when the lights are switched off
From the information that has been published on this site, i think the proposal for alley ways is that they will remain lit. So we will get the strange situation where walking down a dimly lit alley way will actually feel safer than walking along an unlit road.
Chris’ comments about being able to see potholes at night is a valid point, but further than that I would also add standing water when we have had rain, and black ice when it has been cold. On a lit highway it is far easier to see these hazards at distance than when you just rely on your car headlights. Could we expect some common sense with the new fangled lighting system that would see the council leaving the lights on in adverse weather conditions? I won’t hold my breath….
I also think that if this goes ahead – and let’s face it, it will – they should retain lighting on roads that have “traffic calming” obstacles installed. Firstly, if a road is so dangerous that it needs speed humps or pinch points or land mines or whatever, then it should be considered necessary for it to be lit at night. Secondly, these traffic calming obstacles are often poorly maintained, so bright paint wears off, or lit bollards get dirty, and they become harder to see.
Good to hear that some consideration was given to alternative solutions to just turning the light off. Hopefully a compromise will be reached.
Rather than relying on street lights when you’re driving, how about driving in accordance with the conditions of the road?
I can’t see any alternative being considered by the council. They’ve already spent a huge sum of money on the remote controlled activation system – it will take 3 years at the projected saving rate to break even. I don’t believe they would spend more money on movement sensors, solar panels and LEDs.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the EU had some part in this – local authorities in Europe have introduced similar measures.
Would Downhall Park Way, Bristol Close, Victoria Avenue and Priory Chase all qualify to have the street lights on due to the anti-social behaviour in Sweyne Park?
Will carparks remain lit at night? Websters Way carpark is often full of teenagers messing around in the evenings, some in cars, some not – although maybe if it was dark it may deter them from hanging around.
It would be useful if there was an interactive map that showed which roads/junctions would be lit and which ones won’t.
ST1, exactly, I blame the EU. What about our Human Rights to have street lighting.
Every driver should drive in accordance with the conditions. On a lit section of road those conditions just happen to be better due to improved visibility. What’s wrong with helping drivers to remain safe? Street lighting is not just about keeping pedestrians and householders safe.
I’m not too bothered about driving on unlit roads, after all, there are enough country roads round here with no lights already. If drivers are sensible then lack of street lights shouldn’t cause extra accidents. I’m more worried about pedestrians who won’t see uneven bits of pavement and trip up, dog walkers who won’t be able to spot broken glass etc. on pavements and end up with the dog having cut paws, people walking into obstacles that shouldn’t be there like bins left out, cars parked on pavements that sort of thing. I can see a whole spate of injuries coming from pedestrians.
In the 1960’s and early 70’s when virtually all street lights were switched off at night it was compulsory for vehicles to display parking lights during the hours of darkness. The vehicles were also required to be parked with their near sides to the pavement in order that the rear reflectors were facing the oncoming traffic. I am wondering how long it will be before such requirements would be re-introduced!
Who are these 100’s of people wandering around after midnight ? Personally I think a 1.00am to Dawn switch off would be better.
I think you still have to park with your rear reflectors facing traffic at night or use parking lights, it’s just nobody enforces the rules.
I agree with The Mighty Oz 1.00am would be better that midnight, but I can’t remember when I was out walking that late, I’m too old for that 🙂
Admin, I have noticed tonight that ECC have published plans of part night lighting for the Rochford District which come into force on the 26th January 2014 (found at http://www.essexhighways.org/Transport-and-Roads/Roads-and-Pavements/Street-lighting/Partnight-lighting/Rochford.aspx). However, I notice that Priory Chase/Temple Way have no markings to indicate if we have part lighting / full night lighting, or if indeed the lights are developer owned lighting.
Could I ask if you could find out what is happening for this small part of Rayleigh? I note that everywhere around us has part night lighting, is Priory Chase/Temple Way to be a beacon of light in a sea of darkness?
Many thanks
Well spotted. Yes it looks like almost all the lights in West Rayleigh will go out after midnight. I suspect that Priory Chase and Temple Way aren’t included because they aren’t adopted yet!
I’ve asked some questions, hope to have some answers soon…
It’s interesting to note that most of Rawreth is included on the Rayleigh pdf. and none of the Laburnum Way area of Rawreth is on the Rawreth pdf. The Rayleigh pdf. however does overlay the Rawreth one.
Is this another underlying attempt at moving the Rayleigh boundary further into Rawreth Parish?
We DO expect a review of parish boundaries in two or three years time, and we have to be prepared for that – but I don’t think these streetlight maps are part of any underlying attempt, just something done hurriedly.
As I thought Cjav, the lights aren’t shown because teh road isn’t adopted … when they are adopted they will go off after midnight…
There seems to be an increasing reluctance for “adoption” and I have seen proposals from around the UK for the developer to pass all of these services (and more) to an estate management company so that these previously public maintained and paid for services on new developments are effectively privatised with the development properties footing the whole bill on a divisable basis. We certainly have this already with the public open spaces that are required on new developments and also, I think, for surface water management. It could go further into lighting because who pays until it is adopted? The developer? Food for thought?
#32 –
This already operates in for example Spain , due to the vested interest of the
Developers cashing in on the boom, the law was changed and for some years
now the builder has to :-
First construct the underground services / roads – get approval, before property building ( that is why ,since the crash, so many skeleton sites stand idle in Spain).
The builder is also connected to the power and pays for it until formal adoption ( that is Habitacion in Spain ) or does a runner as happened after the crash.
It would certainly change the business model for Developers ( longer pay back time)
but at least the viability of main road junctions & flood mitigation designs would be
available for ‘ proof of the pudding ‘ scrutiny – before housing is built.
But it will not happen, the Government wants the SE concreted over ASAP, witness
what is being pushed through by Inspectors regardless ( not just in Rawreth/Rayleigh but all round ( Southend/ Castle Point/ Basildon – all over the SE).