Letter to Editor | Do we need street lights on Prune Alley?

Noooooooo.

Oh, no, here we go again. Let’s cut down all those distracting trees as well. Can we hire an engineer not infected with Seattle-itis? I thought there was going to be a prototype trial of one set on A St so we could see what happens when we light up our streets? And what happened to the bollards and other solutions that emit far less light?

Thank you Chris! When this idea was floated years ago, we were told that the lighting would be quaint village like and not tall glaring parking lot lights. What happened? Oh wait, I know.

I agree with Chris et. al. 100%. Please let’s stop this urbanizing trend. We do not need street lights on Prune Alley! Who’s idea is this anyway??? As Margaret stated, light pollution is a real problem for wildlife and humans alike. Let’s do everything we can to protect our dark night skies.

I would like to add my voice to the others speaking in favor of night skies. Night skies are worth preserving.

What a terrible idea….big tall street lights ! ! !

Chris says it all. Thank you very much.

I believe the conversation about lighting on Prune Alley warrants more than “yes’s” and “no’s”; the key thing is the type and height of the fixture.

The design of the lighting proposed for the intersections olong Prune Alley has been done by SJC Dept. of Public Works.

What I have always advocated is sidewalk post lighting for pedestrians using a fixture which directs 100% of the light DOWN creating pools of light on the sidewalk.

A good example of this type of fixture can be seen at the sidewalk / pathway at the Crossroad Cottages, immediately west of the Senior Center parking lot.

(Note that at the Senior Center itself, are examples of fixtures and pole heights which, I believe, are approximately what is being proposed by SJCDPW.)

I invite anyone who wants to weigh in on this topic to take the time some evening and evaluate the impacts of various ways to provide night lighting in the public realm.

One of the reasons I am running for County Council is to increase the responsiveness of County government to the wishes of the residents at the same time making our island a safe and enjoyable haven for us and our visitors. I have been dismayed at the proliferation of outside decorative lighting in Eastbound over the last few years. We should all try to attend the Eastbound Planning and Review Committee meeting to hear first hand what the Eastbound residents and businesses think about lighting. Is this a safety precaution for drivers or or pedestrians? Will the light shine downward only in a small circle or will it light up the whole area and cause an issue when a driver exits the light and enters a dark street? If that proves to be the case will the lights be removed or will more lights appear for safety reasons.

My question is, “What do we hope to accomplish here?” How is this being financed? I am not a resident of the village proper so I wonder if those who are feel that that this sort of lighting is needed. Is safety a consideration in this decision? The safety of whom? I’m not sure I’ve heard of any problems in the village due to lack of lighting. More thought needs to go into a decision of this magnitude. Of course, those of us who are against it, if it goes through, can always shoot them out. However, the ugly posts will remain. Lets avoid such eventualities. More discussion is needed.

Honestly, I try to read the various commission and council agendas and minutes but never saw this coming. We’ve had tons of islander input over the past several years and virtually NO ONE wanted anything like this. Who decided to go this way? Why does this keep happening? Should we develop a way to put these decisions to a vote??

I agree with Peg Manning’s observations.

Thank you Chris! I agree the proposed lighting is totally out of character for our village. What and who is driving this?

My husband and I moved here to get away from the street lights and concrete sidewalks of America. We were so pleased to live on such a charming and delightful island where there are occasional stop signs and no stoplights. This is just opening wide the door to more citification and the demise of the picturesque Orcas as we know it. Turn out those lights!

I am writing this as an individual citizen and not on behalf of the EPRC, Eastsound Planning and Review Committee. I am also a current member of the EPRC an advisory committee to San Juan County Council and the Community Development Department. The EPRC is purely advisory, and the county departments make their own decisions, not necessarily following EPRC recommendations. My intent of writing this is to share some history of the last 3+ years of lighting discussions and to encourage all community members who are interested to participate in getting the level of lighting you want in Eastsound, to engage the county with your participation in the Prune Ally Plan’s public input meetings and with letters to the county stating what you support and do not support. The only way any changes will be made with this plan is if we all provide that input.

I was surprised to hear that urban-style street lighting was being proposed for rural Eastsound in late 2016. I started attending EPRC meetings and offered to assist then-EPRC-member Fred Klein to do research on the pros and cons of forms of public lighting. We put together a presentation and showed it at an EPRC meeting, a town hall meeting, and an Eastsound visioning meeting. The negative effects of bright lighting are many including light pollution, negative health effects and impacts on birds and other wildlife. We got a lot of feedback at these meetings. Most wanted no lighting. The biggest pro-lighting wish we heard was people wanting to be able to see where they were going when walking to their cars at night in the winter. There was and still is a misconception that more lighting reduces crime. It actually does the opposite. The more/brighter light, the more crime. The only way to reduce crime is to add cameras to lighting. Luckily, we don’t have high or even moderate rates of personal or property crime in Eastsound. The majority of people who attended these meetings were in favor of low level path lighting but not more. The number one thing that islanders did not want was glare, i.e. seeing the source of light when looking down the street. As Fred mentioned in an earlier comment, there are lights where the shade of the fixture aims all the light downward, where you can’t see the source of the light until you are in close proximity to it, and those should be the only kind of fixture to consider. Fred completed his terms at EPRC, and I later joined. I chaired an Eastsound Character sub-committee of EPRC members and citizens in the Spring of 2017, and a PLIT (Parking, Lighting, Infrastructure & Transportation) team of citizens and EPRC members headed by Paul Kamin was formed. Both teams recommended whatever lighting we selected should be IDA or International Dark Skies Association-compliant, low angle, non-glare, low color temperature lights , 2700K that protect humans and wildlife. PLIT recommended both path lights and low overhead lights at crosswalks for pedestrian safety. The Eastsound Character group recommended all path lights with angled path lights coming from both sides of the crosswalks and to replace the county’s handful old style glare bomb lights with low angled IDA-approved lights as they required maintenance. The Eastsound Survey received broad support for IDA approved lighting and for path/sidewalk lights. EPRC made those recommendations to County Council and Staff.

It has taken a long time to get the Prune Alley project under way. When the Prune Alley plan was released, it had non-IDA overhead lights at intersections and no path lights which was stated as being too expensive. If you have more input, please participate in the public input process attending the county’s Prune Alley plan meetings in the near future.

People have and will come to Orcas in large part because it’s so wonderfully different from what’s outside the island. Please let’s keep it that way. We have a rare gem, and shouldn’t let it be devalued bit by bit with this, and other, “improvements.”

Thank you Charles Toxy for reminding us of the extensive and thoughtful design proposals developed by Fred Klein, the EPRC and many others that were previously offered for site-appropriate street lighting in Eastsound. I remember viewing these designs several years ago when they were presented to the public and was extremely impressed at the options proposed.

My question now is, what happened to these designs? Were they considered and incorporated into the current plan? Can we revisit them and adopt their best aspects to create suitable outdoor lighting that fits the scale and character of our island?

I agree with Dan, this is a safety issue. I’m an amateur astronomer living in Eastsound and dislike light pollution. Lighting certified by the International Dark Sky Association is the way to go. A good example of a small town with IDA certified lighting is Ouray Colorado.

These lights should really be moved to Madrona. They would offend fewer people and still satisfy those that profit from them.
If that does not work, perhaps we could buy bicycles for the fish in the east sound.

Donna Gerardi, For expertise on lighting, go to the study done by the PLIT group in the Eastsound Vision process. I was in that group and we listened to all sides, coming up with the recommendation of low level, non-intrusive lighting in the town of Eastsound.