10:54 AM (35 minutes ago)
to me, regentneighbor.
Mea culpa. My deepest apologies to all for the typo: I intended to say $250,000, I did not realize that I had typed $25,000 erroneously! Again, my mistake. Here is the link to the 2012 budget information, this is project #22, the budgeted amount is $250,000: http://www.cityofmadison.com/finance/do ... CIP53L.pdf
Based on the Dec. 12 neighborhood meeting feedback, there will most likely be at least one more neighborhood meeting to see if some of the concerns brought forward by the homeowners living on Gregory St can be addressed.
Happy holidays, Shiva
District 5 Alder
From: Meade Laurence
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 8:38 AM
To: Bidar-Sielaff, Shiva;
Subject: Re: RNAListserv SW Bike Path Proposed Lighting- More info
In this email, you stated:
"Cost of this project: $25,000 has been budgeted for it."
But in this Cap Times article by Mike Ivey<http://host.madison.com/ct/business/biz_beat/biz-beat-lights-planned-for-southwest-bike-path-draw-complaints/article_cafc3dba-26a0-11e1-83ab-0019bb2963f4.html>, it's reported that the cost will be between $250,000 and $300,000.
"Plans call for spending $250,000 to $300,000 to install high-tech LED lights<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_diode> on 20-foot poles along the path from Breese Terrace to the Beltline overpass. The money was included in Mayor Paul Soglin's 2012 capital budget."
I would appreciate having the discrepancy in these figures cleared up.
2114 Chamberlain Ave.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Bidar-Sielaff, Shiva <email@example.com<mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote:
Based on the dialogue on the listserve, here is some additional information regarding the proposed lighting:
Thank you for Richard, Robin and Ryan for raising the issue of light pollution and the need for down-lighting. That indeed was the subject of much of the discussion between city staff and Alder Solomon and me since we wanted to make sure that the fixtures proposed would be the least disruptive possible. The City has looked at both the High Pressure Sodium (HPS) and LED lights, both are cut-off fixtures, which means that they do not emit light upwards. The LED light proposed has a significant reduction in back spill lighting (lighting behind the fixture), which is important to avoid any light shining into residences adjacent to the path. Staff favors the LED fixtures. The attached “Before and after LED test” pdf illustrates the effectiveness of the LED to reduce back spill lighting—note the LED light does not extend as far away from the pole on the backside as the HPS fixture does.
Cost of this project: $25,000 has been budgeted for it.
Safety issues: over the past few years, many users have been contacting city staff and alders with concerns about safety (in the broad sense) because of how dark the path is at night. There have also been some criminal incidents (certainly all reported in the newspapers). This is a very popular path for pedestrians, runners and bikers alike and safety is always a priority for alders and city staff.
The neighborhood meeting was specifically scheduled so neighbors have an opportunity to ask questions of staff, understand the proposal and the type of lighting being proposed, so I would really encourage you those of you that would like more information and/or would like to offer additional thoughts/suggestions to attend the meeting.
District 5 Alder
11:09 AM (20 minutes ago)
Of course, all those who would like to are welcome to continue to send me their comments, as always. Let me also make it clear that this project involves 5 aldermanic districts, not just district 5. I have certainly received numerous comments already, attended the meeting and I am happy to continue to receive comments. The budget amount was correctly reported in the press and at the meeting. I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of district 5 constituents who have emailed me are in favor, and I am sure they will email me if the price tag changes their mind.