Holdeman Neighborhood Association

Well, they're finally functional.  I was told by the city park folks that these new lights would address the problem of excess light created by the old lighting system that was a problem for folks with properties adjacent to the park (me).  Quit the Opposite.  They are insanely BRIGHT!  WAY brighter than the old lights.  What a disappointment.  Really kills the nighttime vibe in my back yard.  I hope the 6 guys who use the court are happy.  I'm not. I now feel like I live next to a KMart parking lot. Bummer.

Anybody know if anything can be done at this point?

Bruce

Sounds really awful--what a shame that it turned out so poorly.  You might call Mark Richwine at the City, or Bob Pohlit.  Surely there is some sort of shield they can devise to block the light.  Monica is acting Chair of MPWNA while I am away.  Maybe she would call also, and spread the word to have other neighbors call with complaints.  There is also a neighborhood meeting on Jan 24 and that would be a good time to get the word out and ask for support from the neighbors in getting the lights fixed to work as they have been advertised to us by the City.

Marcia

you could talk to them about shielding. also drive past the courts on fifth to compare height, lamp and fixture types. if they are the same as at Mitchell Park, dont think it should have been a surprise. (i think they are)

These things are park standard selection through a pretty severe vetting process. And  get applied matter of course thereafter. the lights installed are metal halide lights, and the foot candles for lighting courts in outdoor parks is a published standard. other types of lights could have been installed. not to mention they are extremely expensive light fixtures/installation.  i like the quality of the light, (not yellow) but they are indeed bright. how about more trees closer to the alley? block your view corridor sooner than the ones planted next to the court.

It's good to look at specific solutions for ea location/park. This is something that the association has been actively pursueing, not entirely successful ie: benches, dog park improvements, park maintenance, etc. But we are making progress. New tree plantings responded to neighborhood involvement, altho it took quite a bit of time (mine) to check it all out and make informed suggestions. (ie, be 'pro-active' as much as possible)

this is an overall topic that could be included in the master plan of the park, that seems to be receding further into the future. 4 years? no reason to keep the courts if the neighborhood doesnt want them anymore?

talk soon - Mark

Got a call back from Bob Pohlit today.  Basically he told me the lights were fine and I don't have a problem.  He wasn't interested in hearing my complaints and just contradicted everything I said.  He insisted that the new lights successfully addressed my problem of too much light in my back yard.  He didn't offer any possible solutions, compromise or suggestions.  It was kind of like the Monty Python "Argument" skit:

M: (Knock)
A:   Come in.
M:   Ah, Is this the right room for an argument?
A:   I told you once.
M:   No you haven't.
A:   Yes I have.
M:   When?
A:    Just now.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:  You didn't
A:   I did!
M:  You didn't!
A:   I'm telling you I did!
M:  You did not!!
A:   Oh, I'm sorry, just one moment. Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
M:  Oh, just the five minutes.
A:   Ah, thank you. Anyway, I did.
M:  You most certainly did not.
A:   Look, let's get this thing clear; I quite definitely told you.
M:  No you did not.
A:   Yes I did.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:  You didn't.
A:   Did.
M:  Oh look, this isn't an argument.
A:   Yes it is.
M:   No it isn't. It's just contradiction.
A:   No it isn't.
M:  It is!
A:   It is not.
M:  Look, you just contradicted me.
A:   I did not.
M:  Oh you did!!
A:   No, no, no.
M:  You did just then.
A:   Nonsense!
M:  Oh, this is futile!
A:   No it isn't.
M:  I came here for a good argument.
A:   No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
M:  An argument isn't just contradiction.
A:   It can be.
M:  No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A:   No it isn't.
M:  Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
A:   Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M:  Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
A:   Yes it is!
M:   No it isn't!

A:   Yes it is!
M:  Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
(short pause)
A:  No it isn't.
M:  It is.
A:  Not at all.
M:  Now look.
A: (Rings bell)  Good Morning.
M:  What?
A:   That's it. Good morning.
M:   I was just getting interested.
A:   Sorry, the five minutes is up.
M:  That was never five minutes!
A:   I'm afraid it was.
M:  It wasn't.
Pause
A:   I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue anymore.
M:  What?!
A:   If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.
M:  Yes, but that was never five minutes, just now. Oh come on!
A:  (Hums)
M:  Look, this is ridiculous.
A:   I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid!
M:  Oh, all right.
(pays money)
A:   Thank you.
short pause
M:  Well?
A:   Well what?
M:   That wasn't really five minutes, just now.
A:    I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid.
M:   I just paid!
A:   No you didn't.
M:   I DID!
A:   No you didn't.
M:  Look, I don't want to argue about that.
A:  Well, you didn't pay.
M:  Aha. If I didn't pay, why are you arguing? I Got you!
A:   No you haven't.
M:  Yes I have. If you're arguing, I must have paid.
A:   Not necessarily. I could be arguing in my spare time.
M:  Oh I've had enough of this.
A:   No you haven't.
M:  Oh Shut up.