« Operation Stop the Yellow Pages Madness | Main | OMG: The convention center hotel land has been appraised by DCAD at $36.5 million! »

May 01, 2008



I saw this article today:


Here's hoping we can learn from mistakes and install lighting that is needed, but not disturbing. I don't think anyone wants the lake to be pitch black, but it would be nice if the new lights didn't cast shadows that actually enable more crime.

Norman Alston

It is a park. It is not a road (even though it increasingly looks like one) and it isn't a 24 hour fitness center. I would certainly agree with those that think that introducing significant amounts of artificial lighting into a park facility whose primary attraction is nature is an inappropriate step. Counterproductive, actually. This is parasitic development without the profit motive. Extending access at the park diminishes the very things that make the park attractive in the first place. And for those who care about sustainable design, such indiscriminate lighting is completely contrary to those principals. It's actually illegal in some places. I'll save discussion of laughably calling sodium lighting "golden white" for another post.

I exercise before dawn year round and have never had a problem with security on the trails around White Rock. That's because I don't go there. I use a very small portion of the hundreds (thousands?) of miles of well lighted streets and sidewalks we already have and have paid for. They are all tree lined or have tree canopies above them. That's all you can see in the dark, anyway, no matter how much artificial light you introduce.

Not NIMBY but NIABY..."Not in Anyones Back Yard". Unnecessary costs to contribute to light pollution. What a bad idea.

James Northrup

Update - Sheffie Kadane has agreed to halt the installation of the poles on the parking lots on W Lawther.
And hold a meeting of the neighbors, neighborhoods and users on May 22 at 7:30 at Winfrey Point.
His assistant Caroline Nosworthy, is scheduling for the 20+ lights on the lot south of Fisher to be turned on at 8:00 Caroline.nosworthy@dallascityhall.com

So anyone interested - come see what 20 street lights do to a lake view - and voice your protest at the meeting.

Parks has raised "security" as a rationale for the 150+ crime lights.
Yet crime stats indicate that crime on the trail is negligible
And most common crime is BMV - during the day.
So "security" is not a compelling justification.
Can navigate this map for the stats on crime by the lake http://maps.dallascityhall.com/


Will C.

To those people who think that the lights aesthetic appeal or "lack thereof" is an issue, then may I ask if you have an issue with the majority of the lights fixtures in the area? If you drive by the old Minyard, Lakewood Theater or even down your own neighborhood street, chances are you are going to see the same style fixture throughout, just probably in a different color. I am glad that whoever installed these lights at least took the time to match the existing ones. Just search park lighting in Google or yahoo and you will be glad they used the style that they did.

To the person who cited the Washington Post article as an example of 'light pollution' should rethink using that article as an example. Where around the lake does someone live that close to the security lights? Nobody lives within 15 feet of these lights. Your right though, that would suck to live that close but that does not represent our area at all.

Katy Trail is one of the most popular trails in the Dallas area and by August 2009 the construction of the Katy Trail connecting to White Rock Lake will be completed. When that happens more people will be biking, running or even walking around White Rock Lake, which means more people in our area, which means the potential and likely hood of more crimes. Every couple of months you hear on the news about a shooting, a robbery or even worse a rape that took place on Katy trail. Get ready for it to that to happen in our area because as soon as they are connected to one another, there is nothing stopping it from coming our way. On a different go to http://www.katytraildallas.org, and look at the lighting that they are installing around the trail. Be thankful that these are not being installed around our lake. Someone said it perfectly; these lights are nothing more than a preventive measure. Well..In my opinion that’s awesome. Why must a rape or even a murder happen before something is done to prevent it from happening again? When you leave your house or when you get out of your car do you not lock it behind you? Chances are you do, and that is your way of preventing or at least trying to prevent you car or home from being broken into. That is all that is happening around the lake.

The lake has to be one of the most beautiful settings in Dallas area but it’s changing. Some will say it’s for the better and some will say for the worse, but the fact of the matter is, it's changing and we as residence of East Dallas have to learn to except that and do whatever it is we can to make our surroundings safe not only for those who live in the area but for those who come to enjoy our beautiful area that we all call home.

James Northrup

"Security" is the alibi being used to sell this project

Actually the lights will increase the most common crime at the lake - burglary of motor vehicles (BMV)

Most BMVs a the park occur during the day

Over-lighting the lakeside lots would simply make it easier for burglars to see into cars - at night -to burglarize.

Plus it will attract more people to the park after the park curfew - at midnight.

Lighting the trails won't prevent crime. The rape at White Rock Lake occurred during the daytime.

The murder happened in a well-lighted parking lot by the White Rock sailing club.

These lakeside lights were pushed by the lighting contractor - they did the plan to maximize number of lights

No input from the neighbors / neighborhoods - who enjoy looking at the lake every night

Security lights would be a better solution - work day and night -

This amounts to little more than a good sales job by a lighting vendor + complicit Parks staff

Come to the meeting at Winfrey Point on May 22nd at 7:30 and see what over-lighting the lakeside looks like.

See you soon "Will C." . . . .

Chip Northrup

Meeting well reported on this site - so here's to local coverage !

Very weak presentation by Parks - who just handed off the stage to a lighting consultant

Who was ill prepared to address the community's concerns

Parks obviously picked the wrong fixtures - the Fisher Road lot likes glared across the lake - instead of down lights.

The wrong color light = the Fisher Road lot looked like a cheap motel.

And put way too many of them in each lot - as they finally admitted = "we will reduce the number of lights per lot - down to 2"

No justification from a security standpoint - as Chief Easterling admitted when asked - "they won't reduce crime"

No "code requirement" for this number of lights - as Parks finally admitted. No written policy. Just make it up.

Show of hands of the 100 there indicated overwhelming opposition.

And some very insightful comments - as reported here

So up to Parks to find another place to stick these light poles.

(The Dog Park guy asked for them and was interviewed as the lone supporter by 5 = http://video.nbc5i.com/player/?id=254965 )

Because by the end of the evening - there was no good argument to light up the shoreline at night.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz


  • Add to Technorati Favorites