72 replies to this topic

[RLK1]

For those who are following the thread:

Completed a zoom meeting noted in post #48 with a legislative director of a LA city councilman and other members of a dark sky organization. 

The director was highly sympathetic with our efforts in reducing light pollution and supports the effort to a much greater degree than I anticipated. He has already initiated discussions regarding street light conversions to dark sky friendly IDA approved fixtures, particularly for those existing units that fail, with the appropriate city public works departments. Additionally, and this is extraordinarily important,  he would like to eventually see the city of Los Angeles transformed into a leading sky city!  Obviously, the latter would require a paradigm shift in thinking among cooperating departments within the city and would take years to implement.  And, of course, good intentions are not actions. But I was most encouraged by his forward thinking and his grasp of the subject. 

There IS hope!...

[psandelle]

Wow! That's very cool.

 

Paul

[RLK1]

For those who are following the thread, here is a brief update regarding ongoing efforts:

 

1. In the City of Santa Clarita: 

   As noted in a prior post in this thread, we've made some efforts in this area since it's in close proximity to the ROLD area that is the topic of this thread. While the city appears to be earmarked as a light 

   generator/polluter, they've made incremental efforts in response to our queries. Recent response from the city of a plan to include a "river of lights" in their central park, which has also recently been lit up after 

   to our request for mitigation:

  "Thank you for contacting the City of Santa Clarita (City) regarding the decorative lights at Central Park."

   "The decorative lights being considered along the exercise stairs at Central Park will be mounted on poles and angled down to be seen by park visitors; these lights would not be shining into the sky. The  

    lights being considered in the plaza would be embedded in the concrete and have a protective slip-resistant covering."

 "Since these lights are facing an upward direction, they would be set to a low-intensity level. City staff has 

   worked with a professional lighting consultant to minimize the impact on the environment and to use low-voltage lighting."

 

2. Kern County:

   As noted in a prior post in this thread, since this county has primary jurisdiction in the Mt Pinos/ Los Padres dark skies area, this is of particular importance to our efforts. Although the public works department

   has shown some positive response in our effort for conversion to dark sky friendly 2700k street lighting, their planning department officials, despite being CC in emails by their own public works department, has been completely and inexplicably unresponsive to our calls and emails. 

  I've never seen an official county department totally uncommunicative to this degree given the fact that their own public works personnel have 

   included our messaging in emails to them. Next week will see another round of calls and emails in our continuing efforts...

Edited by RLK1, 08 October 2023 - 01:05 PM.

[RLK1]

After months of trying via emails and phone calls, I finally received a response from the powers that be at Kern county, and a fairly positive one at that:

 

1.)  " We will review our building permit process to ensure we are implementing the Dark Sky Ordinance for all new construction and remodels."

 

2). "I leave it up to Public Works to discuss changing out any street lights we control."

 

 

So, it appears we are on the cusp of effecting needed changes in this important county, hopefully in the near future...

[RLK1]

I have a brief update for those who are following the thread:

1. Our light pollution committee has received email responses from LA county regarding scheduling in order to discuss additional agenda items designed to help reduce light pollution. We're trying to keep the momentum going and the county folks are being helpful in their scheduling replies so stay tuned for more info, hopefully in the near future, and hopefully before the start of the holidays.

2. I'll be circling back to the folks at Kern county via email to follow up on their recent response as noted in post #54 to continue to shake the trees in response to item number 2 in that post.

I'll update again when I have more info...

[RLK1]

For those who are following the thread, an important update:

1. Check the following link for the Oct 18th Castaic Town council Meeting Video and fast forward to approximately 1:40:29 to begin the county presentation regarding dark sky compliant LED Street Light Conversions:

   https://www.facebook...taictowncouncil

   The presentation and reception by the council was quite positive as was commentary from citizens viewing the presentation.

2.We will host the chief representative field deputy of the 5th district county board of supervisors office at Mt Wilson in an upcoming VIP viewing session with the famous 100" Hooker Telescope. Mt Wilson generally 

   offers public viewing sessions with their 60" telescope but we've got access granted for select viewing with the 100" and, of course, we will press the case for more action to reduce light pollution at the presentation.

3. Awaiting responses from my prior emails to the Kern county public works department regarding the 2700k street lights available from their provider, PG&E. Two of the principals have been out of the office for a couple

   of weeks due to a leave of absence and jury duty. I'll be resuming contact efforts either later this week or early next week once they've settled back into the saddle...

4. Corresponding with Shell Oil regarding a new station in Castaic currently being constructed and with unshielded lighting. Shell acknowledges that, from the my description, it'll "likely contribute to the light pollution".

    I threw everything I had at 'em including the efforts on ROLD in the Castaic area, images of our notification pamphlets and material from the IDA demonstrating that brighter is not better. The want more info on the

    station in question and I'll be providing it.

 

   Future updates to follow...

[KI5CAW]

Shell opened a new station three miles from me several years ago. Lighting was unshielded and obnoxious. Bernalillo County has an LP ordinance and several citizens complained in writing. The County forced the station to re-do its lighting to down-pointing and full shielded. Huge difference!!!

Alas these stations are generally franchises so these battles must often be fought on a case-by-case basis.

[RLK1]

Shell opened a new station three miles from me several years ago. Lighting was unshielded and obnoxious. Bernalillo County has an LP ordinance and several citizens complained in writing. The County forced the station to re-do its lighting to down-pointing and full shielded. Huge difference!!!

Alas these stations are generally franchises so these battles must often be fought on a case-by-case basis.

I received a follow up reply from Shell regarding the additional information they requested from me for its exact location. I also included the following:

I encourage you to recommend shielding over the existing wall lights in order to reduce ambient light pollution and/or lower kelvin rated LED bulbs for the latter as well as for signage.  That still can be implemented.
This new station has faced opposition by the community of Castaic since its inception, and the Castaic Town Council voted 5 to 0 against it and now its a glaring reality.

 

Their response:   "Thank you for providing the requested information."

                            "Our review indicates that your experience occurred at one of our independently owned and operated locations. Please be assured that we have formally recorded your feedback and the local     

                             corporate office that handles the station will be notified."

 

PS: It should be noted the new station is in close proximity to existing gas stations and a mere 1.5 blocks from an existing shell station...

[RLK1]

I have the following update for those that are following the thread:

 

1. We will reschedule the visit to Mt Wilson observatory for the 5th district supervisor's office in the springtime due to weather. We also feel it would be better politically speaking, for reasons I won't get into here, to do this in 2024.

 

2. Concluded another meeting with the county today with emphasis on action steps to reinforce public awareness on light pollution and the ROLD ordinance. Discussion also involved future implementation of a learning module on light pollution in the school districts. A follow-up meeting will occur in January.

 

3. After multiple discussions via emails, we are awaiting further word from Kern county regarding following LA County's lead in utilizing night time friendly IDA approved 2700k rated LED street lights.

 

4. Discussed looming federal ban on incandescent lights/compact fluorescent lights with LA County, noting this may be an opportunity for the county to specify color temps and shielding for LEDs since the federal ban does not specify either.

[RLK1]

For those who are following the thread, I have an update from a recent meeting with the county:

 

1.  The LAAS educational material on light pollution, intended as an enrichment module at the high school level, is being transmitted from the county to the school district administration system for evaluation a

     implementation.

     This material is essentially the same as that derived from the IDA, with some modifications for encompassing ROLD as well as modifications for instructional goals and objectives, as determined by administrators 

     and/or teachers.  The actual material being transmitted is as follows:

 

The Natural Night Sky Inspires

Until recently, for all of human history, our ancestors experienced a sky brimming with stars – a night sky that inspired science, religion, philosophy, art and literature, including some of Shakespeare’s most famous sonnets.

The natural night sky is our common and universal heritage, yet it’s rapidly becoming unknown to the newest generations.

 

“For my part I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of the stars makes me dream.” — Vincent van Gogh

Van Gogh painted his famous “Starry Night” in Saint Rémy, France, in 1889. Now, the Milky Way can no longer be seen from there. If he were alive today, would he still be inspired to paint “Starry Night”?

Experiencing the night sky provides perspective, inspiration, and leads us to reflect on our humanity and place in the universe. The history of scientific discovery and even human curiosity itself is indebted to the natural night sky.

Without the natural night sky we could not have:

Navigated the globe
Walked on the Moon
Learned of our expanding universe
Discovered that humans are made of stardust

Exposure to Artificial Light at Night Can Harm Your Health

Humans evolved to the rhythms of the natural light-dark cycle of day and night. The spread of artificial lighting means most of us no longer experience truly dark nights.

Research suggests that artificial light at night can negatively affect human health, increasing risks for obesity, depression, sleep disorders, diabetes, breast cancer and more.

Circadian Rhythm and Melatonin

Like most life on Earth, humans adhere to a circadian rhythm — our biological clock — a sleep-wake pattern governed by the day-night cycle. Artificial light at night can disrupt that cycle.

Our bodies produce the hormone melatonin in response to circadian rhythm. Melatonin helps keep us healthy. It has antioxidant properties, induces sleep, boosts the immune system, lowers cholesterol, and helps the functioning of the thyroid, pancreas, ovaries, testes and adrenal glands. Nighttime exposure to artificial light suppresses melatonin production.

 

Artificial Lights Disrupt the World’s Ecosystems

Nocturnal animals sleep during the day and are active at night. Light pollution radically alters their nighttime environment by turning night into day.

According to research scientist Christopher Kyba, for nocturnal animals, “the introduction of artificial light probably represents the most drastic change human beings have made to their environment.”

“Predators use light to hunt, and prey species use darkness as cover,” Kyba explains “Near cities, cloudy skies are now hundreds, or even thousands of times brighter than they were 200 years ago. We are only beginning to learn what a drastic effect this has had on nocturnal ecology.”

Glare from artificial lights can also impact wetland habitats that are home to amphibians such as frogs and toads, whose nighttime croaking is part of the breeding ritual. Artificial lights disrupt this nocturnal activity, interfering with reproduction and reducing populations.

 

Artificial Lights have Devastating Effects on Many Bird Species

Birds that migrate or hunt at night navigate by moonlight and starlight. Artificial light can cause them to wander off course and toward the dangerous nighttime landscapes of cities. Every year millions of birds die colliding with needlessly illuminated buildings and towers. Migratory birds depend on cues from properly timed seasonal schedules. Artificial lights can cause them to migrate too early or too late and miss ideal climate conditions for nesting, foraging and other behaviors.

For the teacher:

The goals of the lesson plan are to enable the student to recognize the effects of light pollution on our environment by describing three important aspects of it, namely the night time environment, human health and wildlife and apply a methodology of reducing it by means of ROLD.

For purposes of illustration, insert "Eyes On The Skies" brochure here.

 

 

2. The county-produced video that I refer to as the "opus" on light pollution has been completed and is currently working its way through the county review process. I've a seen a one minute introduction of the fourteen 

    video production and it's going to be good! 

 

3. We have another follow-up meeting with the county in Feb. Will report back at that time.

[RLK1]

I have an addendum to the above post due to late breaking information:

 

I've recently learned of a field lighting installation that is planned throughout the high school district that encompasses the Santa Clarita Valley. This is in addition to the sports field lights that were installed last year in high schools in the same district. I think most of us can realize how bright "field lighting" can be. The reason for the additional lighting, although unjustified in my opinion, is that the school day now starts no earlier than 8:30 am so, somehow, that *may* cause some school activities to possibly happen in the evening. Here are my questions/concerns that were conveyed to the powers that be:

 

"As the chairperson of the light pollution committee of the Los Angeles Astronomical Society,
I have some questions and concerns regarding the recent decision to install field lighting in the Hart high school district.

First, it has been my understanding that field lighting for sports events had already been performed last year and I, in fact, had inquired about their "off times" at one of the high schools in my area, Castaic, and I was informed they would be turned off if games were not in play.

So, are these new lights in addition to what has already been installed? Will they be off and controlled by a timer when not needed, i.e. after a game or activity is over, or will they be on all night long even if no one is using the field?

Will the lights, undoubtedly LEDs which are, as you know, super bright, be shielded so they do not produce more light pollution into the sky and light trespass into the surrounding neighborhoods?

Will they meet, or preferably be under, the LA County color temperature rating of a maximum of 2700K which is currently being used in the LED conversions of 60,000 street lights in the county?

The Los Angeles Astronomical Society has been working closely with the county of Los Angeles to reduce and limit light pollution. In this regard, the county sent notifications to businesses and residences last summer in the Santa Clarita Valley, specifically Castaic, please see attached images.

Finally, I have to say that it does seem to be a stretch to think that a start time of 8:30am would somehow push such a need for field lighting and certainly not one that needs to be on all night long"...

 

I've received a prompt reply from the project manager, and one that I'm, under the circumstances, generally pleased with:

 

"In response to your message, I am sending you a link to the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study (MND/IS) for the lighting project you are referring to. The MND/IS was available on the District's website and in the District Office Lobby from November 9 thru December 11 (2023) for review and comment. The Governing Board approved the MND/IS on January 17th.

Dark skies were taken into account in the MND/IS and addressed on page 5.0-8 (see below):

"It should also be noted that the proposed Musco LED lighting has been approved by the Dark Sky
International Association. The Dark Sky approved program provides for lighting systems that meet
certain objectives for lighting. This includes minimizing glare, reducing light trespass, and reducing light
pollution. To be certified, lighting must restrict the amount of upward-directed light, avoid glare, avoid
over-lighting, utilize dimming and other appropriate lighting controls, and minimize short-wavelength
light in the nighttime environment."

Link to MND/IS: https://drive.google...iew?usp=sharing

These are state-of-the art field lights and specifically designed to avoid light spillover as much as possible. The MND/IS should answer your questions, but please let me know if you have any other questions or comments.

Thank you,"

 

Also: I have a further update regarding installation of the IDA approved 2700k street lighting conversion project for LA county. The project should be nearing completion in key areas within the next two months. Of course, converting 60,000 lights does take time so it's not surprising the project is still ongoing since crews have other duties to perform and unplanned outages and weather constraints need to be factored into the equation.

Edited by RLK1, 22 January 2024 - 04:03 PM.

[RLK1]

I have a brief update for those who are following the thread:

 

1. The county video production on light pollution that I refer to as the "opus" on light pollution is nearing release once it clears the final stage of transmission from the press department of the county of Los              Angeles.

    Given its length of approximately 12 minutes, and since 88 cities lie within the county boundaries, I'll start a separate opening post in the forum when it becomes officially available. I've seen the 12 minute          draft and it's professionally produced and well done.

    

2. The light pollution committee of the LAAS has been approached by a private interest in designating county land as a dark sky park that has an average SQM reading of 20.80. That's quite remarkable since its 

    boundaries include the city of Malibu (light pollution controlled) on one side, canyon hillsides on the other and open ocean to the west and all with a relatively clear and unobstructed viewing site close to LA.        It may be an ideal alternative site to the darker skies of the Mt Pinos/Lockwood Valley regions during colder and less accessible winter months. More on this in future postings.

 

3. Currently scheduling for a follow-up meeting with the county.  Will update post-meeting.

Edited by RLK1, 14 February 2024 - 04:19 PM.

[RLK1]

Just a brief update for those who are following the thread:

 

1. Have an upcoming meeting next week with the county.

 

2. Proposal for a dark sky preserve noted in the above post # 62 on the agenda.

 

3. Installation of IDA approved LED street light replacements continue as planned in target areas. Two of the SCE provided IDA approved units were installed in my cul de sac today and are definitely less intrusive than the high pressure sodium units previously installed. Although the color temperature of the SCE units are the same as those IDA approved units from the county, they appear less intrusive than the county units as the SCE units appear to have two bulbs with one on each side of the undersurface of the mount while the county units have a ring of several bulbs nestled in the center of the undersurface of the mount.  The county-supplied unitus elsewhere in the community just seem to be brighter. So far, I'm quite pleased with what I'm seeing in my cul de sac.

 

 

4. Additional agenda items to be discussed in the meeting with the county will be covered next week in a follow up update to this one. Stay tuned. 

[RLK1]

For those who are following the thread:

 

1. The follow up meeting with the county occurred yesterday, 3-28-24,  with a detailed review of the proposed dark sky preserve previously alluded to in the thread. I hope to be able to post a detailed link to the plan          next week.

 

2. "Echo Proposal": I presented my idea for a follow up to the ROLD notifications mailed to the target area of 10,500 residences and businesses in August 2023.

     In essence, since the zoning department is charged with ROLD enforcement, and is trained to do so with lumen meters, the proposal calls for direct contact

     by zoning inspectors with a minimum of ten addresses of egregious light pollution offenses in each area of the two targeted mailer venues in order to inform but not penalize the homeowners, i.e education & not            citation. Word gets around very quickly in the smaller townships, either through the grapevine or via social media, so it is thought that the voice of the county will echo throughout the community.

    The plan is under consideration by the county and I hope to hear more about it at our next meeting that will occur in either late May or early June.

 

3. The county still has not heard back from the department of education on incorporating a light pollution module in the science classes so it appears they'll be sending a query asking for an update regarding it.

[RLK1]

A brief update to my prior post for those who are following the thread:

 

1. I'll need to wait until posting a link to the proposed suburban dark sky preserve as it is now under consideration by the county by two different county departments. I can say that it was positively promoted within the county at this time.

 

2.  I had my first observing session in front of my moderately light polluted home with the new IDA approved LED street lights in place and, overall, I was generally pleased with the results. Typically, on a good night in front of my home, the SQM readings vary between 18.85 and 19.01 or so and last night I got 19.05. We still have mixed lighting in the area and not all of the high pressure sodium lights have been replaced yet so there's potential for further improvement. Of course, ambient lighting from certain residences remain and that needs to be factored in as well- hence my "Echo Proposal" note in my prior post.

 

3. I feared losing the ability to view various galaxies in front of my home in either of my 12" or 16" dobs due to the LED lights but I was able to view many of the brighter springtime galaxies with my 16" last night with my deepest penetration down to about 12th magnitude with some of them. So far, so good...

[RLK1]

A brief update for those who are following the thread:

 

1. Our next meeting with the county will occur in mid-July.

 

2. We have asked for updates on our suburban dark sky preserve-telescope observing area, educational efforts on light pollution in schools and the echo-proposal.

 

3. New agenda items include our"brighter is not better" campaign and updating ROLD.

 

Stay tuned...

[RLK1]

For those who are following the thread, please be advised of an important update:

 

I am very pleased to announce the county has funded another direct mailing of the ROLD notifications to not only the originally targeted area of Castaic but also to an expanded area of Topanga, Palmdale and surrounding area.

 

The notifications are at the printer and should be going out in a couple of weeks...

[RLK1]

For those who are following the thread:

 

1. The ROLD notifications noted in the prior post haven't gone out just yet. I'm guessing they're delayed a bit for the same reasons as they were last year in order to verify addresses and the need for ESL translations. I'll give it another week or so and then I'll initiate the appropriate contact to firm up a mailing date.

 

2. We have asked for followups on our dark sky park proposal and on introductory light pollution educational modules in schools and are awaiting an update.

 

3. Of great importance to our efforts: We met yesterday with a deputy from the supervisor's office that covers most of the ROLD regions. In essence, we are attempting to revise the ROLD ordinance and update it to manage today's lighting technologies that were not in general use when the ordinance was introduced to the public over a decade ago. This means inserting language that deals specifically with LED lighting such as color temperature and shielding among other considerations. 

 

In addition, we are conducting a significant effort to expand the ROLD boundaries to include areas in Castaic that are not presently covered by the ordinance. Simply put, Castaic is a gateway to the few remaining dark skies in the nearby Los Padres national forest that are readily accessible for most of the SoCal region. The more we attenuate light pollution locally, the better the dark skies will be remotely. 

 

In the ROLD revision process, an expected timeline of six months to a year is a likely scenario. We will be considering incorporating portions of other light pollution ordinances currently in effect elsewhere in the state as well as in the country including the city of Malibu locally and Pima county/Tucson in Arizona. 

 

The main complaint of communities living under light pollution ordinances, by far, is the same one: "lack of enforcement."

 

We were pleased to note the deputy understood that "teeth" are need in the light pollution ordinance revision process in order to make it effective. 

 

Our June visitation to Mt Wilson was highly effective in driving home our concerns on light pollution. The supervisor and her deputies saw the extent of the light pollution from Mt Wilson and, as a result, "THEY GET IT". 

While I can not guarantee a positive outcome, I am far more optimistic than I was before our meeting...

Edited by RLK1, 15 August 2024 - 02:00 PM.

[RLK1]

Just received the new ROLD notification in the mail today! As noted in a prior post, this has gone out to an expanded area for greater outreach.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by RLK1, 17 August 2024 - 07:47 PM.

[RLK1]

Back side of ROLD notification:

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[RLK1]

The major local news source, The Signal, published an article today (8-26-2024) describing the above notifications along with a detailed explanation of the need to reduce light pollution:

 

https://signalscv.co...ight-pollution/

[RLK1]

A brief but important update for those who are following the thread:

 

A meeting with a county rep went very well today with a draft response to the LAAS light pollution committee's proposals for updates to ROLD to be expected in about two weeks. While I cannot discuss specifics at this time, I continue to remain optimistic as I believe we have an advocate in the county for our position to overhaul the ROLD ordinance.

 

Stay tuned...

[MrVolcanoes22]

Very happy to see that progress has been made in the last few years. I live in the South Bay area and would love to know how to help in my area of LA county! Keep up the work 💪