Yes, it¹s amazing what you can see ³in the dark² once your eyes get used to it. But the older one gets, the slower the adjustment back and forth between light and dark conditions. It used to seem to be instantaneous for me. Now I have to wait for my ³night vision² to kick in after being in a bright environment. I¹m for the least artificial light necessary.
Here¹s a little story about dark and light skies. As a child, my family traveled to countryside near Louisville, KY, to see relatives. I was amazed about how it was light all night long due to city lights. I couldn¹t even see their sources which were probably miles away. The sky was actually red at night like it sometimes is in Madison now. I came from southwestern Wisconsin where we took it for granted that we could see see the Milky Way. It¹s impossible to see the Milky Way in Madison now, and I¹m continually surprised when I go to rural Hill Point, WI (Sauk County) and glance up at the sky. ³What is that white band up there?² I find myself asking. And then I find it difficult to pick out the constellations I know because of the many, many scintillating stars in the otherwise black sky. Here in Madison, sometimes it¹s hard enough to see the Big Dipper and Little Dipper at times because those stars are so dimmed by light pollution. Kids growing up in cities have no idea of what they are missing. Mary Mullen On 10/1/12 7:33 AM, "Darryl Jordan" <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm going to chime in, not because I'm a cyclist or even a user of the SW bike > path, but as a photographer and darkroom technician. So? You might ask. From > years of experience of working the old fashioned darkrooms, I can attest that > the eyes, for most people, are quite adaptable to relatively dark surroundings > - after 15 to 20 minutes. However, if hit with a blast of light in a dark > room, there's as bunch of cussing going on. Especially, if I'm using a strong > flash. So if lights are going to be installed, I might suggest lighting about > equal to the brightness of an indirect bicycle light. You don't need overly > strong airport landing lights to see by. Also, in a darkened area, though not > pitch black which would make this discussion more abstract, eyes can discern > the difference between near black, kind of black and a shade lighter grey. > Just enough contrast to determine shape, maybe form and and most importantly, > movement. Color is not easily seen in the dark because human eyes are not > built to see color in dark conditions. If you feel you have to see detail and > color, then my opinion is that you are overly adapted to bright lights. I > think street engineers, consultants, and electrical companies over do it by > using more lighting than necessary. I am confident that the SW bike path can > be lit and be safe and not ruin the ambience of country lighting in a city > environment if a modicum and consistent level of lighting is used along the > dark stretches. > > My two cents. > Darryl Jordan > > P.S. I nearly hit a muskrat at dusk, but that was along the John Nolan Bike > path with some sky light to see by. It wasn't a lot but enough to see the > shape move in front of me. I saved the muskrat's life but my trike didn't > handle the evasive maneuver as well. > > > > From: Mary Mullen <[email protected]> > To: Robert F. Nagel <[email protected]>; Robbie Webber > <[email protected]> > Cc: Bikies <[email protected]> > Sent: Mon, October 1, 2012 4:10:11 AM > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Fwd: SW Commuter Bike Path Lighting and WisDOT Wisconsin > Bicycle Facility Design Manual > > Re: [Bikies] Fwd: SW Commuter Bike Path Lighting and WisDOT Wisconsin Bicycle > Facility Design Manual I¹ve almost hit squirrels and chipmunks quite often on > the SW Path, and a friend of mine got in a wreck on the path when a squirrel > got itself entwined in his bike wheel on the path. However, I¹m not sure that > there would be much danger from these two animals at night. They are out in > the daytime. And they do dart out. > > Mary Mullen > > > On 9/28/12 3:20 PM, "Robert F. Nagel" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Right, I left that out because it seems to go without saying that my proposal >> will not be as bright as yours. But, the question should be is whether it's >> bright enough or a whole lot brighter than nothing. There's a hornet's nest >> of opposition to your proposal because it's too bright. It's overkill. If >> somebody would rather take the sidewalk because it's brighter, they'll still >> have that option. I've never heard of roadkill on the bikepaths. Are there >> really bike-animal accidents happening because of animal dart-outs? The >> bunnies I've seen seem to be pretty well-adapted to urban living and don't >> seem to have a problem getting across the path safely. And if things keep >> going the way the are, there won't be any lights and won't that be a whole >> lot less safe than some subtle lights? >> --- >> >> >> Robert F. Nagel, Attorney >> Law Offices of Robert Nagel >> [email protected] >> www.nagel-law.com <http://www.nagel-law.com> >> Thirty on the Square, 10th Floor >> 30 W. Mifflin St., Suite 1001 >> Madison, WI 53703 >> 608-255-1501 office >> 608-255-1504 fax >> 608-438-9501 cell >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Robbie Webber <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Robert seems to have left out part of my answer to him: >>> >>> Besides being more expensive and possibly prone to damage, whether >>> intentional or not, >>> >>> 3. This area has basically no ambient light (from streetlights, houses, >>> businesses, etc.) Smaller lights would not provide sufficient illumination >>> to light the path and provide a feeling of safety. The path you mention has >>> considerable ambient light from other sources, so lights to illuminate the >>> path and general area are not as necessary. >>> >>> Robert had mentioned the path that runs along the Yahara River. That area >>> has considerable ambient light: businesses, street lights, lights in the >>> mooring area on the river, park lights towards Lake Monona, etc. The SW Path >>> has none of that. This also addresses one of the other suggestions on this >>> list: light the edges of the path. >>> >>> Lighting the ASPHALT or GROUND does not provide the appropriate amount of >>> light to see the area adjacent to the path - where animals or humans may >>> dart out suddenly. We do not use runway lights along the sides of sidewalks >>> and streets. We light the area so that people walking or driving can see the >>> area immediately off the sidewalk or street. This is the reason I use a >>> high-powered light with a broad beam pattern: The LED lights, regardless of >>> how many LEDs they add, simply do not provide the field of view that I want >>> while biking in a dark area. (A broad beam pattern also makes me more >>> visible to drivers on side streets as I approach, but that is a different >>> issue.) >>> >>> Most of our neighbors, friends, and family would freak out if they had to >>> walk down a dark street, why are we assuming that biking or walking down a >>> dark path - with even fewer people around to provide a sense of security - >>> would cause any less stress? Those of you with less-confident bicyclists in >>> your lives should ask those dear ones to go out, alone, after dark on this >>> path. Once your family member, best friend, SO, or other more-timid >>> bicyclist returns from the solo trip, ask him/her how it felt to be on the >>> dark path alone, even with a good light. >>> >>> I think this might change your perspective a bit. I know one male friend >>> definitely changed his mind after thinking of how his wife - definitely not >>> as confident on a bike as he is - would react to that scenario. >>> >>> >>> Robbie Webber >>> Transportation Policy Analyst >>> State Smart Transportation Initiative >>> www.ssti.us <http://www.ssti.us> <http://www.ssti.us> >>> 608-263-9984 (o) >>> [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Robert F. Nagel <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Sounds very sensible to me. What I'm hearing is that the city wants to >>>> scatter some bright lights because they think it will be cheaper than the >>>> subdued lighting, which would require more poles to provide adequate >>>> lighting. They also claim that the shorter poles will be vandalized and hit >>>> by snow plows. Why a shorter pole with subdued light would be more likely >>>> to be vandalized than a taller pole with bright light that the neighbors >>>> hate is totally beyond me. And, I don't think anybody would object to >>>> incorporating flags in the design to give additional notice to the snow >>>> plow drivers. >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> >>>> Robert F. Nagel, Attorney >>>> Law Offices of Robert Nagel >>>> [email protected] >>>> www.nagel-law.com <http://www.nagel-law.com> >>>> Thirty on the Square, 10th Floor >>>> 30 W. Mifflin St., Suite 1001 >>>> Madison, WI 53703 >>>> 608-255-1501 <tel:608-255-1501> office >>>> 608-255-1504 <tel:608-255-1504> fax >>>> 608-438-9501 <tel:608-438-9501> cell >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:43 PM, George Perkins <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> When I originally wondered (on this list, to my Alder, and to the City >>>>> project site) why the city hasn¹t considered a design that follows the DOT >>>>> guidelines for lighting a bike and pedestrian path, I never really did get >>>>> a satisfactory answer. The City may have had this discussion internally, >>>>> but for whatever reason has not made it a public discussion. If the SW >>>>> path is going to be given lighting, then let¹s do it right. The powerpoint >>>>> presentation on the project web site only off-handedly indicates bollard >>>>> style lamp posts are a maintenance problem, but doesn¹t substantiate that >>>>> concern with facts and figures. If there are valid reasons why DOT >>>>> lighting guidelines don¹t make sense from an engineering (physical and >>>>> social), I¹d like to hear them and the city should lobby to have the DOT >>>>> guidelines updated accordingly. Perhaps a good lighting design would cost >>>>> more and budgets are tight. Let¹s not do it wrong just to spend the money >>>>> in this year¹s budget and wind up with an inferior (or unsafe) result. If >>>>> doing it right costs more, maybe the path can be lit in stages, do what >>>>> you can with the money on hand, leave the rest until later? >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Bikies mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Bikies mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bikies mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bikies mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
