Resident tired of being left in dark
Town Council members' response lukewarm to issue of improving lighting for safety's sake
MOUNT PLEASANT — The inky darkness on some major roads is unsafe, and the town should take steps to improve lighting on its thoroughfares and in subdivisions, a resident told a Town Council committee.
"The lighting in this town is so woefully inadequate. It's too dark here," said Susan Sloate, a Dunes West resident. Heavily traveled Rifle Range Road is a particular problem, she said, because it has no lighting. "There is no excuse for no lights there. There are children out there. There are deer out there," she said.
She urged the Council Finance Committee on Tuesday to set aside funds for better lighting, and to craft an ordinance establishing minimum lighting standards. Sloate said the road and neighborhood lighting is much better in New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. "When you drive in L.A., you can see everything there," she said.
Council members were lukewarm about the issue. "There are mixed feelings about this. It's just a matter of taste, how you like it. We need to study it," said Councilman Billy Swails. He suggested contacting experts for more information on the issue.
Sloate said other residents she has contacted about the issue favor improved lighting of town thoroughfares such as Mathis Ferry Road, Chuck Dawley Boulevard, Long Point Road and Whipple Road.
Town resident Leanne Newhill said she has had to stop while jogging at night on Mathis Ferry Road to wait for a car so she could see where she was going. At times, the darkness is so black that she can't see her hand in front of her face, she said.
Town Administrator Mac Burdette urged caution on the issue. "If you went in the Old Village and tried this, I promise you'd get your head handed to you," Burdette said.
A street light costs $117 per year if a pole is available. If a pole is not in place, the cost is 10 times that amount, Burdette said. The town could look at retrofitting for brighter lighting, he said.
Councilman Paul Gawrych said there was not widespread concern about the issue. "You're a minority," Gawrych told Sloate. Gawrych said some people prefer lighting the way it is because they are stargazers. Councilman Kruger Smith suggested the town address the lighting issue in its comprehensive plan, which is currently being updated.
Reach Prentiss Findlay at pfindlay@postandcourier.com or 937-5711.
E-mail this story 
Printer-friendly version
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Post and Courier does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our Web site.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Comments
This article has 30 comment(s)
Posted by majorjohnson on January 8, 2009 at 7:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Gosh, I want it to be as bright as New York city, but I want to be able to see the stars and I don't want my taxes to go up and I don't want any power plants built. Oh, and I want a tree that grows solid gold apples in my back yard too.
Posted by suec on January 8, 2009 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
boo hoo hoo
that's what headlights and flashlights are for.
If you jog at night, buy one of those little headlamps.
what really got me was her comparison to LA, New York, etc. Two words...MOVE THEN!
Posted by 512c on January 8, 2009 at 8:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wish our city lights were less sky night polluting.. Light pollution is one of those things that doesn't have to happen, but people like my old neighbor are so scared at night that they pour light onto everything, when, effective lighting can be a couple of small points of light, and reflectors...
Our roads should have reflectors at least so when it rains the texture is readable.
Posted by Kerry on January 8, 2009 at 8:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why not open a few car dealerships, some fast food joints, and perhaps several new Kangaroo gas stations along these routes? Then this idiot woman who obviously has nothing better to do with her daylight hours either can see where she is going. Just get the hell out of here lady, you do not belong in the South.
As for the night jogger, you can run in front of my car all the way to the state line as well. I will keep the brights on for you.
Posted by icbmman on January 8, 2009 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Light pollution is a misnomer created by environmentalists to distract from the fact that better street lighting in cities makes it safer. Criminals are less likely to attempt their activities in these areas, drivers can better navigate unfamiliar streets at night, and drivers as well as pedestrians have better vision for distant objects like joggers, children, or animals.
The Chas area is notorious for having bad lighting throughout the streets and highways, and Mt. P is no exception. As a matter of fact, I knew a town planner there who actually had the gall to ask why people even have to be out at night and state that street lighting was completely unnecessary. Such utter obtuseness should disqualify anybody from making decisions for a municipality.
This is another common sense issue that many area leaders completely ignore, which again shows how many government officials LACK common sense. If you want to stargaze, here's a hint: drive about 15 minutes outside of the city.
Posted by tigerrecord on January 8, 2009 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Two points. We need reflectors. Other point, when you go up to Clemson or Anderson area they have no street lights, at first, it becomes a total inconvenience and you struggle for visibility. Then you adjust, and then something amazing happens, you can see everything in the sky, and light doesn't pollute your home. It's incredible.
Posted by rtaylo8243 on January 8, 2009 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Be careful of what you ask for you might just get something that you didn't ask for. the area that i live in several years ago made the same complaints and request. Now you certainly have plenty of lighting in our area but there was a price that we are still paying. We can almost not see any of the stars in the night sky due to all of the street lights that are always on at night.
Posted by RTC on January 8, 2009 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
For pete's sake, lady. Children shouldn't be in the road day or night. Streetlights have never prevented deer from being struck. The locals don't care, so you must be a transplant.
If you live in Dunes West then how would you know what hangs out on Rifle Range at night?
Posted by Really on January 8, 2009 at 9:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Seriously. Try and do anything after dark anywhere in the most polulated part of Charleston, ie Mt Pl, and you will get killed by all the Nascar wantabees. There are no sidewalks and no lights. If you want to run, walk, bike after 5:30 in Jaunuary, you have to do it in the dark in the street. No "reflector" can be seen by someone going 50 around a sidestreet corner. Pick one and put them in place. It's called the 21st century. It's not going to do anything, but increase quality of life. Not surprised by the typical HB responses.
Posted by summerville_guy on January 8, 2009 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Jog during the day, or just buy a treadmill.
Posted by wjhamilton3 on January 8, 2009 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In our neighborhood in Mt. Pleasant, the HOA pays the cost of the street lights to SCE&G and the developer paid for their installation. Most new neighborhoods in Mt. P. usually have sidewalks and street lighting. Generally, our area is a dangerous place to walk or bicycle after dark, however many people have to do so.
In our neighborhood we have real sidewalks, generally buffered from the street by a grass strip with trees and armored by on street parking, with street lighting. We have six inch versicle curbing, which keeps traffic on the road. The streets are broken up often enough so that it is difficult (but not impossible) do drive too fast. They're narrower than normal to keep speed down.
The Town of Mt. Pleasant doesn't really grasp how to create and maintain civic space for active use by the community. The only thing they really care about is traffic and tourism.
People also drive far too fast. Street planning to keep speed down in SC has to be much more aggressive than in other places. For instance, US design standards say that to keep speeds under 20 mph, a street must have a break, termination or sharp turn every 1000 feet. In SC, you have to reduce that to every 400. People in SC have lead feet.
However if your streets are broken often enough, not too wide and have parking along them, with lighting and you have a buffered sidewalk with proper curbing and reasonable lighting it can be safe to walk at night.
On street parking isn't pretty, but it's very safe to have Humvee parked between you and the traffic when you're walking.
Posted by wjhamilton3 on January 8, 2009 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
SCE&G currently has two options for neighborhood street lighting. One is the tall pole with the arm lamp used on highways and the other is a "Colonial" style lantern on a short pole which sends half the light up into the sky. In out neighoborhood, people go out and paint out the panes so the HOA ends up paying for light which doesn't go anywhere so it won't shine into their house at night. These are sodium vapor lights and they're very bright.
There are many better options, some of which are installed in Mt. Pleasant on private property, which direct the light downward. SCE&G doesn't want a lot of different designs because they have to maintain them and keeping a stock of parts on the truck becomes a problem. However a third option for properly shielded street lighting is needed. However in the end you have to decide how bright you want them to be and how many you want to have.
Everyone agrees they want as few street lights as possible (to save money), as bright as possible (to cover a large area) in front of someone else's house.
As difficult as this is, you can't have a real community unless people can walk around safely at night.
Posted by Really on January 8, 2009 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ahh, Summerville_guy. Life is simpler out there. I do both of the suggested. However, people work and have children, so not everyone can. The point is, while it is beautiful here, there is still a lot to be done to improve the area. The "let's study it" and "stargazers"??? That is the dumbest and weakest response ever. Seriously? I hope those people at least laughed after they said it. Just tell the lady to get lost and save us all time. You can add lights and improve the area without losing its charm. The new bridge demonstrates that. I'd bet the lights are a little easiers and have little less of an impact. I'm just speculating though. I'm sure their STUDY will give us a clearer picture.
Posted by OverHere on January 8, 2009 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We need less lights in our cities. Light pollution is a quality of life issue. Plus more lighting is expensive.
I don't think the condition of lighting makes roads dangerous in Mt. Pleasant...
BUT BUT BUT
as the population of Mt. Pleasant gets older there will be increased demands for the Town to widen roads, parking spaces, add more lighting, lower speed limits, and more signaled intersections to compensate for the decreased physical abilities of the town's citizens.
The golden years of the boomer generation will be one of the biggest stories for America for the next 30 years. You thought increased costs for traffic management were expensive try social security for a huge population of which a historically high number will live into their 90's.
Posted by icbmman on January 8, 2009 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The obtuseness of some of the responses here is astounding. How does lighting NOT help drivers see deer? How does lighting NOT help pedestrians exercising at night?! BTW, for some people, nighttime is the only time they have on their schedule to jog or walk, especially in professions such as medicine, military, fire, and police. Many of the responders here need to get a clue.
It appears that many want to have their cake and eat it too. They think that they can have all of the conveniences of living in a city as well as all of the conveniences of living in the country. Let's think logically, here; it is impossible to completely have both. Safety of people should be a priority in urban areas, and adequate street lighting is another tenet that provides safety. Adequate street lighting also enables people to be able to see if burglars are lurking throughout the neighborhood; it enables neighborhood organizations to actually do their job!
Honestly people, seeing the stars is something reserved for people who live in the country. I don't think the safety of people should be sacrificed in order for people to be able to see Orion clearly.
Posted by coolfreaknbeans on January 8, 2009 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
wjhamilton3- Boy do I agree with your last post. My neighbor has one of those SCE&G colonial style lights.(through the HOA) It is terrible! It beams an orange light that is obnoxious! I don't want my yard glowing orange. It's not a pretty site. I had purchased "uplights" for my palms and I had to return them. The orange beam from hell will soon be painted-I'm over it!
Posted by wjhamilton3 on January 8, 2009 at 2:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The preferred method for street lighting is to use lower powered units and more of them, but the cost is higher and SCE&G's available units are too bright for that purpose. It's hard to support the cost of street lighting when you have low residential densities and therefore, lower tax base for the amount of street you need to light.
In our neighborhood dozens of streetlights were pulled out a few years ago. The original plan had been for lights that weren't so bright, but when the sodium vapor lights were installed because SCE&G wouldn't maintain the beautiful copper lanterns originally installed with 100 watt bulbs, it was way too bright.
We still have plenty of lighting for the streets, but's its really bright on the corners and where the lights are so they are a nuisance to those who live nearby. We have one across the street from our home, but we're a fairly active and social part of the neighborhood, so people just installed blinds in their bedrooms.
Cheap and good aren't the same thing. It's more complicated than it looks.
Posted by coolfreaknbeans on January 8, 2009 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Update: I happened to speak with two gentlemen outside doing work for SCE&G this morning and they told me that SCE&G will come out and spray paint the sides for people.(to make it less glaring) I think I'm calling.
Posted by ThePhink on January 8, 2009 at 3:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would rather it too dark to see. That way when the crooks do enter my yard they won't see the dogs coming.
Posted by icbmman on January 8, 2009 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
That's great. Get SCE&G to basically degrade what the installed lights are supposed to do because some people think it's too bright. Good grief. I wouldn't want to be their neighbors.
Here's another hint: if the brightness of the lights bothers you, invest in BLINDS for your windows! Don't degrade the quality and safety of a neighborhood just because you don't like how bright the street lights are. Such actions just demonstrate pure selfishness.
Posted by outrage on January 8, 2009 at 5:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
icbmman - You used obtuse in two different comments, it is nice that you learned a new word. Just kidding!
Alot of the area that has no lighting on Rifle Range is in what we call a "donut hole". The county provides much of the services from Six Mile rd. to Porcher Bluff. Mt. Pleasant only annexes the new sub-divisions like Hamlin Plantation for the higher tax base and so the crime stats stay low. Sneaky huh!
Posted by icbmman on January 8, 2009 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Outrage, that is actually a good point about donut holes, and it also shows glaring deficiencies with the state's annexation laws. With developers still able to build outside city limits, the county should provide the infrastructure lighting, but it doesn't, primarily because counties are entities best suited for rural communities. Counties were created mostly to give farmers and large land owners governance and the ability to solve land disputes.
Urban infrastructure such as lighting and police (within an urban area) should be given to cities, but in South Carolina, cities are not able to annex developed areas in a county unless 75% of the population ask for it. In other states, urban areas can be annexed once those particular areas are developed at a certain percentage.
If SC cities had more ability to annex developed areas, street lighting would be more adequate. Cities like Denver, LA, and even comparable cities to Chas like Fort Collins ALL have adequate lighting throughout their developed areas. In fact, when a new street is built in Fort Collins, the city has zoning that requires proper drainage, sewage, sidewalks, and lighting to be built simultaneously on the street. They don't allow just a strip of pavement to be laid down and left, like they do in this state.
Posted by Picky on January 8, 2009 at 7:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think adding light does little or nothing to deter crime. First, most home thefts happen in the day, when residents are at work. So lighting the neighborhood at night will do nothing to prevent these thefts. Second, most of the theives I've known came from urban neighborhoods that were constantly lit - they really got scared in the dark suburbs. I try to keep my place very dark and a little spooky. Eight years and not a single theft, robbery, ax-murderer, terrorist, rapist, serial-killer, drug-crazed crazy, boogieman, etc.
Unfortunately, 512c and I seem to share a neighbor. She has so much exterior lighting that I can sit in my upstairs room and read without turning on any of my lights. She says she does it for security. But with all of the houses around her darkened at night, it becomes more of a beacon calling "I've got stuff worth stealing, I'm alone, and I'm scared."
How about on/off switches for neighborhood lighting in residential areas? Keep the lights on for evening activities, and shut them off at bedtime. The crescent moon is on our flag. We should be able to see it at least part of the night.
Posted by MP on January 8, 2009 at 7:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have a street light in my yard. I didn't ask for it, I did not want it, and if it went away I would be happy. My house is lit up like a mall parking lot at night. I used to love sitting out on my porch at night looking up at the sky and the thousands of stars. Not any more.
Lights use electricity. Here, that means more coal burned. That means more fossil fuel consumed, more pollution in our atmosphere and in our waterways. You want it lit up like New York? I-95 runs there from here.
Posted by firemike on January 8, 2009 at 10:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You have got to be kidding me! I don't give a $hit if Mount Pleasant doesn't have a single light in a single neighborhood. If you don't like the lighting don't buy a house in that neighborhood! I just talked to a guy at the gas station who I've know for a few years. He owned a pretty big electrical company. I say owned because he told me he had to close it down last month. He explained work had slowed down and people owed him money but they couldn't pay him. He sent his wife and two daughters to Greenville last week to live with her parents because they lost their house recently. He asked if I had any work he could do for me, any work at all. I of course told him I didn't have work for myself much less him. Since I knew he didn't drink or do drugs I asked him if I could give him a couple of bucks. He accepted and we walked over to his car as we talked. He obviously was sleeping in his car because I saw a pillow and blanket in it. So I'm sorry if the lighting is less than perfect in your Mount Pleasant neighborhood.
Posted by Really on January 9, 2009 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
firemike,
Nice story, good for you. I want lights and sidewalks. Unemplyment rates have nothing to do with safety in the neighborhood. If anything, that is creating work for people.
Posted by firemike on January 9, 2009 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Then let you home owners association pay for it Really not my tax dollars!
Posted by icbmman on January 9, 2009 at 11:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Firemike, that is an obtuse statement. Lights are normally installed for neighborhoods, but connecting streets and highways have to be lit by whatever government entity is in charge. For Picky, it is pretty illogical to think that lighting doesn't deter crime and provides safety for drivers and pedestrians. Why do you think cities around this nation do it? Again, as I seem to repeat ad nauseum, common sense is not so common anymore.
This whole NIMBY attitude is so prevalent in this area, its a wonder that ANYTHING gets built here. Don't complain about the crime here when your mentality is so convoluted that you don't try to do anything about it like making it hard for criminals to remain inconspicuous with adequate lighting.
Posted by walleyedwoman1215 on January 9, 2009 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why would you CHOOSE to run alongside a highway when you can't see your hand in front of your face? Seriously, buy a treadmill, join the YMCA ($35 per month), invest in a few of the thousands of exercise DVDs available or put a mini-trampoline in your garage. I do not expect the world to change to suit my exercise habits, or because I'm inconvenienced. Sheesh!
Posted by icbmman on January 9, 2009 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Walleyed, that's not the issue. What if there was a deer or dog in the road? How about a fallen tree limb? What if its a person who is stranded and is walking to find help? Road lights not only help pedestrians, they help drivers.
The point is that in an urban area, all streets should be adequately lit for nighttime, regardless if you disapprove of their exercise activities.
Refusing to install proper lighting in city areas not only displays incomptenence, but also willful negligence and stupidity. When you have town officials unwilling to consider the safety of its citizens for freaking STARGAZING shows how utterly idiotic many of these people are. It's like they're begging for an accident or crime to occur.