HomeMy WebLinkAboutSafe City - 1997-02-04 1
--
SAFECITY\1997-02-04
SAFE CITY COMMITTEE MINUTES
FEBRUARY 4, 1997
The Safe City Committee held its meeting under the Chairmanship of Trudy Beaulne with
the following members present: Alan Richardson, Karen Taylor-Harrison, Rita Westbrook,
Rahim Atabakhsh, Philip Fernandez, Bryan Stortz, Lirondel Hazlneh and Nancy Brawley.
Others Present:Brock Stanley, Julie Dean, Bob Arnot, William Sleeth, Don
Snow, Tony Frensch, Peggy Walshe, Marianne Wasilka, Chris
Winters, John McDonald, Phil Gabriel, Jay Cranston and
Sydney Hucul (Minutes).
Absent:Councillor Mark Yantzi.
ACTIVITY REPORT FOR FUTURE
MEETINGS
From: FEBRUARY 4, 1997
NAMECOMPLETION DATETO BE DONE
All Interested CommitteeIn the near futureMeet to discuss white light
Membersvs. yellow light
All Interested CommitteIn the near futureMeet to set-up a task force
Membersto investigate the colour of
light source
All Committee MembersAs soon as possibleReview the Downtown
Lighting Study Report and
return comments
ADMINISTRATIVE
1. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 4, 1997 AGENDA.
It was moved to approve the Agenda dated February 4, 1997.
24
--
Moved By: Alan Richardson
Seconded By: Rita Westbrook
CARRIED.
2.APPROVAL OF JANUARY 14, 1997 MINUTES
It was moved to approve the Minutes of January 14, 1997.
Moved By: Alan Richardson
Seconded By: Karen Taylor-Harrison
CARRIED.
OTHER BUSINESS
1.CONGRATULATIONS TO RITA WESTBROOK
It was moved by Alan Richardson that Rita be congratulated on her promotion to Inspector
Westbrook.
WORKING GROUP REPORTS
1.LIGHTING WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION
John MacDonald introduced himself and Phil Gabriel. They proceeded to give their
presentation. Some of the key points were:
the approach to Downtown activities and image should be to see the street as a place
lighting won't solve the problems, but it can provide leadership
the lighting recommendations are summarized on Page 1 of the Downtown Lighting Study
Guide
the Downtown Lighting Study Guide helps to define and understand the Downtown in the
Executive Summary on Page 3
2.DISCUSSION
John asked for the Safe City Committee's opinion of looking at the balance of the
streetscape, of seeing the street as a place/centre and to redressing the unbalance.
25
--
Nancy stated that she agreed that the street should not be used to define boundaries.
William commented that the back of the King Centre parkade and Joseph Street are so
different that he could not consider them places. John stated that places need front doors.
Phil commented that many think that a lot of lighting is relevant to night safety - that is not
true. You need to understand the city to understand lighting; recognize that night lighting
makes a difference on the sense of place; that an unconscious sense of place is created by
good lighting; light and activity brings something to life.
Nancy stated that she wanted to study done based on the needs of people and places.
She feels that the consultants have taken a very good approach, that they are using the
right perspective.
Marianne stated that she owns some row-housing on Courtland Avenue and she
commented that there is no lighting on the roads. She felt that they needed secondary
lighting, and she would also like to know where they could put the lighting to stop car break-
ins and break-ins in other areas of the complex. John stated that people becoming part of
the street will balance the lighting (as it is now, the road is well lit, but the other areas are
not). Marianne agreed that we live in a vehicular society and that people need to be able to
feel safe when walking from cars to buildings. Phil explained that engineering guidelines
are no longer being written to solely consider vehicles, but are now being rewritten to also
consider pedestrians.
William asked John what the "black blobs" were on the maps. John explained that they
were precincts where the nature of the building show what type of institution it is and what it
is used for. Market Square helps to confirm that East King is cut-off from Frederick/Scott
Streets - it reinforces the precinct, and precincts are balances.
Phil asked us to approach lighting from the point of view of vision and how we see. He
explained that cones are used for day vision, rods and cones for evening vision, and rods
for night vision. Also, our vision is seen in three colours during the day, but at night is
reduced to one colour - blue. We see by contrast, and if the contrast is too great or too
little, we will not be able to see properly. Peripheral vision reduces the feeling of being
unsafe. Controlling the balance of source (light) is the idea of this study.
Phil suggested at this time that another meeting be set up at a later date to discuss the
creating of a task force to explore the issue of the colour of the light source (white vs.
yellow).
A ten minute video was then shown which was produced by Phil for a lighting study at the
University in British Columbia. A few points of the video were:
•safety is important, but comfort is more so
•controlled contrast, character, purpose and attributes are considerations of lighting
26
--
design
Phil stated that he was willing to continue this dialogue from out of town with anyone who
was interested.
John referred to the Downtown Lighting Design Study prepared by himself while discussing
the summary of recommendations (page 1). Phil explained that there were key points in
the margin on pages 4 and 5 of the study, and also, that the summary, the text and the
appendix take the key points from a general perspective to a more detailed look.
John asked the room if better lighting meant throwing more electrical energy into a space
than you traditionally would have, or is it throwing less light into that space? Phil stated that
it generally required more energy and a higher cost to provide better lighting, but John
commented that you could have the most gain by using wasted energy (light pointed to the
sky, etc.) and redirecting it to become more efficient lighting. Phil also stated that it costs
more to provide lighting from nothing than it does to improve already existing lighting.
Alan asked what CD stood for? Phil told him that it stood for candelas. He then showed
two meters that he had brought with him. One was an illuminance meter which measures
how much light there is. The second meter is a luminance meter which measures
brightness (this meter can cost $6,000.00). A new meter/filter is currently being developed
to measure mesopic vision (night vision).
Bryan asked if HP sodium (yellow) light was out. Phil stated that they will recommend metal
halide light because, even though sodium lights last longer, there are not more efficient.
John asked it they could, at some point, discuss with him which places in the Downtown
made them feel comfortable or horrible. Phil would also like to go out with John to see half
a dozen places in the Downtown area.
Bryan feels that white light is good for him. Don Snow, after having converted to yellow
light, also agrees to having white light in the Downtown. Don Snow also asked if there
were any scientific arguments to support the cost of white light. He felt it would be better to
approach City Council with some scientific substantiation as well as the
Committee's/Consultant's recommendations.
Phil once again stated that he would like to have whoever is interested to meet at a later
date to discuss the issue of yellow vs. white light. He would also like this meeting to be
held soon.
Phil explained that at first there was mercury light, then incandescent. Now, yellow light is a
great improvement over nothing, but white light is preferred. In ten years, there may be
another type of light that is preferred. Don stated that they are relamping the ballasts every
five years. Phil commented that he did not recommend changing from yellow to white light
27
--
until the yellow light is used/spent. John also commented that it was okay to get a type of
light today even if technology may change in the next few years.
Julie commented that low light levels may produce enough lighting and women may see
better, but many associated safety with bright lights. She wondered if consultations were
ever done after lighting was changed to show that safety can be better without bright lights?
Phil stated that a survey of types of light that people liked resulted in the discovery that an
equal amount of people felt safety was improved versus and an equal number saying it
wasn’t this conclusion may have arisen because people looked at the fixtures to determine
the amount of lighting, as well as looked at the line of vision.
John commented on historical areas vs. other areas. He felt that such areas as malls have
appropriate lighting for their area, but a downtown area does not due to the fact that it
cannot change its environment. Downtown lighting can be changed, though, to balance all
activities. William was interested in Phil's evaluation of Victoria Park. Phil responded that it
was a big improvement from what it was.
Karen Redman inquired as to what Jay's role was in the group. Jay explained that he
helped John to complete street analysis, produced drawings for the development project
area, and that he would be running the working session later this evening in completing
exercises to gather information.
Brock handed out the preliminary copies of the study and asked that everyone read them
and get back to them with any comments. He explained that the Committee was a
sounding board for the City and the Consultants and that the City Council and the public
would appreciate any comments that they could provide. John also stated that the glossary
of lighting terms should be distributed as well.
Rita enquired about the time lines for completing the study, getting approval and going
ahead with the work. Julie responded that time lines were to have the initial concept by
April, approval by May, and to be completed by June. There have been shifts in Public
Works which now require us to re-evaluate our time lines.
Phil invited anyone who wished to try out the meters to come and point them out the
window to see how they work.
Trudy thanked John, Phil and Jay for their presentation and for reminding us of forgotten
biology. She also thanked DAC members and the Lighting Work Group for being in
attendance.
William asked when the comments had to be submitted. John replied that they did not
have to be formally submitted (ie. in writing, etc.). John stated that they will be moving into
the design phase, and that they will be discussing that at tomorrow morning's meeting.
William asked for a description of how we can turn the study into Design Guidelines. Phil
28
--
explained that the study was the beginning of the guidelines, that it was the first and second
chapter out of six chapters. He then invited anyone interested in defining the guidelines to
join him tomorrow morning at 8:00 am in Williams to discuss it.
Meeting adjourned: 6:10 pm
S. Hucul
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
In the Dark About the Lumen.
City of Ottawa - Street Lighting Study.
Glossary of Lighting Terms