Lighting Design in Our Historic Districts ( 1. November 2006, 07:19 by Derek Young) ~ Hmmm...
I’ve received several emails about the new lights being installed on I Street. The problem for these readers seems to be that the lights are… ugly. They straddle the Historic North Slope District and the Historic Stadium District and add very little value – other than light. People asked for more light and they got light. The problem is now one of design. Could our new lights have helped develop our sense of history and community instead of simply being functional? Or is that too much to ask and/or consider?
Commenting Is Closed
Comments are allowed for two weeks from the posted date. If you want to make a comment or reopen this discussion, please contact us with your request. Thank you for visiting.
They’re better than the cobra-head ones that are attached to power poles along I Street. Even though they’re not at a more “human scale” their profile is a decent compromise between those cobra ones and the great, more historic lamps — which, in some neighborhoods after being shut off a few years ago, were replaced with 10’ tall ones. They still look OK but glow with flourescent bulbs rather than the far more charming incandescent.
1 | Posted by KevinFreitas | Nov 1, 08:17 AM
Just throw on some flower baskets each year.
2 | Posted by Chris from Theater District | Nov 1, 09:42 AM
When we first moved to north tacoma about a year ago (N L st) we received a letter from the city asking us to vote on replacement street lights for a section of our road. The options were “cobra head style” taller streetlights spaced further away at no cost to the residents of the street, or “acorn style” shorter and closer together and the residents would have to cover the difference in cost between the two. The city would set up a payment plan and we would be able to pay our share for the nicer lights over seven years. To me it was totally worth the personal cost to have a nicer looking street.
Maybe the problem in this case is not the city putting up ugly lights, but that residents aren’t willing to chip in to have better ones.
3 | Posted by karin | Nov 1, 09:47 AM
A popular topic on exit133 is that of neighborhood identity. Here is one of those cross-roads where a decision was made that could either add to neighborhood (and city) identity or detract from it.
I don’t know the history of this project, or if it was started before the inception of the North Slope Historic District, but why the City of Tacoma would even give the option of installing lighting best suited for a K-Mart parking lot is beyond me! I would almost rather continue driving in the dark than have to see these ugly light posts line the sides of a beautiful arterial during the day.
Just as with [insert name] Plaza and the Walled-off Bridge downtown, our public agencies have as much or more lacking than private entities when it comes to design sensibilities.
Was the Tacoma’s Historic Preservation officer consulted? If I were a member of the North Slope board, I would be mad as hell! With all the effort being put to ensure sensitive design where replacement windows in homes even have to be reviewed, why then should the City of Tacoma be held to a lower standard?
Let’s tear the lights out, sell them to Lakewood, and try again…
4 | Posted by morgan | Nov 1, 10:59 AM
I think the 3 post summed it all up. You were given an option to pay to have nicer lights, and guess what you got the ugly ones. People on Hilltop cheered when we recently got our new street lights. You folks groan that yours are ugly. Tell you what we have some nice period lights lining our neighborhood streets and would be happy to trade you for a few of those cool flashing school zone signs.
5 | Posted by Hilltop, its not as bad as you think! | Nov 1, 04:11 PM
I assume that the city is going more for function than form. These are arterial streets, traveled often and have a high traffic volume. The necessity here is light and lots of it.
I can understand a person not wanting to add to their tax burden when is comes to a LID. We are being severly taxed in the State of Washington and everyone wants more, the city, the county and the state.
6 | Posted by Mary Jo | Nov 1, 06:39 PM
As taxpayers, we fund everything in the City. There needs to be some marriage between form and function. The cheapest isn’t always the best. I understand that there are budget considerations, but we’re not talking about replacing EVERY light in the city. This is a prime example of why Tacoma lacks an identity (there was a recent discussion of an architectural identity).
7 | Posted by M.W. | Nov 2, 07:08 AM
“...we’re not talking about replacing EVERY light in the city.” Just the ones in front of your house. Get off it their just street lights. I can appreciate the ascetic, but there are more urgent civil projects in Tacoma like ripping up all the bumpy old cobble stone streets and paving them with smoooooth asphalt.
8 | Posted by Hilltop, its not as bad as you think! | Nov 2, 09:51 AM
If the new lights on 30th are to look like the ones shown here, we have mad no prgress at all in turning this street into a NEIGHBORHOOD STREET with attractive lighting.
9 | Posted by John A. Fullinwider | Nov 3, 10:52 AM
Commenting is closed for this article.
Exit133 is about Tacoma. It's about Politics, Civic Involvement, Urban Development, the Arts, and the many interests of our readers.
Do you want to see your message in this space? Become an Exit133 Advertiser!
A special THANK YOU to our Supporters like Amocat Cellars for making Exit133 possible. Thank you.
