Nuisance caused by new street lamp between Whale Rock and Beaches Apts, Clifton

TO: Saville Allan Wenn
City of Cape Town

Dear Saville

Tomorrow at 10 am is fine, thank you.  I will meet you under the lamp and hope we can resolve the nuisance. I will email you under separate cover more photos showing the impact of the new street light nuisance.

I hope Mr. Chris Willemse of the CBRRA can also be there at that time. In advance of that meeting and to save time for all of us  may I please make the following suggestions to resolve this problem?

1. The previous street lamp deflector was removed (without notice to me or reasons given for doing so) by the Electricity Department some time ago when they replaced the light bulb with the stronger (halogen?) bulb which now throws 20 –40 m plus and much wider and even more invasive pool of light in the area and as a result refracts  onto and into surrounding properties and buildings, including our property. It is so strong that we can see the yellow parking lines in pitch darkness from quite a distance away (100, m estimate?) and the street light bounces off neighbors' buildings too, upwards and into our bedrooms.
2. I can send you some more photos if you wish to see what it looks like at night, or we can meet one evening after dark if you wish to monitor it then. 7 pm is fine.
3. Your colleagues should still have the deflector they removed, so I can't see why it is necessary to pay extra for restitution, or why I should be held liable for a nuisances caused by the Electricity team/Council contractors/employees, also in view of the legal obligations for Council to stop the nuisance in terms of various environmental and public health laws?
4. The comment below that you cannot remove the lamp as other road users will be be affected is not supported by the facts on the ground and in this area:
1. There are 4 lamp posts in very close proximity to each other here in addition to roof lights from properties adjoining Victoria Rd..
2. This particular spot is over lit through a combination of public and private artificial exterior lighting at night.
3. As residents and rate payers we live here and can't sleep as result of the reflection into our bedrooms at two levels of our house now also by this street lamp, exacerbated by existing amplification of the light nuisance by the Beaches' Apts. (10 Victoria Rd.) illegal roof and sign lights. 
4. Road users will not be negatively affected by your department taking steps to ameliorating the light nuisance posed by this lamp opposite our house as:
1. there are already too many street lamp posts here providing more than sufficient light over a short distance of 40 m minimum.
2. surrounding roof lights add additional light sources illuminate the public and private spaces more sharply than daylight at this spot;
3. road users and motorists are passing through this spot in an average of 1 second whereas we live here 24 hours a day, with the night time of about 11 hours being invaded by artificial light at night causing permanent residents and ratepayers to suffer more severely from the invasive light sources.
4. motorists manage very well with their vehicle head lamps in this over this overly well lit part of Victoria rd. as they also do 100 m away towards Bantry Bay where there is light only over a greater distance only on the sea side of Victoria Road and also a few kilometers away where there are again no artificial pavement lights (on one side of the road).  
5. There is really no basis for stating that motorists will be negatively affected by the removal of this one lamp. They manage perfectly well 8 km away on Victoria Rd. towards Llandudno where there are no lights on either side of the road, and all along the hundreds of thousands of roads in our country which have no street lights at all.  There are several light bulbs out at several nearby lamp posts (incl. on the duplicate lamp post at Whale Rock apt. opposite our house).
6. There are few pedestrians using the pavement here at night and this area is so excessively well lit with so many permanent sources of artificial light (incl. surplus street lamps) that removing this one light is unlikely to affect pedestrian safety here. I have been monitoring the possible impact on pedestrians here at at night and cannot believe that the removal of this one light would endanger anyone's safety given the reality of excessive artificial light sources here. 
7. May I suggest another option as possible solution: could you temporarily remove the light bulb on this one lamp (as if it blew) and we can both monitor the positive or negative effect thereof? The deflector will then not have to be fitted, you will not have to come back to deal with continuing nuisance problems if the deflector does not work with this new, stronger light bulb, and we should be able to get some sleep?

Please let me know what other suggestions or solutions you have?

Best regards,

Helet Merkling

Clifton

cc:  Chris Willemse, Chairman CBRRA

cc: Sandy Hustwick

cc: Mark Double

cc: Alan Berelowitz, Chairman CBO

cc:  Beverly Schafer