Freeways With High-mast Lighting

[DaTrain]

Though this is not on the minds of many, every single freeway in Houston has high-mast lighting. What's up with that? It seems like with all this freeway reconstruction going on for some ten-odd years these lights just pop up all over, messing up the nightsky views in a few spots. IMO I loved them at first cause I thought it was a pretty sight to see. But now the lighting is just ugly as hell because for example: I can't even look at DT at night without a few of these lights blocking the view like a total eyesore; I can see these from up to three miles away; a total eyesore at night, let alone nighttime pollution. Why can't high-mast lighting be restricted to just the freeway interchanges (typically better navigation between freeway ramps) and just have city street style lights in the medians back in those days?

All these lights all over town:

As opposed to these lights (which have probably been removed for high mast lights as we speak):

[tw2ntyse7en]

...

[ssullivan]

As opposed to these lights (which have probably been removed for high mast lights as we speak):

Haha yeah those actually have been replaced with high masts. That picture is on the I-10 East Freeway and those lights were replaced with high mast lights early this year as part of the repaving project in that area.

TxDOT claims the high mast lights are more efficient at lighting wide freeways with frontage roads and HOV lanes. That may be the case, but they aren't cheaper to install and I think some of the older ones don't do as good of job of lighting the freeway mainlanes as the traditional lights do. I don't mind the newer lights with the full cutoff lights that point straight down as much, but the older floodlight style fixtures aimed at the freeway at odd angles I really dislike.

Fortunately the HCTRA hasn't jumped on the high mast bandwagon and has kept theirs restricted to interchanges and toll plazas. And there are a few areas of old lights still left on the other freeways, but they're disappearing quickly. In the last 18 months I-10 north of downtown between I-45 and US 59, the north and east loops between US 59 and the ship channel bridge, and Spur 527 have all been converted to high mast. Unless I'm forgetting something, that leaves a small section of US 59 between Fannin and downtown, 288 between about MacGregor and 610, SH 225, and portions of the north and south loops with the old lights.

[fewellman]

I like the high mast lights. they make it very easy to see on the freeways at night and make it safer for everybody. I think they look cool too. most cities are all dark when you are driving at night but Houston is all lit up and i tink it is really cool. It is something unique about our city. And i dont think getting rid of the lights would make any difference in seeing the night sky you live in a freaking city i dont think you are going to get a great view of the stars. go out to the country if you want to see the sky

[westguy]

The highmast lights look like UFO's over the city. I guess they CAN be hard for small planes to see - especially in fog.

[ricco67]

I have mixed emotions when it comes to those lights.

I think they're hideous but they DO do the job fairly well and can't think of another practical way of taking care of that particular situation. My only wish is that they're adjusted as effecient as possible with as little light pollution as possible for the nearby residences.

Ricco

[Perimeter285]

They're horrible! Another example of Houston's overengineered, underdesigned infrastructure (along with freeways passing over surface streets, overbuilt feeder roads, exposed rusty steel girders, and those tinkertoy Jersey barriers that are bolted together instead of poured in place). How can these things be more efficient when they cost more to install? High mast lighting along mainlanes is a mistake no matter how you approach it. UGLY UGLY UGLY!!!

A nice string of "low" lights along a median looks much more urban and classy. We should be ashamed to be the high mast capital of the world.

[MaxConcrete]

"Houston Freeways" by Erik Slotboom has a section in his book about Houston's high-mast lighting.

Yes, I devoted a section to high mast lighting since Houston is the world leader in mast lighting and it is one of the distinctive features of our freeways. My reviewers actually advised me to cut out that section since they thought my treatment was way overkill, but I kept it in since it is one of my favorite subjects.

As the book section explains, the main reason for continuous high mast light lighting is to light the full corridor, including both freeway and frontage roads. Also, the HOV lanes make conventional center lighting less practical. Other factors promoting high mast lighting include heavy commercial development along freeways (they like the spillover light), a commitment to safety, and financial strength.

I think the moderate level of lighting provided by the masts is just right to make night driving much easier, less stressful, and safer. Needless to say, I love high mast lighting.

[gardenoaksguy]

I live a couple of blocks from north loop. I dread the day mast lights come to the area. It will be the last time I will be able to enjoy some darkness at night. We tend to forget about the people who live near freeways when decisions like mast lighting are made. I did research on light pollution when working on my masters in public health. The environmental damage done by excessive lighting is only now beginning to be understood. I am aware that north loop will soon be undergoing upgrading. I for one, will be fighting the inclusion of mast lighting, and hope the neighborhood associations along north loop will join.

[kjb434]

Although high mast lighting appears to be just a massive a flooding of light, newer high mast structures and focus only on the freeway corridor and away from residential.

The hight mast lighting is much cheaper in the end and safer for light replacement crews.

They don't have to ride in the center of the freeway, park, and change light bulbs with fast moving traffic.

I was on the central expressway in Dallas once in the depressed portion where a crew had to take up the inside lane to change the bulds. Traffic backed up and it looked fairly dangerous.

The high mast lighting is equipped with a pulley system to lower each light structure at the stop for bulb replacement and repairs. Also, the placement of the masts are over on the side of the freeway in an area that will not impact traffic.

[GovernorAggie]

I can't rememebr what part of town I was in, but I saw some of the newer-style high-mast lights and saw these "eyelid" looking things that seemed to try to block the light from bleeding into the residential areas nearby.

[gardenoaksguy]

Perhaps the newer mast lights bleed less light into neighborhoods, but I can't imagine how something 100 ft off the ground cannot possibly bleed light into the backyards along frontage roads and even further in. The lights would need to be closer to the ground and very focused. Perhaps there are altenative designs that provide safety as well as light. TxDot is not the most progressive agency in the world.

[kjb434]

Actually, TxDOT is way ahead of the world in freeway lighting. Only second to Belgium.

The use of high mast lighting is seen as an innovation in safety and is very highly regard in the US and the rest of the world of transportation.

You can easily direct light even at 100 ft. There are whole manuals on how to design these things. I'm my senior design class back in college, we had to design lighting systems for a sports facility and ensure no outside property owners had excessive live intrude onto their properties. It was that hard. We had light poles up to 75ft tall. Light can be directed very easily, ever see stage lights for performance theaters. The can have only one light focused and everything else is pitch black. Add a couple more lights and broaden the beams, you can light a freeway corridor.

[Perimeter285]

If high mast lighting is so desirable, how come image-conscious DFW doesn't use it? Stop viewing this from an engineering standpoint for a moment and consider the damage these things do to the aesthetics/image/psyche of the city. The fact is, high mast lighting is ugly.

Like it or not, Houston was stuck with these monstrosities because it doesn't know how to say no to TXDOT. Now even the freeways that don't have HOV lanes (like the Loop) are illogically lined with high masts.

I'd love to see the City Council pass an ordinance prohibiting light standards taller than a certain height (say 30 feet?) except at major interchanges. Then if TXDOT balked we could accuse them of bullying a municipality.

[kjb434]

Whether it is ugly or not is personal opinion.

I can't understand how these things will hurt the psyche of the city. To me the delipidated homes and billboards do that job. To me, i don't event notice the structures when driving because they don't line the road.

The city has no jurisdiction to stop TxDOT from lighting its own property. This city can issue concerns and have them replaced. The city doesn't own the freeway right of way, TxDOT does. This places it under the state's jurisdiction.

The pros for high mast lighting for outway the cons. Another reason say Dallas doesn't use these light structures on the central expressway inside the LBJ freeway is because of its depression. The lights will be ineffective at lighting the road way because of its location. Since TxDOT is buying the lower lights en-masses for the trenched portions, the continued the light to the LBJ where the freeway emerges to the at grade position. Dallas does use these lighting fixtures on any new portion or completely rebuilt portion of freeway that is not depressed. Many of Dallas's Freeways have not been widen since the use of these lighting fixtures. Any freeway that is newer in the Metoplex is using them.

High mast lighting is not being used on US 59 from Shepherd to Main for this reason. It work on I-10 because the sides of the depressed freeway are sloped.

The lights on the loop that still exist today will stay that way because it makes no sense to replace them rigtht now. If these portions of the freeway undergo a mass reconstruction like the West Loop, they will go away.

Austin will see them on the new toll roads that will loop around the city.

[GovernorAggie]

Whether it is ugly or not is personal opinion.

I can't understand how these things will hurt the psyche of the city.  To me the delipidated homes and billboards do that job.  To me, i don't event notice the structures when driving because they don't line the road.

The city has no jurisdiction to stop TxDOT from lighting its own property.  This city can issue concerns and have them replaced.  The city doesn't own the freeway right of way, TxDOT does.  This places it under the state's jurisdiction.

The pros for high mast lighting for outway the cons.  Another reason say Dallas doesn't use these light structures on the central expressway inside the LBJ freeway is because of its depression.  The lights will be ineffective at lighting the road way because of its location.  Since TxDOT is buying the lower lights en-masses for the trenched portions, the continued the light to the LBJ where the freeway emerges to the at grade position.  Dallas does use these lighting fixtures on any new portion or completely rebuilt portion of freeway that is not depressed.  Many of Dallas's Freeways have not been widen since the use of these lighting fixtures.  Any freeway that is newer in the Metoplex is using them.

High mast lighting is not being used on US 59 from Shepherd to Main for this reason.  It work on I-10 because the sides of the depressed freeway are sloped.

The lights on the loop that still exist today will stay that way because it makes no sense to replace them rigtht now.  If these portions of the freeway undergo a mass reconstruction like the West Loop, they will go away.

Austin will see them on the new toll roads that will loop around the city.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The North Loop's reconstruction is in the 2025 Plan, but I don't remember the time frame.

[kjb434]

Yeah, they need to completely rebuild the I-45/I-610 interchange. They also have to do some ramp re-alighnment and merge area improvements.

The width of the freeway is fine, it's the interation between I-45 and the other roads that need to be fixed.

[jpcampbell]

Looking out my window, I'm at eye level with the one at San Felipe and the 610 feeder. I have no issue with them, especially after reading all the benefits listed here.

[GovernorAggie]

Yeah,

[Perimeter285]

There have been several freeways in Dallas that have undergone reconstruction in the intervening period since TXDOT first installed high masts in Houston (early 80s I believe). I'm not even counting the Central Expressway; that is a special case. Fact is, I don't know of a single instance where high masts are used outside of interchanges in DFW. Examples welcome.

Back to Houston, I just don't know how I can be the only one who thinks these things make the city look like it's blanketed with cell towers. Certainly nobody would literally want that. Just look at the opposition cell tower construction usually encounters. And cell towers aren't out in the open for everyone to see like high mast lights.

I have to admit, the newer high masts are designed and arranged a lot better than the older ones, but still, it's lipstick on a pig as far as I'm concerned.

[MaxConcrete]

There have been several freeways in Dallas that have undergone reconstruction in the intervening period since TXDOT first installed high masts in Houston (early 80s I believe).  I'm not even counting the Central Expressway; that is a special case.  Fact is, I don't know of a single instance where high masts are used outside of interchanges in DFW.  Examples welcome.

I'm in agreement with you regarding Dallas. High masts are used sporadically around Dallas, mostly at interchanges. I can't think of any long stretches of freeway that are lighted with masts. There are some masts along LBJ near Preston, but it is not a continuous installation.

Overall, Dallas is not as consistent as Houston with freeway lighting. All Houston freeways are lighted; most but not all DFW freeways are lighted. Just about all DFW-area freeways use conventional (non-mast) light fixtures. Central expressway uses somewhat more aesthetic fixtures.

Frontage roads are less prevalent in DFW, and this is probably one factor that contributes to the lack of masts in Dallas.

Houston is number 1 in masts, without a doubt. No other city even comes close.

[ssullivan]

TxDOT is installing about five brand new high mast towers on US 59 northeast of Houston in the small town of Shepherd, where a new overpass is being built to replace an at-grade intersection. I was shocked to see these new towers going up in a location that seems like it could be very adequately lit with standard fixtures.

The new exit/entrance ramps being built right now on 59 between Splendora and Cleveland are being lit with non-high mast lighting, which is what I would have expected in Sheperd.

[gardenoaksguy]

Does anyone besides me actually miss being able to see some stars at night? I don't know about you, but I think humans were meant to have a sleep cycle and to be able to observe "whats out there". Aside from being truely ugly (why does functional always have to be ugly?) I don't believe mast lighting makes a good substitute for constellations...unless of course, we begin to tell our children that all those lights in the sky over 610/10 west are the constellation "Freewaysia", goddess of all highways. I am sure if you look at them at night from just the right angle, they look just like the outline of a female.

[kjb434]

Why would you want to look at the stars from in the city? Any astronomical observer would tell you to head out to the open country away from the city to do star gazing. A lot more than high mast lighting contributes to not being able to see the night sky. Regular streetlights contribute and shopping center lights contribute a large part to the masking of the night sky. In my home town of 20,000 people, i would have to go out several miles from the town to get a good look at the night sky.

I would take the lighting (high mast and all) for safety over that ability to see the stars while in the city.

[Tgilbert85]

Well the Mass lighting in Houston, is not the most urban attractive look, but is anything in Houston?? With the size of Houston freeways, you must have Mass Lighting systems like we have, it the used the regular lights it would look horrible, if you notice the freeways in Houston without HOV lanes in the center do not have mass lighting. On some freeways if you pay attention you can tell how they have changed the lighting over the since since the first started installing them in the early 1980's. I am a fan of the regulaer center freeway lighting though.

[Guest danax]

Frontage roads are less prevalent in DFW, and this is probably one factor that contributes to the lack of masts in Dallas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The feeder roads have really uglified our city with the symbiotic business scene that it breeds.

[gardenoaksguy]

Perhaps we should do a liturature search for research on lighting and safety. Some of the more recent that I have read shows little relationship between night lighting and safety. I doubt we can find any proof that mast lighting actually creates a safer freeway than regular lighting (obviously excluding the safety of individuals changing lights...but I haven't seen much media coverage or studies related to that either). I suspect the reason TxDot uses them is that they are in someway cheaper to maintain. As of having to leave the city to see stars, true, even without mast lights one would need to do that. Pull some research however on the other environmental effects of overlighting cities (bird deaths/confusion, interruption of natural feeding cycles of insects and bats, sea turtle deaths on beaches due to night lighting, etc.) and you will see that we should be thinking a little more about the impact of lighting. Enough said by me about mast lighting. Thanks for listening!

[MaxConcrete]

Some of the more recent that I have read shows little relationship between night lighting and safety.

I have been told the same thing by some people, but I haven't seen the studies myself. One person told me that California does not light its freeways for the reason above. I think California is using it as an excuse since they don't have the money and have a lot of NIMBY interests.

Still, regardless of whether or not lighting improves safety, I think there is no doubt that lighting makes it easier to drive. You can see much further, which reduces vision strain. You don't have to worry about "overdriving" your headlights. For that reason alone lighting is worth it.

It also should be pointed out that high masts do not provide bright lighting. It is a low to moderate intensity over a wide area. If you drive the tollways, you will notice that the conventional fixtures actually provide brighter light over the main lanes. So lower-intensity light may actually be a recognition of the relationship to lighting and safety (or lack thereof), and TxDOT's policy is somewhat of a middle-of-the-road approach.

[tierwestah]

Though this is not on the minds of many, every single freeway in Houston has high-mast lighting.  I can't even look at DT at night without a few of these lights blocking the view like a total eyesore; I can see these from up to three miles away; a total eyesore at night, let alone nighttime pollution.  Why can't high-mast lighting be restricted to just the freeway interchanges (typically better navigation between freeway ramps) and just have city street style lights in the medians back in those days?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i actually agree with you and have thought the same thing about there being too many high mass lighting on the freeways, but you can barely even see our downtown skyline at night anyway.

[Perimeter285]

I put this quote from columnist Maria Sapova in another post, but again, it's applicable in relation to the high-mast lighting discussion:

"Communities sensitive to urban design will seek solutions that enhance their skylines and property values. Communities that just focus on the lowest-cost solutions with no regard to aesthetics will pay a price in their long-term economic development potential."

An ugly Houston today will lead to a poor Houston tomorrow.