Downtown Skyscraper Lighting

[AtticaFlinch]

How about less bickering, and more pics of good/bad examples for how you want Houston to change?

In that case, let's look at it from a purely evolutionary perspective. We evolved as diurnal creatures that occupy the day. Existing outside this niche disrupts our circadian rhythms, and over a long enough timeline this can cause havoc to us psychologically, neurologically and physiologically. Google works just as well on everyone else's computers, so I'll allow you all to do your own research to verify the accuracy of that statement.

Now, take this concept and stretch it beyond humanity, to a wacky world where other animals exist, and extrapolate the real impact of light pollution to them. If it causes us mental and physical problems to be bombarded by constant intrusive lighting, imagine what it does to those animals that have little to no comprehension of what they do or why they do it nor the impact of external factors on their behavior.

I have no pictures, but here's a little reading material for those who want bigger, better, faster and more powerful night lighting in Houston just for the sake of having it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/11/light-pollution/klinkenborg-text

If there exists no reason (that can be adequately articulated) for more lighting, then we don't need it. This isn't an opinion. It's a conclusion based on what's best for us and the rest of the inhabitants of this planet. Wanting more light for the sake of more light is irresponsible at best.

[TheNiche]

In that case, let's look at it from a purely evolutionary perspective. We evolved as diurnal creatures that occupy the day. Existing outside this niche disrupts our circadian rhythms, and over a long enough timeline this can cause havoc to us psychologically, neurologically and physiologically. Google works just as well on everyone else's computers, so I'll allow you all to do your own research to verify the accuracy of that statement.

Now, take this concept and stretch it beyond humanity, to a wacky world where other animals exist, and extrapolate the real impact of light pollution to them. If it causes us mental and physical problems to be bombarded by constant intrusive lighting, imagine what it does to those animals that have little to no comprehension of what they do or why they do it nor the impact of external factors on their behavior.

I have no pictures, but here's a little reading material for those who want bigger, better, faster and more powerful night lighting in Houston just for the sake of having it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/11/light-pollution/klinkenborg-text

If there exists no reason (that can be adequately articulated) for more lighting, then we don't need it. This isn't an opinion. It's a conclusion based on what's best for us and the rest of the inhabitants of this planet. Wanting more light for the sake of more light is irresponsible at best.

Wow, nice links. There's a lot of fascinating reading, there. And perhaps not surprisingly, most of the destinations on my international travel wish list have very little light pollution. Mongolia, much of central Asia, and Australia in particular seem to pop out at me (although subsaharan Africa doesn't count, as usual).

[totheskies]

I think your use of the word progressive to describe more lighting is misguided. As the term is often ascribed to liberalism, and as liberalism in general deplores wasted energy and destructive environmental practices, and as having a boatload of lights on at night is wasteful and potentially destructive, I think what you're a proponent of is actually a regressive lighting scheme. No amount of LEED certifications will negate the fact it makes more sense environmentally to leave the lights off than on.

I'm in total agreement with Hanuman on this issue. Let's have more dark space in the city. I'd like to be able to point out Orion or the Big Dipper to my children someday* (without having to go to the boondocks to do it).

*Why won't anyone think about the children?!!

You probably need to talk to the chemical plants and TxDOT if you want to see stars in Houston. As Niche posted above, the downtown scrapers aren't going to help you see any stars alone.

I stand by my viewpoint that having a coordinated outdoor lighting scheme is progressive as opposed to regressive, while recognizing the fact that a lighting scheme involving indoor lights could also be progressive and/or regressive.

Sounds like we should press the city to develop an ordinance that says we should be "all on" or "all off". That's the only way this argument would ever be solved.

Edited April 12, 2010 by totheskies

[Hanuman]

I'd like to point out that at around the same time as you posted this statement, you also stealthily modified someone's colorful yet inherently harmless expressions in the 'Big Head on Main Street' thread. You made the world a little bit more beige...and tried to cover it up until called out on it, whereas moderators are supposed to indicate when they've edited content (i.e. "Edited for inappropriate language").

I myself am not suggesting that the questionable content necessarily ought to be restored, but in light of your statements here and your actions in the other thread, the evidence would suggest that you're a hypocrite who can't seem to follow the rules.

*facepalm*

I got edited in this thread, in response to 20th's post. No explanation, just chopped off. Sorry Dude, just trying to add some tongue & cheek to this arena, but I guess that's not allowed if I get too close to your religeon. Guess I'll get edited again... Oh well!

[AtticaFlinch]

You probably need to talk to the chemical plants and TxDOT if you want to see stars in Houston.

No chemical plants or refineries have been built anywhere in the US since the seventies, yet I clearly remember being able to see many stars at night as a Houstonian child in the 80s. I don't buy that it's just the refineries, or even mostly the refineries.

[totheskies]

^^ Right. As I said.... TXDOT. Last time I checked, smoke is not flourescent in most cases, but it can definitely obscure vision when combined with light sources. The downtown lighting scheme generates far less light pollution than our ever-constant high-mast freeway lights. So if you want to see stars, you need to either turn off those power-lamps, or cut on up to Cut 'n Shoot.

Edited April 13, 2010 by totheskies

[AtticaFlinch]

^^ Right. As I said.... TXDOT. Last time I checked, smoke is not flourescent in most cases, but it can definitely obscure vision when combined with light sources. The downtown lighting scheme generates far less light pollution than our ever-constant high-mast freeway lights. So if you want to see stars, you need to either turn off those power-lamps, or cut on up to Cut 'n Shoot.

I'm down with that. Let's shut off those street lamps too. My disagreement with excessive light isn't limited to Downtown.

[RedScare]

Sounds like we should press the city to develop an ordinance that says we should be "all on" or "all off". That's the only way this argument would ever be solved.

The argument has already been solved. The people who pay the light bill decide whether the lights should be turned on or off, and for how long.

I like how Houston imitated C2H's old hometown of Denver and copied their lighting scheme.

Edited April 14, 2010 by RedScare

[totheskies]

The argument has already been solved. The people who pay the light bill decide whether the lights should be turned on or off, and for how long.

I like how Houston imitated C2H's old hometown of Denver and copied their lighting scheme.

For now... hopefully we will continue to "see" disagreements like those from the Chase building.

[TheNiche]

For now... hopefully we will continue to "see" disagreements like those from the Chase building.

How would the Chase building be in disagreement with Red's post? He said that the owners get to decide, and in this case, they have. That is evidence of Red's succinct correctness on the issue.

Now, as for my answer to your hope, I say: Hopefully you don't actually believe what you said and understand that the Chase building, itself, an inanimate object, did not decide to install lights upon itself and turn them on. Anthropomorphism as applies to high rises is creepy and reminds me of the overwrought Ashby controversy.

[totheskies]

So you're saying that the blue lights that we saw a couple of weeks ago were a collective figment of our imaginations? The Chase building is in fact an inanimate object. But being an object that houses living humans, it also houses their actions and conversations... which therefore means that it can and most certainly has housed disagreements. I was not referring to a disagreement between the physical building an arrangement of letters posted into the blogosphere. I was (obviously) referring to the ongoing discussions among people that decide the Chase buildings lighting scheme.

Edited April 15, 2010 by totheskies

[TheNiche]

So you're saying that the blue lights that we saw a couple of weeks ago were a collective figment of our imaginations? The Chase building is in fact an inanimate object. But being an object that houses living humans, it also houses their actions and conversations... which therefore means that it can and most certainly has housed disagreements. I was not referring to a disagreement between the physical building an arrangement of letters posted into the blogosphere. I was (obviously) referring to the ongoing discussions among people that decide the Chase buildings lighting scheme.

obviously.

[Hanuman]

obviously.

Second the obviously motion!

[GovernorAggie]

Double-you-oh-double-you.

[Metro Matt]

So are Chase Towers new LED lights still lit? What color are they now?

Did Wells Fargo ever turn their back on?

Edited September 5, 2010 by Metro Matt

[Howard Huge]

I dont think the opinions of the ten people in this thread are going to matter/change too much of downtowns lighting.

[Metro Matt]

I dont think the opinions of the ten people in this thread are going to matter/change too much of downtowns lighting.

You never know...

There are probably more high profile guests floating around on these forums than we realize.

[totheskies]

Yay time to drudge up this thread again

The Chase building confuses the heck out of me. They have "played with" the lights a few times this season, but won't turn them on with the other buildings. They have several colors up there to choose from too. What gives????

And come on... it's now officially time to stop looking environmentally conscious and start showing some pride in the city. Granted, I see that Denver also has a conservative lighting scheme, but they have a more conservative skyline than Houston anyway, and better natural scenery to boot. We need to accent the cool architecture that we have in our skyline. At night, that is best done through lighting.

[mfastx]

And come on... it's now officially time to stop looking environmentally conscious and start showing some pride in the city. Granted, I see that Denver also has a conservative lighting scheme, but they have a more conservative skyline than Houston anyway, and better natural scenery to boot. We need to accent the cool architecture that we have in our skyline. At night, that is best done through lighting.

Agreed. It's almost as if our downtown building owners are embarrassed of their building's architecture. And please don't give me that crap about how they can't afford it. Are you kidding me? An owner of a skyscraper in the 4th largest city in America can't afford to light up their own building in a classy manner?

[TheNiche]

An owner of a skyscraper in the 4th largest city in America can't afford to light up their own building in a classy manner?

What's the difference between a "gentlemen's club" and a "tittie bar"? ...because that's the difference between your definition of "classy" and my definition of "tacky".

[20thStDad]

Downtown shots during MNF tonight looked pretty dark, but I like it.

[rsb320]

Downtown shots during MNF tonight looked pretty dark, but I like it.

I thought so too (dark). I also think that we need to bring some bling back. It's Christmas damnit.

[mfastx]

What's the difference between a "gentlemen's club" and a "tittie bar"? ...because that's the difference between your definition of "classy" and my definition of "tacky".

So you think all downtown lighting is tacky?

[TheNiche]

So you think all downtown lighting is tacky?

I like the lighting on the Gulf Building and Neils Esperson Building because it showcases the intricate detail on the facade and complements the color of sandy color. Likewise, the lighting on Bank of America Center was custom-designed from the outset to compliment the building's architecture. I don't even especially like these buildings' over-adorned styles, but their lighting schemes were calculated and deliberate. I can respect that, just as I respect the austere yet random glow of lit offices juxtaposed against deep sky such as characterizes modern office buildings.

Compare that to an afterthought, lighting that practically screams at you, "look at me!" "here I am!" "come and get me!" Or at its worst... "me too!"

[mfastx]

I like the lighting on the Gulf Building and Neils Esperson Building because it showcases the intricate detail on the facade and complements the color of sandy color. Likewise, the lighting on Bank of America Center was custom-designed from the outset to compliment the building's architecture. I don't even especially like these buildings' over-adorned styles, but their lighting schemes were calculated and deliberate. I can respect that, just as I respect the austere yet random glow of lit offices juxtaposed against deep sky such as characterizes modern office buildings.

I agree, those two buildings have excellent lighting. It's too bad that many of our buidings downtown just aren't made for classy lighting.

I do like the lighting of the windmills of Hess Tower.

[TheNiche]

I agree, those two buildings have excellent lighting. It's too bad that many of our buidings downtown just aren't made for classy lighting.

I do like the lighting of the windmills of Hess Tower.

I'll throw that in as yet another building that I don't especially like, but where I can respect the intent of the lighting.

So are we pretty much in agreement that awesome lighting is awesome and that mediocre lighting incorporated as an afterthought is a tacky distraction not worth having?

[rsb320]

Is Enron/Chevron lighted anymore? I liked the orignal oval lighting scheme.

[totheskies]

I'll throw that in as yet another building that I don't especially like, but where I can respect the intent of the lighting.

So are we pretty much in agreement that awesome lighting is awesome and that mediocre lighting incorporated as an afterthought is a tacky distraction not worth having?

We're in agreement that there are 2.5 million(ish) people in the City of Houston, and that every one of them likely has a different interpretation of what is tacky. I think the Chase building's lighting is ok, but that they should have a little it of lights down the sides as well. Something that accents the fact that the building is actually five sided.

[TheNiche]

We're in agreement that there are 2.5 million(ish) people in the City of Houston, and that every one of them likely has a different interpretation of what is tacky. I think the Chase building's lighting is ok, but that they should have a little it of lights down the sides as well. Something that accents the fact that the building is actually five sided.

No! Bad.

[20thStDad]

My favorite view of downtown is from the west side, coming over the Durham bridge over White Oak bayou, and to a lesser extent Shepherd on the bridge over Allen/Memorial (it's closer and the angle is better but there is some tree blockage), just before the sun comes up. The natural light makes downtown look awesome before the sun pops above the horizon. Every morning I come that way, I wish I had my camera (and 2 extra hands).