« Sleepless on Livingston CB1 Criticizes Truck Traffic in Williamsburg »

September 22, 2009

Flatbush Streetlamp Project Draws Criticism

bishopcrook_220909.jpgA $4.7 million project to replace 500 working streetlamps in Flatbush with antique bishop's crook lamps has met with local resistance, reports the Daily News. Some residents do not understand the utility of spending $10,000 per lamp (standard streetlamps cost $4,000 each) when the current fixtures work just fine and when the neighborhood could spend the money elsewhere, such as streets and sidewalks in disrepair. "It's ridiculous," Kent Thomas, 24, told the News. "The lights we have work fine. There are hungry people in this neighborhood who need help; we need shelters and soup kitchens." The project, which is half complete, received funding from the borough president's 2007 capital budget. In contrast, Brooklyn Heights has launched a similar, $2.7 million campaign to install bishop's crook streetlamps, with support from the Brooklyn Heights Association. Whereas opponents of both projects decry the waste of funds, the BHA defended the new street lights, saying they are beautiful, they enhance the neighborhood, and they are historically significant.
Flatbush Street Lamp Replacement a Dud [NY Daily News]
Brooklyn Heights' Lights [Brownstoner]




Posted by jscheff at 10:01 AM | Comments (49)
Categories: Flatbush, Streets

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11534

Comments

Fancy streetlamps - what do you think this is? Brooklyn Heights?

Posted by: dirty_hipster at September 22, 2009 10:07 AM

hmmm 5 million dollars for 500 streetlights = ? i dont feel like doing the math but that's like..

5,000,000 / 500?

uh, 50K a street light? whoa

street lights are stupid anyway


*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at September 22, 2009 10:10 AM

They are right that the money is better spent on buckling sidewalks. Alonf Stuyvesant Ave though, we have both new sidewalks and antique streetlights.

For those of you who haven't been to Bed Stuy, it ain't so "ghetto" anymore. Knowing all the people on my street, I can't believe it ever really was "ghetto."

I'm glad brooklyn Heights finally caught up.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 10:12 AM

Had an argument w/ a friend re: the economy and aesthetics like street lamps. Sort of a chicken and the egg conundrum. Is this the right thging to do at this time given the economy, aren't we just correcting a wrong (taking them out in the first place)? many good questions, no easy answers...

Posted by: Joe from Brooklyn at September 22, 2009 10:17 AM

$4.7 million / 500 = $9,400 per lamp.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 10:17 AM

This is a cue for Benson to appear......

That said, I more than anyone, love the shepherd's crook lamps and think they add a lot of character to historic neighborhoods.

BUT.....safe streets, and other public works that are not just replacing things that actually work,(kinda)but are feeding people, etc, are more important.

It would be great to have both, and it would be very satisfying if they nixed the lamps, to actually see the money go to those other necessary repairs, programs, instead of the funds disappearing into the pit of city spending, never to return to the community. If that is the only alternative - the money going wherever, without a plan, as opposed to street lamps, go ahead with the lamps. At least there is a tangible outcome.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 22, 2009 10:18 AM

> street lights are stupid anyway

Yes, how I hate having the streets illuminated at night. We should return to the good old days of carrying torches.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 10:21 AM

If the only difference in the street lamps is that the ones that cost 2.5 times as much are niftier looking, then, yeah... it doesn't make a lot of sense.

And why do the niftier ones cost so much more? Is the suppliers somebody's brother-in-law or something?

Posted by: northsloperenter at September 22, 2009 10:26 AM

> And why do the niftier ones cost so much more?

Well, one often pays a premium for good design. They may also be more complicated to construct. And yes, the suppliers may be connected.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 10:31 AM

Snark, I so love you.

Northslope, you've got cast iron, with curliques and black paint, and shaped glass globe vs stainless steel stick with a light on it. What can I say?

Posted by: Montrose Morris at September 22, 2009 10:31 AM

I myself hate the design. Why are we so intent on making every part of Brooklyn look like a disneyland version of the past? However the lamposts looked in 1880, they look grotesque in their 21st century proportions. And is there no room for modern design in this city? These Franken-lamps are a symbol of our aesthetic bankruptcy.

BTW I've asked the whores on Putnam Avenue to dress like Victorian street-walkers...

Posted by: Putnamdenizen at September 22, 2009 10:33 AM

most of the time i love snarkslope (sorry i refuse to call you distmassnark). but not in this thread

*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at September 22, 2009 10:35 AM

yes, expensive nicer looking street lamps so dorks can tape flyers for their moving businesses, handyman services, stoop schlock sales, etc all over them. So historically accurate.

Posted by: Petebklyn at September 22, 2009 10:35 AM

Fair enough.

Then I'd say the cast iron, curliques, and black paint have priced them out of the government-paid-for-market and the local businesses and residents should pool funds if they want to pay for those lights in their neighborhood.

Posted by: northsloperenter at September 22, 2009 10:36 AM

They did it on my street in Bed Stuy and I was very pleased. It really adds to the charm. How do you measure economic sense? Maybe it helps to increase property values, maybe it helps keep crime at bay, maybe it would help you sell your house by making the block more appealing. And it puts people to work.

Posted by: grilledsardine at September 22, 2009 10:39 AM

sometimes i wonder if excess spending in gov't is actually worse than corporate.

Posted by: ftgreenepark at September 22, 2009 10:39 AM

Pete, would you tear off a posting for a lost kitten???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at September 22, 2009 10:41 AM

I say spend the money, landmark more areas to bring in more toursit that will support local business. The street lamps in Hershey PA look like giant Hershey kisses. Brooklyn has lots of catching up to do.

Posted by: jack slade at September 22, 2009 10:41 AM

At this point, I'm just happy when government dollars are spent and goods/services are received. Seems to me the usual is for dollars to disappear into the fog.

This design is too Disney for my taste, but I missed the conversation about which design should be adopted. I like the iron post with large globe on top -- like in some cities' historic districts. I also think these lamps are way too tall.

Posted by: Ringo at September 22, 2009 10:42 AM

wouldnt parallelogramatic rotisserie style lighting on street corners make 1000 x more sense? both in function and cost?

*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at September 22, 2009 10:42 AM

I don't see anything wrong with spending some money to beautify the city's streets. If the funds are withdrawn for this project what will it be used for? To rent a huge tent and buy liquor for the next satmar all-guy party by the waterfront? To buy a new fleet of limos for the council staff? Or will it just evaporate in the morass of city spending? This is a tangible project that will compliment the millions of dollars in private money that have gone into the restoring the boro's building stock. It wasn't an issue when they were installed in Victorian Flatbush, or in Stuyvesant Heights, or along Smith Street. But now that they are proposed for Brooklyn Heights they are morally objectionable. Such baloney. Just put in the lights and get on with it.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 10:43 AM

quote:
The street lamps in Hershey PA look like giant Hershey kisses. Brooklyn has lots of catching up to do.


a giant

:-/


*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at September 22, 2009 10:46 AM

"If the funds are withdrawn for this project what will it be used for? "

I believe the suggestion is for street and sidewalk repair.

If the street lamps are being manufactured in NYC and most of the employees live in NYC, then I withdraw my objection to them.

Posted by: northsloperenter at September 22, 2009 10:47 AM

Putnamdenizen,

I completely agree with you on both points. I don't understand the Brownstone Disney urge or the design of the lamp posts. They're not much different than the suburban McMansion interpretations of the French Chateaux or the Italian Villa that we love to mock.

Posted by: superstooper at September 22, 2009 10:50 AM

Minard- I think the moral objection relates to the fact that we are in a serious recession and unemployment is over 10%. This may not be the time to allocate funds for such a project.

Posted by: orestes at September 22, 2009 11:00 AM

absolutely, DIBS. Stupid people can't keep track of their pets. If they lost a child, Child Protection services would be all over them. Next time I tear down one of the missing pussy flyers, I'm calling PETA and animal cruelty.

Posted by: Petebklyn at September 22, 2009 11:02 AM

"BTW I've asked the whores on Putnam Avenue to dress like Victorian street-walkers..."

I was wondering where all those discarded pettitcoats were coming from.

Posted by: wasder at September 22, 2009 11:22 AM

orestes, the very best time to spend public funds is during a recession. That is what the president's stimulus bill is all about. This is the best time to spend money on goods and services. Spending money on tangible projects is not evil. Quite the opposite. Being stingy during a recession will not help one bit.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 11:26 AM

> most of the time i love snarkslope... but not in this thread

Sorry rob, I really should be nicer.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 11:29 AM

I actually like the cobrahead lamps that are being replaced, even if they're out of character in older neighborhoods. They have that mid-twentieth century George Jetson thing going. I especially like their name.

But the prevailing aesthetic does seem to be to hermetically seal Brooklyn's late-19th century streetscape, and where that can't be done, we'll do our best to come up with an ersatz version. Because anything that's old, or can be made to look old, is better than anything that's new and looks it.

Posted by: Sparafucile at September 22, 2009 11:36 AM

I really like the bishop crook lights. The Daily News article is about parts of Flatbush south of PLG, but they're being installed in our Historic District as I write this and I haven't met anyone who isn't pleased.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at September 22, 2009 12:14 PM

I like them very much on my street (Lefferts Ave. in PLG), although my neighbor commented that she thought they would make her taxes go up. I told her that had already happened.

Posted by: babs at September 22, 2009 12:27 PM

"It's ridiculous" Can someone please send Kent Thomas a banjo and clue.

Posted by: jack slade at September 22, 2009 12:29 PM

There are always the contrarians (like spafucile) who always enjoy having the opposite opinion.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 12:31 PM

> There are always the contrarians...

I disagree!

Posted by: DitmasSnark at September 22, 2009 1:08 PM

I said contrarians not snarkarians.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 1:38 PM

Minard- you reach an illogical conclusion. The fact that one may have a moral objection to spending money on unnecessary street lamps in a time of recession does not lead to the conclusion that such a person believes that no money should be spent on public projects. I don't know how you get there. Sure, wise spend of public funds can have a stimulative effect on the economy during a recession, but not all expenditures are equal. I would think it were self-evident that public spending is not evil. In my view, public spending should be used wisely during these times- provide necessary services to people, rebuild infrastructure that needs repair, etc.

Posted by: orestes at September 22, 2009 2:10 PM

Not to be the hall monitor but i wasn't thrilled with your comment, minard "If the funds are withdrawn for this project what will it be used for? To rent a huge tent and buy liquor for the next satmar all-guy party by the waterfront?"

It wasn't really necessary.

Posted by: bxgrl at September 22, 2009 2:49 PM

Other than that, right now, if it ain't broke don't fix it. That's too much money for his particular project and I don't say that lightly- I love the old style lampposts and I am a big supporter of landmarking. But in this economy to spend money on pretty lights when we have so much else that needs addressing seems a little let them eat cake-ish to me.

Posted by: bxgrl at September 22, 2009 2:51 PM

Bx, these projects do create jobs and they correct the wrongs that were done to these areas when the powers that be yanked all the orginals and installed the modern ones. 10k per light could include fabrication,removal of old and installation during off hours.

Posted by: jack slade at September 22, 2009 3:32 PM

yes- good point, jack. Would the city do that, using city employees? Or do they hire contractors so the job actually goes to businesses and workmen that really need it?

Posted by: bxgrl at September 22, 2009 3:48 PM

FWIW the lamp posts are being paid for out of capital funds which can't be used for operating expenses, like maintenance.While you might take exception to such arbitrary rules, they're an integral part of municipal finance.

I don't know about the lights in other parts of Brooklyn, but the ones currently being installed in the Prospect-Lefferts Gardens Historic District have been in the works for several years, since long before the economic collapse. The contractor doing the work (at least here in PLG) is Welsbach, which is based in NYC, so at least some of the money is staying here.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at September 22, 2009 3:48 PM

I hope people respect them more in your neighborhood, Bob.
They are nothing but free advertising space on Smith (and 5th Avenue)...and end up looking crappy.

Posted by: Petebklyn at September 22, 2009 4:44 PM

From my understanding unionized firms bid every so often for large maintenance contracts with the city. A few years ago Petrocelli Electric were the ones responsible for all electrical maintenence like repairing a traffic or street light thru out the city.

Posted by: jack slade at September 22, 2009 4:46 PM

All well and good to replace the streetlamps, so long as it's done in a reasonable time frame - I live in PLG, and my block has been plunged into darkness for the better part of a week, as the old lamps are taken down. NOT the most reassuring feeling if one is out after sundown.

I do wish more thought had gone into the design: the "cobraheads" were one thing, but to be time-warped back to the late 19th c.? Why couldn't Pratt or other local design-focused institutions participate in a juried competition first? What next, horse-drawn fire engines?

Posted by: vintage60 at September 22, 2009 5:28 PM

My block (Midwood II) has been pretty dark too and Midwood I was even darker tonight, with most mid-block lights down. however, the Bishops Crook light installed near my house this morning throws considerably more light onto the sidewalk [and, conversely, less on the street) than the old cobra-head.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at September 22, 2009 8:55 PM

bxgirl, you are the hall monitor and yes my satmar comment waqs a little over the top, but you know what? it's true.
Last year the whole freakin' waterfront under brooklyn heights was taken up by a huge, I mean humongous, tent, loud music and merry-making all night by thousands of men in black suits. I'm sorry, but I couldn't rent that space for my holiday party. Folks who can deliver big block votes are, to paraphrase Barbra Streisand, the luckiest people....in the world.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 22, 2009 9:52 PM

I live on a Bishop's Crook street... I have to admit, they look pretty damn nice.

Posted by: tybur6 at September 22, 2009 10:37 PM

Actually, BM, I have noticed that when riding my bike at night.... the street is actually pretty dark, while the sidewalks are bright. Makes sense, but I need to get a new headlight.

Posted by: tybur6 at September 22, 2009 10:43 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions