Lack of lighting on urban highways

[ChiMilNet]

Around here, off-freeway/tollway, it varies by municipality. Some, like Plainfield and Naperville, don't seem to put much lighting up along roads like IL-59.  Others, such as Joliet, installed lighting shortly after the road (IL-59) was widened.

As for the controlled access roads, ISTHA seems to install lighting along most sections of six-lane-plus tollway, but not all sections.  All interchanges and toll plazas get lighting.  IDOT has not been installing lighting along sections of six-lane freeway built after 2000 or so (thus, I-80's and I-55's extended six-lane sections lack lighting).  All interchanges get lighting.

In Illinois, some areas have a curious lack of lighting. I keep pointing to areas in Lake County, which are notorious for it. The tollway does a more than sufficient job in any of its new construction. IDOT could do better, but I've seen worse.

[ChiMilNet]

I also wanted to point out that, having spent some time in the State of Missouri, I find their highway lighting to be very lacking. Even through urban/suburban areas, there are spots where busy highways have about as much lighting at an interchange as would a highway in a rural area. What is it about highway lighting that MoDOT is so resistant to lighting an entire ramp?

[epzik8]

The Maryland Route 32 expressway is poorly lit. Maryland Route 100 is better.

[plain]

I-95 in Richmond   

[andrepoiy]

I just drove in California and I noticed the lack of lighting on freeways. Was wondering why there were no lights as I entered the San Fernando valley, and the continued lack of lights as I approached DTLA... Also some residential areas in San Diego had basically no lights either and all street lighting came from private properties, which struck me as strange given that even Detroit, MI has lighting on its residential streets that are mostly vacant lots.

Meanwhile, I come from a province (Ontario) where high-mast lighting is the norm and any new highway expansions in suburban areas now always come with high-mast lighting.

I did notice when I drove in El Paso, TX and Amarillo, TX that TxDOT also uses high-mast lighting liberally. However, instead of being in the median (like in Ontario), they are put on the sides of the roadway.

[ChiMilNet]

I-285 around Atlanta has little to no lighting (especially baffling at some of the big interchanges, notably at I-85 NE of Atlanta and at I-75 in Cobb County), GA 400 North of I-285 has no lighting, I-75 NW of I-285 has light poles installed but are badly rusted and not operating (this is a perfectr case study for the reason I feel that aluminum poles work better), I-75 South of I-285 lacks lighting except for sporadic lighting in only the express lanes, and most suburban surface roads have minimal to no lighting. The city of Altanta itself does OK, though.

[mgk920]

How much of that is just the state and local authorities giving up under the relentless siege of scrap metal thieves relieving the lighting of its power supply wiring.  That is definitely the case WRT Caltrans urban freeways.

< sigh . . . >

Mike

[Quillz]

I just drove in California and I noticed the lack of lighting on freeways. Was wondering why there were no lights as I entered the San Fernando valley, and the continued lack of lights as I approached DTLA... Also some residential areas in San Diego had basically no lights either and all street lighting came from private properties, which struck me as strange given that even Detroit, MI has lighting on its residential streets that are mostly vacant lots.

Meanwhile, I come from a province (Ontario) where high-mast lighting is the norm and any new highway expansions in suburban areas now always come with high-mast lighting.

I did notice when I drove in El Paso, TX and Amarillo, TX that TxDOT also uses high-mast lighting liberally. However, instead of being in the median (like in Ontario), they are put on the sides of the roadway.

From a decade ago:

This is somewhat of a problem on California's urban freeways.  Normally, street lights on freeways are turned off to save electricity however a more recent problem has been copper thieves stealing the wiring to sell for scrap.  Besides streetlights, these thieves also target the wiring for metering lights (ramp meters) knocking them out of commission until the wiring can be replaced (which takes weeks).

[architect77]

I-285 around Atlanta has little to no lighting (especially baffling at some of the big interchanges, notably at I-85 NE of Atlanta and at I-75 in Cobb County), GA 400 North of I-285 has no lighting, I-75 NW of I-285 has light poles installed but are badly rusted and not operating (this is a perfectr case study for the reason I feel that aluminum poles work better), I-75 South of I-285 lacks lighting except for sporadic lighting in only the express lanes, and most suburban surface roads have minimal to no lighting. The city of Altanta itself does OK, though.

I contacted the City of Marietta about the 150 or so non working freeway lights on I-75. They said that in 2017 copper thieves had stripped the wires out, and afterwards the city and GDOT couldn't reach an agreement on paying for them to be repaired. Since then they built the reversible Express Lanes through that area and revamped the entire interstate for many miles. It's a shame to complete such a huge project and keep a cluster of hundreds of unrepaired lights.

They can be restrung with aluminum wiring with other anti-tamper safeguards which i really wish they'd do.

This brings up another bygone practice. Before the great reflectivity improvements of overhead signage, many states like NC had lights on the overheads statewide. It was neat to enter NC on I-85 from SC and be in a total rural stretch and have lighted overheads out in the middle of nowhere (all 10 miles before entering Charlotte metro).

[Quillz]

I like Alaska and parts of Canada that replace lighting with highly reflective poles. Not the same, but actually quite bright at night since there will be clusters of hundreds of them in stretches. 

[ChiMilNet]

I-285 around Atlanta has little to no lighting (especially baffling at some of the big interchanges, notably at I-85 NE of Atlanta and at I-75 in Cobb County), GA 400 North of I-285 has no lighting, I-75 NW of I-285 has light poles installed but are badly rusted and not operating (this is a perfectr case study for the reason I feel that aluminum poles work better), I-75 South of I-285 lacks lighting except for sporadic lighting in only the express lanes, and most suburban surface roads have minimal to no lighting. The city of Altanta itself does OK, though.

I contacted the City of Marietta about the 150 or so non working freeway lights on I-75. They said that in 2017 copper thieves had stripped the wires out, and afterwards the city and GDOT couldn't reach an agreement on paying for them to be repaired. Since then they built the reversible Express Lanes through that area and revamped the entire interstate for many miles. It's a shame to complete such a huge project and keep a cluster of hundreds of unrepaired lights.

They can be restrung with aluminum wiring with other anti-tamper safeguards which i really wish they'd do.

This brings up another bygone practice. Before the great reflectivity improvements of overhead signage, many states like NC had lights on the overheads statewide. It was neat to enter NC on I-85 from SC and be in a total rural stretch and have lighted overheads out in the middle of nowhere (all 10 miles before entering Charlotte metro).

Rather sad and embarassing that they can't agree on repairing highway lighting, which leads to a rather unsafe situation at night and inclement weather. At this point, if they aren't going to repair the lights, at least tear down the rusted and dilapidated looking poles on the mainline lanes until a longer term decision can be made (I guess there's a cost factor with that, though, as well). Another one I noticed was on GA 141 (Peachtree Industrial Blvd) just NE of I-285 is that there are clear placeholders (albeit rusted badly) for lighting which aren't even being used for reasons I cannot understand. That stretch at night is very dark, and I have seen people literally walking along it (I'm sure illegally) or calls pulled over with no lighting to make it safer. I promise my goal is not to pick on GDOT. I just don't understand their logic when it compromises safety on the highways in what is by far the most populated area in GA by not having lighting, but even more so when you consider that I see usually much more sufficient lighting in areas such as Valdosta.

Peachtree Industrial Blvd (GA 141)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/a7KnJxsx1amGtawCA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5BoShPUSAwyQcPFJ9

I-75 in Valdosta
https://maps.app.goo.gl/dmff1ecUQxPoo8ag8

[Quillz]

It always comes down to money. 

[Henry]

Cal freeways only have lights at on ramps and off ramps, generally. I like it that way. It minimizes light pollution.

It may be fine in rural areas, but in urban settings, the lack of lights can be very frustrating. And this is coming from someone who's been used to the continuous lighting in and around places like Chicago.

[mgk920]

String the wiring above ground?

Mike

[architect77]

String the wiring above ground?

Mike

I'd rather not have lighting than to see each pole connected with visible wires. That would be atrocious. Why haven't we perfected glow in the dark lane striping though?

[architect77]

I-285 around Atlanta has little to no lighting (especially baffling at some of the big interchanges, notably at I-85 NE of Atlanta and at I-75 in Cobb County), GA 400 North of I-285 has no lighting, I-75 NW of I-285 has light poles installed but are badly rusted and not operating (this is a perfectr case study for the reason I feel that aluminum poles work better), I-75 South of I-285 lacks lighting except for sporadic lighting in only the express lanes, and most suburban surface roads have minimal to no lighting. The city of Altanta itself does OK, though.

I contacted the City of Marietta about the 150 or so non working freeway lights on I-75. They said that in 2017 copper thieves had stripped the wires out, and afterwards the city and GDOT couldn't reach an agreement on paying for them to be repaired. Since then they built the reversible Express Lanes through that area and revamped the entire interstate for many miles. It's a shame to complete such a huge project and keep a cluster of hundreds of unrepaired lights.

They can be restrung with aluminum wiring with other anti-tamper safeguards which i really wish they'd do.

This brings up another bygone practice. Before the great reflectivity improvements of overhead signage, many states like NC had lights on the overheads statewide. It was neat to enter NC on I-85 from SC and be in a total rural stretch and have lighted overheads out in the middle of nowhere (all 10 miles before entering Charlotte metro).

Rather sad and embarassing that they can't agree on repairing highway lighting, which leads to a rather unsafe situation at night and inclement weather. At this point, if they aren't going to repair the lights, at least tear down the rusted and dilapidated looking poles on the mainline lanes until a longer term decision can be made (I guess there's a cost factor with that, though, as well). Another one I noticed was on GA 141 (Peachtree Industrial Blvd) just NE of I-285 is that there are clear placeholders (albeit rusted badly) for lighting which aren't even being used for reasons I cannot understand. That stretch at night is very dark, and I have seen people literally walking along it (I'm sure illegally) or calls pulled over with no lighting to make it safer. I promise my goal is not to pick on GDOT. I just don't understand their logic when it compromises safety on the highways in what is by far the most populated area in GA by not having lighting, but even more so when you consider that I see usually much more sufficient lighting in areas such as Valdosta.

Peachtree Industrial Blvd (GA 141)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/a7KnJxsx1amGtawCA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5BoShPUSAwyQcPFJ9

I-75 in Valdosta
https://maps.app.goo.gl/dmff1ecUQxPoo8ag8

Those wall mounts are probably for signs that used to be there. In GA the lights are paid for by the municipality the highway is located in. Some areas are still unincorporated if that is a reason.

Peachtree (Ind.) Blvd. looks like an attempt to change a former arterial into a partial limited access highway thus the concrete barrier walls. I emailed GDOT in the 2010s to replace those faded overheads on the access roads. They look bad, but I didn't succeed evidently. I was successful in getting the I-85 access road overheads all replaced around 2014. They had all faded blank by 25 years of the sun's rays beating down on the South facing green overheads.

[ChiMilNet]

I-285 around Atlanta has little to no lighting (especially baffling at some of the big interchanges, notably at I-85 NE of Atlanta and at I-75 in Cobb County), GA 400 North of I-285 has no lighting, I-75 NW of I-285 has light poles installed but are badly rusted and not operating (this is a perfectr case study for the reason I feel that aluminum poles work better), I-75 South of I-285 lacks lighting except for sporadic lighting in only the express lanes, and most suburban surface roads have minimal to no lighting. The city of Altanta itself does OK, though.

I contacted the City of Marietta about the 150 or so non working freeway lights on I-75. They said that in 2017 copper thieves had stripped the wires out, and afterwards the city and GDOT couldn't reach an agreement on paying for them to be repaired. Since then they built the reversible Express Lanes through that area and revamped the entire interstate for many miles. It's a shame to complete such a huge project and keep a cluster of hundreds of unrepaired lights.

They can be restrung with aluminum wiring with other anti-tamper safeguards which i really wish they'd do.

This brings up another bygone practice. Before the great reflectivity improvements of overhead signage, many states like NC had lights on the overheads statewide. It was neat to enter NC on I-85 from SC and be in a total rural stretch and have lighted overheads out in the middle of nowhere (all 10 miles before entering Charlotte metro).

Rather sad and embarassing that they can't agree on repairing highway lighting, which leads to a rather unsafe situation at night and inclement weather. At this point, if they aren't going to repair the lights, at least tear down the rusted and dilapidated looking poles on the mainline lanes until a longer term decision can be made (I guess there's a cost factor with that, though, as well). Another one I noticed was on GA 141 (Peachtree Industrial Blvd) just NE of I-285 is that there are clear placeholders (albeit rusted badly) for lighting which aren't even being used for reasons I cannot understand. That stretch at night is very dark, and I have seen people literally walking along it (I'm sure illegally) or calls pulled over with no lighting to make it safer. I promise my goal is not to pick on GDOT. I just don't understand their logic when it compromises safety on the highways in what is by far the most populated area in GA by not having lighting, but even more so when you consider that I see usually much more sufficient lighting in areas such as Valdosta.

Peachtree Industrial Blvd (GA 141)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/a7KnJxsx1amGtawCA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5BoShPUSAwyQcPFJ9

I-75 in Valdosta
https://maps.app.goo.gl/dmff1ecUQxPoo8ag8

Those wall mounts are probably for signs that used to be there. In GA the lights are paid for by the municipality the highway is located in. Some areas are still unincorporated if that is a reason.

Peachtree (Ind.) Blvd. looks like an attempt to change a former arterial into a partial limited access highway thus the concrete barrier walls. I emailed GDOT in the 2010s to replace those faded overheads on the access roads. They look bad, but I didn't succeed evidently. I was successful in getting the I-85 access road overheads all replaced around 2014. They had all faded blank by 25 years of the sun's rays beating down on the South facing green overheads.

It appears that the GA 141 portion of it was an arterial that was partially converted for a few miles. The interchange with I-285 is a parclo, and after GA 141 splits off Peachtree Industrial, it quickly reverts back to a surface arterial. The overhead signs are in bad shape and the lack of lighting makes it even worse. I noticed a few they just "patched" them with updated signage which makes them look even worse. The reason I suggest that those might be placeholders is because there are about a dozen of them on the overpasses in sizes and positions that suggest light pole bases. IL 53 in NW Suburbs of Chicago had a similar situation for some time until IDOT finally installed some lighting in the mid to late 2000s.

I hope this doesn't go too far off course, but just curious, how did you go about emailing GDOT? I'd love to know how I could get a hold of someone there who I could suggest a few things to (other than just lighting I promise).

[ChiMilNet]

Cal freeways only have lights at on ramps and off ramps, generally. I like it that way. It minimizes light pollution.

It may be fine in rural areas, but in urban settings, the lack of lights can be very frustrating. And this is coming from someone who's been used to the continuous lighting in and around places like Chicago.

I can relate, except GA picks and chooses where lighting even is installed. Again, the complete lack of it on some highways such as I-285 and GA 400 is most striking. Another state is MO, where they have a habit of putting one lone lightpole at the end and then beginning of ramps, very odd.