Open letter to Essex County Council
We have recently discovered that our street lighting has been withdrawn from midnight to 5am in order to 'reduce energy' and the carbon footprint'.
To the front of our house, there is only one street lamp for the front of the close. This has been turned off from midnight to 5am. To the rear of the close there are four street lamps, all of which remain lighted. How does this conserve energy and reduce the carbon footprint ?
Why not ensure the only light at the front of the close remains lit, whilst withdrawing one/two of the lights at the rear of the close from midnight to 5am?
Should not the primary and overriding consideration be for people's safety and the integrity of their property? This does not seem to have merited any consideration.
There is a very real safety risk to people having to work shift work,working for the emergency services, or having to attend an emergency, particularly the elderly.
People that I have spoken to are considering installing security lighting. If every resident in the close introduced security lighting would this not be in direct conflict with reducing energy and carbon footprint?
Assuming that a proportion of our council tax is allocated to street lighting, do residents
not qualify for a reduction to cover security related costs?
It appears that local authorities are introducing war time policies in peace time
Alan Oyston, North Weald