Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

light poles, fixtures on e. wash.

Expand Messages
  • peter wolff
    my understanding is that unanimous opposition to 5 choices indeed referred to the fixtures, not the poles. the city s response, as rebecca says, was to agree
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      my understanding is that unanimous opposition to 5 choices indeed referred to
      the fixtures, not the poles. the city's response, as rebecca says, was to agree
      to select poles, arms and bases for installation on w. wash. and then use it as
      a laboratory to further study fixture selection. unusually adaptable response i
      thought.

      as far as choice of poles, etc. goes, it does seem that d. dett.'s selection
      process was, for want of a better word, arbitrary. in this case, though, while
      not condoning the process, i do support his choice of pole and arm from the 5
      alternatives. here is the reason. lately i have been involved with historical
      preservation efforts in the marquette neigh. influenced by this interest, i had
      decided my preference was for #3 or 4. but then i asked gary tipler, who is
      extremely knowledgeable in these matters (and a neigh resident), what he
      thought. his response was that poles like 3 and 4 would never have been used
      here historically. of the alternatives given he preferred #1 or 2. but to make
      sure, and to try to get an insight into what the old poles did look like, i
      went to the state historical soc. yesterday and looked at old pictures. as was
      suggested at the last meeting, some of the poles around 1900 were only about
      10-12 feet high, and resembled the ones along machinery row and the north side
      of king street. but there were also taller poles, used around the square, about
      20 feet tall, that had double fixtures, attached to either end of a short
      horizontal arm, so that one fixture was over the sidewalk, while the other was
      on the street side. the pole and arm had simple decorative detail like an old
      table leg or stair railing, but nothing like the curlicues etc. in selections 3
      and 4.

      so at that point i switched my preference to 1 or 2, not because i felt
      strongly positive about them, but because 3 and 4 were now clearly identified
      in my mind as pseudo-historical pretenders which, in the presence of real
      historical buildings in the east and west wash isthmus area and surrounding
      neighs could not be justified. could we do better than the five pole assembly
      alternatives we were presented with? i really can't answer at this point
      because i don't know the market at all. but even if i wanted to argue further
      with public works about taking another look at what is available, i have a
      conflict with our neigh association meeting. perhaps others can go if you feel
      strongly enough about it. here is a url to the city website and the agenda for
      the june 5 public works mtg. it looks fairly formidable to me.

      http://www.ci.madison.wi.us/clerk/committee/board_of_public_works_agenda.htm

      as for the less than supportable attitude of the city toward our opinions,
      neigh plans, etc. this, i agree, is something that needs working on.

      peter wolff




      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
      http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.