IT’S a controversial cashsaving proposal aimed at boosting Hampshire’s green credentials.

Thousands of street lights in Hampshire and Southampton will be fitted with new energy-efficient bulbs as part of a drive from county and city authorities to reduce carbon emissions.

But the new white street lights can be remotely dimmed by up to 50 per cent in a move that could bring down carbon emissions by 27 per cent.

It is a move that has been met with concern from sections of the community who fear less light could increase antisocial behaviour and crime, and pose a risk to public safety.

A trial was carried out by Hampshire County Council and Scottish and Southern Energy in low-crime areas to demonstrate the proposals, while Southampton City Council will hold two further demonstrations on June 18 and 25.

Hampshire is not the only county in the UK to undergo a street lighting replacement and dimming scheme.

Most councils across the country have rolled out similar projects, including authorities County Durham, Hartlepool and Bath.

So what is their experience?

Henry Brown, chairman of the Federation of Bath Residents’ Associations, said some sections of the community have criticised North Somerset and Bath Council’s decision to replace its street lights.

He said: “Their aim is to save electricity.

The light fittings are a rather different design than anything before, and the idea is to get as much light as possible shining down on the pavement.

“There have been complaints about two aspects of it.

“Some people have regarded them as unsightly. In the centre of the world heritage site, the streetlights are unsuitable in appearance.

“And some people have said that the new lights are fairly light, but they are used to the yellowish glow.

“I live in an area surrounded by bars and restaurants and there is a lot of late night noise around here. It would be a concern that if it was dark people would be up to no good.”

Councillor Ray Wells, of Hartlepool Borough Council, said the dimming of LED street lights has proven a success.

He told the Daily Echo: “They take some getting used to, because they don’t spread light over and around, like a traditional light.

“People were concerned about safety, without a doubt. It was the first reaction from constituents.

“But that has not proved to be the case.

Generally the fears have been exaggerated in comparison to what’s happened.

“We haven’t seen a notable increase in crime and accidents.

“Lights are being replaced on a priority basis, and areas where there is more crime are at the bottom of the queue.”

But Sylvia Hibbs, of Lewes Close, Boyatt Wood, said the dimming of lights in her neighbourhood has already led to car vandalism.

The 72-year-old said: “A neighbour’s car was scratched down the side. Where I live concerns have been raised.

“We were having incidents before and they were not as bad as this, but when both of my numberplates went I thought it was a bit of a cheek.”

Street light replacement work is due to take place in Bishop’s Waltham in February next year.

Dawn Woodsford of Rareridge Lane, added: “I am against the lights being dimmed. We are pretty fortunate in this area that we don’t get a lot of antisocial behaviour, but we do have some. It’s dim lights that exacerbate the situation.”

Meanwhile RoSPA, the body that promotes safety at work, home, schools and on roads, says local authorities need to carry out risk assessments before switching off street lights.

Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at RoSPA, said: “Councils should do a very careful risk assessment and be confident that switching off street lights will not lead to an increase in accidents or personal safety issues.

“Street lighting improves safety for drivers, riders and pedestrians. Driving outside of daylight hours is more dangerous, and pedestrians and vulnerable road users suffer from decreased visibility in the dark also.

“The presence of lighting not only reduces the risk of traffic accidents, but also their severity.

“Accident rates should be monitored to ensure that sacrificing the quality of lighting does not unduly increase the risk. Increases in