Vote means lights can be installed at high school football field; neighbors may sue
By P.J. D’Annunzio, Staff Writer, The Times
The Kennett Square Borough Council, by amending the borough’s zoning ordinance, appeared to clear the way for Kennett High School installing lights like these at the school’s football stadium, but neighbors are considering filing suit against the borough over how the ordinance was adopted.
KENNETT SQUARE — In what seems to be the conclusion to a long-fought battle between Kennett High School and nearby residents, Kennett Square’s Borough Council voted in favor of the adoption of a text amendment to a zoning ordinance allowing for four, approximately 80-foot-high stadium lighting fixtures to be placed on the school’s football field.
At the onset of Monday night’s Borough Council meeting, attorney John Jaros, representing Kennett Consolidated School District, introduced Matt Sterner — a lighting expert from Musco Sports Lighting — to once again deliver his presentation of the specifics of the proposed light fixtures to the Council.
After the presentation David Malman, legal counsel for those residents opposed to the stadium lights’ construction, voiced his clients’ concerns in the public comment forum. Malman objected to the three-minute time limit allotted for individual public comment, stating that the points his clients have expressed about the ordinance couldn’t be accurately and fully summarized in that period of time. However, he continued on to address specific concerns regarding the text amendment to the ordinance.
“If there are any ambiguities in the ordinance the ordinance can either be declared defective or alternatively the applicant gets the benefit of the doubt as to any of those ambiguities,” he said. “Some of those ambiguities include use of the word ‘et cetera.’ When it talks about users, it is not clearly limited to the Kennett Consolidated School District High School, it just says ‘the school,’ which could mean any school. It’s ambiguous as to the lighting thresholds and offsite impacts: it says to minimize it to the greatest extent possible, what does that mean? It states ‘best efforts to address parking, traffic control and public safety issues.’ What are best efforts?”
Malman went on to claim that the amendment holds no provision for reduced lighting, no provision for reducing lighting to a maintenance level after an event is over, and that the height restriction is limited to the support structures and not on the lights themselves. “They [KCSD] also testified they only needed seventy-foot high standards, the ordinance allows for eighty, why?” he asked.
Malman also commented that the lack of a conditional use clause denies the borough the ability to limit the use of the field, the number of events both major and minor, and the ability place the cost of public safety and police requirements for events on the school district.
Just before the motion to vote was made, Borough Solicitor Marc Jonas read comments from a letter sent to the Borough from the County Planning Commission stating, “The Borough should recognize that while cutoff shields and baffles are required, some fugitive light still may affect nearby residents. We suggest that the Borough carefully evaluate the design of the light fixtures to ensure that they can be modified after installation to adequately address potential glare and fugitive light issues. The recommendation from the county is that Kennett Square Borough should consider the comment in this letter before acting on the proposed zoning ordinance amendment.”
Acknowledging the statements made from the County Planning Commission, Borough Council President David Miller gave his support to the amendment.
“I think the lighting is important to the school’s development. I understand that it is going to affect neighbors who live in the area and are close to the school,” he said. “I understand their concerns with the school going forward with the lighting issue, however, we do live in a community, a very close knit community in terms of people who live here and also logistically and geographically. It’s one of the joys about living in a small town like Kennett Square…but we believe that what’s good for the school is good for the community. Having heard this argument for close to the better part of two years I think it’s important that the school does have the lighting.”
Following Miller’s comments, the council voted unanimously to approve the amendment to the ordinance, effectively allowing the High School to begin the installation process.
“We’re very pleased with the decision and again I want to reiterate that we’re going to be good neighbors. We’ll listen, adjust,” KCSD Superintendent Barry Tomasetti said. “Evidently, it is going to be a nuisance to some people; again I don’t walk in their shoes, but we’ll certainly listen to them and make adjustments where we can. We’re very appreciative of the time the Borough Council and the Planning Commission took, and we thank John Jaros and Carolyn Heinrich for their work, they represented our school district pro bono.”
Kathy Hahn, one of the residents represented by Malman, did not share Tomasetti’s enthusiasm.
“We’ll take a look at the proceedings and how things occurred, take a look at some of the provisions we felt were left out with regards to the ordinance and see if any of those are appealable,” she said. “I think that what is most disturbing to me is typically in this type of ordinance you have a conditional use. Within that conditional use you have you can describe how you want parking, traffic flow, noise, security; all of those things are then addressed when the lights go up. But with the way this is designed none of that is addressed. So the protections for the neighbors as well as code enforcement and police have nothing to go on. Someone can complain and they can’t even cite provisions in the ordinance as a violation. It’s very wide open at this point.”
In addition to the dissatisfaction with the body of the ordinance, Malman also described his disappointment with the way the Borough Council handled the public forum.
“I don’t think that the council considered any of the public comments we made,” he said. “There was no question; there was no discussion of the specific issues that I raised. I think their minds were made up and they voted accordingly. The public hearing, I think, was a show.”
Despite the victory for the high school and an apparent conclusion to the issue by the council’s ruling, the battle may not yet be over.
“There is the possibility to appeal the process of the ordinance,” Malman said. “There would also be the potential to repeal the ordinance in terms of its ambiguities, but I would have to consult my clients in terms of how we wish to proceed. “
To learn more on the history of the lighting debate, visit https://kennetttimes.com/?p=4163
When did sports become IT! As America slips more and more our schools focus on sports. Something has gone grossly wrong.