By Kerri Williams

WESTPORT — A proposal to expand athletic field lighting in town has generated more pushback from neighboring property owners.

During a Planning and Zoning Commission hearing that turned testy at times Monday, several neighbors said they oppose text amendment 850, which is being considered to allow the possibility of lighting more town fields in evening hours.

Proponents spearheading the project say the demand for game and practice times by school teams and youth leagues has outstripped the available facilities in Westport, and has particularly disadvantaged girls’ sports.

Changes still spark opposition

Opposition was voiced even after modifications were made to the proposal following an initial hearing on the amendment last week. (To read updated language of the text amendment, click here.)

Edie Anderson, a neighbor of Long Lots Elementary School, said she was very “disappointed” in the proposed amendment, saying that having the fields available for night-time play is not necessary.

“They don’t need this,” she said. “They want this. I have some rights, too, such as some peace and quiet occasionally.”

P&Z member Amy Wistreich, who said that both she and her children enjoy playing sports, said she wants to see “more opportunities in town.”  Neil Cohn agreed, saying it is “so healthy for our children.”

Proposal only “a framework”

Members of the commission stressed the text amendment would provide a framework for a detailed plan that would be required to install lights at each field where they are proposed. Application would be tailored to address particular issues at every site, such as proximity of neighbors and dimensions.

For each field lighting application, neighbors within 250 feet of the field would be notified. 

Among changes to the proposed amendment since last week, fields on the Hyde Lane of the new Long Lots school would be exempt from consideration for lighting since members said they do not know what the fields will look like. Designs for the new elementary school and amenities on the property have not been completed.

“This is not a rubber stamp,” said Michael Cammeyer, the P&Z secretary who led subcommittee planning for the field lighting amendment. “This is a framework.” 

He emphasized that each field application would be addressed individually with customized site plans.

Nighttime noise a bigger concern

But neighboring property owners, many more concerned about the additional noise later in the evening than new lights, were not appeased by the assurances.

“The impact on neighbors’ lives would be profound,” said neighbor Julianne Mulvey. “We would only have 15 percent of our evenings quiet.”

Currently, the language in the text amendment would allow play on fields near the Post Road until 11 p.m. Practices and games at other fields would be cut off at 9 p.m. Monday through Thursday and at 10 p.m. Fridays and Saturdays. Lights would be dimmed for a half hour after practice and games end so that players and coaches can clear away equipment and leave safely. 

However, commission members said they would address hours at each field separately during the approval process.

Lebowitz to neighbor: “Give it a rest”

As members were addressing Mulvey’s concerns, she attempted to speak again, and was told by Chairman Paul Lebowitz to, “Give it a rest, Julianne.”

Speaking later in the meeting, Mulvey said perhaps there could be a rule to prohibit lighting during the summer, since there is adequate daylight until nearly 8 p.m. “That would give neighbors a break,” she said, adding that she would appreciate a “semblance of respect,” noting that she had spoken for just over a minute earlier when she was admonished to, “Give it a rest.”

P&Z alternate member Michael Valante, who was not at last week’s hearing, questioned why the text amendment calls for only a 5-foot minimum setback for lights from neighboring property lines, adding that it seems like a very low number.

Cammeyer responded that the 5-foot setback number was “just meant as a minimum” and that members would attempt to keep light poles “as far as possible from neighboring properties.”

“This text amendment is not reasonable”

Another neighbor said that while P&Z members’ intent currently may be to keep the poles farther from neighboring homes, future commission members may not be sympathetic or aware of that intent.

Frank Dubinsky, a resident who said he also works at planning for a living, said, “You don’t set a text amendment that you can drive a truck through.” 

Dubinsky added that as a father of three children under the age of 4, he is “pro lighting fields within reason. In my opinion, this text amendment is not reasonable.”

The commission voted Monday to close the public hearing on the proposed text amendment, and plans to continue discussing the measure at its Feb. 24 meeting.

Kerri Williams is a freelance writer who has worked in journalism for years, including as a reporter for the Norwalk Hour and managing editor of the Norwalk Citizen-News.