By John Schwing

WESTPORT — Stars might seem a bit brighter, twinkling in skies shaded against light pollution, if a new “Dark Sky” policy under review by zoning officials is adopted.

Dark Sky principles, currently being considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission’s Regulation Revision and Sustainability Subcommittee, are inspired by an international movement that aims “to protect communities from the harmful effects of light pollution,” according to the group’s website.

Dark Sky advocates say light pollution “disrupts wildlife, impacts human health, wastes money and energy, contributes to climate change, and blocks our view of the universe.”

The P&Z subcommittee, which previously discussed the idea of curbing light pollution in June, is considering whether to draft a text amendment that would apply to local parking lots and non-residential and multi-unit properties.

At the subcommittee’s meeting last week, members reviewed the first draft of a text amendment, which at some point in the future, could be referred to the full P&Z for a hearing. 

The general thrust of the Dark Sky initiative, Michelle Perillie, the deputy planning and zoning director, told the meeting is to use artificial lighting only when needed. The guidelines, she said, also recommend that lighting be targeted and no brighter than needed, and should account for factors like nearby surfaces and reflection.

Details of the light pollution proposal, as it stands so far, include:

• Lighting for off-street parking areas must be “shielded, down-directed and so arranged as to reflect the light away from adjoining premises and public rights-of-way.”
• Lighting plans will be required as part of general site plans for all non-residential and multi-unit development projects.
• The rules, if adopted, would apply only to new or replacement lighting on affected properties.
• Exterior lights and illuminated signs should be “designed, located, installed and directed in such a manner as to prevent objectionable light at, and glare across, the property lines.”
• Among the lighting plan features that would be reviewed are the type, size and color of fixtures, as well as factors like lighting elements’ wattage, “color temperature” and “lumens output.”
• The location of lighting on a property and the hours of operation also will be governed by the regulation.
• Lights that emit “varying intensities, changing colors or light movements shall be prohibited.”
• Holiday lights, however, would be exempt from the regulations.

While the draft rules, as currently worded, would not apply to residential properties, questions arose about whether that could happen in the future.

Both Perillie and P&Z Director Mary Young said that attempts to enforce the regulations on residential properties would be next to impossible given staffing constraints.

P&Z Chairwoman Danielle Dobin weighed in with similar sentiments, saying, “Although in a perfect world, I’d love to see this applicable to residential as well, I just don’t think that’s realistic …

“I think that the enforcement would be a nightmare, and without a full-time code enforcement officer, we already have issues with regard to enforcement of much bigger issues,” she said. “I think that would become a major issue with the RTM because I think a lot of people would be very concerned about this being residential.”

But by starting with non-residential properties, Dobin added, “We can really showcase that this is doable for people, which then opens up the door to expanding it to residential properties, and as we’re doing this, of course, concurrently, there will be more and more Dark Sky-compliant lighting.”

P&Z member Neil Cohn said, “I’m really glad that we’re finally addressing this, and I think it’s really important for many reasons — for wildlife, for people’s own circadian rhythms, for our ability to enjoy the night sky …” 

While Cohn said he understands the reasons to start by enforcing a light pollution regulation on commercial properties, he at least would like to see “guidance and a system” enacted to address Dark Sky issues pertaining to residential properties.

Fellow P&Z member Marcia Falk agreed, noting that many newer town residents, who moved from cities during the COVID-19 pandemic, may “not be quite as sensitive” to issues about neighborhood lighting in a smaller community like Westport.

Falk said she wouldn’t want to light pollution “vigilantes,” but added the town should have guidelines on residential lighting for issues like time appropriateness and security.

Matthew Mandell, chairman of the RTM’s Planning and Zoning Committee, suggested the regulation also should apply to town-owned properties, which the draft amendment’s language does not address.

John Schwing, the Westport Journal consulting editor, has held senior editorial and writing posts at southwestern Connecticut media outlets for four decades. Learn more about us here.