Bright LED Lights at New, Successful San Angelo Business Angers Nearby Residents

SAN ANGELO, TX – Residents along the Red Arroyo have made their voices heard at last week's city council meeting. They said the lights at a number of businesses on College Hills are too bright.

In the video above, on Dec. 15, a resident of Single Member District 5 offered public comment to the City Council. In the comments Jennifer Pape expressed her concerns with the lights originating from Sports Next Level that are shining into her home at night.

"Any use of luminaries shall be operated so as not to produce glare or direct illumination across the bounding property line from a visible source of illumination of such intensity as to create a nuisance or detract from the use or enjoyment of adjacent property. All outside lights shall be made up of a light source and reflector so selected that acting together the light beam is controlled and not directed across any bounding property line above a height of three feet. The allowable maximum intensity measured at the property line abutting a residential use shall be 0.5 foot-candles," states the Sec. 8.11.005 on the city's municipal code regarding light trespassing.

The resident speaking to the council believes that Sports Next Level is actually breaking that rule with their huge overhead lights that illuminate the golf course.

Sports Next Level opened just as the COVID-19 shutdowns were happening in April 2020. It is a multi-activity sporting center that incorporates a golf driving range and indoor gym along with a restaurant and bar.

"Our home is approximately 1,800 feet from the driving range." said Pape. "The light is still hitting our face when we are sitting on our back porch swing, hitting our home. It's measurable and it's a problem"

The owner of Sports Next Level, Shawn Box, spoke in his own defense at the council meeting. He explained that the light poles were originally there, and have been since Preston's Play Yard was located there. He did say however that he changed the type of bulbs to increase energy efficiency, upgrading to LED lighting. 

Preston's was primarily a golf driving range that had been closed and out of business for a long while before Box acquired the leased land and buildings there to create Sports Next Level.

"I would love to just figure it out and be done with it but you know at the same time it (the golf driving range) has been there since the 80s," said Box.

The city council was deciding whether or not to approve a revision to its ordinances concerning light trespass. The council voted at a previous meeting to reduce the threshold for allowable intensity of a light source from 0.5 foot-candles to 0.25 foot-candles. At the Dec. 15 meeting, council voted unanimously to approve the change after a second reading of the proposed ordinance change, as required by City law. 

At issue is the fact that LED lights emit blue light that makes those lights appear brighter to humans. By halving the allowed intensity, it compensates for the physiological perception that LED lights, or blue lights, are brighter than halogen or incandescent lighting.

“We didn’t have any problems until the LED lights started going up,” Pape said.

The residents want not only the lower light intensity enforced, but also demand code compliance compel Next Level (and other commercial entities along College Hills) to shield and have those lights pointed in a direction to reduce glare, usually downward. 

Currently, the Sports Next Level lights are unshielded but city staff had a plan to force Next Level to shield their lights better.

SMD 5 Councilman Lane Carter made a motion to approve the change in the lighting ordinance. SMD 2 Councilman Harry Thomas seconded the motion. The item limiting lighting by half, to the 0.25 foot-candle level, passed 7-0.

If the lighting intensity cannot be measured above 0.25 foot-candles, there isn’t much more that can be done under the new law. Residents remained concerned about the shielding and direction the lights were pointed other than downward.

“The light poles are original. The old lights were not energy efficient. The new lights were placed the same way the old lights were,” Box said. He said he has adjusted them five times to try to work with the residents. 

“They want the lights pointing straight down. If I shield them, it’s going to constrain the lights to a small area,” Box said. He was concerned more constraints on the way the lights are deployed will defeat their purpose and golfers will not be able to see the golf balls when practicing after dark.

"My engineer did do a reading and there is no light trespass anywhere close to my property," Box said.

“The driving range has been there forever,” Box said. “However, now the driving range is consistently doing (financially) well. That’s why there are complaints about the lights,” Box said. In other words, the driving range is being used by more patrons and is popular even after dark, more so than before.

"I am open to finding a solution," finished Box. "I just don't know what the solution is."

The City staff had Shawn in a box, however.

In the agenda item that followed, Box’s Next Level Sports needed approval for a parking lot that was already built without prior permitting. It was built by Box as a caliche parking lot. 

In a planning change agreement worked up between the Planning Commission and Box that required council approval, Box will also be required to point the lights downward and shield them. Also, the lights will be forbidden from being turned on after 10:30 p.m. or before 6:30 a.m. every day. The council voted 7-0 to approve the zoning for the location of Sports Next Level.

Will golfers be able to see the golf balls after sundown? Time will tell.

Subscribe to the LIVE! Daily

The LIVE! Daily is the "newspaper to your email" for San Angelo. Each content-packed edition has weather, the popular Top of the Email opinion and rumor mill column, news around the state of Texas, news around west Texas, the latest news stories from San Angelo LIVE!, events, and the most recent obituaries. The bottom of the email contains the most recent rants and comments. The LIVE! daily is emailed 5 days per week. On Sundays, subscribers receive the West Texas Real Estate LIVE! email.

Required

Comments

Comments

Comment

Seems to me that there is a very simple solution to this problem.... The old grouches that are complaining about this can do everybody a favor and can put a simple sign in their front yard that has "FOR SALE" written on it....I'm certain that with these type people, the surrounding neighbors would be thrilled to see them gone as well..........

jlh, Thu, 12/24/2020 - 08:50
Comment

The city approved it. The owner tried to rectify it multiple times. Time to get over it. Some people you will never please. What a joke!

Comment

Generally, the person who creates a nuisance is the one who should be responsible for alleviating the nuisance, not the people annoyed by it.  This situation is all too common.  A property owner replaces existing lights with LEDs that are twice as bright and half as directional.  When neighbors complain, the owner claims that the new lights are somehow grandfathered in, and that the complaints are unreasonable.  But it’s not unreasonable to want to sit on your patio without feeling like you are staring into oncoming headlights, and it is possible to illuminate a driving range without spilling light onto properties over a quarter mile away.  Unfortunately, the lighting contractor selected light fixtures that have poor light control.  It’s time for the property owner to take responsibility for his actions and hire a contractor that knows what they are doing

Comment

Generally, the person who creates a nuisance is the one who should be responsible for alleviating the nuisance, not the people annoyed by it.  This situation is all too common.  A property owner replaces existing lights with LEDs that are twice as bright and half as well controlled.  When neighbors complain, the owner claims that the new lights are somehow grandfathered in, and that the complaints are unreasonable.  But it’s not unreasonable to want to sit on your patio without having light shone in your eyes, and it is possible to illuminate a driving range without spilling light onto properties over a quarter mile away.  Unfortunately, the light fixtures selected appear to be unsuitable for this installation.  The property owner must take responsibility for his actions, and hire a lighting contractor that knows how to properly design a lighting system. 

Comment

I can completely see the business owners position on the matter.  The city approved it and it shouldn't be a continuing financial burden to him.  I can also understand the position of the homeowners.  The lumens may be less than standard lighting but the light intrusion would be more.  The manipulating of the code for the sake of appeasement would probably not work in anyones favor.  The mistake was not determining the difference in LED's vs Standard or halogen lighting to begin with.  The city needs to eat this one and pay for the shielding for the business owner.  A new section in the code dealing with LED's needs to be researched and added.  The burden on taxpayers for the shielding over all would be negligible and everyone would be happy.

Post a comment to this article here: