Roots Athletic Center Manager Ryan Lavner and owner Frank DeMarinis speak during the Westfield Planning Board meeting Feb. 4, 2020. (AMY PORTER / THE WESTFIELD NEWS)
WESTFIELD – The Planning Board conducted a lighting compliance review for Roots Athletic Center Feb. 4 following concerns from neighbors that the athletic field at the new complex is too bright.
Owner Frank DeMarinis and Manager Ryan Lavner spoke on behalf of Roots, located at 181 Root Road.
City Planner Jay Vinskey reported that on Dec. 3 after the leaves had dropped from trees, he tested the outdoor lights on the soccer field for spillage on the property line, and found some measurable readings.
Lavner said two companies, initially Elm Electric and currently Slingerland Electric, have tested the foot candle at the property line, and found fragments of light overage, some ambient light, and some readings depending on status of moonlight. He said they were below .5 foot candlelight.
A foot candle is the measurement of how bright light is one foot away from a light source. It is the most common unit of measurement used by professionals to determine light levels in both indoor and outdoor spaces.
“I think it’s the board’s position that we would like zero foot candlelight at the property line,” said Planning Board member Jane Magarian, adding, “.4 rounded to zero is not zero.”
Vinskey noted that the lights were installed before the current lighting ordinance went into effect, which has a standard of .05 foot candlelight at property line.
Lavner said the lights that were replaced in September, 2019 are stronger at being able to maintain their position, and the shields won’t catch in the wind.
DeMarinis said he is also willing to increase the height of the planned six foot fence on the Roots Road side to 15-feet, which he believes will block all the light. He also said that the .4 foot candlelight is effectively no light.
Carellas asked if there were fixed hours when the lights are on and off. Lavner said they are mostly on in the fall, and there are no activities past 10 p.m., usually ending at 9:30 p.m.
Carellas said he liked the 15-foot fence proposal, as did other members of the Planning Board.
DeMarinis said they were trying to do the right thing. “To be honest, it’s not easy. Paying $160,000 a year in taxes is not easy,” he said, and questioned whether other businesses putting up lights received the same scrutiny.
“The difference is, people complaining that the light is trespassing. That’s the difference,” Magarian said.
Carellas asked Planning Board member Richard Salois, who lives in the neighborhood, for his comments.
“My problem is not how much the trespass is, but the neighbors. I live there, and I wasn’t happy with the shield lights. I was used to the dark. You have a lot of lights up there. You lit up an area that was dark for years and years,” Salois said, adding, “You need to consider the neighbors. That’s how we got here to begin with; you lit up the neighborhood.”
Carellas asked DeMarinis if Roots would be agreeable to have Vinskey test the light at the property line going forward, to which he agreed. The Planning Board agreed by a majority vote, that going forward .49 foot candlelight at the property line would be acceptable, or less than .5 on the permit.
Vinskey said the change to a 15-foot fence would require an amended permit application and a public hearing would have to be scheduled. Carellas told DeMarinis that although not required, a drawing or mock-up of the proposed fence would be nice.
