City is going to install stadium lights behind my house

[AeroEngy]

The small town in which I live is planning to install large stadium lights in a local little league field located in the middle of a residential district (the actual field is zoned Open-Space). The community has been able to persuade the city council not to do this for about 10 years until now. They are on track to install them but they have to get waivers for several items to move forward. They will need at least 2 waivers for my knowledge. One because the tower will be within 10 feet of a residential property line violating the local setback requirement and another to exceed the max height requirement. I believe they will get their waver due to the nature of the small town politics and "good old boy" relationship between little league and zoning administrators.

Also the only mention of light pollution in the city ordnance states that light from an commercial/industrial district can not illuminate any residential district more than 0.5ft-candles. The spill light from the towers will exceed this limit but this ordnance is not defined for Open-Space zoned areas just industrial. However, I think it could be argued that the intent of the ordnance was to protect the residential areas from spill light.

My question is do the local residents have any recourse? I believe erecting 80 to 100 foot stadium light towers within 10 feet of the property line would lower the property value and be a severe nuisance due to light pollution. I know I would not buy a house that was that close to large stadium lighting. Can the City be held responsible for this loss in value?

 

[PAB]

If said lights cause you to lose sleep or enjoy your property, sue.

A measure this controversial should have had mitigation built in. As in if they're going to put up a bunch of lights, a large fence or wall would be constructed to offset any impact to the neighbors.

 

[randalee]

You're screwed, my friend.

Eminent domain was the end of America.

 

[slsmnaz]

Sell quickly!

 

[jhayx7]

Originally posted by: PAB
If said lights cause you to lose sleep or enjoy your property, sue.

A measure this controversial should have had mitigation built in. As in if they're going to put up a bunch of lights, a large fence or wall would be constructed to offset any impact to the neighbors.

So they have to install a 80 to 100 foot wall to keep in the light pollution?

 

[Mermaidman]

BB gun

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: randalee
You're screwed, my friend.

Eminent domain was the end of America.

Eminent domain is fine. the abuse of ED and the SCUSA ruleing that is ok to take private property for any reason didnt help

 

[PAB]

Originally posted by: jhayx7

Originally posted by: PAB
If said lights cause you to lose sleep or enjoy your property, sue.

A measure this controversial should have had mitigation built in. As in if they're going to put up a bunch of lights, a large fence or wall would be constructed to offset any impact to the neighbors.

So they have to install a 80 to 100 foot wall to keep in the light pollution?

I didnt say have to, I said should.

As an example, if you build a highway next to a bunch of houses - it's customary to put up a sound barrier.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: Mermaidman
BB gun

Yep.

 

[KBeee]

Buy eyepatches and shut up whinging - it's the American Way
You're obviously pinko-commie scum that's standing in the way of progress
Hehehe

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: jhayx7

Originally posted by: PAB
If said lights cause you to lose sleep or enjoy your property, sue.

A measure this controversial should have had mitigation built in. As in if they're going to put up a bunch of lights, a large fence or wall would be constructed to offset any impact to the neighbors.

So they have to install a 80 to 100 foot wall to keep in the light pollution?

Wouldn't matter, the neighbors would complain about the wall.

The funny thing is, I think just knowing the lights are there would bother most people more than the actual light would, but the OP is right that even that is enough to lower property values. I live next to a church that is under construction, and when they first installed the lights in their parking lot they left them on all night every night for a while - why, I have no idea. My bedroom window faces the church, and I imagine the amount of light was comparable to the spill light from these stadium lights that will face away from the OP's house and I assume won't be used past a reasonable hour (10 or so?). The lights never bothered me - I only noticed them when I went outside.

There is a proposal in my town to install stadium lights at a little league complex as well. The concern from most of the residents is about noise more than light - they worry that they'll hear the crack of a bat or the roar of a crowd late at night. Trees are being planted to reduce the noise, and I think the OP wouldn't be unreasonable in requesting the same to be done near him. But I also live on a very busy road, and people love to use their horns here. You learn to tune out the noise.

This is a case of "not in my backyard." The perceived harm is far worse than the actual harm, but again the OP is right that the perceived harm will affect property values.


Edit: How does this have anything to do with eminent domain?

 

[Amused]

Hey, free light! Just open your drapes and save some electricity.

 

[everman]

Hey it's not like you need sleep anyways :Q

 

[Spacehead]

There might be some good info here

Good luck!

 

[SagaLore]

Have the town pay for placement of tall dense pines and shrubs between your property and the field.