News

Business owners implore city to snuff out lighting ordinance

By Bill Moss, Published: January 6, 2023

After hearing broad concerns from business owners about the cost of a strict lighting ordinance and its effect on parking lot safety and security, the Hendersonville City Council delayed voting on the ordinance as drafted and agreed to discuss it during its Jan. 25 meeting.

More than a year in the making, the ordinance aims to make the city in compliance with "dark sky" requirements and reduce commercial light shining into neighboring residential properties.

Business owners and business association leaders told the council that the ordinance was an overreach that would create a costly burden.

Susan Frady, executive director of the Partners for Economic Progress, said PEP had drafted a "compromise that addresses the city's concerns about light pollution while also allowing businesses to comply if they made changes or expanded their businesses." PEP also retained a lighting engineer, who appeared at the meeting to tell the council the many ways in her view the ordinance would be burdensome to businesses and harmful to safety.

Bill McKibbin, owner of Henderson Oil Co. and the Energy Mart convenience stores, doubtd the city's cost estimate of $36 for changing an outdoor fixture to make it compliant.

"I can't find anybody to change a light for $36," he said. Instead, bringing property into compliance would likely involve hiring a lighting engineer, adding more fixtures, erecting more light poles and running electrical. "The cost to get into compliance could be very high," he said.

McKibbin, who is also a member of the chamber's public policy committee, said business owners also fear that the dark-sky standards will darken parking lots, making them seem unsafe.

"Businesses want folks to feel comfortable going to and from their business," he said. "Our preference would be to address problems with a simple solution rather than a blanket ordinance."

Marilyn Gordon and her son, Ken Gordon, owners of the 24-hour Norm's Minit Marts, also objected to the ordinance for both safety and cost reasons.

"To me, this ordinance as it's intended really speaks to reducing outdoor llghting," Marilyn Gordon said. "Nothing in this ordinance addresses safety and security. Safety and security is your primary obligation. ... In 42 years, nobody has ever asked me to reduce the lighting in our business to make them safer. ... You're exempting a lot of institutions but you're not giving the private sector the opportunity to make the decision on what's best for them."

Ken Gordon said it appeared the impact would be broader than the council realizes.

"Driving to work this morning on Spartanburg Highway I was trying to count the number of flood lights — well over 150 just in a short drive," he said. "It was asked the number of businesses that would be affected. I would think nearly all would be affected."

Chamber of Commerce President Bob Wiliford warned the council about "the potential for recurring cost, to find staff, (hire) a lighting engineer, to provide equipment, office space, office supplies. You're talking $150,000, $200,000 every year." The chamber opposes the amortization piece — requiring businesses to comply 10 years from now. "We would prefer you stay with the typical grandfathering clause that you see in most of the ordinances."

Ralph Hammond Green, an advocate of the dark sky lighting ordinance and one of two speakers to endorse the dark-sky ordinance, rebutted the business owners' comments.

"It does not reduce lighting," he said. "It redirects lighting so it is not going upward." Newer technology provides compliant lighting that lasts longer and uses less power than current lights, he said. "The 10-year amortization is a reasonable period of time and I would encourage that be left in the ordinance."

Both council members Jerry Smith and Lyndsey Simpson objected to the idea that the council should dump the 5-page draft and pass a simple regulation that would just bar light that shines into the sky.

"I think to go from all this to 'no uplighting' would be a huge mistake because it's not going to do what we intend," Simpson said.