This story is part of Worthington Pulse's coverage of the September 10 Architectural Review Board meeting. Start with the September 10 meeting recap.
The Architectural Review Board voted on September 10 to deny a request to keep bright, unpermitted lights and cameras on a multi-tenant commercial building at 5589-5617 North High Street, after months of complaints from neighbors whose backyards the fixtures light up. The denial is meant to support a code-enforcement case against the property that is already headed to the city's Mayor's Court.
How the lights became a problem
Planning staff told the board the building was remodeled more than a decade ago without any "wall-pack" fixtures (the boxy lights that project outward from a wall) in the approved plans. Wall-packs were added later without approval, but for years they were dim and drew no complaints. Early this year the property owner replaced them with bright white LED fixtures, and the situation changed. Staff said one wall-pack at the north end "lights up the whole backyard" of the homes behind the building, and four more on the front shine across High Street. An attempt to cover a fixture with tape did little.
Neighbors also raised concerns about security cameras on the building that reach into their yards. Staff said the city does not object to businesses using cameras for safety, "but we also don't want to have them harm any residential neighbors." The smaller light fixtures required above the building's doors, which point downward, are appropriate and were not the issue.
One board member described the effect on the households behind the building as "a highly invasive thing to people's lives" and asked how long relief might take. Another walked through the kind of full-cutoff fixtures that would solve it: lights that "don't shine light up into the night sky" or "into neighbors' windows" while still lighting an exit or a parking area.
Why a "no" vote was the point
Staff recommended denial: the wall-packs should come off, and if the property needs security lighting, the owner should return with appropriate fixtures. Because the complaints have gone unresolved since January despite repeated contact, staff said the practical path to a fix now runs through Mayor's Court, where the owner is due to appear. The city's recourse, staff explained, is for the mayor to find the owner in violation and impose fines that continue until the lighting is corrected.
The vote itself came with a wrinkle the chair had to clarify: the motion still had to be written as a request to approve keeping the lights, so a "no" vote is what denies it. Every member voted no. The board's action calls for all the outward-facing wall-packs to be removed and a new lighting plan to be submitted.
This is one of 2 Worthington Pulse stories from the September 10 Architectural Review Board meeting recap.