Harpers Ferry council sends dark‑skies ordinance back to committee for rework

Harpers Ferry town council voted unanimously March 9 to send a proposed dark‑skies ordinance back to the drafting committee for revisions focused on the lighting‑plan requirement and clarity about what projects the ordinance would affect.

Karen, who presented the draft on behalf of the Dark Skies Committee, said the only change in the latest version was adding a 25‑lumens‑per‑square‑foot figure on page two and that the ordinance is intended mainly to regulate new construction and major lighting replacements, not routine bulb changes. She said the committee also planned to produce a brochure to explain compliance in plain language.

Several residents and council members said the draft is technically dense and could impose costly hurdles on ordinary homeowners. “As a layperson, it’s very difficult for me to comprehend — it looks to me like the regulations apply to new construction, permitted renovation and new lighting on existing properties,” resident Lehi Petrocones told the council, urging the body to delay adoption and simplify the rules.

Council members pressed for clearer definitions of “significant lighting” and better guidance for applicants. Multiple members recommended adding simple diagrams or a basic checklist and using the Dark Skies Committee as a technical review resource so applicants would not always have to perform complex calculations themselves. An amendment proposed that the fine section be refined to specify who fines apply to and how the 18‑month grandfathering period is calculated; the council asked the committee to incorporate that feedback.

Storm moved — and Jesse seconded — to return the draft ordinance to the Dark Skies Committee to rework section 7 (lighting plan) for clarity, reduce complexity, consider council feedback, and make explicit which projects are subject to the ordinance, including after the grandfathering period. The motion carried 7‑0.

The council’s action does not adopt the ordinance; instead, it directs the committee to revise the draft and return with clearer language, illustrative materials and specific recommendations about enforcement and applicability. The committee also was asked to consider where responsibility for final technical review will sit (code officer, planning commission or the committee itself).