Lisle trustees approve Bennett Academy stadium plan with strict sound and lighting conditions
Loading...
Summary
After weeks of debate and a lengthy public comment period, the Village of Lisle Board approved an ordinance amending Bennett Academy's PUD and a special use permit for recreational lighting, imposing monitoring, limits on lighted events and numeric sound controls intended to protect nearby residents.
The Lisle Village Board voted to approve an ordinance allowing Bennett Academy to renovate and expand its on‑campus athletic facilities, including a synthetic turf field, bleachers and recreational lighting, subject to a set of operational conditions aimed at limiting noise and light impacts.
Mayor Mary Jo Mullen introduced the item at the April 6 meeting, and Development Services Director Smetana summarized staff recommendations, which included a peak sound limit of 83 decibels, a one‑hour average sound limit of 75 decibels, installation of a sound‑monitoring system for at least three years with data submitted to the village, and an outdoor lighting audit to confirm compliance with approved photometric plans.
The approval followed a lengthy public comment period in which nearby residents urged trustees to delay the vote and tighten the conditions, citing concerns about light glare, ongoing missing technical data (including marching band noise measurements) and potential harms to property values. "Once built, these impacts last forever," said Lorraine Chavoche, an Oak Hill South resident, asking the board for more time to review the eight‑page conditions exhibit and recent revisions.
Opponents pointed to analysis they said showed a 2.4 percentage‑point slower home appreciation rate near a comparable stadium, a figure they translated into an estimated $175,000 per affected home and millions in neighborhood losses. "Bennett has not met their burden under the standards and review criteria," said Matthew Morin.
Supporters, including parents, Bennett staff and other residents, told the board the project represents private investment that would improve student athletics and campus life without using taxpayer dollars. "This proposal represents a significant private investment in Lisle that does not require taxpayer funding," said Maria Anderson, identifying herself as a resident and Bennett parent.
Bennett representatives, including counsel Caitlin Chuck (Rosenauvin Whitaker), described changes made during the review process: shifting the stadium farther east to provide a roughly 100‑foot separation from the west property line, reducing scoreboard size by 38% and trimming seating capacity in phases (the applicant reported reductions from over 3,000 seats in early designs down to 1,700 and, in some comparisons, 1,400). The applicant also outlined a traffic management plan, a privately negotiated parking agreement with Benedictine University for overflow parking, and a limit on lighted stadium uses to 54 days per year (described as 17 practices, 31 non‑football events and up to six football events) with blackout periods for specified months and Sundays.
Trustees debated legal exemptions and enforcement. Director Smetana and staff noted village code contains a recreational‑facility noise exemption for schools between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., and she also cited the Illinois Environmental Protection Act's provisions regarding organized sporting activities. Trustees said the village would retain the ability to place and verify the location of sound monitoring equipment and that submitted monitoring data would be public.
Several trustees said the conditions had been strengthened since earlier reviews and that staff and Bennett had made numerous changes in response to residents and the Planning and Zoning Commission. After discussion, the board took a roll‑call vote and the motion passed with six "Aye" votes; the mayor did not cast a vote.
Next steps: The ordinance as approved includes the enumerated conditions (sound limits, monitoring and reporting, lighting audit and restrictions on lighted days). Implementation details such as monitoring location, the village's third‑party review of noise data, and landscaping along the west property line were discussed and in several instances staff agreed to follow up with revised plans.

