2020-08-26-NAC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

ahead of the next Committee meeting. Seconded by several members of the Committee. After a vote,the Motion was passed unanimously. The Committee also considered the draft PowerPoint document summarizing the health impacts of GLB prepared by Stewart (included with the Minutes). It was agreed that the draft PPT would be sent to Jamie for her substantive review.Jamie also agreed to provide graphics from various sources including the EPA and CDC for insertion into the presentation. 3. Nick's Proposal to Add a Phase-Out for GLB Nick presented a series of slides detailing the experience of other local communities in seeking to regulate the operation of GLB's. He noted that Arlington had implemented a GLB ban in 2012 without a phase-out provision and with little engagement with local landscapers. He advised that in 2013 Arlington was forced to "water-down" its regulation.Jamie further noted that Arlington's problems were exacerbated by the fact that Arlington town workers were permitted to operate GLBs despite the regulation. Nick also offered the example of Chevy Chase, MD which adopted a different and ultimately successful approach. Chevy Chase enacted regulations that provided for the gradual phase-out of GBP over several years and included engagement with landscapers, an education program related to health hazards and a financial package designed to assist in the transition to electric powered equipment. Mark also commented on the experience in Newton and Jamie noted that Newton has 65dB noise limit with respect to GLBs. Dan asked Jamie for her thoughts on what common features have characterized successful attempts to regulate GLB.Jamie advised that seasonal restrictions on operation were standard. She noted that regulation in Lincoln had proceeded well although the process took several years to complete with several delays and setbacks along the way. She also noted that any bylaw, such as the one contemplated in Lexington, would require the approval of the State Attorney General. Dan expressed concern about amending the draft bylaw to include a phase-out provision. He raised a concern that such a provision may result in a failure to pass a bylaw given that the Committee,to date, does not have a well-documented public base of support for a GLB bylaw nor has it been able to fully engage with interested parties (such as landscapers) at this stage. Nick expressed his opinion that support for the bylaw would be there at the time the Select Board voted on the matter. Stewart suggested, as a compromise, that the draft bylaw presently approved by the Committee could be amended to include a phase out but could also be structured to come into effect (as to all of its provisions) after a period of time (such as one year) after approval by the Select Board and subsequent ratification by the State AG.