HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-04-01-ATM-min ADJOURNED SESSION — 1998 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
APRIL 1, 1998
The April 1, 1998 Adjourned Session of the 1998 Annual Town Meeting was called to order
by Moderator Margery M. Battin, at 8:06 p.m., in Cary Memorial Hall. A quorum of 186
members was present.
The Moderator announced that it was planned that Articles 32, 40, and 46 would be taken up
this evening.
8:08 P.M. The Moderator declared the meeting open under Article 32.
ARTICLE 32: ZONING BY -LAW, WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
FACILITIES
8:08 P.M. Steve Colman, Planning Board, moved that the Report ofthe Planning
Board on Article 32 be accepted and placed on file.
Following a voice vote at 8:08 p.m. the Moderator declared the vote unanimous and
the report to have been accepted and placed on file.
8:11 P.M. Presented by Steve Colman.
----------------------------------------------
MOTION: That the Zoning By -Laws of the Town be amended as set forth in the
motion and attached to the report of the Planning Board and filed with the Town
Clerk.
(M O T 10 N of Planning Board Report):
That the Zoning By -Law be amended by adding a new Section 15, as follows:
"SECTION 15. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
15.1 OBJECTIVES:
This Section permits the use of wireless communication facilities within the town, regulates
their impacts and accommodates their location and use in a manner intended to:
a. protect the scenic, historic, environmental and natural or man -made resources
of the town,
b. protect property values,
C. minimize any adverse impacts on the residents of the town (such as, but not
limited to, attractive nuisance, noise and falling objects) with regard to the
general safety, welfare and quality of life in the community,
d. provide standards and requirements for regulation, placement, construction,
monitoring, design, modification and removal of wireless communications
facilities,
e. provide a procedural basis for action within a reasonable period of time for
requests for authorization to place, construct, operate or modify wireless
communication facilities,
f. encourage the use of certain existing structures and towers,
g. minimize the total number and height of towers located within the community,
h. require tower sharing and clustering of wireless communication facilities
where they reinforce the other Objectives in this Section, and
i. be in compliance with the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.
15.2 APPLICABILITY, TERMINOLOGY
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
15.2.1 APPLICABILITY
The requirements of this section shall apply to all wireless communications facilities, except
where Federal or State Law or Regulations exempt certain users or uses from all or portions
of the provisions of this Section.
No wireless communication facility shall be considered exempt from this Section by sharing a
tower or other structure with such exempt uses.
15.2.2 TERMINOLOGY
In addition to the terms defined in Section 2, Definitions, of this By -Law, the following
words, which are technical terms applying to wireless communication facilities, shall have the
meaning indicated below. Although set forth here for convenience, the terms shall have the
same effect as if set forth in Section 2, Definitions.
ACT: The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.
ADEQUATE COVERAGE: The geographic area in which the carrier provides a level of
service expected by the Federal Communications Commission under its license or authority.
ANTENNA: A device by which electromagnetic waves are sent or received (whether a dish,
rod, mast, pole, set of wires, plate, panel, line, cable or other arrangement serving such
purpose).
AVAILABLE SPACE: The space on a tower or other structure to which antennas of a
wireless communication service provider are able to fit structurally and be able to provide
adequate coverage.
CAMOUFLAGED: A wireless service facility that is placed within an existing or proposed
structure disguised, painted, colored, or hidden by a compatible part of an existing or
proposed structure, or made to resemble an architectural feature of the building or structure
on which it is placed.
CARRIER: A company, authorized by the FCC, that provides wireless communications
services.
CHANNEL: One of the assigned bands of radio frequencies as defined in the ACT, licensed
to the Service Provider for wireless service use.
CO- LOCATION: The use of a single mount by more than one carrier and /or several mounts
on a building or structure by more than one carrier. Each service on a co- location is a separate
wireless service facility.
COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT SHELTER: A structure designed principally to enclose
equipment used in connection with wireless communication transmission, and /or reception.
CONCEALED: A wireless service facility within a building or other structure, which is not
visible from outside the structure.
DBM: A unit of measure of the power level of an electromagnetic signal expressed in
decibels referenced to one (1) milliwatt.
FACILITY SITE: A lot or parcel, or any part thereof, which is owned or leased by one or
more personal communication wireless service providers and upon which one or more
wireless communication facility(s) and required landscaping are located.
MODIFICATION OF AN EXISTING FACILITY: Any material change or proposed change
to a facility including but not limited to power input or output, number of antennas, change in
antenna type or model, repositioning of antenna(s), or change in number of channels per
antenna above the maximum number approved under an existing permit or special permit.
MONITORING: The measurement, by the use of instruments away from the antenna, of the
electromagnetic radiation from a site as a whole, or from individual wireless communication
facilities, towers, antennas, repeaters or associated power supplies and generators.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
MONOPOLE: A single self - supporting vertical pole with no guy wire anchors, usually
consisting of a galvanized or other unpainted metal, or a wooden pole with below grade
foundations.
RADIO - FREQUENCY RADIATION (RFR): The electromagnetic emissions from wireless
service facilities.
REPEATER: A small receiver /relay transmitter of not more than 20 watts output designed to
provide service to areas which are not able to receive adequate coverage from the primary
sending and receiving site in a wireless communications network.
TOWER: A structure or framework, or monopole, that is designed to support wireless
communication transmitting, receiving and /or relaying antennas and /or equipment
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SERVICES: Commercial mobile radio services,
unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange access services as defined
in the ACT.
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY: All equipment buildings, and structures with
which a wireless communication service carrier broadcasts and receives the radio - frequency
waves which carry their services and all locations of said equipment or any part thereof.
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDER: An entity licensed by the Federal
Communication Commission (FCC) to provide wireless communication services to
individuals, businesses or institutions.
15.3 LOCATION OF FACILITIES
15.3.1 CRITERIA, PRIORITY FOR LOCATION OF FACILITIES
Wireless communication facilities shall be located according to the following priorities:
1) within an existing structure concealed,
2) within an existing structure and camouflaged,
3) camouflaged on an existing structure, such as but not limited to an existing electric
transmission tower or an existing radio antenna, a water tower, or building, and of a
compatible design,
4) co- located with existing wireless communication service facilities,
5) on Town of Lexington owned land which complies with other requirements of this
section and where visual impact can be minimized and mitigated,
6) if adequately demonstrated to the SPGA in the special permit process that each ofthe
five types of locations is not feasible, erection of a new facility which complies with
the other requirements of this section and where visual impact can be minimized and
mitigated.
Applicants shall demonstrate that they have investigated locations higher in priority ranking
than the one for which they are applying and whether sites are available and, if applicable,
under what conditions.
15.3.2 LOCATIONS WHERE FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT
A concealed wireless communication facility may be installed in a structure on a lot in a
commercial district provided all the requirements for wireless communications facility building
permit are met.
15.3.3 LOCATIONS WHERE FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED BY SPECIAL PERMIT
A wireless communication facility may be installed in the locations indicated in subparagraphs
15.3.3.1 through 15.3.3.5 provided all prescribed conditions are met and the SPGA grants a
special permit.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
15.3.3.1 MULTI- FAMILY DWELLING
A concealed wireless communication facility may be installed in a building or in a structure on
a building on a lot on which a multi - family dwelling or group care facility (or other residential
use listed in line 1.186 of Table 1, Permitted Uses and Development Standards), is the
principal use provided all residents of such multi - family dwelling or group care facility (or
other residential use listed in line 1.186 of Table 1, Permitted Uses and Development
Standards) receive 30 days notice before the application for a special permit is submitted.
15.3.3.2 INSTITUTIONAL, AGRICULTURAL, NATURAL RESOURCE or
COMMERCIAL USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
A concealed wireless communication facility may be installed in a building or in a structure on
a building on a lot on which an Institutional, Agricultural, Natural Resource or Commercial
Uses in A Residential District (as provided in subsections 2, 3, and 4 respectively of Table 1,
Permitted Uses and Development Standards) is the principal use.
A wireless communication facility may be installed if it is co- located with an existing electrical
power transmission line tower, an existing nonconforming transmitting or receiving tower, or
a water tower, provided that the wireless communication facility is camouflaged and does not
exceed the height of the tower as of January 1, 1998.
For the purposes of this section, an electrical power transmission tower, an existing
transmitting or receiving tower or antenna for commercial activities other than a wireless
communications facility (as provided in line 14.13 of Table 1, Permitted Uses and
Development Standards) shall be considered to be a commercial use in a residential district.
15.3.3.3 MUNICIPALLY OWNED LAND IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
A wireless communication facility may be installed in residential districts:
a. on municipally owned land if it is camouflaged and does not exceed the height
controls under Section 7.5.2.
b. on a municipally owned water tower if it is camouflaged and does not exceed the
height of the water tower by more than 5 feet.
15.3.3.4 MUNICIPALLY OWNED LAND IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
A wireless communication facility may be installed in commercial districts:
a. on municipally owned land if it does not exceed the height controls under Section
7.5.2.
b. on municipally owned land in the CM District if it does not exceed the height controls
under Section 7.5.2, by more than 25 feet.
15.3.3.5 USES IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
A wireless communication facility may be installed on a lot in a commercial district provided
the wireless communication facility is camouflaged and does not exceed the height controls
under section 7.5.2.
15.3.4 LOCATIONS WITH NON CONFORMING SITUATIONS
The SPGA may grant a special permit to:
a. modify a pre- existing nonconforming wireless communication facility, subject to the
provisions of Section 6 of this By -Law; or
b. allow an existing wireless communication facility to be reconstructed with a
replacement wireless communication facility if it decreases the degree of
nonconformity.
15.4 DIMENSIONAL, SCREENING AND OTHER SITE DEVELOPMENT
REQUIREMENTS
15.4.1 SHELTERS AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
Any communication equipment shelter or accessory building shall be designed to be
architecturally similar and compatible with the surrounding area. Whenever feasible, a building
shall be constructed underground.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
15.4.2 SETBACKS
Any new tower shall be set back at least one (1) times the height of the tower plus ten feet
from each lot line of the site on which the tower is located. Any non - concealed antenna shall
be set back at least one (1) time the height of the antenna, as measured from the ground level,
from each lot line of the site on which the antenna is located. In nonresidential districts or on
Town of Lexington owned land, the SPGA may grant a special permit to allow a lesser
setback if it makes a finding that such lesser setback provides adequate safety, promotes co-
location or improves design, and will not negatively impact the appearance and character of
the neighborhood.
15.4.3 SECURITY, SIGNS
The area around the wireless communication facility shall be completely secure from trespass
or vandalism. A sign not larger than one square foot shall be posted adjacent to the entry gate
indicating the name of the facility owner(s) and a 24 -hour emergency telephone number.
Advertising on any antenna, tower, fencing, accessory building or communication equipment
shelter is prohibited.
15.4.4 LIGHTING
Unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration, no exterior night lighting of towers
or the wireless communication facility is permitted except for manually operated emergency
lights for use when operating personnel are on site.
15.4.5 NEW TOWERS
Any new freestanding tower shall be of a monopole construction. New towers shall not
exceed the minimum height necessary to provide adequate coverage within the Town of
Lexington. Erection of a new tower that exceeds the height restrictions listed in Section 15.3
is not permitted unless the applicant demonstrates in the special permit process that adequate
coverage within the town of Lexington can not be met for the locations permitted under
Section 15.3.
15.5 JUSTIFICATION OF NEED
15.5.1 COVERAGE AREA
The applicant shall provide a map of the geographic area in which the proposed facility will
provide adequate coverage.
15.5.2 ADEQUACY OF OTHER FACILITY SITES CONTROLLED BY THE
APPLICANT
The applicant shall provide written documentation of any facility sites in the town and in
abutting towns or cities in which it has a legal or equitable interest, whether by ownership,
leasehold or otherwise. Said documentation shall demonstrate that these facility sites do not
already provide, or do not have the potential to provide by site adjustment, adequate
coverage.
15.5.3 CAPACITY OF EXISTING FACILITY SITES
The applicant shall provide written documentation that it has examined all facility sites located
in the town and in abutting towns in which the applicant has no legal or equitable interest to
determine whether those existing facility sites can be used to provide adequate coverage.
15.5.4 ADEQUATE COVERAGE THROUGH THE LEAST DISRUPTIVE MEANS
The applicant shall provide written documentation that the proposed facility uses the least
disruptive technology (through the use of repeaters or other similar technology as it may be
developed subsequent to adoption of this Bylaw) in which it can provide adequate coverage in
conjunction with all facility sites listed above.
15.6 APPLICATION, PERMITS AND SPECIAL PERMITS
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
15.6.1 APPLICANT
The applicant or co- applicant for any permit for a wireless communications facility must be a
licensed carrier who has authority from the FCC to provide wireless communication services
for the facility being proposed. The applicant shall submit documentation of the legal right to
install and use the proposed facility mount at the time of the filing of the application for the
permit.
15.6.2 REVIEW BY THE DESIGN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The Town of Lexington's Design Advisory Committee shall review an applicant's site plans
and make recommendations to the Director of Inspectional Services for By Right Permit
applications and to the SPGA for Special Permits. The Design Advisory Committee will make
comment on whether the site plans show that a proposed wireless communications facility will
be concealed for a By Right Permit if built according to the plans, or whether the site plans
show that a proposed wireless communications facility will be concealed, or sufficiently
camouflaged for a Special Permit if built according to the plans.
15.6.3 REVIEW BY THE CABLE TELEVISION AND COMMUNICATIONS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The board of Selectmen's Cable Television and Communications Advisory Committee shall
review an applicant's application and make recommendations to the Director of Inspectional
Services for By Right Permit applications and to the SPGA for Special Permits. The Cable
Television and Communications Advisory Committee will make comment as to the
application's adherence to the provisions of Section 15. The Committee may recommend that
a consultant be hired by the SPGA (at the applicant's expense) if technical expertise is needed.
15.6.4 PERMITS
Each application for a Permit must contain site plans with sufficient detail that would enable
the Town to determine whether the proposed facility meets the requirements of Section 15.
15.6.5 SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTING AUTHORITY (SPGA)
The Board of Appeals shall be the SPGA for permits under this Section.
15.6.6 WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY REGULATIONS
The SPGA shall maintain a set of regulations that contains the necessary policies, procedures,
and standards to implement the provisions of this section.
15.6.7 APPROVAL CRITERIA
A special permit shall be granted under this section only if the SPGA shall find that the project
is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this By -Law and the SPGA's
Regulations. In addition, the SPGA shall make all the applicable findings before granting the
special permit, as follows:
a. that the applicant is not already providing adequate coverage or is unable to
maintain adequate coverage without the special permit,
b. that the applicant is not able to use existing facility sites either with or without the
use of repeaters to provide adequate coverage,
c. that the proposed wireless service facility minimizes any adverse impact on
historic resources, scenic views, residential property values, natural or man -made
resources,
d. that the applicant has agreed to implement all reasonable measures to mitigate the
potential adverse impacts of the facilities,
e. that the facility shall comply with the appropriate FCC Regulations regarding
emissions of electromagnetic radiation and that the required monitoring program is
in place and shall be paid for by the applicant, and
f. that the applicant has agreed to rent or lease available space on any tower it
controls within Lexington or its contiguous towns, under the terms of a fair -
market lease, without discrimination to other wireless service providers.
If a special permit is granted, in addition to such terms and conditions as may be authorized
by subsection 3.3.3 of this By -Law, the SPGA may impose such additional conditions and
safeguards as public safety, welfare and convenience may require.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
Any decision by the SPGA to deny a special permit under this section shall be in conformance
with the Act, in that it shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a
written record.
15.6.8 TERM OF PERMIT
Each Special Permit shall be valid for a fixed or conditional period of time as determined by
the Special Permit Granting Authority. A special permit for any wireless communication
service facility that exceeds height provisions of Section 7.5.2 shall be valid for a maximum of
fifteen years. At the end of the approved time period, the facility shall be removed by the
carrier or a new special permit shall be required.
All permitted and special permitted wireless communications facility carriers shall periodically
file with the Town, every five years (or sooner if specified in a special permit), on operational
aspects of the facility including: power consumption; power radiation; frequency transmission;
the number, location, and orientation of antennas; and types of services provided.
15.7 REMOVAL REQUIREMENTS
Any wireless service facility that ceases to operate for a period of one year shall be removed.
Cease to operate is defined as not performing the normal functions associated with the
wireless service facility and its equipment on a continuous and ongoing basis for a period of
one year. At the time of removal, the facility site shall be remediated such that all wireless
communication facilities that have ceased to operate are removed. If all facilities on a tower
have ceased to operate, the tower (including the foundation) shall also be removed and the
site shall be revegetated by the owner. Existing trees shall only be removed if necessary to
complete the required removal. The applicant shall, as a condition of the special permit,
provide a financial surety or other form of financial guarantee acceptable to the SPGA, to
cover the cost of removal of the facility and the remediation of the landscape, should the
facility cease to operate."
- -- END OF SECTION 15 - --
In Section 2, DEFINITIONS, by adding the following in the proper place in alphabetical
order:
ACT: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
ADEQUATE COVERAGE: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for
definition.)
ANTENNA: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
AVAILABLE SPACE: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for
definition.)
CAMOUFLAGED: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for
definition.)
CARRIER: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
CHANNEL: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
CO- LOCATION: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT SHELTER: (See Section 15, Wireless
Communication Facilities, for definition.)
CONCEALED: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
DBM: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
FACILITY SITE: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
MODIFICATION OF AN EXISTING FACILITY: (See Section 15, Wireless
Communication Facilities, for definition.)
MONITORING: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
MONOPOLE: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
RADIO - FREQUENCY RADIATION (RFR): (See Section 15, Wireless
Communication Facilities, for definition.)
REPEATER: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
TOWER: (See Section 15, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition.)
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SERVICES: (See Section 15, Wireless
Communication Facilities, for definition.)
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY: (See Section 15, Wireless
Communication Facilities, for definition.)
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDER: (See Section 15, Wireless
Communication Facilities, for definition.)
In Table 1, Permitted Uses and Development Standards, in subsection 4, Commercial Uses in
Residential Districts, by adding a new line, 4.15, as follows:
"4.15 Wireless communication facility
(See Section 15)"
and by including the designation "SP" under the RO/RS, RT, RM, and RD district headings,
so the new line 4.15 will read:
RO CB
Line RS RT RM RD CN CRS CS CLO CRO CM
4.15 Wireless communication SP SP SP SP
facility
(See Section 15)
and in subsection 14, Utility, Communications and Transportation, by adding a new line,
14.19, as follows:
14.19 Wireless communication facility
(See Section 15)
( *Y if concealed, see Section 15.3.2)"
and by including the designation "SP *" under the district heading for each of the commercial
zoning districts listed in Part B of Table 1, so the new line 14.19 will read:
Line ALL COMMERCIAL USES CN CRS CS CB CLO CRO CM
14.19 Wireless communication facility SP* SP* SP* SP* SP* SP* SP*
(See Section 15)
(* Y if concealed, see Section 15.3.2)
and in subsection 14, Utility, Communications and Transportation, in line 14.13 by adding the
words "other than those which are used exclusively for wireless communication facilities"
after the words "Transmitting or receiving tower or antenna for commercial activities ", so the
entry as amended, will read:
"Transmitting or receiving tower or antenna for commercial activities other than those which
are used exclusively for wireless communication facilities "; and
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
In subparagraph 7.5.2 STRUCTURES OTHER THAN BUILDING, in the first paragraph,
second sentence, by inserting after the word "antennas," the phrase, "wireless communication
facilities that are permitted as provided in section 15," so that the second sentence will read:
"Structures other than buildings, such as antennas, wireless communication facilities that are
permitted as provided in section 15, recreational apparatus, fences and the like maybe located
in a required front, rear or side yard provided the height of the structure is not greater than its
horizontal distance from the lot line, except that a fence or wall not greater than six feet in
height may be located on, or closer to a lot line than six feet."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
In subparagraph 7.5.2 STRUCTURES OTHER THAN BUILDING, in the second paragraph,
first sentence, by inserting after the word "antennas," the phrase, "wireless communication
facilities that are permitted as provided in section 15," so that the first sentence will read:
"Structures erected on a building and not used for human occupancy, such as chimneys,
heating - ventilating or air conditioning equipment, solar or photo - voltaic panels, elevator
housings, antennas, wireless communication facilities that are permitted as provided in
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
section 15, skylights, cupolas, spires and the like may exceed the maximum height of a
building in feet provided no part of the structure is more than 20 feet higher than the upper
elevation of the building and the total horizontal coverage of such structures on the building
does not exceed 25 percent.
-----------------------------------------------
8:11 P.M. Steve Colman discussed the need for the amendment, the process used
to arrive at the proposed amendment, large amount of input sought and received, and
objectives of Section 15.
8:22 p.m. Richard Canale, pr.9, former Chairman of the Planning Board
continued the presentation, addressing the process.
8:30 p.m. Chairman Peter Enrich reported unanimous support of the Board of
Selectmen. David Kanter reported unanimous support of the Cable TV and
Communications Advisory Committee.
8:31 p.m. Elizabeth Whitman, pr.8, speaking on behalf of Design Advisory
Committee Chairman John Frey, explained that no official vote had been taken but the
Committee will add this to its meeting agenda.
8:32 p.m. Ephraim Weiss, pr. 5, questioned section 15.3.1, criteria #5 and use of
Town owned land and allowable locations for antenna placement and payment.
8:33 p.m. Richard Canale, pr.9, on behalf of the Planning Board, responded to
Mr. Weiss' questions.
8:34 p.m. Ephraim Weiss, further stated his concern of placement of products on
public property.
8:34 p.m. Town Manager Richard White spoke to the process for placement of
antennas on Town property should this by -law change be adopted.
8:36 p.m. Nicholas Hay, 40 Valley Road, questioned FCC regulations and
Planning Board compliance.
8:37 p.m. Richard Canale responded to Mr. Hay's question re: monitoring.
8:38 p.m. Nyles Barnert, pr.4, spoke in support but questioned process used for
approval of 11 current antennae and being grandfathered.
8:39 p.m. Robert Bowyer addressed preexisting uses legal at the time of
installation and that such cases are normally allowed to continue.
8:40 p.m. Robert Rotberg, pr.3, questioned the wording of proposed
amendment. Mr. Canale responded and Mr. Rotberg questioned if the wording was
restrictive enough. Mr. Canale stated he thought it was as restrictive as it can be.
8:43 p.m. Neal Boyle, pr.7, questioned Mr. Canale about permitted action on
single family house lots. Mr. Canale confirmed antennae are not permitted on single
family house lots and explained why the proposed wording prohibits these lots.
Mr. Boyle stated further restriction on freedom to do as one wishes with one's own
land.
8:45 p.m. Dawn McKenna, pr. 9, questioned a matter of right of situation and the
antenna installation in the Muzzey building cupola.
8:46 p.m. Mr. Canale explained that the matter of right pertains to all parts, not
just the antenna (wires, etc.) and the role of the Design Adivsory Committee in
oversight.
8:47 p.m. David Kaufman, pr.6, questioned the definition of wireless
communications facility and household antenna.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
8:48 p.m. Mr. Canale reviewed the three definitions of wireless communication
services and explained these do not include satellite to home antenna and broadcast
TV.
8:50 p.m. Marsha Byrnes, pr. 5, questioned municipally owned land in residential
and commercial districts.
8:52 p.m. Paul Jenkins, pr. 8, questioned Planning Board review of plans of other
cities and towns and how the proposed by -law compares with other towns.
8:52 p.m. Richard Canale explained the proposed by -laws are tailored to fit the
Town of Lexington.
8:54 p.m. Mr. Canale further stated in his opinion it is superior to the others and
takes the best of what he's seen.
8:54 p.m. Paul Jenkins, pr. 9, questioned clustering of antenna and if the intent is
to have as many clustered together in as few locations as possible.
8:54 p.m. Mr. Canale explained that "co- locating" should be done as best as
possible.
8:55 p.m. Paul Jenkins commented on the interruption in public safety
communications lines from what he saw caused by the Jean Road towers.
8:55 p.m. Caleb Warner, pr.3, questioned Mr. Boyle's question on using
residential property and Mrs. McKenna's comments on the Muzzey building.
8:57 p.m. Paul Chernick, pr.6, followed -up on monitoring of emissions and
conveying data to the Town.
8:58 p.m. Richard Canale responded that only essential items are included in the
by -law, other information will be included in the regulations.
8:59 p.m. Paul Chernick, pr.6, questioned section 15.6.7 — Special Permit
recipients.
9:00 P.M. Mr. Canale commented on the Board's desire to encourage
cooperation with carriers.
9:01 P.M. Mr. Chernick, pr.6, questioned if further requirements could be added
in the regulations. Mr. Canale responded on hopes of the Board for ample
opportunity for public comment.
9:01 P.M. Sheldon Spector, pr.6, moved the question.
9:01 P.M. The Moderator asked if the question should now be put.
Following a voice vote the Moderator declared the main question now before the
meeting.
9:02 p.m Following a voice vote the Moderator declared the vote unanimous
and the motion adopted.
The Moderator declared the meeting open under Article 40.
ARTICLE 40: ZONING BY -LAW, OUTDOOR LIGHTING
9:03 p.m. Presented by John Davies, Planning Board.
John Davies, Planning Board, moved that the Report of the Planning
Board of Article 40 be accepted and placed on file.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
Following a voice vote at 9:03 p.m. the Moderator declared the vote unanimous and the
report to have been accepted and placed on file.
----------------------------------------------
MOTION: That the Zoning By -Laws of the Town be amended as set forth in the motion
attached to the report of the Planning Board and filed with the Town Clerk.
(M O T 10 N of Planning Board Report):
That the Zoning By -Law be amended by adding a new
"SECTION 14. OUTDOOR LIGHTING
14.1 OBJECTIVES
The regulation of outdoor lighting is intended to:
a. enhance public safety and welfare by providing for adequate and appropriate
outdoor lighting,
b. provide for lighting that will complement the character of the town,
c. reduce glare,
d. minimize light trespass, and
e. reduce the cost and waste of unnecessary energy consumption.
14.2 APPLICABILITY, TERMINOLOGY
The requirements of this section shall apply to outdoor lighting on lots and parcels in all
districts but shall not apply to:
a. one and two family dwellings on lots on which they are the principal use, or
b. street lighting, lights that control traffic or other lighting for public safety on streets
and ways.
When an existing outdoor lighting installation is being modified, extended, expanded, or
added to, the entire outdoor lighting installation on the lot shall be subject to the requirements
of this section.
14.2.2 TERMINOLOGY
In addition to the terms defined in Section 2, Definitions, of this By -Law, the following
words, which are technical terms applying to lighting, which are set forth below, shall have
the meaning indicated below. Although set forth here for convenience, the terms shall have
the same effect as if set forth in Section 2, Definitions.
COLOR RENDERING INDEX (CRI): A measurement of the amount of color shift that
objects undergo when lighted by a light source as compared with the color of those same
objects when seen under a reference light source of comparable color temperature. CRI
values generally range from 0 to 100, where 100 represents incandescent light.
CUTOFF ANGLE: The angle formed by a line drawn from the direction of the direct light
rays at the light source with respect to the vertical, beyond which no direct light is emitted.
DIRECT LIGHT: Light emitted from the lamp, off the reflector or reflector diffuser, or
through the refractor or diffuser lens, of a luminaire.
FIXTURE: The assembly that houses a lamp or lamps, and which may include a housing, a
mounting bracket or pole socket, a lamp holder, a ballast, a reflector or mirror, and /or a
refractor, lens, or diffuser lens.
FULLY- SHIELDED LUMINAIRE: A lamp and fixture assembly designed with a cutoff
angle of 90 °, so that no direct light is emitted above a horizontal plane.
GLARE: Light emitted from a luminaire with an intensity great enough to produce
annoyance, discomfort, or a reduction in a viewer's ability to see.
HEIGHT OF LUMINAIRE: The vertical distance from the finished grade of the ground
directly below to the lowest direct light emitting part of the luminaire.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
INDIRECT LIGHT: Direct light that has been reflected off other surfaces not part of the
luminaire.
LAMP: The component of a luminaire that produces the actual light.
LIGHT TRESPASS: The shining of direct light produced by a luminaire beyond the
boundaries of the lot or parcel on which it is located.
LUMEN: A measure of light energy generated by a light source. One foot candle is one lumen
per square foot. For purposes of this By -Law, the lumen output shall be the initial lumen
output of a lamp, as rated by the manufacturer.
LUMINAIRE: A complete lighting system, including a lamp or lamps and a fixture.
14.3 LIGHTING PLAN
Wherever outside lighting is proposed, every application for a building permit, a special
permit, a special permit with site plan review, a variance, or an electrical permit, shall be
accompanied by a lighting plan which shall show:
a. the location and type of any outdoor lighting luminaires, including the height of the
luminaire;
b. the luminaire manufacturer's specification data, including lumen output and
photometric data showing cutoff angles;
C. the type of lamp such as: metal halide, compact fluorescent, high pressure sodium;
d. a photometric plan showing the intensity of illumination at ground level, expressed in
foot candles; and
e. that light trespass onto any street or abutting lot will not occur. This may be
demonstrated by manufacturer's data, cross section drawings, or other means.
14.4 CONTROL OF GLARE AND LIGHT TRESPASS
14.4.1 Any luminaire with a lamp or lamps rated at a total of more than 2,000 lumens shall be
of fully shielded design and shall not emit any direct light above a horizontal plane passing
through the lowest part of the light emitting luminaire.
14.4.2 All luminaires, regardless of lumen rating, shall be equipped with whatever additional
shielding, lenses, or cutoff devices are required to eliminate light trespass onto any street or
abutting lot or parcel and to eliminate glare perceptible to persons on any street or abutting
lot or parcel.
14.4.3 Paragraph 14.4.1, above, shall not apply to any luminaire intended solely to illuminate
any freestanding sign or the walls of any building but such luminaire shall be shielded so that
its direct light is confined to the surface of such sign or building.
14.5 LAMPS
14.5.1 Lamp types shall be selected for optimum color rendering as measured by their color
rendering index (CRI), as listed by the lamp manufacturer. Lamps with a color rendering
index lower than 50 are not permitted. This paragraph shall not apply to temporary decorative
lighting which may include colored lamps, such as holiday lighting.
14.6 HOURS OF OPERATION
14.6.1 Outdoor lighting shall not be illuminated between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. with the
following exceptions:
a. if the use is being operated, such as a business open to customers, or where
employees are working or where an institution or place of public assembly is
conducting an activity, normal illumination shall be allowed during the activity
and for not more than one half hour after the activity ceases;
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
b. low level lighting sufficient for the security of persons or property on the
lot may be in operation between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a. m., provided the
average illumination on the ground or on any vertical surface is not greater
than 0.5 foot candles.
14.7 SPECIAL PERMITS
In accordance with Section 3, the Board of Appeals, acting as the special permit granting
authority, may grant a special permit modifying the requirements of this Section, provided it
determines that such modification is consistent with the objectives set forth in paragraph 14. 1,
in the following cases:
a. where an applicant can demonstrate, by means of a history of vandalism or other
objective means, that an extraordinary need for security exists,
b. where an applicant can show that conditions hazardous to the public, such as steep
embankments or stairs, may exist in traveled ways or areas,
C. where a minor change is proposed to an existing non - conforming lighting installation,
such that it would be unreasonable to require replacement of the entire
installation,
d. where it can be demonstrated that for reasons of the geometry of a lot, building, or
structure, complete shielding of direct light is technically infeasible.
In Section 2, DEFINITIONS, by adding the following in the proper place in the alphabetical
order:
"COLOR RENDERING INDEX (CRI): (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for
definition.)
CUTOFF ANGLE: CUTOFF ANGLE: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for
definition.)
DIRECT LIGHT: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
FIXTURE: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
FULLY - SHIELDED LUMINAIRE: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for
definition.)
GLARE: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
HEIGHT OF LUMINAIRE: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
INDIRECT LIGHT: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
LAMP: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
LIGHT TRESPASS: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
LUMEN: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)
LUMINAIRE: (See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting, for definition.)"
In subparagraph 3.3.2.e. I by adding the phrase "(See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting)" afterthe
phrase "level of illumination ";
In subparagraph 3.3.3.g by adding the phrase "(See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting)" after the
word "illumination ";
In subparagraph 3.4.2.g by adding the phrase "(See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting)" after the
phrase "level of illumination ";
In subsection 5.7, in the third paragraph, by adding the phrase "(See Section 14, Outdoor
Lighting)" after the word "lighting ";
In subparagraph 5.8.1 by striking out the existing subparagraph "b. Any nighttime
illumination shall be installed in such a way so as not to shine directly into nearby
housing. ", and by redesignating subparagraphs 5.8.I.c, 5.8.I.d and 5.8.I.e and all cross
references thereto to be 5.8.1.b, 5.8.1.c and 5.8.1.d respectively;
In subparagraph 11.2. l .b by adding the phrase "(See Section 14, Outdoor Lighting)" after the
word "lighting ";
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
In subparagraph 11.6.6 by striking out the existing subparagraph "d. All artificial lighting used
to illuminate specifically any parking space, loading bay, maneuvering space or driveway shall
be so arranged that all direct rays from such lighting fall entirely within the parking or loading
area and shall be shielded so as not to shine upon abutting properties or streets. The level of
illumination of lighting for parking and loading areas shall be low so as to reduce the glow of
ambient lighting perceptible at nearby properties or streets.";
In paragraph 13.2.5, Illumination, in the first line by striking out the phrase " 12:00 midnight"
and by inserting in place thereof. "11:00 p.m. ".
-----------------------------------------
9:03 p.m. John Davies presented information on the article.
9:12 p.m. Selectman Peter Enrich stated the Board of Selectmen's unanimous support of
this article.
9:13 p.m. Anne Ripley, pr.6, questioned one and two family housing clusters. Mr.
Davies explained that the clusters would be excluded.
9:13 p.m. Andrew Friedlich, pr. 5, questioned one and two family lots being exempted.
9:14 p.m. Mr. Davies spoke of hopes for people to begin thinking of lighting issues.
9:15 p.m. Perry Pollins, pr.5, questioned future inclusion of town street lights.
9:16 p.m. Cindy Blumsack, pr. 6, questioned if these requirements would be retroactive.
Mr. Davies replied that the rules cannot be retroactive.
9:17 p.m. Sheldon Spector, pr.6, questioned excessive holiday lighting and impact on
neighboring homes. Mr. Davies replied that such lighting is not controllable.
9:18 P.M. Thomas Diaz, pr.2, commented on the Tucson, AZ plan and questioned
technical lighting measurements.
9:19 P.M. Mr. Davies addressed sodium vapor lamp usage and explained that the
Planning Board had made these amendments somewhat more lenient than
Tucson, AZ.
9:23 p.m. Carol Grodzins, pr.3, referenced a letter received from a resident of precinct
three and their desire to include street lighting.
9:24 p.m. John Hayward, pr. 5, called the question.
9:24 p.m. The Moderator asked if the question should now be put. Following a voice
vote the Moderator declared the main question now before the meeting.
9:24 p.m Following a voice vote the Moderator declared the vote unanimous and the
motion adopted.
The Moderator declared the meeting open under Article 46.
ARTICLE 46: TRANSFER HENNESSY FIELD PROPERTY TO
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
9:26 p.m. Presented by Clarke Cowen, pr. 7.
------------------------------
MOTION: That the Town transfer the care, custody, management and
control of the land acquired by an order of taking dated June 25, 1962 and
recorded in the Middlesex South Registry of Deeds Book 10065, Page 405
and known as Hennessy's Field, to the Conservation Commission for
conservation purposes as provided by Section 8C of Chapter 40 of the
General laws, as amended.
----------------------------------
9:27 p.m. Clarke Cowen presented information for supporting this article.
9:30 p.m. Deborah Brown, 47 Robinson Road, speaking on behalf of the
Friends of Hennessey, spoke of the property's use as open space and of
the need to transfer to the Conservation Commission.
9:34 p.m. Eileen Entin, 104 Blossomcrest Road, spoke in support of the transfer.
9:36 p.m. Frances Ludwig, 19 Wyman Road, advocated use as an outdoor
classroom for the schoolyard adventures program at Estabrook School.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
9:39 p.m. Tom Sileo, former Lexington resident and author on open space
in Lexington, spoke on the ecological issues, unique aspect of open
space and the Hennessey field and it being one of the only wildflowered
meadows of its kind in Lexington.
9:39 p.m. Selectman Dan Fenn spoke of the difficult decision this article presents,
with conflicting needs of the community. Mr. Fenn reported that the
majority of the Board of Selectmen voted to support this article.
9:46 p.m. Sandra Shaw, Recreation Committee, spoke on the need for more fields
for recreational team sports and requested this transfer of land request be
opposed.
9:53 p.m. Robin DiGiammarino, speaking on behalf of the School Committee,
reported the Committee's recommendation for postponement of this article
to allow for a more collaborative proposal from the Recreation and
Conservation Commission.
9:54 p.m. Joyce Miller, Conservation Commission Chairman, stated the Commission,
which is always happy to accept conservation land, had hired a consultant
for ecological study impact of a soccer field. Mrs. Miller stated the
property is a jewel which should be preserved and protected. The
Conservation Commission unanimously and strongly supports the transfer
of this land to its Commission.
9:57 p.m. Robert Boudreau, 15 Hill Street, spoke as President of the Lexington
Athletic Association and past President of Lexington Youth Soccer. Mr.
Boudreau spoke of the benefits of youth sports and of the need to retain
the land, and of his opposition to transfer to Conservation.
10:03 p.m. Emily, Carrie & Louisa, students from the Estabrook School, spoke of
their bluebird house project and other values of the Hennessey Field.
10:04 p.m. Carolyn Tiffany, pr.8, spoke of the need to balance team sports
enthusiasts with the needs of others and in favor of the transfer to
Conservation.
10:08 P.M. Donald Chisholm, pr.4, and Recreation Committee, read a letter from
former Selectmen Bill Dailey and Paul Marshall proposing the land remain
under town jurisdiction and defeat of the article.
10:10 P.M. Jacquelyn Ward, 15 Robinson Road, urged Hennessey Field be put into
Conservation.
10:11 P.M. Richard Thuma, 52 Ivan Street, representing Lexington Youth Soccer,
spoke in opposition to the transfer to Conservation.
10:15 p.m. Richard Neumeier, pr.3, questioned Town Counsel if the article were to
be passed what would be required to take back some acreage if so desired
in the future. Town Counsel Norman Cohen explained such action
requires and act of the State Legislature, among other things.
Mr. Neumeier further expanded upon that issue and spoke in opposition
to the transfer.
10:18 P.M. Jonathan Lederman, pr.7, requested a point of information and questioned
why four soccer fields are currently out of service.
10:19 P.M. Donald Chisholm, Recreation Committee, explained that the fields
currently in restoration are Muzzey, Harrington, Lincoln, and Adams.
10:20 p.m. Myla Kabat -Zinn, pr.2, asked Sandra Shaw about field usage.
Ms. Shaw and Recreation Director Karen Simmons clarified adult usage
of fields, and multi - purpose field usage.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
10:21 p.m. Ms. Kabat -Zinn commented upon open space and assumptions that
certain pieces of property are conservation land. She spoke in favor of
the land transfer and of the need to protect the land.
10:24 p.m. Alan Levine, pr.8, spoke in favor of the transfer.
10:26 p.m. Judith Uhrig moved the following subsidiary motion:
MOTION: The subject of this article be referred to a committee to be
composed of a) one representative from each of the following groups;
The Board of Selectmen, The Conservation Commission, The Recreation
Committee, the Planning Board and the proponents of this article, and
b) two Town Meeting Members to be appointed by the Moderator.
The Planning Board member will serve as the convener and chairman.
The Committee will report back to the next annual Town Meeting.
The Moderator explained that the motion to refer is a subsidiary motion and 10 minutes
for debate is allowed
10:28 p.m Ms. Uhrig spoke of the need for a thorough process, with discussion
among several town boards to consider the needs for the entire town.
10:30 p.m. Fred Merrill, Planning Board, explained the Board had originally 4 -0 in
favor of the amendment but now is split 3 -1 in favor, explaining the need
for more time for opposing interests to work through in a more
participatory process and recognizing there is no immediate threat to the
property.
10:32 p.m. Robin DiGiammarino indicated the School Committee agrees with the
motion to refer.
10:32 p.m. Dan Fenn reported the Board of Selectmen is evenly divided on the
motion to refer.
10:33 p.m. Sandra Shaw reported the Recreation Committee supports referral.
10:34 p.m. Joyce Miller reported the Conservation Commission agrees they see no
particular reason to refer the matter to committee.
10:35 p.m. Judith Uhrig stated her reference to open discussion she meant as one
entity, which she doesn't believe has happened as yet.
10:37 p.m. Clark Cowen spoke in opposition to referral.
10:40 p.m. Sandra Shaw spoke in need for referral and discussion.
10:42 p.m. Ephraim Weiss, pr. 5, questioned the limit on debate and the ability to
debate further. He then moved to recess.
10:43 p.m. The Moderator called the vote on Mr. Weiss's motion to recess.
Following a voice vote at 10:43 p.m. he Moderator declared the motion to
recess not adopted.
10:43 p.m. David Kanter, pr.7, questioned a point of order and asked if the question
will come back up by default next year if referred to committee. The
Moderator explained that it would not but the committee would report
back to town meeting. It takes only 10 signatures to bring an article to
Town Meeting.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
10:43 p.m. Following a voice vote which was uncertain, the Moderator called for a
standing vote on the subsidiary motion to refer to committee, tallied as
follows:
Precinct Yes No
1 10 7
2 9 9
3 10 7
4 14 5
5 8 8
6 5 11
7 5 14
8 6 10
9 8 10
At Large 8 3
TOTAL 83 84
10:48 p.m. Less than the required majority, the Moderator declared the motion not
adopted.
10:48 p.m. Jeannette Webb, pr.4, spoke in opposition to putting the land into
Conservation.
10:50 p.m. Marsha Baker, pr.7, chairperson of pr.7, spoke on behalf of precinct 7 and
reported the majority of precinct 7 is in favor of the land transfer to the
Conservation Commission.
10:52 p.m. Elizabeth Whitman, pr.8, commented that the Conservation Commission
was established approximately 2 years after the Hennessey land gift.
10:53 p.m. David Kaufman, pr.6, stated his preference to develop Willards Woods
over the Hennessey field property and supported the land transfer.
10:54 p.m. Eugene Skelton, 91 North Hancock Street, spoke in favor of recreation
programs and needs.
10:59 p.m. Arlayne Peterson, 12 Turning Mill Road, spoke in favor to the transfer to
Conservation.
11:00 P.M. Carolyn Wilson, pr.2, former Recreation Committee member, spoke on
the issue of fairness and stated the property had been earmarked for
Recreation for 36 years.
11:02 p.m. Susan Elberger, pr.9, spook of the need for process to provide the
Recreation Committee and Conservation Commission to meet together
and recommended voting against the article.
11:04 p.m. Tom Fenn, pr.9, spoke in support of the article.
11:09 P.M. James Wood, pr.7, spoke of the need for referral and hopes of voting no
on this article this evening to provide time to propose the best solution for
the future.
11:12 p.m. Alan Lazarus, pr.6, spoke in favor of the article and of the need to
preserve the field.
11:13 p.m. Margaret Rawls, pr.4, moved the question.
11:13 p.m. The Moderator asked if the question should now be put. Following a voice
vote the Moderator declared the main question now before the meeting.
Adjourned Session —1998 Annual Town Meeting, coot....... April 1, 1998
11:13 p.m. As this motion requires a two - thirds vote the Moderator called for a standing
vote on Article 46, tallied as follows:
Precinct Yes No
1 8 9
2 8 11
3 9 9
4 5 14
5 8 9
6 10 5
7 17 2
8 10 7
9 11 7
At Large 5 6
TOTAL 91 79
11:18 p.m. Less than the 2/3 required, the Moderator declared the motion not adopted.
11:18 p.m. Bebe Fallick, pr.6, served Notice of Reconsideration on Article 46.
11:18 P.M. Peter Enrich, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen, moved that the meeting
be adjourned until Monday, April 6, 1998 at 8:00 p.m., at Cary Memorial
Hall.
Adopted by voice vote. 11:18 p.m..
A true copy.
Attest:
Donna M. Hooper, Town Clerk