Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-04-01-NAC-min Town of Lexington, MA Noise Advisory Committee (NAC) Minutes of Meeting, April 1 2025 The meeting of the Noise Advisory Committee (“NAC”) was held via Zoom on Tuesday April 1, 2025 called to order at 7:02 PM. Members present: Barbara Katzenberg (Chair) (BK), Benjamin Lees (BL), Laura Rosen (LR), Elaine Rudell (ER). Other attendees: Rick Reibstein(RR) Action Items: 1. BK: to investigate efforts by state representative Ciccolo’s to get transition funding for buying electric equipment 2. ER to investigate opportunities (grants, rebates, etc) that might exist for helping landscapers 3. BK: To reach out to DPW on whether staff and contractors working on town land are and are required to follow the GLB-phase out bylaw Introduction and Announcements 1. BK announced that Sallye Bleiberg resigned from the committee. She didn’t know whether a replacement could just be selected from the other recent applicants or whether a new cycle of application and review by the Select Board would be needed. Discussion 2. BK asked for people’s impressions on the first few weeks of the GLB phase out for commercial landscapers a. BL: It’s been mixed, some are using electric b. ER: I heard the prices are going up because of the new equipment. They told me that because they have to recharge the batteries they need a diesel source which itself is polluting. They weren’t sure what the benefit was c. BK: Examples of people not complying, but also neighbor with a large mower and literally 5 guys with rakes. Don’t know what the economics would be, but certainly more pleasant to be a neighbor d. BK: I did hear that there had been inquiries relating to getting a “waiver” or special permit by some landscapers and I spoke with Select Board Chair Doug Lucente about it. There isn’t currently a process & form which enumerates what a company would need to provide in order to formally request a waiver to use GLBs. e. RR: I was asked my opinion about this by (Select Board member) Mark Sandeen and said you would need a process but my impression is there had just been one inquiry so not sure there is really a problem f. BK:I spoke with Mark Sandeen and also reached out Town Manager Steve Bartha and Doug Lucente today and nothing has been received in writing yet. g. RR: I wouldn’t work on it. What would be great is more assistance to help with transition. Our state representative Michelle Ciccolo got $75,000 from the state and that helped with town companies that work here. Don’t focus on the waiver, help them! 1 h. RR: also help customers adjust to the change. And we need to work on recycling batteries i. RR: Lexington DPW Has brought this group called AGSA, the American Green Zone Alliance, which trains people in how to do implement electric equipment intelligently. 3. BK: Special Permit requested for mural painters who need to do a one-night, all night use of equipment that has a backup alarm. a. BK They would use a white noise back-up alarm. On GIS it’s not super close to neighbors, but it is apparently 87 dBA.s This is exactly what the special permit was designed for. The noise is intermittent when they back up the equipment, but that is apparently the most annoying. 4. BK: This one-time use seems like what the special permit part of the bylaw was designed for. Hard to think how this could comparable for GLBs which a landscaper wanted to use regularly. Can you think of any exceptions for landscapers? a. ER: First you have to decide whether you are going to allow a permit or go down the other avenue of aid. b. LR: Maybe like a condo group that was having a one-time event they need to specially cleanup for. An exception should be a one-time thing. c. BK: There is no specific process right now. You let the Select Board know, they are going to use the criteria in the bylaw or general reasonableness to make a determination. d. LR: So that is the process—which could apply to GLBs but it’s hard to think what cases would meet the criteria e. Review of bylaw language 5. Comments from BL email about special permits copied here: (1) I think "excessive financial hardship" for an applicant could be interpreted as requiring a comparison to the size of the applicant. They should provide the details of their financials to show this--my impression is that most landscapers service a region, not just one town, and unless Lexington makes up a particularly significant portion of their business, only a sliver of their work would be affected. (2) The applicant should have to provide map data to show that few "neighboring citizens" would be affected. I suppose if they wanted to blow leaves on a single landowner's giant property, or some other location where there are only a few neighbors and they consent to the noise, the impact might be minimal. But for those locations, the exception for four-stroke blowers would likely kick in anyway. As far as additional guidelines: * The extent to which the applicant has attempted to mitigate their losses or explore alternatives. Given that there are landscapers who use electric leaf blowers, the applicant should have to explain why they can't simply subcontract it to one of them. * Whether the ban was unforeseeable to the applicant. Unless a contract was entered into before the ban was passed by Town Meeting, the applicant knew or should have known that they would run into the ban. If they chose to gamble on 2 the ban being delayed or repealed, they have no cause to complain. Are there really any landscaping contracts that last more than 3 years? Likewise, unless their equipment was purchased more than 3 years ago, they knew it might outlast the period they could use it in Lexington. * Non-noise impacts of leaf blowers. Unlike most of the other prohibited activities, gas-powered leaf blowers are also banned for health and environmental reasons, so those interests should be taken into account for any special permit. * The extent to which a special permit will interfere with the enforcement of the ban townwide. Specially permitted activity may still generate complaints, and town staff will have to explain to people why the rules don't apply in this instance. They will also have to explain to all the other landscapers why they have to follow rules that their competitors don't. a. BL: Very hard to meet these criteria. Reviews considerations if you wanted to lay it out formally. Two criteria in bylaw for mural are probably sufficient. Time limitation seems important for any special permit. b. LR: Financial criterion in bylaw is surprising. Seems like it could open floodgates. c. ER: helping landscapers financially is best. And I’m told the equipment may be changing. Is there funding from the state? (BK asks and ER agrees to look into what types of state level programs there might be) d. BK: One hypothetical use case brought up by Doug Lucente where someone had a 5-year contract and bought equipment before the bylaw was passed (not considered realistic) e. LR: When the Federal government wants to incentivize they do some type of rebate. Is that something towns can do? (Are services taxed?) 6. BL: Does the GLB phaseout apply to town staff and contractors working on town property? th Minutes of the September 11 and November 4 Meeting were approved Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 PM. The next meeting is May 6th, 2025, at 7pm. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Katzenberg 3