HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-06-02-NAC-min.docxTown of Lexington, MA
Noise Advisory Committee (NAC)
Minutes of Meeting, June 2, 2026
The meeting of the Noise Advisory Committee ("NAC") was held in person and on Zoom in the
Select Board Room of the Town Office Building on Tuesday June 2, 2026, at 7 PM.
NAC Members Present: Barbara Katzenberg (BK), Chair, Benjamin Lees (BL), Laura Rosen
(LR), Elaine Rudell (ER, online), and Joe Pato (JP), Select Board Liaison
1. Announcements
BK called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. She updated the NAC that Joseph Lehar resigned
from the committee, as he is overcommitted and travelling a lot. She encouraged people to
invite their friends to join meetings to see if they'd be interested in joining the NAC. JP noted
that in September the Select Board will advertise for the open position.
2. Review of Planning Board Meeting
BK mentioned that another multi -family housing project going up at 419 Marrett Rd, which was
reviewed at the Planning Board (PB) meeting on May 27, 2026. She played a section of the PB
meeting for the NAC to hear:
The PB approved that the project had addressed the Stormwater Prevention Plan (SWPP)
and that the proposed mitigation also addressed compliance with the Tree bylaw waiver.
Michael Lyon (an Associate Member of the Planning Board who is a real estate lawyer and
knows a lot about the Department of Environmental Protection) proposed modifying the
noise regulation to make it more stringent. In addition to restricting the level of increased
noise over background at the property boundary, a provision should be added that the condo
association must put up additional screening in the future if abutters are impacted by the
noise. The PB noted that this was a more universal issue it would need to address.
Others suggested abutters at the same level across from the heat pumps on top of the new
building would be impacted and suggested requiring the developers to put up baffling from
the start. The developers acknowledged the concern and said that was why they did the
environmental impact assessment, and they were also concerned that the visual impact of
the baffling would be negative. The environmental impact study said they would not be
violating the noise bylaw.
BK summarized that eventually the chair of the planning board said it would require the
developer to put up the baffling anyway, in case there were unintended consequences. She
raised that concern that the environmental impact studies should either be considered
meaningful or not, but if they are considered meaningful, they should be the guidance that's
used in making decisions like this. The NAC agreed in principle but was also glad that the PB
was being careful about the noise bylaw.
JP noted that if the NAC becomes aware of an issue it is concerned about, it's worth going to
the PB meeting to weigh in. But if the developer has conducted a study and the PB wants to go
beyond that study's findings in its final recommendation, that is their purview (i.e., the NAC does
not have standing to object).
3. Review of the Noise Bylaw
The rest of the meeting was spent continuing the NAC review the current bylaw, focusing this
month on Chapter 80 Sections 80-5 Exemptions.
4. Public comments — There were no public comments.
5. Review of Minutes
LR moved, BL, seconded, and all approved April minutes. LR said she would bring May
minutes for approval at the next meeting.
6. Adjourn
BL moved, ER seconded and all approved a motion to adjourn at 8:07 pm
Respectfully submitted, Laura Rosen