HomeMy Public PortalAbout2019-12-17- Noise Ordinance Committee Report FinalWatertown Town Council
Joint Committee of Human Services and Rules and Ordinances
Committee on Rules and Ordinances - Councilor Donato, Chair, Councilor Woodland, Vice Chair,
Councilor Feltner, Secretary
Committee on Human Services — Councilor Palomba, Chair, Councilor Bays, Vice Chair,
Councilor Falkoff, Secretary
Tuesday, December 17 at 7:00 PM
Philip Pane Conference Room
1. CaII to Order
Committee chairperson, Anthony Palomba, called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m., and
introduced the committee members who were present. He also stated that Kenneth
Woodland could not attend the meeting, sent his regrets, and registered his opposition.
Lisa Feltner said that she was still working on the draft of the minutes she had taken from a
previous meeting, and they were not yet ready. Anthony Palomba stated that the
development of the noise ordinance has been a lengthy process and that his objective for
the meeting was to have a motion to accept the draft, opportunity to discuss the motion,
and, possibly, a vote on the motion.
Community members present: Rena Baskin, Peter Centola, Marcia Ciro, Kate Coyne, Ann
Cox, Stephen Kennedy, Leo Martin, Jesse Myott, Meghan O'Connell, Vincent Piccirilli, Jill
Reirs, Libby Shaw, Mark Sideris, David Stokes, and Elodia Thomas
The meeting was recorded by the Watertown Cable Access. Minutes were taken by Anne
Korte.
Prior to the beginning of the discussion of the next agenda item, both Susan Falkoff and
Steve Kennedy publicly thanked Anthony Donato for his hard work on the latest draft of the
revised noise ordinance.
2. Continue the Discussion of the Revised Noise Ordinance and
Consideration of Final Suggestions/Amendments to the Latest Draft Prior
to Final Review by the Town Attorney
Anthony Palomba started the final review of the revised noise ordinance by asking the
committee for their comments and concerns. Susan Falkoff said that she considered the
third "whereas" unnecessary (95.02), but withdrew her objection. Susan Falkoff started a
discussion about amplified sound. Elodia Thomas noted that "musical instruments" were
named twice and one should be removed. Libby Shaw suggested using the term "amplified
musical instruments." Marcia Ciro added that it would be wise to keep the language in
there because there are so many ways to amplify sound. Steve Kennedy said he would be
satisfied with the addition of "amplify" before musical instruments.
-1-
Susan Falkoff made a motion to add the word "amplify" before "musical instruments" and
strike the second instance of "musical instruments." Caroline Bays seconded the motion.
All were in favor.
95.03:
(B)2 Animals and Birds: Susan Falkoff submitted that (B)2 language is not necessary
because it is addressed in the animal control ordinance. Anthony Donato stated that it
probably came as a result of replicating the Somerville ordinance. Lisa Feltner agreed that it
is addressed in the animal control ordinance, but that she is fine with keeping it in or taking
it out of the noise ordinance. Marcia Ciro said that she thought it was good to have and
that it makes it clear for lay people. She added that the animal control ordinance could be
cited, as well. Libby Shaw seconded Marcia Ciro's comment. Elodia Thomas said, "third it."
Susan Falkoff said that she was fine with citing the animal control ordinance.
Vinnie Piccirilli suggested that 95.03 could be deleted entirely because it is a duplicate of
95.06(A). Lisa Feltner said she understood Vinnie Piccirilli's point, but believed that it was
helpful to have it. Libby Shaw explained that 95.03 addresses the sources of noise,
whereas, 95.06 speaks to levels, duration, and timing of noise. She said she believes both
are helpful. Marcia Ciro commented that if 95.03 were to be removed, the noise ordinance
would be more difficult for the public to understand. Vinnie Piccirilli pointed out that "noise
disturbances" is not defined in "definitions," and 1) legal language is important, and 2)
95.03 has no point in the ordinance because it cannot be noise pollution, as defined. He
cautioned against creating an ordinance that is impossible to measure and enforce. Lisa
Feltner suggested adding a definition for "noise disturbance," including a list of noise
disturbances, and including "noise disturbance" in the definitions. Susan Falkoff said she
was not happy with the definition of "noise disturbance." Caroline Bays suggested using
"sources of noise pollution" as a way to connect everything, as opposed to "noise
disturbance" which seemed to disconnect everything. Vinnie Piccirilli liked Caroline Bays'
idea. Anthony Donato suggested changing 95.03 from "prohibition" to "sources of noise
pollution."
Susan Falkoff made a motion to change 95.03 to "sources of noise pollution." Anthony
Donato seconded the motion. All were in favor.
(B)3a: The committee decided to add 10 minutes.
(C): Susan Falkoff made a motion to insert "and/or" between "owner" and "occupant."
The motion was seconded by Lisa Feltner. All were in favor.
(B)3: It was decided to change the title from "Alarms" to "Alarms and stationary non -
emergency signaling devices." There was also discussion about deleting (B)4a and moving
(B)4b to (B)3e. Vinnie Piccirilli noted that emergency alarms are intended to be loud, but
(B)4 is a non -emergency alarm (i.e., a gas station bell). Tony Palomba said he thought it
made sense to keep the different types of alarms separate. Susan Falkoff added that it
-2-
should be specified that (B)3a is a continuous sound and (B)4a can be an intermittent
sound.
Susan Falkoff made a motion to change the wording in (B)4a to "more than 10 minutes
total" and correct "single" to "signal." Tony Palomba seconded the motion. All were in
favor.
It was also decided to add language to the end of (B)3, similar to (B)2, about the applicable
existing ordinance (in this case, section 130.04).
Anthony Donato suggested changing "city" to "town," as necessary.
Tony Palomba made a motion to remove the word "particularly" and the phrase "at any
time or place." Susan Falkoff seconded the motion. Lisa Feltner made an amendment to
the motion to add the word "parks." All were in favor.
There was a brief discussion about vibration versus noise. Vinnie Piccirilli cautioned that if
you keep "vibration" in 14, it would have to be added to Definitions.
Lisa Feltner made a motion to add vibration perception threshold definition from
Somerville/Cambridge ordinances to Watertown ordinance Definitions. Caroline Bays
seconded the motion. Susan Falkoff voted "present." Everyone else was in favor.
95.04:
There was no discussion or changes.
95.05:
There was no discussion or changes.
95.06:
Anthony Donato introduced the discussion by stating that this is the section of the
ordinance that most people take issue with. He stated that his concern is that some of the
time periods are too restrictive and decibel levels are not high enough. He suggested
considering an increase of decibel levels to match Somerville's ordinance. Caroline Bays
asked when the Somerville ordinance was written and Elodia Thomas answered that it was
written in 2016. Caroline Bays suggested that the Newton ordinance was more recent and
was based on the most up-to-date equipment, and that Watertown should be looking to
that ordinance more so than the Somerville ordinance. Elodia Thomas commented that the
Somerville ordinance has more layers to it.
Anthony Donato stated that he would not have a problem with adding a third time period.
Lisa Feltner said Watertown is in the "ball park," but she, like Anthony Donato, is not
against adding another time period. Vinnie Piccirilli raised his concern about adopting
another city's ordinance without Watertown's reality/science. He added that the
committee needed to rethink picking dbA levels at random. Caroline Bays countered that
-3-
they were not random, but based on what was read in other towns' ordinances. She took
her suggestions from Newton. Leo Martin suggested that Somerville's ordinance is more
applicable to Watertown than Belmont's, and that maybe the committee should have
considered hiring a noise consultant who could have also helped them write the ordinance.
Steve Kennedy shared Anthony Donato's concern; the numbers seem reasonable, but no
idea what they mean. Elodia Thomas stated that she believes the numbers to be
reasonable and fair. Anthony Donato raised his concern that the ordinance could
potentially be used as a weapon, and that it would be difficult to enforce, especially
regarding decibel levels and duration issues. He went on to say that he has received many
comments from residents who do not believe that Watertown needs to regulate noise.
Caroline Bays said that, in her mind, the sound ordinance is protection for residents.
Kate Coyne addressed Anthony Donato's concern and suggested asking other towns if their
ordinances are abusive or helpful. She also said that she agreed with Caroline Bays, that the
ordinance is for the protection of Watertown residents. Anthony Donato said that the
committee needs to decide what levels are needed. His belief is that higher decibel levels
are needed and other residents have voiced the same concern. Susan Falkoff supports
Anthony Donato's position. She admitted that the whole decibel topic has made her
uncomfortable because it is so hard to measure and enforce. Lisa Feltner said she
understands everyone's nervousness, but believes there is a general misunderstanding
about how noise is measured. She added that she likes the idea of duration because it is an
acknowledgement of different types of noise. Lisa Feltner sympathized with the fact that
this is new and difficult, and it makes people nervous, but stressed that it's necessary. The
point is to provide more protection because we are growing and getting more dense, and
the hope is to reduce noise pollution. Vinnie Piccirilli said that he is okay with the way it is
now, from a practical standpoint. Rena Baskin stated she thinks we need a new ordinance;
the current one is outdated. Marcia Ciro challenged the committee to do the research to
see if this ordinance is actually used as a weapon. She also suggested that public education
would help make this accepted by the public. Tony Palomba said he liked this point. Libby
Shaw agreed that the concern about enforceability is valid and that it might be helpful to
see how other towns have dealt with it. Elodia Thomas commented that she tried to reach
out to residents with counterarguments, but no one has stepped up.
Anthony Donato made a motion to add another column to the existing chart and to adopt
Somerville's duration of sound chart (additional/third column, 7:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m., 75
dbA, all districts, 6:00 p.m. — 10:00 p.m. in residential districts, 6:00 p.m. — 7:00 a.m. in all
other districts, and 10:00 p.m. — 7:00 a.m. in residential districts).
Susan Falkoff made a motion to approve the chart, as written. Caroline Bays seconded
the motion. All were in favor.
Peter Centola questioned the ban of external amplified music for individuals. He gave an
example of a parent and child playing Frisbee while listening to music being played on an
iPod (within approved noise limits/content). Steve Kennedy gave an example of his
problem with external amplified music on the basketball courts and noted that the town
was supposed to have posted signs prohibiting external amplified music. Ann Cox agreed
-4-
with Steve Kennedy and stated that it has been a problem for her, too. Peter Centola
countered by saying that would be a change in policy, and there is no current law/rule
against amplified music. Tony Palomba said that was a good point. Meghan O'Connell said
that there is a difference between music from a phone speaker versus boom box blasting
music and that it is not reasonable for the town to limit personal music/sound. Steve
Kennedy asserted that his problem is with enforcement.
Susan Falkoff made a motion to keep section (B)3e as written. Caroline Bays seconded
the motion. All were in favor.
(B)3: Caroline Bays stated that she supports 8:00 a.m. — 8:00 p.m. weekdays. Susan Falkoff
said that 7:00 a.m. is the industry standard. Leo Martin agreed with Susan Falkoff that the
start time should be left at 7:00 a.m. He also questioned the 70 dbA level. Tony Palomba
suggested omitting the dbA level. Vinnie Piccirilli said he had expressed his concern
regarding 70 dbA at the last three meetings; that it would render too many things illegal
(i.e., chippers, chain saws, gas -powered lawn mowers). He urged the committee to strike
off the last phrase. Tony Palomba withdrew his time suggestion.
Susan Falkoff made a motion to drop the last clause. Anthony Donato seconded the
motion. The motion was defeated 3-2. Caroline Bays, Tony Palomba, and Lisa Feltner
were not in favor. Anthony Donato and Susan Falkoff voted in favor.
Vinnie Piccirilli commented that the police are concerned about how to enforce all of the
additional provisions. Tony Palomba asked if there were any other concerns, other than 3.
Anthony Donato noted that there is an extra "and" in 4 and that it should be struck. Lisa
Feltner said she would like to request a separate leaf blower ordinance next term. Anthony
Donato responded that he has no problem with a leaf blower referral, but does not see its
relevance to 3. Tony Palomba suggested that Caroline Bays and Lisa Feltner come up with
an alternative to 3a.
Lisa Feltner made a motion for 80 dbA, as measured at least 50 feet from the source.
Susan Falkoff seconded the motion. All were in favor.
Libby Shaw asked if there was an exception for wood chippers, etc. Meghan O'Connell
requested that protests be included.
Susan Falkoff made a motion to include "protests" after "outdoor gatherings." Lisa Feltner
stated that she thinks it is covered under (G). Anthony Donato said he would add a note for
the town attorney to confirm.
Tony Palomba announced that the final draft of the noise ordinance would now be brought
to the town lawyers for review, and then to full council.
Tony Palomba made a motion to ask the department of public health to investigate the
enforcement of noise ordinances which was withdrawn.
-5-
Anthony Donato made a motion to present the final draft of the noise ordinance to the
town lawyers and town council. Susan Falkoff seconded the motion. All were in favor.
Susan Falkoff made a motion to make a referral to committees for a leaf blower
ordinance. Lisa Feltner seconded the motion. All were in favor.
A motion was made to look into how other cities/towns (Newton, Somerville, and
Cambridge) and community development planning (Steve Magoon) are handling
enforcement. Anthony Donato seconded the motion. All were in favor.
Tony Palomba made a motion to request that the health department produce educational
materials to help explain the noise ordinance. Susan Falkoff seconded the motion. Susan
Falkoff voted present. Caroline Bays, Anthony Donato, Lisa Feltner, and Tony Palomba
voted in favor.
3. Adjournment
Lisa Feltner made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Susan Falkoff seconded the motion. All
were in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m.
-6-