Loading...
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-