Overview:
A survey conducted by Athol High School student Om Patel on the experience of residents with nighttime lighting in the town was presented to the Planning Board. The survey found that a lot of responses were in the four to six range, which reflects how lighting conditions vary across town. 31.4% of respondents said that Athol was over-lit at night, while 62.9% felt positively about lighting shields, which can reduce excess light and improve energy efficiency. The board also discussed whether tools like shielding and motion sensors could reduce unnecessary lighting at night.
ATHOL – The Planning Board heard a student presentation on the Dark Sky Lighting and Light Pollution survey, focusing on how residents experience nighttime lighting in town.
At the April 1 meeting, Athol High School student Om Patel presented the results of a survey of about 70 residents, which he said was conducted using a random sampling approach and met basic statistical thresholds.
As part of the survey, Patel asked residents to rate nighttime lighting on a scale of one to nine, with lower numbers representing darker conditions and higher numbers indicating brighter, more light-polluted areas.
“A lot of responses were in the four to six range….so suburban, polluted sky,” Patel said.
He said the middle range reflects how lighting conditions vary across town, noting that even areas that appear darker on maps can register higher when they are closer to more developed areas.
When asked whether Athol is overly lit at night, responses were more mixed.
“31.4% responded that Athol was over-lit and then 21.4% said it was somewhat over-lit,” Patel said.
There was more consistency when residents were asked about possible changes.
“62.9% of civilians felt positively about lighting shields,” Patel said.
He said lighting shields are designed to direct light downward, which can reduce excess light and improve energy efficiency.
Board member David Small asked whether certain areas of town could be prioritized for those changes.
“Definitely in close, approximate areas such as downtown,” Patel said.
Board members discussed whether tools like shielding and motion sensors could reduce unnecessary lighting at night. Small said those types of upgrades are easier to incorporate into new developments than existing systems.
“It’s tough to retrofit everything backwards. If you’re building new stuff or doing new equipment, that’s the time to do it,” he said.
The Planning Board also held a public hearing on a flag lot special permit application submitted by Reginald Haughton Jr. for property at 1 Lenox St., continued from March 4. Director of Planning and Community Development Eric Smith said the proposal would create a 7.1-acre flag lot from an existing 8.2-acre parcel.
He said the application met most driveway standards, with two waivers requested. The first involved a passing area, which is typically required every 300 feet for longer driveways. Smith said that was not necessary in this case given the driveway’s length. The town’s bylaws require the proponent to apply for the waiver.
“This existing grade is a 104-foot long driveway. It’s only about 2%, so it’s certainly well under the 10%,” he said.
The second waiver involved turnaround space. Smith said the layout includes an area near the end of Lenox Street where vehicles, including fire trucks, can turn around.
“We have no public safety concerns, public safety officials, you know, when they have issues….they’re vocal about it,” Smith said.
The board approved both waivers, closed the public hearing and voted unanimously to approve the special permit.