Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends stricter noise and setback rules for utility-scale solar equipment
Summary
The commission advanced ordinance changes that require noise studies and establish minimum setbacks for inverters, transformers and substations at utility-scale solar facilities, with larger projects facing larger minimum separations from property lines.
The Suffolk Planning Commission recommended approval of an ordinance text amendment (OTA2025002) that would tighten city rules for utility-scale solar installations by codifying noise-study compliance and setting minimum setbacks for noise‑generating equipment such as inverters and transformers.
Assistant Director of Planning Meg Pittenger told the commission staff had worked through recent noise complaints at existing solar facilities and researched neighboring localities. The proposed changes require a noise study and make the approved study binding (facilities must comply with the approved noise levels). They would also introduce a stepped minimum-setback approach for equipment: for facilities under 5 megawatts, inverter and transformer equipment would need to be 400 feet from exterior property lines and substations/connector stations 600 feet from exterior lines; for facilities 5 MW and above the proposed minimums increase to 1,000 feet for inverters/transformers and 1,500 feet for substations/connector stations. Pittenger said staff also recommends placing perimeter landscape buffers outside perimeter fencing and requiring that any increase in generation beyond the CUP authorization would need a CUP amendment.
Pittenger explained the rationale: tonal noise from cooling fans on inverters/transformers can be audible at modest decibel levels and the logarithmic nature of sound means distance significantly reduces perceived noise. City staff said they had already been adding a compliance-with-noise-study condition on recent CUPs and wanted to codify the approach. The proposed language would preserve City Council’s ability to require larger setbacks through CUP conditions if local circumstances warrant.
The Planning Commission’s ordinance committee had already reviewed the draft and the full commission voted 7–0 to forward a recommendation of approval to City Council. Pittenger said the change would not be retroactive to facilities already approved under prior rules, although existing facilities remain subject to the noise standards and enforcement.
