Residents press planning board over noisy vacuums at Squeaky Clean car wash near 6 Mile Creek

Several residents told the Ithaca City Planning and Development Board on Jan. 28 that loud, high‑pitched vacuum noise from the Squeaky Clean car wash at 6 Mile Creek has eroded their ability to use their yards and sleep in their homes.

Neighbors said the vacuums run at four‑minute intervals from roughly 8 a.m. to 8:30 p.m., seven days a week, and that the sound is amplified across the creek into housing on Center Street. "The volume, duration, pitch, and piercing tone of the car wash are amplified over the surface of the 6 Mile Creek directly into our residence," resident Meg Pritchard said during public comment. Andrew Lund, who lives at the same address, said the machines began operating in spring 2024 and at times ran 24 hours a day despite permitted business hours he cited as 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Those speakers and other neighbors cited wording of the city's noise ordinance, including the definition of "unreasonable sound," and urged the board and staff to require enforcement or mitigation. "The sounds do violate the city noise code," Pritchard said. Many speakers asked the board what processes exist to reverse or limit approvals that led to the business locating there.

Board members said the Planning and Development Board does not itself enforce the noise ordinance. Several members recommended that residents continue complaints to code enforcement and the Ithaca Police Department while the board presses the applicant to return to the planning process with a technical response. "At our last meeting we suggested an acoustical engineer to be added to the team, to help mitigate some of the issues that you're talking about," said board member Andy Roman. Board members Daniel Correa and Elizabeth Gauden also urged that the applicant submit third‑party acoustic measurements and specific mitigation materials rather than aesthetic fixes such as a simple fence.

The board said it will review notice rules and the site‑plan process to see whether notification radii or documentation can be adjusted to better reach neighbors who said they were not informed about the car wash during earlier permitting. Staff and board members encouraged continued contact with code enforcement and the mayor's office and said the applicant will be invited back to present an acoustical study — but no formal order or permit reversal was issued at the meeting.

Board Chair Emily Petrina closed public comment after more than eight speakers and asked staff to accept written follow‑ups and petition material previously submitted by residents. "We hear you, and we have to make [the owner] hear you as well," Petrina said. The board emphasized that enforcement of the noise code itself rests with code enforcement and police, and that the board's role is to ensure mitigation appears in any future site plan revisions and to ask the applicant for measurable, third‑party acoustical work.

The matter remains open; residents were told to continue filing complaints with code enforcement and the police while the board awaits a formal acoustical response from the applicant.