A Santa Cruz resident told the Planning Commission during oral communications on Oct. 2 that a new piece of equipment installed by Santa Cruz Metro in June — described by the resident as a "mobile refueler" that converts methane into hydrogen for a new hydrogen bus fleet — is producing intermittent, high-level noise that is disturbing nearby homes.

"This thing, when I measure it, is about 24 to 25 dB above the Santa Cruz city noise limits," Mike Nussbaum, who identified himself as living at 200 Crossing Street behind the cemetery, said during public comment. "For those of you not familiar with dB, that's a factor of 250 in power. When this thing goes off, it wakes you up. I was woken up at 03:15 this morning. I was woken up at 05:15 on Tuesday morning. We have double pane windows. It is not acceptable."

Nussbaum said he has lodged a complaint with the planning department. He said the department sent a courtesy notice to the Metro about two weeks ago and that Metro has another week to reply. He said Metro CEO and general manager Corey Aldridge has been in communication with affected residents and that Metro had previously said a muffler would be in place in August, then September, and now October.

"This affects a whole bunch of people on Ocean Street extension," Nussbaum said. "...I frankly, you know, it was permanent, I think, without anybody paying much attention to the noise emission. And I'd like to know what we can do about this. If they put that muffler in and it does not meet code, what are we gonna do?"

The Planning Commission did not take formal action on the issue during the meeting. Chair Paul Hammes thanked Nussbaum for his comments and the commission proceeded to the next agenda item.

The complaint was raised during the meeting’s oral communications period (public comment on non-agendized items). Nussbaum identified the Metro device as having been installed in June in the Metro bus yard across the river and said the noise is sporadic and loud enough to penetrate double-pane windows.

No city staff response was recorded on the public record during the meeting beyond confirmation that a courtesy notice had been sent and that Metro had been given time to reply.