Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Noise Element topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners workshop draft Noise Element; staff to revise language after agriculture, habitat concerns
Summary
A staff presentation on the draft Noise Element prompted questions about decibel thresholds, agricultural and forestry operations, wildlife habitat designations, and whether the draft's state-derived compatibility table needs localized language; staff will return with revisions.
At a planning workshop, county staff presented a draft Noise Element prepared by outside consultants and asked the commission for direction on thresholds, mitigation, and implementation programs. Mr. Phelps described the element's five sections — introduction, noise measurement, types of noises in the county, goals and policies, and implementation programs — and said implementation could include a noise ordinance and noise contour maps for areas such as the I‑5 corridor.
Commissioners and stakeholders pressed staff on decibel thresholds and practical effects. The draft references ordinary noise ranges (about 30 dB quiet to 110 dB for a loud rock concert), cites the state's Office of Planning and Research guidance, and uses land-use compatibility tables where "clearly unacceptable" ranges can be as high as 75 dB in the state's table. Commissioners asked whether those thresholds would prohibit common activities, and staff said the tables are guidance and that mitigations or conditions could be applied rather than barring development outright.
Agriculture and forestry interests warned against unintentional restrictions on seasonal operations and mobile equipment. One commissioner said limited operating periods and mitigation burdens could hamper post-fire recovery and harvest seasons; staff and counsel responded that many habitat-specific mitigations are better handled through CEQA/EIR or permit-level review and that the draft can be adjusted to preserve flexibility for agriculture and forestry.
Commissioners also asked whether the draft should specifically identify national forests or generalized areas (for example, the Scott River Headwaters) as "sensitive wildlife habitat." Staff agreed to review and, if state law requires, keep necessary references; otherwise they will avoid overly broad designations and defer site-specific determinations to environmental review.
Several commissioners recommended removing a specific reference to "agricultural truck traffic" from policy language to avoid undue public concern; staff agreed to remove or reword that line. Staff said they will produce noise contour maps, take commissioners' comments, and return with a revised draft that localizes state guidance and clarifies which standards trigger mitigation.
