Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Noise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners press for stronger noise and buffer standards for battery storage projects
Summary
Commissioners raised concerns about proposed noise limits (55 dBA at the exterior wall of occupied structures) and asked whether lower limits or sound-mitigation measures should be required; they also favored placing cleared, noncombustible buffer zones at the fence line.
Commissioners at the Feb. 24 meeting questioned whether the noise thresholds proposed in Ordinance Amendment 2024-04 are sufficiently protective of nearby residents and recommended stronger mitigation options be available in individual permits.
Scott Foster, the applicant's attorney, explained the draft standard: 55 dBA at the exterior wall of existing occupied structures and 65 dBA at the property line in some districts. "So at the end of the day, sound is only offensive to somebody who can hear it... that's why we went with that 55 dBA at the outer most wall of the structure on an adjacent parcel," Foster said, and added that final manufacturer noise specs would be submitted as part of final site plan approval.
Commissioner S4 challenged whether the ordinance should set a lower baseline or require additional mitigation such as sound walls or landscaping: "It feels like this is saying, you know, you can aspire to a D minus on this sound that you're listing here," the commissioner said, urging the commission to consider higher standards as the county's baseline. Commissioners recommended using the CUP process to impose more stringent site-specific measures when projects are near sensitive receptors.
