Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Impacts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landowners near proposed Crown Ridge site warn of noise, safety and property impacts
Summary
Several landowners told the PUC they live within a few miles of the Crown Ridge site, expressed fears about sound, fire risk and property‑value losses, and some acknowledged using AI‑generated summaries as sources for incident distances.
Multiple landowners who filed to intervene or requested party status in the Crown Ridge siting docket addressed the commission on July 28 about potential local impacts.
Emily Mack, a landowner who said her family has lived on the homestead for generations, told the commission she lives about 2.3 miles from the proposed battery‑storage site and expressed concerns about property values, livestock and the household well. "We own about 12 acres. We have livestock. We have cattle ... We all drink from our well," Mack said, asking the commission to consider those interests when deciding petitioners' party status.
Other petitioners (the Lindgrens) raised safety concerns and cited battery incidents at sites such as Moss Landing and Surprise, Arizona; when commissioners asked for sources, the Lindgrens acknowledged they had relied on an "AI chat" for those distance estimates. Staff said its research showed either smaller advisory areas or no shelter‑in‑place advisories in the examples cited and questioned the evidentiary basis for broad 3–5 mile impact claims.
Applicant counsel responded that the Crown Ridge application includes sound modeling (Appendix F) indicating projected sound levels at 1.5 miles are within county guidelines and that, on balance, the two‑mile presumptive notice standard has been used in prior dockets. The commission will proceed with the admitted parties and assess technical evidence in subsequent hearings.
