By Elizabeth Cloutman

Photo by Joe Hu, Town Crier

Los Altos Hills

Updated ordinance could temporarily double city’s legal sound levels

Los Altos Hills residents can expect an increase in allowable noise levels if the city council decides to temporarily change the town’s noise ordinance at its first meeting in May.

The planning commission unanimously voted March 14 to recommend a temporary increase in allowable daytime noise levels from 50 to 55 decibels and nighttime levels from 40 to 50 decibels for machines, tools and appliances.

The commission also proposed that the town staff fine-tune the details of a more permanent amendment and that the town not allow any new equipment to be placed outside a lot’s setback.

Town staff requested the increase after a resident complained about the noise from a neighbor’s air-conditioning system. The three-unit system, located in an easement, exceeded the nighttime level by as much as 22 decibels, according to readings by a Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office deputy.

City Planner Carl Cahill said the problem with strictly enforcing the current ordinance is that the ambient noise levels at night are 15 decibels above the current limits.

“Without cars driving by, no one talking (nearby) or dogs barking, we are pulling up around 55 decibels,” Cahill said. “If ambient levels are that high, what does an air conditioner add? … Most residents would be in violation of the current ordinance.”

Decibels are used to measure sound. Each 10-decibel increase represents a tenfold increase in noise intensity, or a doubling of loudness. This means a noise measured at 30 decibels is 10 times louder than one measured at 20 decibels.

Usual conversation is approximately 60 decibels, the humming of a refrigerator is 40 decibels and city traffic noise can be 80 decibels, according to experts.

The commission’s recommendations are consistent with what’s been recommended by the General Noise Element of the General Plan, which recommends a 55-decibel limit until 10 p.m., Cahill said.

Cahill said the town has received only three noise complaints within the last year or two: One was a complaint about an attic exhaust fan; another was about a rooster. The city council voted to uphold the ordinance in the case of the rooster.

The most recent occurred last fall when resident Roy Woolsey and his wife complained that his Snell Lane neighbor Nimish Mehta’s air conditioner units, which were placed close to the property line, produced noise levels exceeding the noise ordinance limits.

The units “can be a nuisance for many, many hours at a time, particularly in the late afternoon and early evening when I want to enjoy the tranquillity of my patio,” Woolsey wrote in an Oct. 16 letter to the city council. “In addition, the noise is a very unpleasant sound, one of constantly running motors, which sound much like a dentist’s drill.” The Woolseys briefly reiterated their objections at the March 14 planning commission meeting.

Cahill called and wrote a letter Sept. 11 to Mehta, notifying him that he needed to install noise-mitigating measures, such as surrounding the units by a sound-reducing wall, prior to operating the air conditioning units this summer. However, Cahill noted in the letter that the city council was likely to review the noise ordinance before that time to determine if the town’s noise standards are reasonable.

“I believe most residents will have a hard time complying to the current noise ordinance,” Mehta said.

The council will consider the duration and unpleasantness of the noise, the source of the noise and the variability of noises in different locations when amending the law.

“We need to use a common-sense approach to revising the ordinance,” said resident Shabnam Jain.