found this on Google Maps. I just figured it it's a much clearer That's that's way of looking at it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Bill told me. So, and then I looked it up and it's a a really nice clear picture. >> Yeah.
>> Howdy. Howdy. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, it's it's it's a thing on top and a box. Not a big deal. Now, what are these things? What are they going to be doing? What are they used for? >> Okay. You're not >> I know a little bit about
>> Yeah, we made some of these. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm just curious about that because I'm looking through I'm like not really seeing a uh >> I think a good explanation of what these things do. >> Reach out to you and say, "Were you playing?" >> Yeah, let's talk. I know it's about that time. >> Yes, I saw that.
>> Yeah. explain. >> See you. >> Yeah. >> See you, buddy. >> What's going on? You're back in action, huh? >> Yeah. >> Good. Good. Good. >> That's fine. That's fine. >> Hey, Mike. >> How you doing? >> Good.
>> Okay. >> All right. No problem. No problem. Boy, do I like having two people at this table. >> I mean, so >> three is a bit much. >> We all ready? Okay,
>> I'm not even going to open these things up again. >> Did you go by them, Dennis? Did you go by them? You take a run by them. testing. Jesus ready. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. Okay. The regular meeting of the Kate City Planning Board is now in session and in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act of 1975. Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided. Should any member of this board have reason to believe this meeting is being held in violation of that act, they shall so state at this
time. Hearing none, we'll start with the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
>> Karen, roll call. Karen. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bazair, >> here. >> Mr. Jones, >> here. >> Mr. Riggs, >> here. >> Mr. Crowley, >> here. >> Council member Bodner >> here.
>> Okay, that's wrong. Deputy Mayor McDade >> here. >> Mrs. Reed, Mr. Lhome >> here, >> Mr. Paducus. Mr. Krippen >> here. >> Thank you. >> Um, first of all, as everybody obviously
recognizes, um, Zach's not he's no longer on the board and Steve has Steve Roger has replaced Zach. I think Zach's going to be doing a lot of traveling in the next couple of months. So, welcome, Steve. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Welcome, Steve. >> Okay. Thank you, everybody. We appreciate look forward to working with
everybody. >> Call any of us if you have any questions before the meeting if >> Okay. >> Whatever. >> We'll do. >> Okay. So, um >> Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. >> Okay. I'm going to read this and then you say I do. Okay. >> Okay.
>> I, Steve Bonner, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States in the state of New Jersey. That I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the governments established in the United States and in this state under the authority of the people. and that I will faithfully impartially and justly perform all the duties of the
office of planning board member according to the best of my ability and that I will not use my office to grant preferential treatment nor to seek personal gain, favor or advantage not available to the general public. You so swear affirm. >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you sir. Thank you for
>> this is you. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh so the the uh agenda here is needs to be adjusted a little bit. We're going to start off with the the five applications for Crown Castle Fiber LLC.
Um and I we've had a discussion with the listener and engineer. It seems appropriate we would do them all at once since it's effectively the same thing but just five different locations. So um you guys want to come up? >> Unless the applicant has any objections. If you have an objection, let us know.
But Okay. You want to introduce yourselves and be sworn in? >> Yeah. Good evening, uh, members of the board. Uh, on behalf of Crown Castle, my name is, uh, John Thomasini. I'm a senior external affairs manager, um, covering the state of New Jersey, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and Delaware. Um, and I'm here joined with my colleagues. Hi, I'm Lisa Mosy, manager of uh permitting and utilities for Crown Castle for Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. >> Good evening. My name is Patrick
Behringer. I'm the permitting specialist for Eastern Pennsylvania, Southern New Jersey, and Delaware. >> Permitting specialist. >> Permitting specialist. >> Good evening. My name is Jordan. >> Put your Put your mic. >> Good evening. Jordan Fry, partner at the law firm of Snyder and Snyder Council of the Crown.
Just for clarity purposes, is this is this for Verizon >> or is it >> T-Mo? These are specifically T-Mobile tonight. >> T-Mobile. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Who wants to start? >> Yeah, I'll I'll start. Um, >> swear. >> I guess the witness is in council. I
don't have to swear you in. You're attorney at law state in New Jersey, >> correct? >> Okay. So, the other three folks I do have to swear in >> and Craig. >> And we'll swear in Craig as well. Do each of you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, all truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> I do. Thank you. Good sir.
>> Yeah. Thanks again and and uh we appreciate the opportunity to to be here tonight. I uh I'd be remiss if I didn't start out by just saying that uh over the last three years um I spent a great deal of time here in your community. Um getting out ahead of the the work that
we're doing uh not just in Cape May City uh but as well as the other jurisdictions on the peninsula, West Cape May, Cape May Point and Cape May County. Um, and I will just say that it's been a tremendous working relationship to this point. Um, and I know he's not here this evening, but I I would really uh miss the mark if I
didn't thank uh Mr. Dietrich um and all his time and energy that he's put in to really help us feel welcome here. Um, I will also say that, you know, what sets Crown Castle apart from other folks in the telecommunications space, um, is that we're the we're the largest shared provider of telecom infrastructure in
the United States. And what that means is that we put up the capital, we build and we colllocate. So while you ask me uh who the carrier was tonight, these are T-Mobile nodes. But what happens when we build is we build it once and when the other carriers want to come,
they will locate on this infrastructure that's already built. So what that means is less poles, less impact in your rightways, uh less environmental concerns, right? And a lot of the things that we've already done here on the ground, um I'm sure that many of you know that we've already deployed fiber
um over the last year in and around your community, um have all been done um keeping in mind that this is a really special historic place um and done uh with the point of minimizing impact to your rightways and your community. So, um I think I it would be really lost if
we didn't start with that. Um but having said that um we're here tonight to ask for approval uh for five small cell nodes. Um again as I mentioned Crown Castle um as a shared telecommunications infrastructure provider. Uh these five nodes would be added to our portfolio of
approximately 120,000 uh that are on air across the country right now. Uh that goes along with 40,000 traditional cell towers that we have in our portfolio and about 90,000 route miles of fiber. Um, again, these five nodes, uh, small cell
nodes, uh, for those of you that aren't familiar with a small cell node, and, um, that is not something to certainly be ashamed of, as uh, they're they're not everywhere, and they are ever growing and, uh, being built at a rapid rate. So, um, these kind of look like your street light posts, your canisters,
if you will, in certain places, or a lamp post. Uh, things that are going to fit in with the aesthetic as much as possible. Uh, sometimes they're looking like a cylinders type of shroud. Um my colleague Lisa will explain a little bit more about what that looks like. But um there's 13 nodes uh planned as part of
this deployment uh that will touch the larger peninsula. And tonight we're here to ask approval for the five that would uh be in Cape May city. With that, I'll turn it over to uh to Lisa to talk a little bit more about the specifics. >> Okay. Really, I I believe uh the
construction drawings were sent out. Hopefully everyone had a chance to to look at them. if you um pretty much and you had mentioned it's it's kind of the same uh deployment times five here on five different locations. These are all utility poles uh that we are placing an
antenna and then of course we call it the shroud but that's the housing for the carriers radios and their equipment. Um this is all in the public rightway. Those are the drawings. >> These are the drawings. Yes, I have them >> going on existing poles. Yes, three of
the five are on existing utility poles. So, they will be ACEowned poles. Um, they will be, I believe, the three that are on existing utility poles, those polls are scheduled to be replaced for new poles. Same exact location, but
it'll be a fresh pole that goes in. Um, and then we'll build on that. We are we have an agreement with ACE and the other utilities to partner with them to be able to attach to their polls. >> I guess from that that means there's two new poles going up >> there. Yes, there are two new Crown
Castle poles that are being proposed here. >> Can you just tell me which ones are the two new poles so my >> Yes. So 2011 Beach Avenue which is at Beach and Patterson which is um our note ID all starts in CAY for Kate May. So that would be Kate May number four. Kate >> can you repeat that? I'm sorry you said
>> four. I'm sorry. >> My my job I I'm basically just to take notes so I can prepare resolutions. So I I know it sounds somewhat ridiculous but like the spelling of your names gets tricky and for me to get it right in the resolution, you know, I got to there's
one S. So some of it I have to ask him a name question. So >> I I should have spelled that for you. So let's want to go back to that. >> Go ahead. Yeah, >> it's T O M A S I N I. I I should know better than
that. Sorry. >> That's okay. And then sometimes you want to get a right self-correct makes it wrong. >> I've been doing that my spelling it for people my whole life, right? I don't I don't know how different. >> And then Mosi is M O S E Y. >> It's M O ZI. >> M O ZI. There you go. That's what I am. M O ZI.
>> Um okay, that corrected to Zilla for some reason. And then Behringer is >> uh an impossible spelling. B A E R I N G E R. >> All right, you guys are going to be doing a lot of these. My advice is to spell those names because they're kind of tricky ones.
>> And then Fry is fry. >> Correct. >> By chance. Way to go. Okay, so I have um there are two polls which are on 2011 Beach. >> Yes. So our node identification is C A
Y-00004. So K4 and that address is 2011 Beach Avenue. >> Okay, >> which is at Beach and Patterson. That is one site that is going to be a new pole, >> a Crown Castle own pole. And then the
other is CAY-00006 and that is at 104 North Street. And they're they're being from what I read they're six inches in from the curb line and they're in the sidewalk. >> I need to re reference the drawings for
each of those but um I believe we're impact because I don't want to misquote. So CAY4 >> they're on city property. They're not on private property. >> These are in public rightway. Yes. Yes. So let me pull CAY4. I think the one on North Street said it
had a 6 inch. >> Uh to confirm uh CAY6 104 North Street we have proposed as 1 foot uh away from the outside of the from the curb one foot from curb.
>> Okay. >> And >> and that looks to be the same for four. We should be one foot from face of curb. Okay. Go ahead. >> Okay. Really, I'm here to answer any questions that you may have regarding the scope of work, any any concerns
about the build itself, the equipment. >> It's a pretty straightforward application. So, if I think it's appropriate that anybody has any specific questions. >> Um, >> got two Dennises that already raising >> Dennis number one. Um, exactly what is
the purpose of the node? What what are they used for? So these are used to improve coverage andor capacity. So um traditionally the small cells are interspersed where there may be holes in coverage. You have the towers
>> that are the main source of coverage. And a good example we use sometimes if you would >> have bowling balls next to each other and they have circular radius without um there's still going to be holes in between those that may need to be filled
and that could be because of um geography. It could be blockage of buildings or or other topography. Um, and then in addition to that, you may have hight traffic areas where you've got a lot of communication happening at once, like in a venue, in a stadium,
something like that, where you ever you been in a stadium, you have good cell coverage, but you can't get a text out or a picture or anything because everyone's on at once. So, that's the other thing that a small cell does. It offloads some of that capacity
from the towers to allow everyone to be able to have coverage >> as in a beachfront. as in a popular beachfront location. So, >> and John, if you wanted to add to that at all. I know. >> No, that that was really the answer. I I'm a I'm from Central Pennsylvania, so
I always give a Penn State example that there's pretty good service in State College, Pennsylvania, but on a game day, you're going to have five bars and good luck getting out the picture that you that you took or or telling your friends where you're going to meet them. They're not going to get that right till later. So, um and same thing we see here, right? you might have decent
coverage um but as we know right that beach is going to get real crowded from May to to September and um your your existing networks are going to get overwhelmed. So this relieves Lisa did a really good job explaining how that works. It'll relieve the pressure from that >> um as well as help with some areas where
um you know you lose a signal behind a taller building or something like that. Small cell really brings think about bringing the signal down to the ground um it's always connected to fiber. Um and then as you start to think about autonomous vehicles right Teslas's um
emergency services using drones right tella health all those all those things and technologies that we've really seen increase recently or postcoid right all all that stuff is supported by this infrastructure being brought down to the ground >> I see okay um and real quick you
mentioned that you know these T-Mobile is the these are for T-Mobile and that other carriers may want to join but what does that look like on the pole? Is there going to be multiple? >> No, that's and that's the beauty. Once we >> top one and that's it. >> The the at the very top of the pole,
that's the antenna, >> right? >> Um that the cylinder canister, that's your antenna. That antenna can accommodate all the carriers. >> Okay, that's >> the shroud, which is the the box that's being attached to the side. All the individual carriers radios will be
inside that box enclosed. So once that's placed, we've got >> Yeah. I will say that we had capabilities to fit more than three carriers, but uh as I think most people know um Boost Network with Dish Network is uh kind of dropped off as as the fourth carrier there. So our our
infrastructure absolutely can handle uh the three main carriers who coincidentally are our three largest customers. >> Perfect. All right. Thanks. >> What is the dimension? Oh, I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. I was going to I was going to piggy back onto that question. So, with that being said, can we expect any like
we haven't seen many of these applications before. We have one that's been constructed in front of the Ocean Club. Um, you barely notice it. Um, but there is a small cell that we approved that's been constructed. So, we have an
example. Um, will these five pretty much take care of the city's uh >> demand >> demand or can we expect a bunch more of these, you know, applications to come in in a
proliferation of these things? >> I I'm not going to speculate, right? Um, but I think that in our experience, what we typically see is that the carriers don't want to necessarily invest that capital up front, right? But once we do, right, and it's kind of like I hate to use the cliche, but once you build it,
right, they typically will come after that, but it makes it more attractive, right, for Verizon and AT&T um to attach to existing infrastructure rather than going into what we would call a green field, right? So, um that's as far as I'm going to go on record as as speculating, Craig. Um hopefully that's that's okay with you. Um
>> no, I I I just we're a historic town. I just I'm curious, you know, I I grew up with the the I cut my teeth with all the cell cell carrier uh the cell tower um during the 90s were all coming in was when I was starting out as a
professional. Um so I'm very familiar with that technology and listened to night after night of presentations with coverage and gaps and coverage etc. Um, so but this is new te technology to me and I'm just interested and we're a historic town and it's just, you know,
we would like to know, can we expect a lot more of these or is this going to pretty much >> Well, as as an AT&T customer, I certainly hope so. Great. >> I'm glad I understood your answer. I just want to make sure that I understand >> by putting in these five in areas that
appear to your analysis to be gaps. Okay. whatever that as >> I'm sorry the the carrier's analysis not not crown castles we're building these nodes where the carrier has identified >> someone someone did an analysis said this is a good spot for this guys are are accommodating that that opinion of
theirs >> so and what I think the next testimony was that other carriers who now want to fill their gaps right they can use your same um shell put their equipment in the
shell and all use the same antenna. >> Correct. I can say that right now, just to answer your question more directly, those are the only five that we have contracted to build. So there's nothing in our purview right now. >> It doesn't preclude that there might be future applications. >> In the future, if another carrier deems
that they need a spot, it's possible that we could be back right now. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Let me just finish my thought. So then the next thing is you said that it's once you do this, the others might follow. Once you build it, they will come. And what you mean by that, I think, is presumably they're
going to go and piggyback on the infrastructure that you've just constructed. Not that there's going to be more people doing infrastructure, but that they're going to use the infrastructure that's there because it's it's there and it's cheaper to use it. >> Yep. That shared shared infrastructure. Exactly. >> It takes some comfort without any guarantees that by doing these five, it
may not be the only five, but we may be sort of fulfilling a large part of the need for these things and not going to be there's not going to be 25. No, that that's sort of the >> I take Yeah, that's correct. >> I take comfort the fact if they come back again, we can just say no. >> You can't say no. >> Why can't
>> Well, you you I mean you >> why can't we? >> It's like a it's like a by right sight plan. I mean, if it's a conditional use, >> I'm talking about new polls. >> No, >> it's a restrain trade. >> It's not city. >> I think it's fair to say that we would make that commitment, right? If AT&T
comes in or Verizon comes in and they say to us, "Hey, we've identified a coverage gap in Cape May City. we'd like to do, I don't know, let's say five nodes, right? Lisa's team is going to push them to locate on the existing infrastructure. Um, we're not going to come here and ask to put another pole
right across the street or next to an existing one that we just did. So, I can tell you that from a Crown Castle standpoint, unequivocally. >> And you you're the own you're you have ownership of these and you're leasing the space out or the the capability. two two >> so two of the polls will be Crown Castle
owned polls and then the other three are ACE uh utility polls but we have an agreement with ACE so that we will you know um have that space those positions on the poll. >> How long was your agreement? >> Probably I'd have to look to see when it
was signed but our agreement uh is at least a decade when we originally signed it with multiple >> renewals after that. So there's no no worry of, you know, the agreement running out anytime soon that we have with the >> go crazy if they don't can't use their
funds. >> And I can say just to speak a little bit more about your concern that other carriers would come in. Um many times Oh, sorry. >> I'm sorry. I I just >> I just wanted to Yeah. Before we go too far, what is the size and dimensions? I
I mean there's a lot of paper I've looked at this. >> Yeah. And just and real quick while while Lisa's getting that up, Craig, I just want to say to you in the in the immediate term because we didn't get back to the second part of your question, T-Mobile customers, right, will see the the most immediate impact. And then the other the other way I will
support the community is 911, right? So um 911 calls are uh no priority, right? So if I was an AT&T customer and I have no service and I connect to that T-Mobile radio, the 911 call will in fact go through. So, T-Mobile customers at first and then
>> these units look like the ones in front of Ocean Club. >> Yeah, >> you kind you kind of answered my question. >> Correct. Am I Am I wrong on that? They look like an ocean club right in front. >> So, is there a picture of that? >> The the tower that's the pole the the pole that's in front of the ocean club
right now. That's what they look like, right? >> Yeah. Give that to you. The old atlas. >> The old atlas. >> Thank you. There's a little >> It must look like a little electric. >> Everyone just a little less cross talk because we have to create a record. Okay. So, I know like we're this is a
little different, but we're we're crying cross talk. I'm going to ask the chairman to do our usual raise your hand. He'll call on you and then speak. So, we have one person at a time. Okay. >> Craig Craig just explained. >> Yeah. >> I'm sorry. It's it's on sheet five of the construction drawings if you want to
see what the shroud looks like. >> Sorry. Yeah. I'll hold the rest of my >> Yeah, >> I think you addressed my question. You're promoting collocation and that's that's all that's where I was going with my question and it it's your business model. You want to lease out the space
to other carriers. So, it's in the best interest of you promoting that collocation until it's filled up and then you know if they fill up then we may need more but you can't you can't make that call. I I understand. Okay. >> Yeah. Except I I will tell you to that point we uh we've done some really neat
things where we've uh built some stealth poles on the Ben Franklin Parkway in Philadelphia um that can get up to six carriers. Um although I don't really see any need need for six carriers anytime soon. But um I will tell you we have contemplated that stuff and you know that that's our goal right that's as you said that's our model. Our goal is to
minimize that footprint. Um it's to make things aesthetically pleasing and and to hide as much of that um equipment that we need to handle the data demand in this country um as possible. >> Dennis, how long do they last in this
environment down here on the beachfront with the weather can >> do you want me to take that? Naturally with telecommunications as you know I how many phones has everyone had at this point? technology changes. So there are upgrades that
happen within the shroud. So new customer radios will come out every few years, different generations. So those will be changed. Antennas will be changed periodically over the years. Um so I would say it's more likely that the technology would change before
physically there would it would >> change the look of it. >> Yeah. But but as the radios change, they go inside the shroud. um the antennas, those forms remain the same. It may be a different model number or something that gets changed, but we have um uh
operations technicians, a team that maintain everything. They do um preventative maintenance on the sites to take a look at the sites, make sure everything is wired properly, that you know it everything is safe and secure. um they
do that frequently uh to make sure that there's you know nothing that will fail on the site. >> Yeah. And I think just to add there, right? So everyone hears 5G, right? So those initial radio radios equipment that's put in there will be 5G, but we
already know that markets are rolling out 6G, right? So, what would happen to Lisa's point is when T-Mo contracts us to upgrade to 6G, they're going to pull that canister shroud off the top and they're going to swap that radio equipment out, put that canister right back on and be on the way. And those are
actually pretty pretty quick upgrades to uh to have happen. Yes, please. >> So, the shroud itself, the container box doesn't change in size or dimension at at any point in time. We really make a concerted effort to size those appropriately upfront so that we can
accommodate different variations of equipment. >> Would be notified if there was any change >> if there was any change aesthetically to the exterior that would be impactful to you and that's any size change that would be a new permit application. >> Okay.
>> A question for you. So um or I guess observation and then a um I guess just a couple of observations. So, regarding uh this entire project, you're actually only looking to add two new poles as far as in two new locations where there
presently is not a pole. There's a pole in the other the other locations. That is that correct? >> That's correct. We make every effort to try to get on existing utility poles. In those two instances where we have found that we need to place a new Crown Castle
pole, it is because the surrounding utility poles are not viable. And when I say not viable, they may have primary power on those. And that's likely the case why we decided, okay, we need to go across the street and place a new poll. We cannot build on polls with primary um
in a with ACE. So that's not, you know, an option for us to be able to do that. >> Okay, that was that leads into what my other question was going to be or an observation which I think is probably helpful to this anyway. is to me is
looking at um the application that you had for the 2011 Beach Avenue um poll, which is the one that's located near Patterson Street and and Beach. That's one of the the new pole locations. I mean, on the one hand, it's to me it doesn't come across as an anomaly
because there's already utility polls in the area. Um but I did notice I think there's at least two polls in that area. Neither of those polls would be suitable. >> No, they're not viable, unfortunately. So if if uh utility has a transformer on the polar, they have their own equipment
that's automatically, you know, ruled out, that's disqualified or if there's primary power. So um there can be times when there's underground conduit risers that come down and would block our uh ability to build on the pole. So our
first choice is always um to to select an existing pole so that we're not adding to, you know, pole population in the town. >> Okay. And I believe North Street is the other location where you're would be installing a new pole in a new location. And although there's not a that would be
a new location, there are other utility poles in that area. Correct. >> There's a whole utility line across the street, but it has primary. So, we're we're coming across to be able to to set a new one. >> Um, and I don't want to take anything away from what Craig may be adding, but
I believe I thought I saw it in the North Street application. There was some mention about needing to get HPC approval. Is there is there a need for that and has that been acquired? >> I was handed all five HPC approval evidence of HPC approvals tonight. >> Okay.
>> So, we have those in hand. >> Okay. Okay. So, I just wanted to make sure all the boxes were checked off. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. >> You're welcome. >> Any other questions? >> Yeah, I have a question. >> Yeah. Craig, who owns the polls?
Um, there is a height requirement. So, this is a conditional use. You >> said who owns the poles? >> Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said how high. >> No, no, >> sorry. >> Who owns? >> Who owns? So, three of them are owned by Atlantic City Electric and the other two
that they're putting in will be owned by them. >> Okay. So your business model is you you're basically uh provide the linkage for carriers. Um and uh what would prevent a carrier from
saying you don't they don't like your prices >> and what would they do then? a carrier can what we would call self-perform which is to build themselves you know and and in some areas they they will do that but it's
more cost effective and this is where John was speaking to if a site is already constructed it's much more cost-effective for a carrier to join an existing site um than they than it would be for them to incur the expense to build from the ground up
themselves. So suppose you're maxed out on carriers, what happens then? They have to build their own. >> They'd have to come back. >> We really don't get maxed out. I'll say because we would we would be >> Go ahead. >> Let me jump. There's only, as I
mentioned in the beginning here, um Boost Boost, right, was owned by Dish Network. Dish Network went out of business or bankrupt, I don't know, a couple weeks ago. So there's only three carriers, right, that have um the spectrum from from the US government. So AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile are the only
players in the in the market, the in the US market right now. >> Um will that change? I I I don't know, right? Because it it went pretty poorly with with Dish. So for the foreseeable future, um I I think probably for for as long as I as I need to worry about, um we're going to be looking at these three
large carriers here. So, Crown Castle's infrastructure easily handles the three major carriers. Um, as I mentioned to to Craig here, um, we have u done some stealth what we call stealth poles and things where we actually could have had all four of those carriers. Um, and then as I mentioned on the Ben Franklin
Parkway, we were able to get four carriers plus emergency services and county or city >> the same shred. >> Yeah. Same size. >> Yeah. Six six different sets of radio equipment. So all the carriers um as well as city and county um and that's what you'll see sometimes with our tower
sites, right? A good way when you see a a macro tower site that it's crown castles was when you see multiple levels of radio equipment. Um but oftent times when there's only a single carrier, there might be a smaller level of radio equipment that is actually free or reduced services to local emergency
services, uh 911, things like that. And who owns the uh unit that's in front of the beach in front of the uh ocean club? >> I'm not familiar with that one. I don't not sure if you are, John. I It's not a crown class. >> Is that Cape May city limit? Is that
Kate May city limits? >> Yeah, it's right out. It's right on Beach Avenue in front of the Ocean Club. I thought, and I'm going way back to try and jog my memory, but I think it might be AT&T. >> AT&T. Yeah, because I vaguely remember that coming before
>> I have AT&T and I seem to remember like being hopeful that it was going to help my coverage. >> I think this is what you're talking about. >> Well, now what does um >> Oh, there it is. Yeah, >> I think that's what they're talking about, right? >> And they have a and there's a secondary
poll next to it also. Feel free to look left and right. >> I think it's funny when I was uh >> they came in under another company name. So, but I they told us that they were providing service for >> I I I I spent some time in Kate May Point actually has a few nodes. Um and
I'm pretty sure that theirs are at AT&T. >> That that's the only application that this board has ever approved before you guys came in. >> Those are the three three isn't it? >> Three of them on Beach Drive. >> No, just one. >> Oh, just the one. that jumps out. >> There's just one and it's in front of
the ocean club. >> Okay. >> I'm not sure. My guess is that that is one of the >> Now, have we uh have we come far enough along in technology to to to uh comfort us that beach drive won't start
looking like the top of the water tower? >> Not if we can. If we can help it that it will not. No, >> it already does. Dennis drive down the beachfront. Yeah, >> poles everywhere. >> There's there's lots of utilities hanging all over our poles. I >> I would I would challenge I was gonna say, Mr. Crowley, I would I would
challenge you. We uh we deployed fiber uh for you right before uh tourist season opened last year from convention hall to the uh beach tag kiosk up on Madison. And the reason we uh were able to install this fiber on the prominade was because it was very minimally in
invasive. It's about an inch below the surface. And I would challenge you the next time you walk the prominade to see if you can even find it. And my guess would be that you can't. But I but so I I just mentioned that because it it matters to us, right? We we don't want your we don't want Beach Avenue looking
like the water tower, right? That's that stuff is important to us. It's doesn't make us look good if we go places and there's radio panels and fiber wires uh everywhere. And you know I I will tell you we have had a lot of success uh deploying telecommunications infrastructure in places where um
historic designation matters. Right. Princeton, New Jersey. Uh Lisa's team has deployed two dozen nodes there where they're matching flower pots on street light posts with historic guidelines and it and it and it really what I take from
it is is that we're not going to build something sloppy and we're not going to leave something sloppy. And we're certainly not going to come into a place like this um that I know uh history matters probably more so than Princeton um and do anything to rock that boat. So for what it's worth on these things
>> like what if if Princeton got stuff that look like I don't know basket weaving or whatever are these anything special about the ones you're putting in here. Well, in those cases, >> they had to match exist. They had to match what was existing at at the in the area where the poles were. And there was obviously a lot um >> more a lot more poles, right, in a
denser in a denser area. Um so, a lot of attaching to existing infrastructures and lamp street light posts, right, that already had >> um decorative ornamental type of things on them. And listen, if if that's where we would be attaching here, we we would do the same thing.
>> Yeah. In those cases th those were um squares that had decorative lamp post existing that we were able to match for them. And that was John's uh point in that um in this case we're not going into an area that's all metal poles or a
decorative square and that kind of thing. We're we're in the the right of way along the utility line. So in that case the majority of our small cells do go on to utility poles. Um, but I can say these things >> tend to hide in plain sight once they're
constructed. In the same way, like you drive down the street, there are transformers on the utility pole and you don't really take notice to them. >> Yeah. >> And Beach Drive is already way too sloppy with utilities. >> It certainly is. >> And uh it just it it's >> I I I just don't want to make the mess
down there worse than it is. >> Sure. No, I understand. Um, I can say and I think they're noted on the drawings. The shroud itself is painted the national park brown it's called, which is the same color to kind of blend in with the pole as is the antenna. So,
they're all that same. >> And the one location >> hopefully seamless color with the pole. >> One location of Washington and Ocean is about as clean and neat a look as we have on these five because there's nothing in that intersection. Your poll
is down the street a little bit, but there's nothing in and that looks nice and clean. So, uh, that's good that you're not doing anything. >> Well, and I will be curious to hear what HPC if they had any comments on their approval. They already passed. >> They passed them all with no comments. Yeah. Okay. All right. Because that that
really is what our design standards are set at. Well, I mean, >> yeah, I I get your point. >> The HPC um did provide their approval and the applicant included them in your packets. Yep. Yeah. And I I I think also it's probably worth uh for your knowledge just
mentioning that we we have walked these sites with uh Mr. Dietrich. Um he has been intimately involved uh from the very beginning of our work here. I I mentioned about three years ago um when we started looking at um how we could deploy fiber um ahead of these these
nodes um in the least impactful manner as possible. Okay. >> So he he should have familiarity with with these five sites at least. >> Mr. Can I just ask one technical question too? How how does the units there's two pieces, one on top and and the box down the bottom. How does that
get uh power? >> So ACE does deliver power to the pole for us. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Assuming Mayor there's already maybe power on that pole. >> Question. >> Quite frequently it's they're pulling
from a transformex pole down, you know, and bringing service to us. So there'll be a connection to a power connection to your box. >> There will be a disconnect. Yes. As part of this um that we'll terminate at. Yeah. >> Question back to the HPC real quick. Was that Karen? Was that with their
subcommittee or was that the full the full commission? >> They approved them all in review subcommittee. >> Their subcommittee >> they did. >> Yes. in front of the Washington. >> Yeah. Yeah. Every single one was
approved and review. >> Well, I can understand something out on Beach Avenue between 10 other things, but this is in front of the Washington. This is a shopping center, >> right? And there's a pole there. There's already a poll there. >> Oh, yeah. But now there's going to be a big box that's at Well, how high in the air is the box?
>> 10 ft. 8 ft in the air. >> So, the base of that is at 10 feet. They're putting a big metal box in front of the state approved. >> So is subcommittee. We went through this before, >> right? And and and that's where I'm going back. That's why I asked is it with the subcommittee or the full
commission? I mean, is it within our purview, Mr. King, that if we wanted the full commission to make their recommendation on it, we can do that. or what's what's the >> I I I mean not for all five, but if you want that if if if you are, you know,
one of your conditions of approval is always HBC approval. And um I mean, you're allowed to refer things to HPC for >> I don't know how >> review and advice. >> I I mean, I would definitely like that one that we're speaking about to have at least the full commission's
input and their their consent on it. I mean, That's it. >> So, I I would agree. I mean, I think that anything that's impacting the historic district, I I just want to make sure that we're >> they're all these district the whole beach.
>> Well, well, that's what I'm saying. So, I I I understand that >> there are there's historic district and then there's historic district. I mean, so if they're going to put a black box where there's six other telephone poles out on Beach Avenue, that's one thing. But to put it in your main shopping
district 8 ft from a storefront at 8 feet at 8t in the air, I I would think the HBC would want to all the members would want to see that and say if that's okay because I mean I I don't know. I'm not on the HBC so what do I know? But >> I mean I I I just would like to jump in
on that. I would really I mean the one in question that Mr. King is speaking about and that's what we're talking about. I have a concern that it went only to the subcommittee and not to the full commission for their full input on on that particular one. I'll leave my judgment to the rest of the board. Um
but that one in particular I do have a concern with um without having the full HBC's input. >> I have I have I have a question about that. If they've got if they've got a stamped sealed signed approval, how come HBC
>> and that's why I asked Mr. That's why I asked Mr. King if if it was in our purview to to send it to the full commission for the for their advice. >> I guess was an approval, not an approval. Not >> Yeah, an approval is an approval. >> What's that? >> I'm sorry. >> Has this board not done that in the past
or was it the zoning board that did that? >> I thought one of the boards >> we normally we normally refer to we like to have the HBC's approval before we hear an application. Yeah. >> And that and that's where we are right now. They have they have that. >> I remember this this argument being had before it was the zone. It was the zoning.
>> We didn't get anything from the HBC except verbal and we pushed back and made them look at it. >> All right. First of all, whatever this this thing is, it's not checked whether it's conceptual or final, is it? >> No, it should it should be it should be
checked final. >> I'm not >> for for for this this this is an existing pole. It meets all height requirements and >> we have HPC approval. the the shroud's going to be painted to match and it's going to serve the customers on the storefront.
>> Whereas it says it's gonna be painted. This does require paint. If you take a look at the plans, >> yeah, the all of the shrouds are painted the national park brown >> and it's not it's not we're not talking about a large box here either, but but the plans do detail how they're painted match similar to the to the you guys
have >> and your code prefers utilizing existing pole, >> right? >> And we mean we're meeting all the height requirements. We have HPC approval. So we would respectfully request that this gets approved. >> So it's going to be brown. >> Yeah,
>> that's >> okay. Karen, is this approval that we have in front of us in HBC? Is it preliminary or final? >> It doesn't. It's not checked. >> Okay. Um, it should be checked final. It's just an error that they missed that. They missed that. If they put that
stamp at the bottom, that means it's approved and it's final. >> Okay. Whose signature is that? >> Probably John. >> That is John Becker. >> Fine. Thank you. Because again, >> is there another shroud color you would like to see there instead of brown? >> That's the problem is we aren't
qualified in the colors. That's >> you you mentioned the colors. So, I didn't know if >> you're the ones who say whether they should be brown or white since all the trim around that thing is white. I I don't I don't know. the HBC >> the HBC doesn't have jurisdiction over color. >> They they can they can control they can't do the color of a house, but they
can do a streetscape and say we think the pole should be shaped like a basket. It's good enough for Princeton. I mean, so I'm just saying that I if for something that's this prominent, I mean the other stuff, but this is on Washington Street in front of your shopping district. I would think that the HPC would want to the members would
want to see it and talk about it. I mean and decide well >> does it have to be >> we can only operate on what's in front of us which is an approval >> what we have in front of us is something that is a >> approval it's an approval >> I don't know what it is >> says HPC approved >> I have a question but I have a question though
>> is conceptual and it's final neither box is checked >> and that may be because it is a >> it's stamped >> uh it's done by a single member of the HBC >> it says approval soft does it require planning board or zoning board approval it says >> that's not concept >> conceptual or final
No zoning board approval. >> Will this require approval? So all that's not >> this is not there's two boxes and neither one is >> exactly. >> So I I it's okay. Listen, I'm not I don't give a hard time. It's just that it's it's it's in the shopping district
on Washington Street. And we had this thing before where remember I I do both boards and we had a thing in the zoning board where one member uh approved something um in with in whatever they call it technical review and then it got
before the larger board and the larger board said wait a second shouldn't that be thought about a little bit more and then it went back before the whole board every like oh my god we we missed that is basically what happened and and they it it turned into a big thing and I'm still dealing with it So be before we
get too far down the road and this is our first one of these. So we're setting a bit of a precedent. Okay. So now if three more of these go Washington Street I'm I'm just giving you guys fair warning. I'm not a decider. I don't vote. >> And Mr. Kingd I I I hear you and and
that's why I honed in on that particular one. I mean >> I would feel comfortable having the full commission look at at that particular one and get their input on it. And I mean, we talk about Princeton having it look like a a basket or
something along those lines. Maybe the full board wants that input when it's going to be in that shopping district area. So I >> are we are we in a position to tell HPC how to do how to operate? >> Well, we can refer to their full commission. Well, that's what we told
them before. We don't want to hear until they've given their >> right. and and it was only in in the the subcommittee which I respect their work but that's why we're saying this particular one we may want the full commission's input so I'll >> Mr. was there my hand, but you can't see me.
>> So, I need to I need to clarify uh and revisit what I said. >> Technically, the applicant should have checked off conceptual because unless they didn't know that planning board approval was needed because they submitted permits without knowing
planning board approval was needed. So, that could be where there was a a miscommunication. It would in a perfect world the secretary who processed this would have uh the HBC would have given it back and
said can you get them to to check one of these boxes and then it would have been um clearer. So we I will discuss this with the HPC for the future so this doesn't happen again.
One one thing you know that we can offer is um the color of the node can be painted to match brown or it could be painted to match a a color that if you prefer the gray matches the gray on the building. >> Yeah. Yeah. What? Whatever.
>> And then and we're happy to submit samples building 10 years from now. >> Why don't we do this for Why don't we do this? Let me try I want to keep it up. Don't we don't want to hold up your project. We just don't want to I'm telling you historic district stuff. Washington Avenue. That's a touchy subject for us and and we're the ones
who get the grief. They won't track you down. They track us down. So, what what I'm going to suggest is we treat this because it's not clear as as as um conceptual approval. And the standard condition so you you can get approval from us tonight, but a condition of
approval from us is that you get final approval from HBC. so that all you have to do on this one application for Washington is go back to the HBC with your conceptual approval and get final approval so that the full board sees it and can opine that wait a minute we
missed that we don't want it brown we want it white or they can talk about height or whatever things that they care about just so that we give the board the HBC one final look you don't have to come back here you just got to go back there you'll have four that are final
we're not going But for that one, I do think it's appropriate to get >> the the the location of the equipment is not an issue. You're talking about the color. >> I don't know. >> Really, the color would be the only thing. >> Put another poll in. >> I'm not smart enough to know if color is
the only >> I was just going to say that could be the only thing that could change would be the color in that that pole is a an ACE utility pole. So, we can't turn that into a metal what it's an ace existing
utility pole. So, we have an agreement with them, but they have approved those shrouds, you know, size. >> So, really, it's the color that can change. >> You had something. >> There's a difference on here. The address is 315 Washington Street, but
this is in front of like Victorian Towers, which is like the 600 block of Washington. >> That's the That's the 600 block, right? So, did so did HBC approve the location or the address? >> Those are two totally different places. >> I put in 315. It was in the middle of Washington Mall. >> Exactly. >> And this is marked right.
>> It's not. It's on the corner of Washington and Ocean. >> Yeah. But the address on the application says 315 Washington. >> This says 315 Washington Street, which is about your office. >> It should say 315 Ocean Street. >> It should say or or 6 something Washington. >> That's probably what it's supposed to be.
>> Yeah, that that complex is 315 Ocean. Just to clarify, can we please confirm which site we were speaking about at the moment? I thought we were >> It It's 3:15. It says 3:15, >> but that's probably what happened. >> This is your K004. >> 300 block
street. >> Yeah, we 001 different. We had confusion there. >> Which is 315 Washington Street, >> which it's not. >> I put in 315 Washington Street. and it came up in the middle of the mall. So, I don't know where that is. >> Uh,
>> it should be 315 Ocean Street. >> What size is this? >> So, if I Google map this and and you type in 315 Washington Street, it does not come up this. >> That's where we're trying to >> uh I to clarify here. Um, you will
notice this happen all the time. It's the wonders of doing work on the street. This is why we also go by the block and lot to ensure that we are on directly the the property abudding >> because there's no address for a street >> bill and 315 is that whole is the whole
mall. It could be anywhere in there. >> There are yes >> same thing pictures. >> This is the one I'm talking about. >> Yeah. >> But there are no existing telephone poles on the mall. Correct. >> Not in the mall. No.
>> So it can't be 315 Washington. No, no. The mall doesn't start till till the till the uh >> 305. Three's all the way to the other. >> There's no Washington. >> Yeah, but I'm saying there's no poll at 315 Washington Street. So, it can't be >> correct. >> This has an address 315 Washington
Street, Cape May, New Jersey. >> I have a lot block. >> Uh it's it's your it's your issue. I tell you, it's 315. >> We keep the lot block on page one underneath project summary. Uh bottom right note. Yeah, >> the picture looks like the corner.
>> All of them are within the rightway and none of them are within a block and lot. >> The block and lots and the street addresses were given as proximity location locators, but they're all within the city street.
>> 315 should have said Ocean Street and >> it's so 315 Ocean Street. If I do the Google map view, >> no, >> there's a green gas lamp that's that's there >> in front of the
>> comfort station area or the the bathrooms, right, where the horses are. So, I'm just trying to understand because that's where it goes back to my whole >> But we have pictures here to show we're getting >> it's I I I think what what Craig is trying to emphasize just an approximation
our record has to say somewhat clear. So, can we just have one person speak at a time and uh I leave it to the chairman to direct? >> I I I believe if you say it's at the corner of Ocean and Washington Street on an existing poll that is actually on Washington Street, that clarifies which
poll it is. >> All the more reason why I believe that this needs to be sent back to HBC and for the full commission. >> I I disagree because they they they know exactly where this is. They've got pictures. They clearly don't cuz there's two different addresses. >> No, but they got
>> 315 would be in front of a store on the mall. >> Let's send it back. All All we're talking about is the color and we're not talking about can they use the pole or not use the pole. >> They're doing that with all the other ones. >> It's an existing poll. We can't argue that. They're going to put another poll
in. Who wants that? >> But the but the address says 315 Y. >> We just clarified that for the record. >> Okay. All right. But if you can if you want to send it back to the HBC if that's if that's the >> Can I see the Can I see the published
notice for this whole >> I have a question. I have a published notice. >> Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question? >> Washington Street. >> There has to be notices and it's that has to be is in the ordinance. >> Can I have a question? Can I ask a question? >> Yeah. Wait, hold on. Mike wants to ask question. >> Where are the Where are the locations of
where you're going to install new poles? So if you want me to separate this one P >> Beach and P one on North >> 104 North. >> So So there's those are the ones that that HPC should be concerned with because they really can't touch those other polls with a new design on them
other than color. >> But they did approve them. >> I know. I know they did. But if they wanted but they mentioned that other areas they've made it really they dialed it up, you know, like whatever whatever reason. Does does HPC know that they can do this?
>> I I didn't want to I didn't want to pull you down the rabbit hole with Princeton, but the the reason I brought that up, right, was just to just to really emphasize what's important to us, right? But the reason that we did that in Princeton is that was what their existing polls looked like, right? So, if Washington Street had green poles
with planters, well, that's what that's what we would do, right? If you had green poles with planters mixed in with that, it probably would look kind of funny. So, it's it's it's really using what's what's existing, right? Um and and to Lisa's opening remarks, we're always going to try to attach on existing
infrastructure before we have to install new poles, right? Th >> this is not an attack on you and your application. This is more about protocols that may or may not have been followed with dealing with the HPC
approval. Typically when an application has to be approved by the zoning or planning board, they give conceptual approval. You come to us with your conceptual approval. This board or the zoning board would grant final approval
and you would go back to the HPC for final approval before their full board for their full commission. I'm sorry. Um that's normally how our applications work. In this case, the conceptual or final was not checked
off as to what approval was given. Um, and it should have been checked off as conceptual because the application requires zoning board planning board approval. That is why we're recommending that you go back to them. It's the normal protocol for all of our applications. It's not really and and we
just want them to make sure they took a full look at that particular site. If if you look at this particular site, and this is why we're reacting viscerally to the site, okay, is that if you look at this site, and I know you know Princeton's Princeton, but right across
from that, we have old gas lamposts. Our the street light matches the old gas lampost. This is on the same corner where this thing is. Look, this is across the street from that. That's where this pole is. >> So, it's not that we have it's not like we're just saying, "Oh, now I know you're not putting in a new pole, but
what concerns us is this is our first one of these." Okay. And we may get many of them. And it sounds like the the HPC, not to be critical of our friends there, they do a great job, but this is their first one as well. Okay. And they gave
you what's called approval in review, meaning one member looked at it. >> Yeah. They have they have a two, three member board. >> They have what? >> Two or three, but it's not the full board. It's not the full board. Okay. I have one signature. I don't know who looked at it and who didn't. >> Okay. We were told we had historic
approval. So this is in our >> estimation it was final. >> So now we get it doesn't say if it's final or conceptual. >> Okay. >> For us we often get conceptual >> and then it goes back to them for one more run because it's sort of like then they do the final touches. Okay. >> So we're trying to understand is what's
the process for these polls that are going in our historic district or these big boxes that are going in our historic district. Okay. So, I appreciate that there's not a new poll, but now there's going to be a a box 8 ft in the air next to our fancy lamp posts and our shopping district, and I'm just saying, well, did
the HPC really look at this and consider what can be what can be done? Did it have the benefit of the full membership? It's one thing in front of the hotel on Beach Avenue where a whole bunch of polls, but this is literally like maybe our most important intersection in the
town. Literally, it is. So when we're talking about a poll is there and the whole board has looked at it. That's what's causing some of our members to be like a little squirrely. So I don't vote. I'm just trying to give them all options. And I also I do push I we do want approvals. Okay. >> Are you guys are you guys good with us
passing passing this with you going back to the HPC for approval? >> So are you are you speaking about just the one note at issue or >> if we're doing it for one, we got to do it for all of them as far as I'm as far as I'm concerned. >> I I know. I think it's in your discretion to say >> this is on Washington.
>> I would I would suggest if we're going to go that route, I would suggest it's a new pole on North Street as well that also is a street that has that the true historic character in town >> on the beach front in front of. >> So yeah, you can you and you to your point, you can make the same argument for all of them. So
>> and I I I think you know I would agree with Councilman Bodner. Look, if this is five of them, correct? And so at this point in time, you've got some that are existing and some that are going to be new. Um HBC may not have had the benefit of the Princeton story. It would it
would behoove you to share that with them because their design standards, you know, and are important to us. Um and we take those very seriously and that's what guides the city. So this one poll
is in question. I appreciate that it exists, but Mr. King is correct. It's smack dab in the middle of one of the most historic streets in Kate May. And if they didn't have the benefit of understanding or potentially knowing that there were options that could be
afforded, I know it's a brown poll and it's going to probably be a brown box, but at the end of the day, I think what you're hearing from us is please have the conversation. And I'm sorry that you feel like you're getting battered around on this, but it's critically important
that we get it right. >> So, yeah. You know what? >> It's the applicant's position that we got the necessary HPC approval. Um, for the for the one the one poll question, I think we're happy to go back uh if we can get a uh an approval from this
honorable board with the condition that we go back and and get HPC's blessing on on the uh the paint color and design. But we would respectfully we respectfully request that we get approvals for all five and then the one note I question we we um
>> we meet with HPC uh and get the approval for that. Yeah, for for that one for that one node. But um >> we'll have to put that out to the board to vote on to be honest with you. >> I you know >> and just time is of the essence too to get these constructed for the the summer
season coming up as well. That that would help us >> and we're going to start going other stuff. >> Call a new pole on your street. So the the construction itself, it
depends on whether it's a brand new pole. If it's one of the Crown Castle poles, it's a couple step process. So we would place the new pole, then go back, add the equipment, um, and then we have to wait for ACE to deliver power before we can actually
>> get it online. >> No, no, I'm sorry. Um, in in the case of these, these are brand new locations. So, until we have at this point, if we're going back, we're not going to have these built before their moratorum starts um for summer. So, this would
likely be fall construction. >> When you say if you're going back, you're just going back to the HPC, right? that that's >> well I think we were under the impression that this was the final approval tonight and in the information that was shared with us it would be
another 30 days before the final approval was given to us and writting after tonight for the resolution >> for the resolution um so at this point then we would be into the April May and we need to get uh >> well we're talking about utility
>> with a condition they go back to the HPC >> right So the resolution would not happen tonight. No, no matter what that that's we're not putting that it's still a month. It's still the next meeting when we do the resolution. It might even be the second meeting of this month. >> Yeah. And there's a 45day appeal period.
>> And that's exactly what I'm saying. So in that timeline, it doesn't allow us to really >> You don't understand the time. >> Go ahead. Even if we approved it tonight without any questions at all, I would not have a resolution prepared until the a month from now >> and then that resolution would be passed
and then there'd be a 45 appeal period after publication of that resolution. So you're 70 days away from being able to do anything anyway and your HBC meeting would be in 30 days. So I'm trying to figure out why your timeline is so drastically altered by that. >> Okay. >> No, your that's fine. Your existing
timeline was going to be very challenging to get any construction done before or scheduled before moratorium starts in the interim and get get that straight. Okay. What >> Mr. King? What we what we respectfully request is that this honorable board
vote to approve all five nodes with the one node in question condition that we get HPC final approval for that one node. that would meet the construction timelines that we would require. I think it would also satisfy the sensitivity of that one node for certain members of
this board and um I think that would be appropriate and that's what we respectfully request. We believe we have HPC approval but we also understand the the request happy to do that. U there are timelines in in the local zoning
code specific to small cell facilities. Uh I'd have to go back and look at them, but right now the applicant respectfully requests an approval uh vote on approval of all five with the one node at question that uh was the Washington Street node. We're happy to go back to
HPC with the materials uh as to what we propose to colllocate uh which we believe are appropriate and uh designed to be aesthetic aesthetically match and pleasing. >> Well, North Street is a new poll where I was going >> correct. >> Yeah. And that's like I don't know one
of the three oldest streets in the town. >> No. >> So I mean if north if Washington if we're asking for HBC houses >> in street approval >> they're all wait north. It connects Windsor and Congress. >> That's where it is. It's between those two streets.
>> I understand that >> if we're waiting if we're getting HBC's approval for Washington Street. Council member Bodner brought up and and I seem to agree with him on the position of the North Street pole.
I just need some clarification on where exactly is this pole being proposed in the >> along the street >> between the two buildings between the condominium >> and between that blue house on the corner. And that's a and that's with a new >> within
>> within the construction drawings that would be on page three. Uh where we take a picture of the existing site and then when it's a new pole there's an arrow to the exact spot. >> Yeah. There's poles on the one side of the street but they're not going on the side where the poles are. >> They're on the other side of the street. So now there's poles on both side of the
street. We uh propose poles on the opposite side of the street because your ordinance requires that a pole cannot be placed within 200 feet on the same linear side as another pole. Um so we are unable to so say there are poles down the right side 100 each. We can't place a pole.
>> Doesn't have poles within 200 feet on on seide. >> Uh it does not a new one in >> our new proposed polls uh apply uh fit your ordinance in every way. >> Uh I did triple check. >> So just on this map if I could just Just so I'm understanding if you don't mind.
So we're talking about in the right there >> if there's no >> Greg the new pole on Beach Street that's not within 200 ft of the other two poles that are sitting there >> within 100 ft. It's
so the 200 feet only applies if you're located it across the street located on the opposite side of the street. The 200 foot applies. >> So we can't >> So it's not applicable in that case because it's on the same side of the
street as the rest of the poles. >> And on North Street you wouldn't be able to put when you're putting a new pole in that's within 100 ft. No, that's what I think of the gas light. >> To be clear, I am referencing um
your small cell wireless. Let me make sure I give you the section correct. And then it's an E. So underneath your ordinance 525-87 conditional use standards for wireless facilities within the municipal right ofway uh underneath E uh
E gives the standards for the small wireless facilities which these all qualify as poles they must not be higher than the 35 ft which we've done here they can't be further than the 18 in from curb line that's why we're at a foot uh no pole shall be erected in the
right of way unless it is replacing an existing so in the case for this or 200 linear feet from any other existing pole along the same side of the street. And so that's why we have to go across the
street. Also, we are unable to go on the any of the poles on north because of the main power on top and so we are unable to go on those which is why we had to propose a poll. >> So if I could just add add on to that. So, if I'm looking on North Street,
do we have looks like we have gas lamps on on North Street >> Beach side? Looks like >> So, when you brought this to the HPC, did you give them any options in terms of addressing the streetscape or did you say, "Hey, I got this box and I'm this is where I'm going to put it."
>> These construction drawings, structurals, uh, emissions reports are given to them for review. We did not speak in front of them. These were given to them for their review and and approval. >> So, it's going to be at least just my
opinion to to go off of what Mr. Bodner are saying that I I think you have to send both of them >> the new polls to the HBC's >> for review because I think there's a an option to >> try to address the streetscape better
>> for for both >> in in my opinion >> except with all due respect your HPC has approved the five locations and we're going to >> No, HBC did not. They they they had you had a subcommittee. >> You had a subcommittee conceptionally. >> That's not their fault,
>> right? No, no, no. It's not their fault. But I just want I just want to make sure that that's understood, though. It's not the full HBC. The full HBC didn't review it in its entirety. >> I don't know that that is understood. >> So, we want that to be noted. These folks have been caught in the
backwash of HPC's inability to fully understand what they were doing with respect to improving these plans. >> Yeah. No, >> look at multiple. I mean, I think we're showing some pretty good by doing what we need to do to work out Washington.
>> Well, North Street is North Street's a new poll on in the historic district. >> So is So is Beach Avenue. >> I understand. have a beach job. >> It's in the historic district. It's It's in the It's in the historic It's >> I'm not going to argue with you. >> It's in the historic district.
>> What you gained in my in my opinion >> is is giving the full commission the options of the hearing the story as you present. Listen, as somebody that works for the city, >> I have some experience in terms of knowing that, hey, you guys can address
streetscape like you talked about explaining to the full board talking about the Princeton story air quotes, right? I don't know if that subcommittee without you sitting in front of them understood that the streetscape could be better
addressed. And that's what my position is. And I again, I'm only one member, but that's my opinion. I look, we we we're gonna we're going to kick this around forever. Um I I think that we need to these guys have come to
us in good faith. It's been raised by some people that the one on Washington Street is an issue. Um I I mean the polls there. I mean I I don't I I I if we're sending it back to the HBC, in my opinion, they all should be sent back
to the HBC and then and and and but we give final approval tonight and they just go back to them and see what what what they want to have done with if there's anything with any one, two, three, five of them, whatever. I mean, three of them are
existing. There shouldn't be any question there. want to watch. >> No, there is a question. >> Yeah, want to watch your The ordinance itself calls out your ability to refer it back to the HBC. >> So, my suggestion is we refer all of
them back to the HPC. As long as we're going, might as well look at all of them. >> Well, I don't think I don't think it's incumbent on us to say we don't like this one and we do like that one. That's their jobs. >> Bill, why why can't we why can't we approve it? uh
>> pending a review. >> Exactly. That's what we do. That's what we're going to do with the condition. That's what we do all the time. >> Perhaps >> this is no different than any other approval that we grant conditionally then going back and getting final HPC approval. >> Yeah. Right. That doesn't slow any protocol what we always do. I don't know
why we're arguing >> our process which which it to you it seems like we're dragging this out longer and quite frankly we're not. Well, we really technically are not. Yeah. All right. So, anybody else have any other questions about How about if
we get a motion to approve this? Give preliminary and final with the condition they have to get approval for the >> If you could just give me five minutes and I will briefly go through my review map. >> I'm sorry. >> Oh, that's right. Um, >> but before we do that, could I do have one quick question for you?
>> Is there any requirement that adjacent property owners be notified when there's a poll put up in front of the house? >> I think so. Yeah. >> No, >> there. All right. So, there could be if they're not, >> they said they did. >> They did anyway. >> Okay. But >> I don't believe there's notice required
because they are conditional use >> meeting all the conditions, which means they're permitted use. >> Okay. >> Um, and that's what these reviews did is essentially established the criteria and went through the whole checklist of what
the conditions that our ordinance requires and how they were meeting those. Okay. So each review is sight specific. So I did five of them and I'm not going to go through each one of them five times because they're very redundant. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So >> go through. All right. So
>> for the record, we did notify the public. >> Okay. That's awesome. >> Right. >> Okay. I am going to summarize my December 14th, 2025 review memorandum, and I'm using the North Street application just because it's the one I
have out. Um it is uh 104 North Street. It's your CAY006. Um I'm using that as essentially the template for my um summary of the findings of my
reviews. Okay. With regards to So you've heard testimony there are five sites. Uh they are at located near once again all of these are within the municipal rightaway. So they are adjacent to or
approximately located to 315 Washington Street and they give the block and lot 707 Beach Avenue 6 Perry Street. All of those are co-losations or replacement of existing poles and the two new poles are
proposed at 2011 Beach Avenue and 104 North Street. >> For the record, 315 Washington Street is incorrect. uh we we've discussed that but that's what the agenda lists so I'm going to keep referring to it until that >> until we know something different.
>> Okay. So with regards to completeness um there is a completeness checklist for this type of wireless facility. Um and once again they are asking for conditional use approval. So what a conditional use approval is it means you can grant approval
um providing they meet all of the conditions of approval. Now, these guys were kicked back a couple times because they had not established that they were meeting all the conditions, and I couldn't tell. This board does not have the ability to grant conditional use approval unless they're meeting all of
the conditions. Otherwise, it would go to the zoning board and require conditional use devariance approval from the zoning board. So, that's the difference. Okay. So, with regards to completeness, I did recommend deeming all of these applications complete. Um,
one of the checklist requirements says a small wireless facility shall comply with all applicable building and safety codes in the checklist. We have no way of dealing with that at this point, but we recommend that that be approved. I mean, that be remain a condition of
approval. Okay. So, therefore, I did recommend deeming all five of the applications complete. Uh the next section of the uh my review starts on page two and three. Um that is essentially telling us the
purposes and scope of this um code section that deals with this type of approvals. The second section has the definitions. The third section is the permitted conditional use application and fees. Um all of that
they've met all of those. Um there are specific recommendations for some of those items remaining conditions of approval. Uh section four details the procedure for action on permit applications. This
is on page six of 10 of my review. Um that has the review of small wireless facility applications. Tells us how to review that. Um there are specific time limits that are very specific to this type of application that don't apply to any of our other types of applications.
And then finally section five, the small wireless facilities in the rightway, maximum height, other requirements under subsection A, the maximum size and design of conditional use. This is essentially your conditional use standards. They have to meet all of these things or they are not a permitted
conditional use. So with regards to the height, there's height requirements for the poles. Um there to be no taller than 35 ft or 110% of the height of the poles in the surrounding streetscape. Some cases they prov they've not gone higher than 35 ft. In other cases, they
provided evidence that they are well within the 110% of adjacent poles which they provided information on those pole heights. There is an offset um requirement. It says no pole should be farther than 18 in from the curb line.
So they have to be tight to the curb line. Um typically in line with other poles are typically 18 in from the curb line. Um they've demonstrated that in all cases. Um I did ask for uh information on one of the applications but they will have to provide that and
demonstrate they're complying with that. Um then uh the applicant has already touched upon this but it said no pole shall be erected in the rightway unless it is replacing an existing pole approved pursuant to the land development application by the planning
board um or located on the opposite street side of the street from the electric distribution system and is located 200 linear feet from any other existing pole or proposed pole along the same side of the street and not located in the area of underground utilities and
does not inhibit existing sight triangles and allow adequate room for the public to pass. All of those things have been evaluated in all cases. I did information ask for information on this actually North Street application just to demonstrate compliance with that, but
that should be a condition of approval. Um, all of the other ones did meet that criteria. And then finally, all poles shall be finished or painted as to blend incompatibly with this background and so as to minimize his visual impact on surrounding properties and streetscape.
So they've in all cases for the poles have provoke proposed wood poles that would match the existing wood poles that are in the area. Um under item two small wireless facilities. So that was that was the criteria for the pole itself. Now the small wireless facilities is
which is the equipment that they're attaching to the poles has specific height requirements. Um it also has um uh support structure requirements. Um and they've demonstrated that they've met
that those requirements. I'm going to point you to number four on page eight of 10. Design requirements for poles or small wireless facilities to be installed or placed within the historic preservation district. The planning board may refer the proposed
design for comment to the HPC unless and until the HPC promulgates uniform design standards for such facilities which shall be incorporated herein by reference once adopted by city council pursuant to section 529 52939F of the
city code. any specific requirements imposed by the city relating to design or placement of small wireless facilities will be reasonable, non-discriminatory and objective. So that in itself tells you you may refer this back to them for their final
approval. Um so I'll continue. Uh section six effective permit um they should all be remain all those items should remain conditions of approval. Item seven is removal, relocation or modification of small wireless
facilities in the rightway. Um that is provi pro providing for a removal clause um in case they're required. Section 8 deals with rates um not really applicable in this case um if they were colllocating on a city pole they would
be required to deal with that. So that is the entire small cell wireless ordinance. So in my opinion these all will meet that I do believe they you know have satisfied that they do are condition have met all the conditions of
the conditional use and therefore you may grant approval. However, it is conditional on them providing any additional information that I've asked for as well as meeting the conditions that I've recommended. Um with regards to general review comments, um they led
off with addressing item number one. Um and two itself, item three is our standard condition that they have to have once the improvements are installed, we have to certify those improvements meet the conditions of the board approval. Um
item number four, comply with the recommendations of the Sha Tree Commission, Police Department, and Cape May Fire Department. We received reviews back from all of the departments. They all recommended approval. They didn't have any comments. Um so there's no item issues there. Um
our standard condition that they have to comply with any and all other necessary state county local approvals. And finally the project is located within the historic district. So evidence of HPC commission approval is required. So that's a summary and that applies to
all five. Um there are nuances between the the five review memos that I did, but they're sight specific and um they all should be incorporated for each specific site. >> Can I ask a question?
>> Sure. regarding the consideration as far as a condition of approval that we've been talking about for the HPC if we were going to consider that as a condition of approval the discussion of of sending this back to the HPC
folks have come to us you know being candidly blindsided tonight by this particular issue and we're kind of we are caught up in this process which we understand on this side of the table and understand the significance of it and why we need to work through this, but they're kind of caught up in this to a
certain degree as well. When if we were to consider a condition going back, can we tailor our language to I don't want to hamstring the HPC. I wouldn't want to do that, but is there a way for us to provide some type of guidance as
as far as what the planning board's concern is so they can at least tailor the issue and they don't walk in and have to try to explain this from the beginning to the HPC as far as what is going on. >> Whenever you refer something to the HPC, you're always allowed to provide comments to them as to what you want
them to look at. So I think that well um look we've we've talked about the Washington you know the particularly the Washington Street um poll with that fitting in with streetscape North Street
um as has been discussed it is one of our older more with historic properties in Kate May it's a new poll so I think there's an opportunity to consider that that's different than simply the other polls that are pre-existing pre-existing
polls. Candidly, I think they would look at them and say, "What color should it be? Should it be brown? Should it be white? Should it be green? Should it be whatever?" I'm not HPC, but that's what I think that they would be looking at. >> Yeah. >> The one on the one on North Street. I don't know what they'll say, but I think they're probably going to be weighing in
more on color and say just don't put up a big old aluminum pole there. I do know this. HPC is looking at things for historic character and streetscape. There weren't these telecommunication poles back in the 1800s either. So, they're going to be looking at it from a streetscape standpoint, not this and and
of course how it how it fits in as seamlessly to the neighborhood. So, I think it's probably going to come down to color and what it looks like. And I don't think they're going to be saying put baskets on it and things like that. It's going to be a pole ultimately. It's going to be a pole. That's what's going to be going up there.
>> Wood and and a wood Yeah. a wood a wood pole as opposed to an aluminum pole. Right. But I I my feeling is if if our concern is materials, color, um
if there's something else that other other um board members think would be appropriate to include in there, that's what we that's what we would would express because I'm not trying to put a roadblock in place for the completion of the project, but I do think that there
needs be to be that fully developed conversation to say, "Yes, this is what works for the streetscape of Kate May." And the people who look at that on on a on a regular basis and look at the aesthetics and make sure it fits in that they just kind of sign off on that. That's my feeling. I think that making
it as generic as possible and broad in in our condition back to them just to say please validate that um all of this meets within the historic design standards and sort of make it a very general
statement so that they are aware that we want to make sure that they've considered that and whether it be the poll on Washington um or Ocean or the poll on North Street that's going in that they're they're they are have an eye to that um and that they they have
considered it and I think that's our concern is that was that considered versus just with all due respect that the application came to them and what they were told was we're just attaching these to existing telephone polls and maybe
didn't think outside the box enough to say but what other opportunities are there to make sure that it just doesn't look out of place within the historic streetscape, which is what Councilman Bodner is saying. So, I want them to at least consider um that please keep in
mind, you know, like now's the time to ask because >> So, why don't we why don't we pass the applica the application tonight and have instructions that they look at these historical historicity, the color, the material,
and the streetscape. Those whereable those are the issues. >> Yeah. If possible, if the urgency, if you could indicate that, you know, for the summer season, if they could expedite their review. >> Sure. >> Yeah. >> Sure. >> Can you let them know if you want a full commission hearing because that's a
resolution. >> Yes. >> Y for reasons I'll discuss in a moment. I think it has to be and I'm going to speak on that in a moment. >> Karen, >> and just so you guys have full information, th this this would likely be fall construction. I think we would be uh there's no way we're going to turn
this around in time for your tourist season this year. Just no way. Just under normal procedure. There's >> if we approved it tonight, it would be true. >> The HPC is going to >> Yeah. No, no, no. >> You could do anything. I feel like you're I feel like that's a little disingenuous in the sense that even if
we approved it tonight an hour ago, >> you would not be able to do anything any sooner. >> So, it's not a result of us being cautious about historic district. >> No, no. I I know that. No, no, no, no. Oh, I'm I'm sorry. What what I was saying is I don't don't feel like you need to operate on an accelerated timeline. We were What I was saying is
we were not going to >> Oh, well, we just asked to do it on an accelerated basis. >> No, no. I was I'm sorry. This is our our council. I just wanted to provide that clarification. Listen, if you gave me the approval last week, we weren't building these for this summer, right? >> Better that it could clarify that that she you
indicated that that's not going to happen under any circumstance. >> Yeah. I just want I just wanted to make sure you know we're not asking for any accelerated timeline or skipping steps or anything. Our goal is to have this Listen, we have some fiber in the ground already. Lisa's team will take the next step and attach fiber or build existing
fiber to these sites. And I think fall is a pretty fair timeline, right? >> Okay. >> Would you would you agree? >> Yes. I mean, we I would be interested in getting the historical review. We as as we all mentioned, you know, we were under the impression that we were
approved for historical. So we have applications with ACE for the ACEown polls in flight to perform make ready that we are compensating them to change these polls to brand new polls for us if something now may change this that's
something that I need to know so that we can notify ACE >> will ask the HBC to act as quickly as they can and we gave them with that. So for for that reason, okay, we need to know if there's any showstoppers here. >> So can I get a motion? >> We'll kind of say a couple things
technically. I just gota do it right. Okay. First of all, section 525-38 referral from municipal agencies says on all matters referred to the commission which require approval by the planning board or zoning board of adjustment. The decision of the commission shall be a recommendation only. We are a superior
board to the HPC. We do different things, but when we refer things to them, their opinion is something we can consider and we can also ask them to consider. That's what they're there for. Also, um hold on, I got to go to my photos.
Also, uh, with regard to, and this is what particularly concerns me, and I'm not saying anyone, the applicant certainly didn't do anything wrong, and HPC didn't do anything wrong, but I want to offer my opinion on what is a minor application. In my opinion, although our
ordinance doesn't exactly say this, anything that has to go to the zoning board or the planning board should not be considered a minor application. In my opinion, it should be reviewed by the entire board. It avoids a problem that we had in other applications. If it's important enough that it's going to come to a zoning board or planning board, the
entire board should hear it in my opinion. But also, a minor application is defined as any application for a certificate of appropriateness which does not involve an addition to a property in historic district or new construction in historic district. In my opinion, putting in a poll in the
historic district is although it says property, I believe that it's a structure and that it should um be done, it is not a minor application. They're adding a structure in the historic district and that should be reviewed by the whole board in my opinion. Also section C says
a application for a certificate of appropriateness which is a request for approval of fences, signs, lighting, doors, windows, roofs, paving, exterior sheathing or streetscape work which will comply with the adopted design guidelines for the improvement proposed where a specific guideline applies and
which will not substantially affect the characteristic of the historic site or the historic district. In my opinion, I am not aware of a historic guideline that specifically addresses um small what do we call it? Small cell. Sounds like a cancer to me.
>> Small wireless. >> Small cell wireless. >> Uh and I I am not clear how there is a adopted design guideline that specifically applies and that this does not substantially affect the characteristics of historic site. So I don't think it qualified as a minor
application. So even though we have what appears on its face to be HBC approval, it's not indicated whether it's final or preliminary and also I don't know that it qualifies for minor application. So we're going to deem that as a recommendation that we can accept or
reject and I think we are rejecting it only in the sense that we want the whole board to look at it. So we're going to approve it with that condition. That's my recommendation of the motion. I'm sorry I can tell I'm killing you, Mr. Jones. But I have to put that in the record because I don't want to >> I was listening intently.
>> I can tell. I can tell the voices inside. >> But they don't they do not have to return to this board once they get the HPC's approved. That's >> unless the HBC does something. I don't envision them having to come back to this board for aesthetic changes
that are made to these. >> Correct. That's that's the intent of this vote. >> But we would compensate for a full Yes. >> And they meet >> just for >> we don't do anything for
>> Yeah. All right. So the motion I recommend being made, but how you vote is up to you is a motion to grant conditional use approval and completeness and technical review. Um there will be five separate
resolutions because there's five separate applications. We're going to vote on them all at once. um to approve uh the conditional use approval and previous technical review subject to the conditions outlined by the board engineers report dated December 14th, 20125.
>> There are different dates on some of the different applications. >> Okay. on all the board engineers uh reports that have been submitted for each application as dated with the additional condition that it is to be
returned to the full Historic Preservation Commission for review in accordance with their guidelines and areas of expertise. Um, as long as there's no change in location or increase in size of what's proposed,
they do not need to return to this board. That will be the end of it. Um, that's the motion I recommend being made, but how you vote is up to you. Any Does anybody have any questions of me? >> Anybody care to make that? >> Mr. Chairman, I'll make the motion.
>> I'll second. >> So, is that Mr. Jones motions. >> Yes. >> Yes. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Jones motions. Deputy Mayor McDade seconded. >> Council member Bodner. >> Yes. >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Crowley. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lenhomem. >> Yes. >> Mr. Riggs. >> Yes. >> Mr. Krippen. >> Yes. >> Mr. Jones. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bizair. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Thank you. I will talk to my counterpart
the attorney for the HBC to just introduce him to the to the issue. Okay. >> No problem. >> No. And the other thing is the attorney doesn't attend review committee but he attends the full HBC. So love the
benefit of his presence. >> Chris Gillan Chris Gillanworth who's also the attorney for the city. Yep. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am. >> And council, if you want to have a three-party conversation with him, make
myself available to you. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Have a good night. >> Bill, can I just ask a question of our attorney before >> about this application? >> About not this application, about the issue of the HPC. I >> I'd rather not. We just had a whole thing about that.
>> All right. Well, okay. I'll talk to you later. >> You Yeah. Okay. Um, >> okay. >> We did. Somehow we skipped the approval of the February 10th minutes. >> I'll make a motion to approve.
>> I we we I skipped over the February 10th minutes. >> Moren just made it. >> Second. Motion to approve. You also have all those in favor. >> I >> I >> I'm going to abstain because I think I was absent. Mr. Chairman, >> you have a resolution >> and I abstain also.
>> Okay. >> Okay. I'm going to have a quorum. >> Mr. Kribbon, did you second? >> Don't have to. >> Uh, I didn't second. >> Mr. Mike did. >> Mike did. >> Mike. Okay. Thank you. >> You have a resolution. >> Bill, we also have a resolution that's not dealing with the affordable housing
stuff. It's the uh the Jersey Development Group LLC. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Crippen, did you abstain? Is that what you said? >> I did not. >> Okay. You you say yes. You eyed. Okay. Thank you. >> Which one is that, Rich?
>> This one, Bill. >> Good. >> Oh, that's not on here. >> Yep. No. >> So, that is um >> Yes. Right. Jersey Development Group LLC block 1093, lot 9. There's a the resolution for that.
>> I'll make the motion. >> We make some motion. >> I'll second. >> Deputy Mayor McDade motions. Mr. Krippen seconds. Council member Bodner. >> I abstain. >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes. >> Mr. Crowley. >> No. >> Mr. Lenholm.
>> Abstain. >> Mr. Riggs. >> Abstain. I was absent. >> Mr. Krippen. >> Yes. >> Mr. Jones? >> Yes. >> Mr. Bizair? >> Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. Okay. We're moving on to um this is all tied together to the
adoption of the of the amended fourth round housing and fair share plan. Um there are some >> ordinances that are proposed. I'm going to let Craig dive into that. Yes. It doesn't take an hour and a half. Now, I'm going to try and merge this all together because we've already dealt
with this once. We've already approved our housing element and fair share plan. Um, as part of that this process, we submit that to the state and the courts. Um, when we did that and and the the findings of fact inclusions of law and
resolution 310 2026 semicolon 2, um, provide a great outline of where we're at. Um so we submitted our housing plan um housing element and fair share plan on time to the program. We received a deficiency letter from
excuse me >> uh fair share housing center which is the group that typically opposes everyone's fair share plan um throughout the state. Uh we responded to that deficiency letter um and the court entered a case management order um in
November of 2025 and required the city to provide Fairshare Housing Center with documents addressing their deficiencies and to negotiate a consent order. So as part of that negotiation um we had to modify our uh housing
element and fair share plan. um one of the major uh in so there's a consent order that's signed by the judge that once the city agrees to that provided uh mechanisms that we agreed that the city was agreeing to most of which were
already in our plan. Um the biggest change uh is the fact that we have to address 25% of our fourth round unmet need and that number is 48 units. So 25%
of that is 12 units. So we have to come up with a zoning adjustment to accommodate an additional 12 units. So if you will see uh one of the accompanying ordinances uh was let me
make sure I got it right here. um resolution 310 2026 semicolon 3 which is ordinance 5912026 which amends chapter 525 uh to promote affordable housing in the
C5 zoning district. The C5 zoning district is our light business industrial district that's located uh primarily in the area of Bank Street. Um it includes uh Swains Park uh
Swaines. It includes the um the real estate homestead real estate and includes the uh Bank Street Commons I think is what the sign on the building is called >> and the parking lot. Um it it does go across the street into the wetlands
area, but most of the uplands are in that contained in that area. Um that being said, we once again we have to we have to provide a realistic opportunity to provide affordable housing and that realistic opportunity
has to at least address 12 units. So um an ordinance was drafted uh that promotes affordable housing in that district. Let me make sure I got I have so many documents here. Bear with me one second.
Trying to find that ordinance. Okay, so the C5 ordinance is ordinance 591 2026 and it modifies the service business light industrial affordable housing overlay
district to accommodate new uses. Right now there are no permitted residential uses in that district. We're now allowing attached dwellings and multif family dwellings as permitted uses. However, they are subject to the following conditions. The overall track
size must be at least one acre. So, a lot of the smaller lots within that those blocks within the C5 district um are not eligible to take advantage of this. And the project must include an on-site inclusionary zoning component
with a presumptive maximum affordable housing set aside of 20% of the total number of units of the development. Um, and then it it says all affordable units in such projects have to be constructed and occupied in compliance with the fair housing act, the uniform housing
affordability controls and the city's housing element and fair share plan and the city's affordable housing ordinance. Um, and it also accommodates the accessory uses that would that our ordinance normally permits with attached dwellings and multif family dwellings.
And the bulk and area requirements were taken directly from your RS district which allows the most densest development. It's RS and R5. They're they're exactly the same density
requirements. They're taken from there. So, a minimum lot size of 12,500 ft² for attached dwelling and multif family dwellings. And there's a minimum lot size per dwelling unit of 2500 square ft per unit. So, that's your
density. Um, that is not density any higher than you see anywhere else in the in the RS district or the R5 district. So, we're we're essentially taking similar bulk and area requirements from the RS and R5 district for those two
permitted uses and allowing those to be that type of development to be a permitted use in the C5 district. Okay. And it has to have an onsite affordable housing component if you're to take advantage of that.
>> Um based on calculations, >> can I ask a question, Craig? Um, your note says R3. So, is it >> I'm sorry. Did I say I did I say R5? >> Yes, it's R3. >> It's R3 and RS. >> Thank you for correcting me. Um,
so R3 and RS district, same density, bulk area requirements. Um, and we're incorporating that based on the calculation of lot air lots that qualify and meet the requirements. um a total of 81
units could be built. If you take 20% of that, you would have a 16 unit set aside. So therefore, we would be addressing that 25% requirement of our unmet fourth round need. >> Okay. >> That doesn't mean they have to be built.
>> No, we have to provide the realistic >> can I just stop you here for a minute? It's a >> I wouldn't say anything >> before you speak on the record. It has to be a real It has to be realistic. >> It has to be a realistic opportunity.
>> Realistic and give very specific reasons why or don't say anything at all, which is another option. >> Explain that again. I can't say something that's not realistic. >> Our our plan has to be realistic. >> So, for example, if you were to create a record that makes it unrealistic, then
>> your mind >> sorry, the plan has to be a realistic plan. So if you're going to create a record that is unrealistic, then really think about that and then give very good reasons why you believe that to be the case. Um because if you say it in justest, then it defeats the object of
Craig's plan, which is it has to be a realistic opportunity. Am I correct about that? >> Yes. So it has to be a realistic opportunity. That's not to say that a developer is going to do that. >> We don't have to force developers to do that to chase unit. We don't chase unit
numbers. We provide zoning that allows for the opportunity for a developer to develop the number. >> I got that. I just and I don't want to make this more elaborate than it has to be because I think the history of this issue all of the cows are already out of
the barn. There are no cows in the barn at this point. But when you say 81 unit and I look at this map, tell me where they are. So there's three sites, >> right? >> The city's parking site.
>> City's parking lot. >> Parking lot. >> Yeah. >> The Swain's Hardware. >> Okay. >> And Bank Street Commons. >> That's it. >> Are the three sites that meet the criteria. >> And you could then put 81 units if if all three of those >> based on if you take the lot area of
those three lots. Those are the three existing lots. That's not to say you can't play monopoly and add on or anything like that. You know, you could consolidate lots and and theoretically meet this, but right now we're providing a realistic opportunity to develop 81
units with a 20 20% set aside to create 16 affordable units that could be built in that zone. >> Theoretically, >> that's all we have to do. >> That's all we have to do to meet our obligation. >> Okay. >> Okay. Now, the reason why that area was
chosen is because there is no residential uses that are permitted there now. And we already have an a city overlay that has density bonuses in it. So, it's
very hard to manipulate or modify other zones without creating really intensifying density in a specific zone. >> Okay. So it's unrealistic to consider overlays in other sections. >> Okay. >> More unrealistic. Yes.
>> All right. >> Okay. >> That was my second. >> So that's that's that was the basis for the choosing of that area. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> That's all I wanted. Now that being said, that change is essentially other than tweaking some
language in the housing the existing housing element and fair share plan that was dated June 4th, 2025, the incorporation of the methodology for creating or modifying the C5 district to
allow that has now been incorporated into our now amended housing element and fair share. plan which has an amended February 3rd 2026 date. Okay, we have to adopt this plan. That's the
first step in this process. Um I can't we can't find consistency with this. This is becomes a master plan element. We can't find consistency with the other accompanying ordinances until we adopt this. So it should be we adopt this
if there's no comments. because you want you want we need to do that now. That's the first step. >> We get a motion to adopt that. >> I'll make the motion to adopt. >> I'll second. >> Okay. Um can I just be uh get
clarification? You're adopting the fourth round housing element fair share plan. >> Amen. Housing element and fair share plan. Okay. >> Made it February 3rd. >> Not 591 2026 at the yet. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. Right.
>> So, uh, Deputy Mayor McDade motioned and Mr. Crippen second. Confirmed. Is that right? Okay. Thank you, >> Council Member Bodner. >> Yes. >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes. >> Mr. Crowley. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Lunhome. >> Yes. >> Mr. Riggs.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Krippen. >> Yes. >> Mr. Jones. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bazair. >> Yes. >> Okay. There are three implementing uh ordinances. There would be ordinance 5912026
which is the ordinance that amends the C5 zoning district exactly how I just described it. Mhm. Ordinance 592 20226 which repeals and replaces chapter 59 which is article 5 entitled affordable
housing of the city code and ordinance 593 2026 which is an ordinance repealing and replacing chapter 59 article 6 entitled development fee requirements of the city code. These are implementing do
uh the implementation ordinances. Um they're all consistent with our amended housing element and fair share plan. They update fees. They update the language with the fourth round. Um they are compliant with our amended housing
element and fair share plan. Okay. I did do a consistency review. Um that review is a memorandum as part of exhibit A of resolution 310206 colon 3. I think it's probably all of
them but uh yeah it's in all of them. Um, so I tackle I I lumped them all together um and did find that each one of those ordinances is consistent with the master plan
um for the reasons stated and I can go through those reasons if you would like or but they're enumerated on page three four three and four of that review memorandum dated February 5th 2026. six.
Um, so I would ask that the board find those three ordinances consistent with the master plan. >> Motion. >> I'll make the motion. >> I'll second. >> Deputy Mayor McDade motions. Mr. Krippen
seconds. Council member Bodner. >> Yes. >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes. >> Mr. Crowley, >> yes. >> Mr. London. >> Yes. >> Mr. Riggs, >> are we voting on all three right now? >> Yes. >> Yep. >> Yes. >> I'm going to abstain on 03102026
and then yes to the rest. >> I'm sorry. Which one did you abstain from? >> 031026 colon 3. I'm sorry. >> The C5 zoning district. >> Okay. Stand on that and then yes.
>> Thank you very much, Mr. Krippen. Yes, >> Mr. Jones. >> Yes, >> Mr. Bizair. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay, so we've adopted the the fourth round housing element and fair share plan in incorporated that into the master plan. We found consistency with
the three ordinances. So, I would recommend that you adopt the resolutions that accompany each one of those things unless we just did that al together. I'm not sure. >> Clarification. Yeah. >> Yeah, >> we did all we did all three of these.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> So, resolution two, semicolon 2, three, four, and five have been adopted as well. >> Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Then the affordable housing is now going
to be forwarded to city council. Um those uh implementing ordinances will be considered at the next council meeting. Okay, >> I think that leaves the bill. We >> have for tonight is payment of the bills.
>> Motion to pay the bills in the packet. >> Wasn't bad, right? >> I'll make the motion. >> I'll second. >> Marina, did we go on the record about keep Marina? >> Oh, we need anyway. So, I don't have to announce Marina.
>> I'm sorry. Were you going to make an announcement? I thought it said that I thought the agenda said there were going to be notice. >> Okay. Okay. All right. We're good. Um, >> did we get a vote on the payment of bills? >> We need to do that. Uh, we have a motion. We need a second. >> Second.
>> Thank you. Deputy Mayor McDade motions. Mr. Lholm seconds. All in favor? >> I. >> All right. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Do we have a motion to adjurnn? >> All in favor? >> Thank you everyone. Good night. I'll see
you in a week for final it >> the judge. >> Have you heard it so many times and read it so many times? >> Yes. Now it's >> Thank you. Absolutely. I'm going to get some me. Good deal. Congrats. >> Good. I I mean I that's what should have
happened but that's