Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telecommunications Small Cells topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant urges Saddle River to adopt narrow small‑cell rules to protect streetscape
Summary
A telecommunications consultant told Saddle River council that a tailored small‑cell ordinance can preserve the borough’s historic character and give the town procedural tools to shape deployments, while warning federal rules limit local health standards and that low population density makes full 5G roll‑out unlikely.
Peter Loopo, Saddle River’s telecommunications consultant, urged the borough on March 2 to adopt a tailored small‑cell ordinance that prioritizes concealment, reuse of existing utility infrastructure and a narrow anti‑proliferation standard over the FCC’s default rules.
Loopo told the mayor and council the draft ordinance requires carriers to show why new poles are necessary, prioritizes collocation on existing utility poles and sets spacing limits—generally about 150 feet—so small‑cell radios are not clustered unnecessarily. He said the ordinance also caps cumulative equipment per pole and that "you can't exceed 28 cubic feet" and described the deployed radio unit as "roughly the size of a mini‑refrigerator."
The consultant said municipalities retain some design control: where local streetscape or historic districts have distinctive lighting or pole styles, councils may require a compatible decorative or concealed pole so long as requirements are not "arbitrary and capricious." He recommended early site walks with carriers and embedding preferred locations in the borough’s master plan to steer future deployments.
Why it matters: Saddle River’s low housing density and rolling topography make it less attractive to carriers seeking densely populated deployment areas, Loopo said, which reduces the immediate risk of visual impacts but, he argued, means the borough should adopt rules now so default FCC procedures do not govern aesthetics and local processes if an application arrives later.
On health and regulatory limits, Loopo reiterated that the Federal Communications Commission currently considers 5G radio emissions safe for continuous human exposure but acknowledged that groups such as the Children’s Health Fund have criticized the agency’s methods. "The FCC is saying that it's safe for continuous human exposure," he said, while noting municipalities have limited authority to override federal exposure standards and instead can require reporting and operational controls in local permits.
Loopo also discussed operational issues. He described typical costs—about $15,000 for a pole plus roughly $150,000 for equipment and labor per small‑cell site—and said noise from cabinets and cooling fans can be an issue in dense settings; the draft includes a 40‑decibel limit and remediation pathways. He said carriers generally pay application fees into escrow and municipal consultants bill against the escrow, a common practice to avoid direct carrier payments to town staff.
Public questions focused on power and permitting, historic‑district design criteria, consultant conflicts of interest and whether residents or communities can opt out. Loopo said sites need both power and fiber, that county roads require separate county permitting and that individual property owners have no legal right to prohibit service, though towns can seek mitigation and alternative siting. He offered to provide photographs from nearby towns to illustrate concealment options.
Next steps: Loopo recommended the council keep the proposed ordinance on the books and incorporate preferred siting into the town’s upcoming master plan revision to guide future carrier proposals. The council did not vote on the ordinance at the meeting; it concluded the presentation and opened the item to public comment and follow‑up requests for examples and maps.
