One notable matter before the Cape May Planning Board was the approval of an updated Municipal Public Access Plan. This plan, originally developed in response to a state program initiated in 2015, had been stalled due to legal challenges. The current update for 2025 is important for compliance with coastal management rules and beach management permits. It provides a detailed inventory of public access points, covering aspects such as beach badge requirements, parking availability, and ADA accessibility.

Craig, an expert presenting the plan, emphasized that the updated document aligns with the city’s master plan, supporting its goals and objectives. The plan’s comprehensive mapping of access locations identifies areas where access might be limited due to environmental concerns, such as at Elmyra Street. A community needs assessment highlighted the ample access points along Beach Avenue, while also identifying necessary improvements, particularly for access to marinas.

Proposed projects include enhancing physical and visual access to Cape Island Creek and extending the asphalt promenade. The implementation plan also stresses the importance of clear signage to promote public access, as required by state regulations. Craig concluded his presentation with a draft resolution template to incorporate the Municipal Public Access Plan into the master plan.

Board members raised several questions regarding the plan. Concerns were voiced about the parking information’s accuracy, with suggestions to update parking rates more dynamically. A typographical error near a lifeguard station image prompted a request for clarification. Another issue was the phrasing regarding beach tent restrictions, which could potentially lead to misunderstanding of current regulations. Following these discussions, the board approved the plan with a roll call vote.

Alongside the public access plan, the board reviewed zoning issues, particularly around solid fences and pool regulations. Solid fences, especially those in front yards, were discussed due to their aesthetic impact on the town. Although solid four-foot fences are currently permitted, the board considered revising the ordinance to favor open or semi-open fences. This discussion stemmed from a previous zoning board request to reevaluate the rules, though current board members were largely unsupportive of changes.

Pool regulations also drew attention, focusing on the ten-foot separation requirement between pools and principal structures. This rule, originally for firefighting access, raised concerns about emergency access during potential drowning incidents. A board member highlighted the need for ordinances to clearly state safety rationales, so applicants must address these when applying for variances.

The ten-foot rule sparked debate on whether its enforcement should prioritize firefighting needs or broader safety concerns. Some participants noted that applicants were bypassing the rule’s intent with minimal grass strips, which compromised access during emergencies. Suggestions included consulting an engineer to ensure safety requirements for pool design are well-founded.

There was acknowledgment of recent improvements in pool regulations, such as landscaping requirements to mitigate effects on neighboring properties. The board noted the governing body’s responsiveness to recommendations from planning and zoning boards, although the full impact of these changes is yet to be assessed.