Regional Symposium on Deer Management

Earlier this month, elected officials and mayors from the region met to discuss deer management at a regional symposium featuring wildlife biologists from the NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife.

Coverage of the event can be found here:
Deer Dilemma Forum: Lethal vs. Non-Lethal Options Discussed
Additional coverage: Pascack Press.

Here is a video of the presentation from last December and the slides from the 6/5/19 presentation can be found below. Continue reading “Regional Symposium on Deer Management”

The code was meant to be a shield, but someone is using it as a sword

In my previous post (Sidewalks – the deal you didn’t know you made),  I discussed some of the origins of our sidewalk codes and explained a little bit about the deal residents made to repair them if they became a hazard.

In this post, I want to focus a little bit on how our municipal code operates and the norms that existed when certain provisions were created.

The importance of Norms

While it’s clear that residents who wanted sidewalks, agreed to fix them if they fell into disrepair, problems became apparent from the start.  New residents would buy homes and discover they had to fix sidewalk slabs, coming to council for relief.

Here is how Councilman Haggerty described the problem in January of 1948: Continue reading “The code was meant to be a shield, but someone is using it as a sword”

Sidewalks – the deal you didn’t know you made

We made a deal.

We may not know it, but we did.  The deal was simple — the town would put in sidewalks, assessing homeowners for the cost, and if they had problems, it was on the homeowner to repair them.

That was the deal. 

In fact, the Council went to great pains to see if people actually wanted sidewalks.  They sought and received input from residents, on a block-by-block basis, to see if they wanted sidewalks installed.  You don’t remember anyone asking?  It might have been before your time.

Here’s an example from the Township minutes in the 1950’s:

Beverly Road:

Continue reading “Sidewalks – the deal you didn’t know you made”

Historical Perspectives on “New Problems”

Since joining the Teaneck Planning Board (about a decade ago), I’ve spent a lot of time researching how we did things, in the past.

I use that information to gain perspective, and guide decisions on what we might wish to do, going forward.  When you know what has been tried (for better or worse), you gain a good perspective.

Issues residents face tend to be cyclical1 and knowing how we handled them in the past, is very informative if you want to avoid prior mistakes2.

With that in mind, I hope to make several posts in the future about issues affecting Teaneck, that we face on Council.

Lighting:

A couple weeks back, a resident asked, via the Facebook group Teaneck Today (click to join)  “has there ever been an audit on the effectiveness of Teaneck’s street lighting? Continue reading “Historical Perspectives on “New Problems””

[UPDATE] The Port Authority Apologizes For Any Inconvenience But That Is [NOT] All

[UPDATE] After posting this, I received a call from the manager of the Port Authority.
The update appears below the post


Last month, I was frustrated by the fact that carpools are limited to “Cash-Only” lanes at PA bridges and tunnels and I fired off a tweet to the Port Authority and my elected reps.  Shortly after, I got a letter from Diannae C. Ehler, Director of the Tunnels, Bridges and Terminals at the Port Authority, who is responsible for operations and maintenance at the PA.

If you are tasked with making sure that people can efficiently move between NYC and NJ, there are several things you want to do.  Among them is to

  1.  Reduce the number of cars on the road and
  2. Have the remaining cars move as quickly as possible.

 

The Port Authority has an incentive program, for people that wish to carpool (with 3 or more people) whereby they pay reduced rates to go over the GWB or Lincoln Tunnel: Continue reading “[UPDATE] The Port Authority Apologizes For Any Inconvenience But That Is [NOT] All”

Larch Ave Traffic Study and Police Reports

The Teaneck Police Department was asked to conduct a report as to traffic and safety on Larch Avenue (in the area of Terhune Street).

Here are the findings:

On Wednesday, September 12, 2018, Lieutenant Christopher Kurschner forwarded a speeding complaint he received via Facebook. The complainant, Philip Moell, complained about speeding on Larch Avenue in the area of Terhune Street. Mr. Moell wrote that he had observed a D&M school bus speeding every morning at 8:35 AM. Mr. Moell provided a picture of the bus and what appeared to be a handheld radar gun style device.

In response to the complaint, we conducted a site study, reviewed the speed and volume study we had just completed, and conducted observation and enforcement. Continue reading “Larch Ave Traffic Study and Police Reports”

Grace Terrace (between Sagamore & Woods) Traffic Study and Police Reports

The Teaneck Police Department was asked to conduct a report as to traffic and safety on Grace Terrace (which runs between Sagamore Avenue and Woods Road).

Here are the findings:

On Monday, September 17, 2018, Deputy Chief John Faggello forwarded an anonymous “Report It” notification complaining of speeding on Grace Terrace. The complainant reported that vehicles are proceeding at speeds of at least 50 MPH at all hours of the day. In response to the complaint, the Traffic Bureau performed a speed and volume study and a site survey. Continue reading “Grace Terrace (between Sagamore & Woods) Traffic Study and Police Reports”