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”

Why re-codification of the Teaneck Code is important

At some point in the past, the township passed a rule to prohibit businesses from operating on the first floor of buildings.  Not only could they not operate, say, in a basement — but they had to be seen from the street.

Maybe this provision made sense at some point in time.  It has become pointless today. 

Whether or not it made sense when the provision was last tinkered with (in 1951) is debatable, but it appears that I’m not the first person to think this is pointless and counter-productive.  Teaneck also considered it pointless in 1973.

That’s the year that the Teaneck Council passed ordinance 1568, which reads in relevant part:

Section 3. That Sec. 5-14 entitled “Buildings to be open to public view” and Sec. 5-15 entitled “Business to be conducted at street level; exception as to bowling alleys” of said Chapter 5 entitled “Amusements” be deleted in their entirety“. (emphasis added)

Continue reading “Why re-codification of the Teaneck Code is important”

[UPDATE x2] [LAWSUIT] Senator Weinberg to Teaneck Business: Not in my backyard!

There’s a new kid-friendly establishment coming to Teaneck, but not if State Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg has anything to say about it.

Senator Loretta Weinberg, in her capacity as our representative, has sued the Township and a business trying to open up in “her” building (full complaint available below).

The tenant, Teaneck Speedway LLC wishes to put in two amenities:
1) Slot-Car Racing tracks and 2) a Mini-Bowling area.  (The latter is kind of a mix between skee-ball and bowling)

Here’s what it will look like: Continue reading “[UPDATE x2] [LAWSUIT] Senator Weinberg to Teaneck Business: Not in my backyard!”

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”