Thanksgiving in Teaneck

Holy Name Hospital and the Master Plan Amendment

Good Neighbors of Teaneck Letter

Land Use Boards and the Required Expertise for Site Plan Review

Letter to the Editor - Howard Rose

Unanswered Questions

Upcoming Town Meetings

Events at the Library

Laura Reyes came to Teaneck to help a friend choose the perfect cake for her wedding and she ended up buying a house with her husband, Joel. When Joel arrived at the cake tasting he mentioned that he had been driving around Teaneck and liked the town. He suggested looking in Teaneck for a house. They had been living in the Bronx searching for a place to live in Westchester for a long time but had found nothing they liked. Laura’s friend suggested they call Gina Gerzberg who had been her realtor. Then the pandemic hit in March 2020. That unwelcome surprise didn’t stop the house hunt but slowed it down a bit. In June 2020 with Gina’s help Laura and Joel found what they described as a great house in a wonderful friendly neighborhood on Palmer Avenue.

The previous owners of the home were moving to North Carolina to be near their daughter. They made it a point to tell residents on the block about Laura and Joel in order to make them feel welcome in the new neighborhood. The kindness of the previous owners in introducing the couple to the neighborhood helped Laura and Joel feel right at home. Buttercup, a rescue dog they adopted, also made it her mission to befriend the Palmer Avenue dogs and thus their owners. Apparently many dog owners live on Palmer and neighbors walk their dogs and greet their neighbors at dog-walking time in the morning and evening.

Laura finds the quiet of her Teaneck neighborhood a welcome change from the noisiness of living on a busy street in the Bronx. She believes the pandemic taught her she needed to slow down and that the relative peacefulness of her Teaneck neighborhood plus the space a house provides helped her to do just that. Laura commutes each school day to serve as Vice Principal of a small charter school in the Bronx. Joel is an architect who designs fare collection systems for mass transit.They are raising Joel’s nephew, a senior, who attends the charter school.

When asked about what surprised her when she moved to Teaneck she mentioned the “blue laws” right away. New York does not have blue laws so the first time she went to Costco in Teterboro and saw sections of the store roped off she had no idea why. She also questioned why so many stores in Cedar Lane are closed on Saturday. Her next-door neighbor Fran, explained to her that Saturday is the Sabbath for many who live in Teaneck and they do not shop on Saturday.

Earlier in November, Chris and Gail, the previous owners of the house came north to visit and stopped to visit their former neighbors and, of course, checked in on Laura and Joel. “This will be our forever home.” said Laura. She is grateful to Gina for helping her and Joel to find the house, to Chris and Gail for assuring they would be welcome on Palmer Ave and to Buttercup for making certain they met everyone on Palmer Avenue.

What was Teaneck like before most of you moved here? Robin Bado and her mother, Helen Haupt, told some interesting stories about Teaneck when it was filled with open fields and farms. Helen grew up in Bergenfield where she met her husband Robert. They married in 1954 after a short courtship and eventually moved into a home in Teaneck. Helen and Bob loved living in Teaneck.

When she discussed what Teaneck used to be like, Helen mentioned that her father, Ernest, delivered the newspaper on horseback to its readers. When it reached the school the horse dropped Ernest off and returned home. Now, we have delivery men who throw the paper on the lawn or we get it online. Times have changed.

Helen lives in Arbor Terrace, an independent living facility in Teaneck. She and her husband lived there until three years ago when he passed away. Her daughter, Robin Bado often visits her there and on Saturday morning November 27th the two women sat and discussed how Teaneck has changed over the years. Marlise Montelione is Helen’s second daughter.

They reminisced about a time when the stores on Cedar Lane were all occupied and the street was busy. Louie's Charcoal Pit was open. Both women spoke of Schulman’s where that dress for a special occasion could be found. Then there was a bookstore near Louie’s but what was the name*? County Discount was loaded with merchandise and appeared to be unorganized but the clerk could find you a measuring tape, a mouse trap or a birthday present needed at the last minute. Joey’s on Water Street sold children’s clothing at a discount. Cars with NYC license plates parked outside Joey’s. There was and is no tax on clothing in New Jersey. Both women are happy Bishoff’s is still thriving.

Helen and Robin both remember when bussing began in order to integrate the schools in Teaneck. Teaneck was the first town in the United States to vote to voluntarily integrate its school system. If you are living in Teaneck you probably already know this fact. They both describe the time as being a contentious period but eventually the deed was accomplished. Robin and Helen remembered hoping that integration was a step toward eliminating racism in the town but recognize it still does exist here. Robin expressed her gratitude for being able to grow up in a town as diverse as Teaneck and believes it has been a rewarding experience for her two daughters also.

One organization the Haupt family played a pivotal part in was the organization of the Community Scholarship Fund. In 2021 the Teaneck Community Scholarship Fund awarded 39 deserving high school seniors $103,550 to help with their first year of college. Scholarships averaged $2655 each. Memorials have been created to honor the memory of special people. The Haupt Family Memorial is among them and Robin Bado serves on the Board of Directors of the Community Scholarship Fund.

Helen and Robin have been enthusiastic volunteers in the school system of Teaneck and Robin is the Director of the Youth Ministry at St. Anastasia’s Roman Catholic Church. While they are grateful to have lived many years in Teaneck we at Teaneck Voices are grateful to have them as residents of our town.

*Note: The bookstore was Balaban’s

Last week, an important announcement of a special meeting of the Planning Board finally appeared on the Teaneck Town website and in the required print media where such important agenda items must be published.

On Tuesday, November 30th, at 8pm, The Planning Board will finally review the long-delayed Proposed Amendment to the Land Use Element of the Township of Teaneck Master Plan for H-Hospital Zone Expansion.

Various drafts of this document have circulated. Some made it to earlier Planning Board meeting agendas and some were just shared with various groups at different times during the past year 2021. And some of these drafts have been presented at Council and Planning Board agendas.

The specific language of this Master Plan document and its timing are both noteworthy and, for many, highly controversial. This version of the Master Plan amendment was drafted by a relative newcomer from the firm of Phillips, Preiss, Grygiel, Leheney and Hughes LLC. It appeared on the Township website late this week is dated September 28, 2021. Click Here and go to pp.18-40 for that Amendment’s narrative and maps of the proposed phases of Holy Name Hospital expansion, should the zoning changes in the amendment be adopted.

But the required public announcement of this Master Plan agenda item in the local media (the Record and the Jewish Link, for example) specify an amendment document with a different date from the one announced on the Teaneck Town website! Rather than a September 28th date, these news media point to a version dated almost two months later - November 20th.

These dates do matter! Specific wording and alleged negotiated commitments in this amendment have been fluid. The precise wording of the agreements have been matters of continuous and often acrimonious allegations among the Town, Holy Name, and the hospital’s resident neighbors to the west and south of the current hospital zone.

The well-organized hospital neighbors publishes its views under the title of Good Neighbors of Teaneck. For months, they have pressed to get a negotiated agreement with the hospital that would include deed restrictions about how, in the long-term, the hospital would function in relation to the residential areas primarily to the west of the current zone but also on its southern border on Vandelinda Avenue. The Neighbors have sought direct agreement with Holy Name, which they strongly believe should precede the final discussion and approval of any Master Plan amendment on the Hospital Zone.

No agreement has been forthcoming. So when the date for the Master Plan amendment was announced as 11/30 without this prior agreement, many Neighbors actively criticized that decision at the November 23rd Council meeting.

Clearly this failure to reach an expected agreement has led to an escalation of the conflict. 90 residents from Good Neighbors of Teaneck signed a letter on November 22 (see below) which presses the Town Manager to rescind the new zoning permits he issued for hospital parking because the Manager’s executive order relied on the powers given in the Governor’s pandemic emergency directive that expired last June. The following day, November 23, the Good Neighbors sent another letter. This time they insisted that the Town’s zoning officer issue Holy Name a violation for continuing to exercise parking rights provided by expired permits.

Earlier expectations that the dispute between the hospital and its resident neighbors would be amicably settled by now have evaporated. One can expect a long and contentious Master Plan amendment review at the Planning Board meeting this week on November 30th.

LETTER FROM GOOD NEIGHBORS OF TEANECK

GOOD NEIGHBORS OF TEANECK

November 22, 2021

Dean B. Kazinci

Township Manager

Township of Teaneck

818 Teaneck Road

Teaneck, New Jersey 07666

Re: Expiration of Zoning Permits Issued for Block 3002, Lots 2, 4, 5, and 6

Dear Mr. Kazinci:

We respectfully request that the Township of Teaneck inform Holy Name that the temporary zoning permits issued by the Township, pursuant to the Township's Special Emergency Directive No. 03-2020 dated November 17, 2020 (the "Special Emergency Directive"), have expired.

We further request that the Township inform Holy Name that it must stop using those properties for parking immediately.

Four zoning permits that were applied for by Holy Name on April 19, 2020 were issued by the Township's Construction Official on May 14, 2021, pursuant to the Special Emergency Directive.

Each of the zoning permits was "Approved with Conditions" and state in the additional comments directly above the signature of the Township's Construction Official that:

"Shall expire upon termination of the Health Emergency or Special Emergency Directive"

The Special Emergency Directive states in subparagraph f. that:

"Any permits issued by the Construction Official under these temporary rules and regulations promulgated hereunder shall expire upon the termination of the health emergency or the termination of the Special Emergency Directive, whichever first occurs."

On June 4, 2021, Governor Murphy signed Assembly Bill No. 5820 into law as P.L.2021,

c.l 03 and issued Executive Order No. 244, which terminated the public health emergency declared in Executive Order No. 103 (March 9, 2020). Executive Order No. 244 states in paragraphs 1 and 3 that:

"The Public Health Emergency declared in Executive Order No. 103 (2020) pursuant to EHPA, N.J.S.A. 26:13-1, et seq., is hereby terminated."

Once the public health emergency was terminated by Governor Murphy on June 4, 2021, the temporary rules and regulations and procedural requirements that were suspended temporarily and purportedly authorized by the Special Emergency Directive (whose improper issuance is not discussed in this letter) were automatically reinstated by operation of law. This resulted in the expiration of the zoning permits.

Therefore, we, the undersigned residents of the Township of Teaneck, respectfully submit that the Township of Teaneck advise Holy Name that it must stop using those properties for parking immediately.

Respectfully submitted,

Good Neighbors of Teaneck

With the exception of the Planning Board’s power to create and amend the Township Master Plan, the most important work of our two land use boards (the Planning Board and the Board of Adjustment) is their authority to approve a Developer’s Site Plans proposals.

No site plan application ever gets to one of these two boards unless the developer’s plans call for variations from the existing zoning and related Township requirements.

The first page of an application that does not comply with existing requirements, are the zoning officer’s DENIAL OF APPLICATION – an example of which is found in the Planning Board’s agenda for Tuesday night:

There the Zoning Officer explains why the developer’s site plan violates some site plan Town rule.

The applicant then submits an extensive plan with applicant experts (architects, engineers and professional planners, etc.) weighing in on what typically are very technical data and arguments about why the proposed plan is really okay; why it serves the public interest and should it be approved despite its variances.

There are frequently social policy issues at stake: Who will be unfavorably affected by the variances requested? How will they possibly diminish an aspect of the town?

But these questions are frequently buried in the technical details and language specifying the variances. Without special expertise, the lay members of our land use boards are often in the dark about these important questions. But there is a solution to this problem.

There is in fact a Township requirement that our Council and its Mayor have violated.

In a 1980 Council action, Teaneck passed an ordinance that was consistent with a state municipal/county statute (40:55D-39f) requiring the Mayor to appoint a 9-member Site Plan Review Advisory Board.

This is the Board that must first examine the Zoning Officer’s denial and the Applicant’s effort to get site plan approval.

The Applicant for the rejected site plan applicant has to fill out a page where the variances are explained to a Site Plan Review Advisory Board, all of whose members are to be experts in evaluating plans in the context of a town's overall development efforts. Furthermore, four members of that Board must have degrees and certification as either engineers or architects.

In other words, the Teaneck's own Administrative Code recognizes the need for expertise that lay people on its land use boards frequently lack. Teaneck recognized that mistakes would be made without this special expertise, and that approval of deficient plans could lead the town into litigation. The Site Plan Review Advisory Board of experts was set up to prevent such poor outcomes that end up costing the Town unnecessary attorney fees and aggravated residents.

All of the site plans for the past five years have been judged by our lay-only land use boards. No Council member has discussed the lack of a Site Plan Review Advisory Board. All of the earlier appointments to this Board have expired.

When this Council reconstituted its closed advisory boards in 2020, the Site Plan Advisory Board simply disappeared. There is no mention of this required board on the Township website, except in the Code section where, obviously, it has to appear!

Town leaders should not close their eyes to the vital role experts should play in reviewing site plans. In failing to address the knowledge gap that exists, the Council, Mayor and Manager will continue to make weak appointments that lead to poorly informed land use decisions.

Recently, the Teaneck Historic Preservation Commission (THPAC) has had an architect appointed to it – the first in some five years. The Commission needed such a member. It is, in fact, legally required of this statutory board. Our THPC is at last legit again.

Unfortunately, the current Council likes to appoint people who agree with their goals rather recruit people with the necessary knowledge. We will continue to have weak development decisions unless we elect a Council committed to selecting land use entities and decision makers with the appropriate expertise.

Take a few minutes to read what the Teaneck Code says about the Site Plan Review Board:

Township of Teaneck, NJ / The Code / Development Regulations

Article III Site Design Review

Sec. 33-16 Site Plan Review Advisory Board;

Sec. 33-17 Site plan review Procedure;

Sec. 33-18 Standards and specifications.

Sec. 33-16 Site Plan Review Advisory Board.

[Ord. No. 1811, § 17; Ord. No, 1859, 5-27-1980, § 3]

There is hereby created a Site Plan Review Advisory Board, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-39f, for the purpose of reviewing site plan applications and making recommendations to the Planning Board and Board of Adjustment in regard thereto.

(a)

Members; qualifications. The Advisory Board shall consist of nine members. Each member thereof shall be specially qualified by reason of training or experience in architecture, engineering, land development, municipal planning, real estate, landscape architecture or other relevant profession or business, or by reason of civic interest and proven ability to determine the effects of a development upon the standards set forth in this chapter. At least two regular members shall be registered architects, and at least two regular members shall be professional engineers…

(c)

Appointment; term. Regular members of the Advisory Board shall be appointed by the Mayor, without compensation, for three-year terms…

(d) … Two regular members shall be elected by the Advisory Board, including alternate members, to serve as Chairman and Vice Chairman, respectively.. Said election shall take place at the first meeting of the Advisory Board in each calendar year… One regular member of the Advisory Board shall be a member of the Planning Board, who shall be entitled to vote as a member of both Boards

(e) Rules of procedure. A quorum shall consist of three members, at least one of whom shall be a registered architect or professional engineer.

The advisory board shall hold at least two regular meetings each month, unless there

is no public business pending. The deliberations and proceedings of the advisory board

shall be public. The advisory board shall keep minutes of its proceedings, and such

minutes shall be public records…

(f) Standards of conduct. No member of the advisory board shall be permitted to act on any matter in which the member has, either directly or indirectly, any personal or financial interest.

Sec. 33-17 Site plan review procedure.

[Ord. No. 1811, § 18; Ord. No. 1859, 5-27-1980, § 4; Ord. No. 3267, 6-26-1990, § 1; Ord. No. 3381, 12-21-1993, § 1; Ord. No. 3475, 10-8-1996, § 1; Ord. No. 3479, 10-22-1996, § 1; Ord. No. 3908, 10-6-2005, § 1; Ord. No. 4007, 5-21-2007, § 1]

(3)

Referral to advisory board…. the Zoning Officer shall forward the site plan to the advisory board, whether the approving authority is the Planning Board or Board of Adjustment…Within its jurisdiction, the advisory board shall review all drawings, plans and specifications submitted and report thereon to the approving authority within 30 days of receipt of a complete application and site plan for a development involving 10 acres of land or less…. The foregoing time limitations may be extended with the consent of the applicant.

The recommendations of the advisory board are not binding upon the approving

authority…

Upon receipt of the site plan, the advisory board shall distribute copies to the

Environmental Commission, the Township Engineer and such other Township boards,

agencies and personnel as the advisory board may direct. The applicant may be

required to furnish an environmental impact statement if the conditions of Section

33-19 hereof are applicable.

--------

Want to see the Site Plan actually up for approval at Tuesday’s Planning Board meeting?

Go to Zoom Link and scroll to pages 13-14 where the applicant did in fact fill out the required form to the Site Plan Review Advisory Board. But, of course, the Board's responding report on that form which should go to the Planning Board is blank.

After Alan Sohn was interrupted and then removed from the November 10, 2021 Teaneck Planning Board Zoom Meeting during "Good & Welfare" I sent Mr. Sohn a text message:

       Your 3 minutes should have been respected.

Good & Welfare is an opportunity for the public to comment. A speaker can agree, disagree or be off topic, there is no restriction. Mr. Sohn should not have been interrupted nor removed from the meeting. Chairman Bodner began the public comment portion of the meeting with the following:

       Let me open up Good & Welfare so that the

The statements and actions of Chairman Bodner regarding Alan Sohn can be categorized as censure, criticize castigate, chastise. Choose any or all. While Chairman Bodner has experience and knowledge of planning board responsibilities, he is not an omnipotent regulator of thoughts and opinions expressed by any speaker at a Teaneck Planning Board meeting.

Why does the Township Council have 16 subcommittees - none of which have a quorum - about which Teaneck residents are told virtually nothing?

In how many lawsuits is the Township currently involved? How many has it settled in the past year except for the Glenpointe tax appeal? How many has it won?

Why is Stop & Shop suing us?

Did any Town official tell Englewood anything about our Alfred Avenue plans? Englewood says NO!

When will the Planning Board act on the OSRP?

What's really happening with the Holy Name issues? (It now seems that the Planning Board is going to amend the Master Plan despite lack of agreement from neighboring residents. See article above on Holy Name Hospital Expansion.)

When will Councilwoman Orgen make available the records from the Marijuana Subcommittee that she in August said she would readily give to Councilwoman Gervonn Rice?

Why did the Town website have nothing about Thursday's Veteran's Day until Wednesday afternoon?

Monday, November 29, 2021 at 8:00pm

Still on the website - but ALMOST CERTAIN NOT TO HAPPEN

No agenda available

Zoom Link with passcode 249002.

Tuesday, November 30 at 7:00pm

Zoom Link with passcode 284883 

Agenda Packet is available with the meeting’s complete and very interesting agenda at Click Here 

Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 8:00pm

Zoom Link with passcode 033660

The agenda to the extent known is:

Wednesday, November 1, 2021 at 6:30pm

Public access by approval of the Chair only - contact Town Clerk.

Meeting status uncertain. Township just added "if needed" to original announcement.

Wednesday, November 1, 2021 at 7:30pm

Public access by approval of the Chair only - contact Town Clerk.

Wednesday, November 1, 2021 at 8:00pm 

Click here for this week’s Teaneck Library Events Calendar