At its September 20 Council meeting, as the Council began the public hearings that precede its votes to adopt or reject introduce ordinances, Councilwoman Orgen moved that Ordinance 20-2022 on Outdoor Cafes and Parklets be tabled indefinitely; Her motion was seconded, interestingly, by Deputy Mayor Katz and Council then voted unanimously to table.
This “Parklets” ordinance has been the subject of a Voices story in its 9/18 edition. That article described the very unusual discussion and vote about that proposed ordinance that had occurred at the August 25 Planning Board meeting. What follows is a copy of that 9/18 Voices story:
OUTDOOR CAFES: PB SAYS
“NOT CONSISTENT w/ MASTER PLAN”
COUNCIL PLANS VOTE ANYHOW
Teaneck’s Planning Board (PB) held a session on August 25 nearly all of which was again devoted to a discussion of whether the Town code should codify conditions under which “Outdoor Cafes and Parklets” extending across public sidewalks and into Township streets should be given certificates which would effectively allow such “outdoor cafes and parklets” to establish durable structures and then be given long-term operating rights. The subject matter of this Ord. 20-2022 had been floated by Council in the Spring in introduced Ord. 25-2022, had not been well-received by the Planning Board and eventually was tabled in July with the understanding that it would be revised. Just who asked that it be revised and be re-introduced in August? That has not been made public. To see the amended version, Click Here
At the PB’s 9/25, the entire hour+ discussion could be accurately described as a Board finding ever more reasons why this Introduced Ord. 20-2022 was wholly INCONSISTENT with the Township’s current Master Plan.
The Board noted – and its attorney confirmed – that were the Board to communicate to Council that it had found the ordinance inconsistent with the MP, Council would need a super-majority (5 members) of Council to then pass the ordinance – whereas normally only a majority of a quorum is needed.
Voices covered this 8/25 PB meeting earlier and questioned whether Council would proceed to an actual vote in this 9/20 Council meeting. Click Here to see that story.
Of particular note is the fact that a key moment in the 8/25 PB discussion came when the Board asked whether the existing “cafes and parklets” were found anywhere else in town beside the one block of West Englewood from Queen Anne to Palisade. And more specifically the PB questioned whether the proposed ordinance could provide certificates (i.e. legitimize) any other eating establishment’s outdoor cafes additional to those on that single town block. No one present at the PB meeting could identify any other location – and surely none on county or state roads would qualify.
Not every Voices reader will be able to watch this entire PB meeting so Voices has carved out a short 5-minute video where key PB points are made and the Chair makes the motion to find proposed Ord. 20-2022 explicitly inconsistent with the Master Plan. Click Here.
One final point. When this Ord was re-introduced on 8/9, Deputy Mayor Katz was absent. If, as the PB itself appeared to conclude, this ordinance would benefit only the block where D.M. Katz has so many ownership and operating interests, Voices asks will Katz recuse himself from the vote?
