Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Tenafly council for stronger traffic, stormwater and school analyses
Summary
During public comment on the Dean Drive plan, dozens of residents urged expanded traffic counts, independent school-impact studies and concrete stormwater solutions, citing repeated flooding on Dean Drive and crowded classrooms.
Residents filled council chambers and dozens spoke during public comment after the developer presentation, pressing for more technical analysis before zoning changes are finalized.
Multiple residents described recurring flooding near Dean Drive and asked how the project’s underground parking and stormwater piping would affect adjacent buildings and downstream properties. Site engineer Mike Dickel said testing and soils work are underway and that the design "will greatly reduce the rate of runoffs that this site right now generates under its current conditions," adding that the developer will present detailed storage and rate calculations to the planning board.
Parents and educators asked for an independent review of school impacts and classroom capacity. A number of speakers referenced the developer’s citation of a Rutgers estimate of roughly 18 new students and said local enrollment patterns could produce far higher figures. Akash Shah urged the borough and the Board of Education to commission an independent analysis and make results public so residents can weigh trade-offs between downtown vibrancy and school costs.
Traffic was repeatedly identified as an unresolved issue. Council members and residents asked that counts and intersection analyses include Dean Drive plus Highler Avenue, Westervelt Avenue, Franklin Street and George Street; one resident flagged that recent traffic counts predated activation of the new signal at the key intersection and asked for fresh data. Traffic consultant Lou Muggio said peak periods differ by land use and that his initial counts do not show adverse impacts, but he acknowledged more detailed work is pending.
Speakers urged the council to require precise commitments in redevelopment agreements and to use planning-board review to hold developers to stormwater, traffic and school-mitigation obligations rather than rely on initial concept-level estimates.
