Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and garden club urge Tenafly council to preserve Davis Johnson Park space, not lease to private café
Summary
Council discussed a resident proposal to convert the Davis Johnson Park main building into a revenue‑generating café, but garden club members and residents urged preserving the park, raised concerns about parking, trash and deliveries, and asked the borough to research deed/land‑trust restrictions before proceeding.
Mayor introduced an exploratory conversation about converting the main building at Davis Johnson Park into a café whose rent would support the park. Councilmembers framed the item as preliminary and asked staff to gather information about current use, historical storage in the building, and possible in‑house repurposing before any decision.
Members of the Tenafly Garden Club and residents spoke at the microphone, expressing opposition to a private commercial operator in the park. Maria Makovetska, who said she has been a Tenafly resident for about 19 years and a garden club member, warned that a private café would bring “garbage” and delivery trucks and could undermine the park’s peaceful character. “I will not be fooled that, a cafe is just a little, you know, just a little sandwiches with cheese and coffee,” she said, arguing the town should expand signage and promotion instead of leasing the facility.
Other commenters raised concerns about parking, enforcement of permits for professional photographers (a current revenue source), the presence of historical documents stored in one room, and the potential need for new access or service roads. Council members acknowledged these concerns and the need to check the land trust and deed status of the property; the mayor made clear the council would not vote on any lease or ordinance at this meeting.
Council members asked staff to produce additional details on current building usage, rental statistics, historic‑materials storage and any legal constraints from donors or land trusts before bringing the concept back for formal consideration. The council opened a public comment period for this topic only and closed it after hearing multiple residents; no motion or vote was taken.
The council also suggested checking whether existing interior space could be repurposed (avoiding new exterior construction) and to look for funding or revenue opportunities that preserve public access.
