PART VII

Teaneck Plans For The Future

Shortly after the State of New Jersey passed a Zoning Act in 1928, granting to municipalities the power to determine certain areas for the use of business, others for industry, and still others for different types of housing, Teaneck stepped boldly forward. In 1929, Herbert Swan, a zoning engineer of considerable reputation, was engaged to prepare a map of the Township with the various areas designated. The ordinance adopting the Building Zone Map in its original form was passed November 6, 1929.

The result was not an expression of Mr. Swan's judgment and advice. Heavy pressure from property-owners along the main thoroughfares forced the zoning for business of entire frontages along Cedar Lane, Teaneck Road, Fort Lee Road, Glenwood Avenue, parts of Palisade Avenue, and Queen Anne Road, and an area around the West Englewood railroad station. The entire area bordering on the Overpeck Creek and certain tracts along the West Shore Railroad right of way were marked for industrial use. Three types of residential properties were classified; Class A for one-family residences, Class B for two-family residences, and Class C for multiple dwellings, that is, buildings housing three or more families.

Mr. Swan remarked that he had never in his life put his name to a document more reluctantly than he did to that zoning map. He probably realized at that time what the past fifteen years have proven-- that Teaneck was predominantly residential in character, and that it would undoubtedly attract home-owners who were employed in New York. Its potential possibilities as one of the big city's most accessible suburbs were apparent, not only to Mr. Swan, but to many families who purchased homes in Teaneck at about this time.

The Township did not offer the facilities industry needed, and the purchasing power of the community would not justify the business allotted to the frontages on that map. It has been conservatively estimated that more than fifty times the business Teaneck would ever accommodate was designated. The prospects of rich returns bolstered the hopes of those who thought that commerce would pour past their doors. A few citizens with a vision of Teaneck's future were ineffective in their efforts to direct the public viewpoint toward the greatest eventual good for the whole community.

Planning Board Created

In 1930, the New Jersey Legislature passed an enabling act permitting municipalities to create a Planning Board as part of their official organization. This statutory body was empowered to prepare an official map and a master plan for the future development of the community and to assume control over the subdivision and plotting of land within the limits of the municipality. 

On September 1, 1931, the Township Council adopted an ordinance pursuant to this provision, and by October 20, 1931, the personnel of the Teaneck Planning Board, consisting of nine members, was appointed. Early in 1932, Campbell Scott, a planning consultant, was engaged with a staff of engineers, and all factors and conditions pertinent to good community planning were considered in a series of studies that involved the making of many maps, surveys and drawings. An official map and a master plan of Teaneck was presented to the Township Council, as revised to September 8, 1932, which the Council subsequently adopted, after a public hearing.

Plan Anticipates Teaneck's Needs

The Plan, published in 1933 as the Teaneck Plan, and distributed to every home-owner at that time, anticipated the probable needs of the Township during the following twenty years with respect to new and extended street, parks, playgrounds, public building sites, railroad and highway over-passes, and suggestions for the financing of the improvements.

During the preparation of the Master Plan, the George Washington Bridge was opened and State Highway Route 4 came into prominence. The threat of road stands and gas stations, which are quick to appear along the new ribbons of concrete, was met by the Planning Board with courage and daring. They ruled against them in a move unprecedented in this section of the Country at that time. Builders sought to exploit the new roadway fronting on their property, and some endeavored to place garages so that cars would back out into the stream of traffic. All received the Board's emphatic "no." The opposition to the ruling which flared up momentarily soon died down, and the Township won its fight to keep business and private interests from Route 4 within the limits of the town. 

Buffer Strips Deeded

To further safeguard the Township against future encroachments, the Board was successful in having developers of tracts fronting the highway deed to the Township a strip fifteen feed wide as a buffer or park strip. Planted with shrubs and evergreens; this strip may be used to further beautify the parkway. By means of trades and gifts, the Township now owns about ninety percent of the border strip which lines the highway on both sides between the Town's limits.

The growth of Teaneck, following rapidly upon the heels of the improved transportation made possible by the George Washington Bridge, attracted developers of apartment houses as well as of one-family homes. This presented an unpleasant problem because the zoning code permitted the building of multiple family dwellings on any plot of land designated as Class "C," or on business properties. Applications for building permits were received by the Building Department for the erection of large apartment houses on both sides of Teaneck Road south of the highway. The prospect of these apartment buildings, with their rear walls towering over private homes on adjacent sites, agitated the home-owners into a spirit of violent protest, and they petitioned the Township Council for relief.

Rezoning Efforts Defeated

In an effort to correct the zoning situation which had continued in effect from the time the map was adopted, the Council engaged a consultant to review the map in the light of current conditions, and submit his recommendation for changes. His suggestions included many areas for rezoning, and among those recommended as Class "A" residences were the sites for the proposed apartment houses. The Council, acting on the suggestions, passed an ordinance changing the zoning on the affected properties. The vote was split 3 to 2.

The owners of many of the parcels rezoned by the ordinance made no effort to contest it, but the builders of the apartments, denied their permit, appealed the case to the New: Jersey Supreme Court. The Court sustained their point of view, declaring that the Township had exceeded a rational use of the police powers delegated to them in the Zoning Act when it attempted to alter the zoning map in a discriminatory manner.

Court Attitude on Zoning

It will be helpful to the reader to appreciate the attitude of the New Jersey Court toward zoning, according to E. M. Bassett on zoning. In the early days of zoning many authorities were inclined to consider that zoning regulations were an unlawful invasion of property rights. Caution in this new field of legislation is shown in the constitutions of some states which delegated specific powers to their municipalities to adopt regulations to "secure the health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience, and general welfare of the community." In New Jersey, even after the Legislature passed the Zoning Act, the courts declared that zoning for use was an unreasonable exercise of the donated power. For instance, they declared that the exclusion of stores from a residence district had no substantial relation to the community health, safety, morals, and general welfare. It was not until the constitution of the state was amended by a specific declaration in favor of the lawfulness of zoning that the courts of New Jersey upheld use zoning.

Go to Next Page

Back to Teaneck After 50 Years Homepage

Back to Teaneck Virtual Village