Speed Limits, Nokia, and Community Concerns

The February 18 town council meeting covered a range of key issues, including a heated discussion on speed data collection, debate over grant fund allocation, and growing concerns about community development. Tensions ran high as residents and council members challenged decisions regarding traffic studies, financial oversight, and affordable housing expansion.

Traffic Study Raises Questions

A significant portion of the meeting focused on the methodology and validity of the town’s recent traffic study. One resident with expertise in traffic regulations, questioned why northbound and southbound speed limits were combined and why Park Avenue was included in the study. Officials defended their approach, stating that they believed it was reasonable.

Concerns arose over the data collection process. The resident inquired whether the study used manual or automated speed meters and whether observer presence may have influenced driver behavior. Officials admitted to using handheld speed guns, citing budget constraints as the reason for their methodology.

The discussion also highlighted discrepancies in the town’s adherence to traffic regulations. When asked if the study accounted for free-flowing traffic, officials stated that they followed U.S. standards rather than local considerations, which raised further concerns about the study’s applicability.

Speed Limit Certification Issues

Councilman Poage questioned whether there was opposition to lowering the speed limit on Park Avenue to 30 mph. Meanwhile, a resident asked who authorized speed line markings on Plainfield and Park Avenue. A consultant responded that he had advised on the placement.

However, a key issue arose: changing a speed limit requires an engineer’s certification, which was notably absent from the process. Officials claimed that a one-page speed study provided sufficient data, though residents remained skeptical.

Mayor’s Handling of Public Commentary

The mayor’s conduct during the meeting came under scrutiny as she frequently interrupted speakers, insisting that she was being “generous” with the three-minute rule. Despite this claim, she cut off a resident at six minutes.

Grant Funding for Nokia Development

• The Mayor’s Proposal: Amend the resolution to allow spending the full $50,000 grant.
• Issue: The CFO had only certified $10,000.
• The Mayor questioned whether the council could override the CFO’s decision.
• Attorney’s Advice: The resolution could be amended with a vote, and the CFO could re-certify once the grant funds were received.

Ultimately, Councilwoman Illis moved to amend the resolution to “not exceed $50,000,” following the township attorney’s guidance. However, some attendees perceived this as a strategic push to ensure the full grant was spent, rather than exercising fiscal restraint. Grant money is funded with tax dollars.

The discussion on Nokia Bell Labs took an interesting turn when the topic of historical preservation arose as a result of resident feedback.  Neither the Mayor nor any member of the council were aware that Nokia was on the Historic Registry. The resident, a former employee of Bell Labs reported that exterior modifications were once prohibited, leading to an agreement that more research is needed.

Community Announcements & Initiatives

Several community initiatives were highlighted during the meeting:

• Black History Month & Zero Discrimination Day were recognized.
• Volunteer Recognition: Poage acknowledged volunteers for a flag-hoisting committee celebrating Black History Month, including Kashika Sinha for her performance at the ceremony.
• Cultural Celebrations Committee: Poage encouraged residents to participate in organizing events that promote diversity and inclusion.
• Mayor’s Wellness Committee: Announced as a permanent fixture starting March 4, with membership expanding from 12 to 20 members.
• Upcoming Public Meeting (March 4, 2024): The final decision on reducing the Park Avenue speed limit is expected.

Public Concerns on Development and Housing

Springholm Drive Residents Seek Fair Contributions

Residents of Springholm Drive requested township intervention to ensure that an investor-owner contributes fairly to a community study. They noted that their community was incorporated before relevant township ordinances were in place, complicating the issue. The mayor advised them to contact the township attorney for guidance.

Concerns Over Affordable Housing Expansion

A senior resident questioned why the town, despite its small size, was being required to accommodate extensive affordable housing developments. The mayor offered no direct explanation, instead stating that the issue was dictated by the state.

With the next public meeting scheduled for March 4, community members will have another opportunity to voice their opinions—particularly on the controversial Park Avenue speed limit decision.

Read More on Berkeley Heights Town Council

Subscribe to NJ21st For Free