In Ridgewood ,Some can’t see the forest for the trees
To the editor:
Maybe some members of the Ridgewood Town Council along with Chris Rutishauser, Village Engineer and Tim Cronin, Director of Parks and Recreation, “Can’t” see the forest for the trees.”
I live on the East Side of Ridgewood and have been fighting passionately, along with many of my neighbors, to protect the large number of healthy trees in the small forest that encompasses the Schedler Property along West Saddle River Road. One of our key arguments for not building a 90-foot baseball field on this Schedler Property, is that it will require the clear cutting of these large healthy trees that beautify and protect our neighborhood and especially protect us from the noise pollution of Route 17.
I just finished reading an article in the March 11 edition of the Ridgewood News, entitled, “Presenters to reinforce value of trees.” I immediately said to myself, how can these be some of the same individuals that are not only ready but also willing to clear cut the trees from the Schedler property in order to build a huge baseball field? Why are these same people not fighting to protect the trees that are so important to the citizens who live on the East Side of Ridgewood is very disturbing to me and I am sure my neighbors?
This article in the Ridgewood News reinforces so many of the arguments that we have all been stating before for the Village Council, asking them not to clear-cut this property to build a 90-foot field. The clear cutting of these trees for such a large field will have a devastating effect not only on our neighborhood, but in the end all of the neighborhoods of Ridgewood.
Everyone who lives in this great Village of Ridgewood should read this article. You will then see why we must all join together to fight and protect all of the trees that have taken so many years to grow. These trees surround our Village and are very important to the health, safety and quality of life of all Ridgewood residents.
Alan Dlugasch
Ridgewood
Strengthen our downtown – TO THE EDITOR,
I support the parking deck because those who earn their living in our downtown and operate its businesses are literally pleading with us to end decades of inaction. Making a go of it as retailers in a high-rent town like ours is tough enough. To survive, they must compete successfully with Internet giants and big-box stores with parking galore a short drive away. In my 27 years of residence here, I’ve seen too many beloved businesses like Drapkins and Irish Eyes disappear or relocate — stores that for years contributed greatly to the village’s distinctive character. The chronic and worsening paucity of parking certainly hasn’t helped.
We’ve had a productive public debate since the November referendum produced an overwhelming vote in favor of the deck. Residents have contributed great ideas and valid criticisms, and the village council has responded with significant changes to the design. But some of the more implacable critics have repeatedly summoned up a parade of imaginary horribles. To hear some tell it, for example, Ridgewood is just a parking deck away from becoming — gasp! — another “Hackensack,” overrun with non-resident commuters. Even if the deck does attract some non-Ridgewood patrons, such out-of-towners might just discover a shop or two they like, or a new restaurant to try. More to the point, those who worry about what a parking deck might do to erode the character of our village should think hard about what the perennial lack of parking has already done in the last two decades to change the face of our once-quaint retail district.
So let’s not continually make the perfect the enemy of the good. Let’s not nullify the November vote. Let’s lend a helping hand to Ridgewood’s business district and to all who depend upon and enjoy it. I hope that all five council members will come together and enthusiastically support the deck, at long last.
Lee D. Mitgang
Ridgewood
Patience for opponents to downtown housing wearing thin – TO THE EDITOR,
I have been a Ridgewood resident for close to 15 years. I have two young children in our school system, and I am passionate about Ridgewood’s future and the state of our downtown.
I was pleased to see that the statistics provided in the recent studies on the impact of proposed luxury downtown apartments show that there will be no detrimental effects on the village. From the discussions I have had with my neighbors, the patience shown to opponents of development, who insisted on these additional studies at a cost of more than $100,000 to the Village, has worn thin. Concerns over impact issues were vetted for four years by the planning board, studied by the Village, all four developers, the opponents to development and now have been conclusively demonstrated to be without merit by an independent set of planners. That makes seven planning studies, all of which came to the same conclusions. And at least six engineering studies, all which come to the same conclusions. And at least six traffic studies, all of which came to the same conclusions.
The Board of Education weighed in. Not one credible person has ever found a significant negative impact from downtown luxury residential development and any other land use would be far more negative. It’s time to move past this and recover the use of these important sites for a productive purpose. And yet the opponents to development again are threatening to disrupt the work of the Village Council. You have to wonder what the real agenda is. But whatever it is, at this point it has no place in a reasonable civic dialogue.
Jeff Kahn Ridgewood
Mr. Kahn, please. “Reasonable Civic Dialogue”? Who is to define what “civic dialogue” is reasonable and what “civic dialogue” is unreasonable? The three amigos?
Alan – The Council (The Wholly Trinity) see the $100K bribe from the RBSA so the trees at Schedler don’t matter.
If we wanted Hackensack or Montclair we would have moved there.
What is the connection for these two?
The first guy writes as if the residents should pay the taxes and let the businesses should control the downtown. I am not here to support anyone’s business model. Ifyou have a good product people will come.
The second guy writes that payience is wearing thin. He seems to want high density housing and the garage.
What is in it for them? Neither talks about making Ridgewood a great town.
9:22 The problem is that it is not the first time “studies” such as these that forecast no impact from some proposed “improvement” have been presented to the Village. Time and again, we have discovered significant impacts after these projects move forward. “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”. Many villagers are tired of these self-serving reports that don’t reflect reality which are designed only to check off some bureaucratic requirement. Building hundreds of apartments and claiming no impact on schools and infrastructure is just bull**** on the face of it. Some honesty on the other side would go a long way to fostering a constructive dialog.
Ridgewood used to be a great town. Not any more and the outspoken few are trying their best to keep it that way.
The Village should just sell Schedler
Mr./Ms. Mitgang: How can you confuse a”deck” with a garage ? Very few guarantees in life, but had the town erected a “deck” across from the Post Office, or even on top of the current lot on Hudson St., when the parking situation was brought up during the best of economic times, this 10 mill.plus “garage” would not even be talked about. And by the way, any thoughts on what we do with this garage when people buy more off the internet, or from the big box stores in the malls in our back yard, or if the economy really tanks and people cut back on eating out ? This garage is the ultimate in “wasteful spending.”
Kahn…I’m sure you were pleased about the outcome of the studies, since you support these developments! Threatening the work of the village council…Lol! Good one. I’m sure Paul appreciates your support.
What will we do with the garage when, in a few more years, everyone is tele-commuting??? The number of people working from home instead of NYC is greatly on the rise and this trend will only continue. .
The garage is not a forward thinking solution.
Garage will be the center of the new red light slum district..with any businesses of value or common sence relocated away from that insulting and dangerous hulking structure..fat cats will be long gone by then,,taxpayers left holding the bag or on parkway south with household goods in tow..