SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
More insight is needed to address Schedler property
To the Editor:
I am in support of the Village Council votes regarding the Schedler property.
The heated debate at the Village Council meeting meant those who had an issue with the resolution gave up an opportunity to positively influence the development of the property. They could have tried to see if a high berm could be built to insulate the property from traffic on Route 17. The berm could be capped with a sound barrier and covered with dense plantings. This would serve as a safety, sound and pollution barrier.
The third of the property left to nature could be converted into an arboretum of native species and pollinator habitats. The walk around the perimeter could be made to appeal to “seenagers,” those of us who are chronologically seniors but mentally can’t outgrow their teen years. A foot bridge could be built over Route 17 to make it easier for pedestrians to walk over from the west side of the highway. I can’t but believe such a park would be a great improvement over a weed-choked lot with fallen trees and mounds of empty beer cans. I have walked around the property and find little salubrious about it.
Regarding the Schedler house, I am a conservationist and a reader of history. Destroying a historical site is an act of vandalism. I thus support giving the preservation committee another year to come up with a plan for the house. My recommendation to the committee would be to add several new members who would add depth to its considerations. For instance, I would add an engineer and an architect with experience in preserving historical homes. Also, perhaps, a realtor with experience in finding uses for such a property. A historian and a fundraiser would be helpful.
If I were a member of the committee, I would try to answer the following questions:
What is the age of the house? Supporters say it was built in the 1820’s. This may not be a true statement in its entirety. Some of it may have been built in the 1820s, but I have a feeling much of it was built much later. Is it truly a “nationally recognized historic home” as some claim?
How sound is the house structurally? With a broken roof and black mold, what else ails it? Rot? Termites? Lead paint? Asbestos?
What uses will there be for the house and thus what will it be restored to? Some mention a library for historical documents. That’s an interesting idea, but what would it take to reinforce the beams to carry the heavy weight of books, and what would it take to fireproof it to protect invaluable documents?
Depending on the use, what would it cost to restore the house and bring it up to code, especially for public use. If it is to be used for public purposes, who will underwrite the future operating costs?
A rational discussion of our options with less heat would be in everyone’s interests.
Rurik Halaby
Ridgewood
Mr. Halaby is nothing more than a hand puppet of the Aronsohn administration. This is bullshit.
Sell it to a private developer and get some tax revenue from the property.
Rurik – so you’re a Conservationist ?
Wait until you see the garbage left behind by the soccer, baseball and lacrosse teams….
Get a hobby.
Nothing will be built without NJDOT approval. Their development criteria will render this whole ball field fiasco null and void.
The plans are missing a couple of things:
1. Bleachers
2. Lights
3. Bathrooms
4. Entrance on W. Saddle River Road
5. Giant fence down the 3rd base line to prevent foul balls from going onto Rt. 17
6. ON street parking on W. Saddle River Road
Oops forgot.
7. Scoreboard
8. Speakers
Look at the proposed plan again…soccer and lacrosse outline fits perfectly within the playing area. This has nothing to do with baseball. There are 3 60×90 fields in town already.
Fast Eddie and Captain Jack decided long ago to turf the town…almost there….
In Rubric’s opinion.
In my opinion, make the whole place a park or turn it over to developers. The cost to build, maintain,traffic accidents/problems and garbage are not worth it. I believe in conservation of Historically Significant Landmarks. The building is beyond saving and IMHO a dump.
Not to worry the RBA says they won’t put any lights, bathrooms, scoreboards or sound systems. Sound familiar ??
I am impressed by the spirited debate. Let’s have more of it.
I do support the Three Amigos since for once we have a can do Council. Having said that please read the various letters I have written to the Ridgewood News. You will find few people have been as critical of the Mayor as I have been. Not because I don’t like him but because I want him to be the best Mayor Ridgewood ever had.
You have some bromance with the Mayor. Why don’t you to get a room preferably out of Town.
“I want him to be the best Mayor Ridgewood ever had.” Whats he your little boy?
Rurik, a “can do” council is horrible when it is the bullshit that these three are doing. They are horrible. We need to be rid of them.
Anon 8:06 pm You are an awful person. A pathetic person with a twisted mind.
Given the possibility of motor vehicle accidents on 17, is this where we want a recreation area??? A car just plowed into Wendy’s. Will there be any barriers stronger than a row of trees and bushes?
Rurik could gives your thoughts of the Iran deal ?
Rurik and Keyser Sose – separated at birth….?