Posted on

Pro Athletic Field Space Residents Respond….

>The NIMBY (not in my back yard) attitude from the “lakeview dr people” regarding the consideration of athletic fields at King’s Pond Park is so predictable. We have all heard it so many times from many other selfish and ignorant people in town. Your threat and reference to concerned parents as “athletic bums” says a great deal about your character. But, it doesn’t really help to solve the issues that face us all as citizens and taxpayers in Ridgewood.

The rest of you, particularly “village group inc”, have no idea what you are talking about.

The VOR has ONLY 60% of the necessary open space per capita for recreational activities, as recommended by the state of NJ. Walk by the fields at Brookside, Vets, Stevens or Citizens Park and take a good look at the deplorable conditions. You can blame the severe shortage of field space in town. You can also blame the shortage of field space for night usage of the fields (as late as 9PM). Ridgewood DOES NOT have enough fields for our children.

The synthetic surface at maple Park is the only responsible way to address this condition, at this time. And, it didn’t even cost you a dime, unlike the grass field that it replaced.

Contrary to “village group inc’s” incoherent rambling, last week’s storm was the perfect demonstration of why the field at Maple Park is so necessary. The storm dropped 3.5” of rain in less than 48 hours, on top of the 2.5” from a storm a week earlier. In two weeks we saw 36% more than the average rainfall for the ENTIRE month of November in Ridgewood. Last week’s storm flooded the parking lot at Village Hall with 6” of water and closed athletic fields in town for days.

When the storm ended, there was less than 1” of standing water in one small area in a corner of the new surface at Maple Field. Even though the surface and its drainage system are not completed and fully functional, the water had completely disappeared within a couple of hours. Had the field been completed, it would have been ready for play, while every other field in town was under water or unplayable for several days afterwards. By the way, no workers in Parks & Recreation were laid off as a result of the savings from the synthetic surface at Maple Park. Nor has that ever been a justification for installing a synthetic field in Ridgewood.

It can be hard to admit when you are wrong. But, maybe it is all of you who need to “wake up”, as “village group inc” demands.

15 thoughts on “Pro Athletic Field Space Residents Respond….

  1. >A “severe shortage of field space” isn’t good enough reason to even think about bulldozing the beautiful wildscape areas of Grove Park and Kings Pond Park.

    Why don’t you ask your buddy Dave Pfund to build a few soccer fields on top of the new parking garage? That would be a perfect place; plenty of parking and a location at which lights wouldn’t bother any residents.

  2. >Actually, the severe shortage of field space is EXACTLY why we all need to consider intelligent compromises. This issue is not limited to sports use and it certainly is not limited to any one sports group. It is a problem that faces all residents and requires everyone to approach it objectively, without any “sacred cows”. Thoughtful leaders in town (on and off the Village Council) are trying to re-evaluate how we utilize all of our free space in town. Much of it may not presently be used in a way that is effective for all village residents.

    At Maple Park the issue is being addresses with sensitivity to how all residents can and do use the space. The resulting improved Maple Park environment will be more friendly to small wildlife due to the proposed tree plantings and landscaping, not less so. It will also provide a more useful site for athletics and general leisure activities, such as walking or just sitting on the new park benches to enjoy the peaceful environment of a MORE secluded park, than what existed previously.

    As for you suggestion about a field on top of the new parking garage…I think that is an innovative idea. It is exactly what Valley Hospital proposed several years ago. The concept is applied in urban environments all the time. As long as such a plan does not pose a safety risk to children who would frequent the field, it is worthy of consideration. That is exactly the type of constructive alternatives that we should be considering. I urge you to propose the idea as an alternative to converting existing areas that are important to you for other uses.

  3. >Since you’re the one advocating the construction of additional athletic fields, why don’t you drop the Mayor an e-mail and let him know that the Village Council should consider building a few on top of the new parking garage. His e-mail address is dpfund@ridgewoodnj.net. While you’re at it, why don’t you drop Audrey Meyers an e-mail an ask her to build a few athletic fields on the top of The Valley Hospital’s new “Renewal” facilities. Her e-mail address is ameyers@valleyhealth.com. And with respect to your “sacred cows” comment, I suspect that you’d even propose relocating the library and Village Hall to get more playing space? What a buffoon!

    And stop with the sanctimonious crap about improved environmental conditions at Maple Park. The bottom line is that large trees were removed and wildlife was permanently disrupted to facilitate the installation of synthetic turf. I will not let that happen at Grove Park & Kings Pond Park without a HUGE fight. There is no reasonable argument anyone could offer to support the destruction of either of those natural areas.

    ADEQUATE PLAYING SPACE FOR ORGANIZED SPORTS ISN’T IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO WARRANT THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR NATURAL ENVIORNMENTAL RESOURCES! Get a reality check and get if fast.

  4. >I never said that I was advocating the destruction of natural environmental resources to create more athletic fields. I am simply pointing out that, even by state guidelines, we do not have enough open space in the village to support the needs and desires of all our residents.

    There is nothing sanctimonious about my comments. I am merely stating facts, of which you are clearly not aware. It is true that five trees have been cut down at Maple Field. Of these, four were so rotted in their core and root system that they were barely standing and posed an extreme safety hazard, necessitating their removal…with or without a new field. Regretably one tree had to be removed because the excavation would have damaged its root system far from the tree’s base, making it unstable. On site tree experts determined that it would have died over time and posed a safety hazard in the future.

    Did you know that 10-20 large and healthy trees will be planted at the site? Thousands of new shrubs and ground cover plants will also be planted at the site.

    You claim that wildlifde was permanently disrupted. On what are you basing this? Specifically, what wildlife was displaced? The reality is that very little, if any, wildlife (other than Canadian Geese) has been permanently displaced.

    You are arguing with the wrong person. I would be willing to consider the prospect of building synthetic fields on top of the new garages. I don’t want to change the nature of any natural space in town, unnecessarily. But, I am also realistic about the need for Ridgewood to accomodate the needs of the explosion in growth of our active school age population during the past 10 years. You obviously feel strongly about not including the sites you mention as part of any compromise. Perhaps you should propose your idea as an intelligent alternative to the Village Council or suggest alternative areas for consideration? If you are only willing to anonymously threaten and criticize those who are trying to deal thoughtfully with this challenging issue, then your cause is bound to fail. I may support you. But, I won’t fight your fight for you.

  5. >Instead of building more athletic fields to accommodate “the needs of the explosion in growth of our active school age population during the past 10 years,” why don’t we just encourage these same children to each buy a good pair of waterproof hiking boots and get their exercise by hiking at Grove Park and/or Kings Pond Park. Perhaps the schools could start hiking teams? And, hiking would also be an activity that parents could participate in with their children. No expense required; the trails are already in place. Save the environment and tax dollars as well!

  6. >Really, does it matter how much open space and fields we have when people are fleeing the state in droves? As the state becomes more and more expensive, more and more folks are cashing out. Vacant homes are staying on the market longer. I think if we wait it out, eventually the population will match the amount of field space we need. Hell, if we keep things going the way they are, we might even be able to get it down to one field per child.

  7. >Sure, the turf didn’t flood, it just sent the water somewhere else, and in time, to the neighbors after the brook overflows. Turf does not, does not, absorb like grass. The reason fields flood is to hold in the water that would just rush somewhere else. If you pave a driveway, that driveway is dry soon after a flooding rain, but the water has to go somewhere!

    Anon

  8. >Once again, you have your facts wrong!!!

    The new field at Maple Field DID flood as it always will during flood conditions. Nothing can be done to prevent that…it is in a flood plain! However, the design of the stone drainage base under the field absorbs much higher volumes of water at a much higher rate than is possible with natural grass. As a result, the playing surface does not saturate and water dissipates well below top 2-3” of the field, making it 100% usable within hours.

    In addition, unlike an impermeable driveway surface, the synthetic field is very porous and base under the field acts like a dry well with a retaining wall, holding thousands of gallons more storm water than would ever be possible with natural grass and soil. Only after the base’s “holding capacity” is reached does the drainage system begin to drain the overflow into the nearby brook.

    The net result is that water from the field does not flood surrounding areas and water flow into the brook is slowed or eliminated all together, depending on the amount of rainfall over a given period of time.

    Those who have taken the time to understand all the facts have actually come to appreciate the many benefits of the Maple Park project.

  9. >ALL I CAN SAY IS I SEEN THE FLOOD AND IT WAS SO NICE TO SEE THE FEILD GONE IN2.HRS,AND THE WATER STAYED AT THAT SITE FOR 7HRS.I SEEN IT I WAS AT THAT SITE FROM TIME TO TIME TO CHECK IN WITH MY WORKERS AT PSE,G.AND I HAD A BAD FEELING ABOUT THIS AND IT WAS NO GOOD.TO SEE THIS NOT WORKING.SO TO THE VILLAGE.GROUP.INC GOOD GOB FOR THE LOOK OUT.SO MANY PEOPLE ARE OUT OF THE LOOP.AND THEY HAVE A LOT TO LEARN.SO ALL I CAN SAY AT THIS TIME YOU WILL SEE ME ON CH.2 VERY SOON.

  10. >Apparently, Mr. Line, your eye-sight and ability to tell time is as poor as your mastery of the English language.

  11. >hello to all who think that this will happen anytime soon.no way i no how much money we have and it is not going to work out any time soon with makeing any more filds.we dont have the money for this one and some will like more no way.at this time.

  12. >stay out of lakeview dr.we like the site and we like how the town runs the compost they care about the job and the town and the tax people we are very lucky to have this so dont mess this up
    .

  13. >just give your name so we know who to go after.at town hall and shut you up for once and all.the gang.

  14. >YOU LIKE TO HAVE MORE FIELDS THEN YOU PAY FOR IT YOU BUM.AND YOU HAVE NO PLACE TALKING ABOUT THE DAM LAST FLOOD.WHAT THE HELL DO YOU NO ABOUT THAT STUFF.TALK TO THE WORKERS WHO WORK THE STORMS AND THEY WILL TELL YOU A NEW TUNE,AND THE REAL ONE NOT YOUR BULL OF A STORY.TALK TO PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THE TOWN AND THEY WILL TELL YOU WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON IN THE LAST 30 YEARS.WAKE UP.

  15. >I LIKE TO MEET YOU YOU ARE A COOL GUY.IAM WITH YOU LETS GET IM.HURR.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.