Posted on

Reader says There is great value to preserving the history and character of our village

Ridgewood-_4thofJuly_theridgewoodblog

There is great value to preserving the history and character of our village. Does 315 East Glen Avenue qualify? I don’t know, but if the home is from the 1830s then I think it is at least worth considering. There is and always will be tension between those who wish to preserve certain qualities of the village and its structures and those who argue that development needs to naturally proceed and a property owner can do what he wishes, within reason, with his own property.
Certainly we don’t want the village to become a cookie-cutter suburb like much of New Jersey. The area of the lawns is testament to what happens when a developer does as he pleases (nothing against the people there at all). The village should have proper controls in place to determine what is worth saving and what is not. Room for public debate should be included in any discussions.

5 thoughts on “Reader says There is great value to preserving the history and character of our village

  1. Have you driven through the Lawns recently? Most of the homes have been remodeled during the years and no longer have a “cookie cutter” appearance.

  2. I’ve lived here for 25 years and didn’t hear so much as a burp about 315 E Glen until a former resident got all nostalgic. The, she starts an online petition signed by other bleeding hearts and former residents who want to designate a portion of town they’d never live in as ‘historic’. If anyone wants to truly preserve a home they call historic, go to the owner, make an offer and preserve it yourself. Just because a home is nearly 200 years old sometimes just means no one wanted it. Put your $$$ where your mouth is and start preserving using YOUR funds, not Ridgewood’s and certainly not the funds of someone who wants to improve / rebuild a residence on PRIVATE property.

  3. I thought that previously there was consideration of landmarking the house and it was decided not to do so.

  4. Didnt the owner pack up and leave and isnt this another situation of a greedy developer and owner sub dividing on a lot that seems to be screwed up with three other houses in the back. Why would the village approve this

  5. Let it be built we need the tax revenue
    Just because a place is old,does not mak it historic

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *