Comments on: Brooklyn Bridge Park Controversies Continue

By: Publius

Publius — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 00:51:23 +0000

For some innane reason, it was decided by the Powers that Be that BBP should be “self-sustaining”.

Then why the hell do we bother to pay state and local taxes? Let’s privatize everything!!!!

Is Central Park, Prospect, Cadman, Flushing Meadows, or any other park in NYC “self-sustaining”? No. So why BBP?

Sorry if this takes us back years to the beginning. But for me, the entire cause of this issue is the idiotic decision someone (the aforementioned Powers that Be) made In The Beginning to essentially privatize a public park.

IT MAKES NO SENSE. Let’s go back to this fundamental decision and undo it before it’s too late. The era of privatization of the public domain need to end. Enough gimmes to developers.

By: DOT

DOT — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:28:35 +0000

Rockefeller park is one of the best retreats in NYC.

By: V.H.

V.H. — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:20:35 +0000

The city tax payers will end up paying for this park the ‘indirect’ way.
Sure, the co-op/condo owner taxes collected will go to park upkeep. BUT, these co-op/condo owners are not paying any additional taxes to the city. Which means that every new city service needed over there, whether its additional police, fire, sewer lines, traffic cops, schools, etc. All will come out of the city tax payer pocket because the owners of those units will not be paying for it. All of their taxes will go strictly to the park. And what happens when the park upkeep goes over budget? Who pays for that?

I say, just plan some trees, grass, a bike path and be done with it. Its getting way too over the top.

By: markznyc

markznyc — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:40:51 +0000

Check out the privately run Rockefeller Park as part of the HRPT that connects to Battery Park. Probably the most beautiful and well kept prk in all five boroughs. Whereas Battery Park (where most of the world comes to visit Lady Liberty) is a disgrace.

I will take a privately run “public” park any day.

By: epc

epc — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:44:54 +0000

I no longer support the park. It will not be a New York City park, owned by the people of New York City, but a private park owned and operated by a public benefit corporation of the state. It may seem like a minor distinction, but given how restrictive the state park system is with the existing Fulton Ferry park, The possibility of having an allegedly contiguous park operated by three different agencies, with differing regulations and restrictions isn’t very palatable.

You may not want to pay tax dollars to support the park, but in turn we’ll lose any public claim to public use or control over the park.

“Open to the public” is not the same as “public park”.

By: rascal

rascal — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:05:34 +0000

Better some rich residents pay for park maintenance than my tax dollars, thankyouverymuch. As long as it’s open to the public, who cares if they have priority seating? You could argue to infinity about what’s “possible” in the world, but unless we move toward what’s practical, the damn thing will never get done.