Gothamist: Washington Square Park's New Era

Peggy Friedman

Fri, 13 May 2005 14:16:44 -0500

Everyone is invited to the Washington Square Music Festival's 47th season of free concerts in Washington Square Park -- 2 classical, 1 classic jazz, July 12,19,and 26 at 8 pm. They take place on the bandstand in the southeast quadrant, which, if the Parks Dept. has its way, will not be there next season.

metromade

Tue, 10 May 2005 16:46:15 -0500

Dave H. You're right about where the fountain would have been located in a traffic-free park, but I like where the fountain is now, especially when approached from University or MacDougal. I don't care that it is not in line with the arch, because it make it easier to get across the park from Washington Square North to Washington Square South. I may not be a car, but I still like a straight line. I vote No-New Fence, just redo the one that is there, which I like. I'm sure the plan for the new one has iron spikes on top. I admit I hate the idea of changing that park. I'm sure the plans are great, but there is something so "public" about it now. The Central Park Conservancy has made Central Park look better in so many ways, but I feel the limited access to the park (sheep's meadow for instance) so off-puting. Whenever I pass it, I should see the beauty of the lawn, but I just bristle because I can't sit on it. It's public space that we can never use. It's just ain't right. To see this "limited access" happen again in WSP would be painful. How many people feel safe sitting in WSP at 4AM having a good laugh? I'm sure plenty do it and like it (until chased away). I haven't heard of anything horrible happening there in decades. I don't see anything wrong with the with the park, (except those horrible asphalt humps can go, and perhaps a little more care for the gardens would be nice.)

jim

Tue, 10 May 2005 16:36:55 -0500

Where was Landmarks when NYU was building two oversize buildings on the downtown side of the park, casting a huge shadow? And don't tell me NYU has done great things for the neighborhood. They only do what makes them money. Remember when there used to be a small public park at Mercer and Houston? They put up a sports center which was supposed to be open to the community. Ha! Tear down the new NYU buildings. Robert B. Tierney is a stooge!

Dave H.

Tue, 10 May 2005 16:10:13 -0500

I may be misremembering, but isn't there a fence of sorts already around the park made of metal tubing and about 4 feet high? If so, I don't see what the big deal would be replacing it with something a little more aesthetically in tune with the surrounding neighborhood. The locked-gate-at-night thing sounds a little draconian, but the park is already closed from 12-6am and with only a 4-foot fence, someone determined to be in the park after hours shouldn't have too much difficulty gaining access. As for moving the fountain, I believe its off-center placement was a design concession to continue to allow traffic through the park. Seeing as how cars have been banned from the park since 1971, I think it's cool that they would want to follow through and place the fountain where it probably should have been located originally in a car-free park.

T.A.

Tue, 10 May 2005 15:20:50 -0500

Personally I think they should just get rid of the park and build an 80-story parking garage with a gigantic modernist football stadium on top of it. Also there should be a McDonald's, a Cracker Barrel, a Wal-Mart, and a beauty supply store that sells nothing but White Rain shampoo.

dhex

Tue, 10 May 2005 15:14:02 -0500

that last bit about nyu students and the fence makes a good point - they have a TERRIBLE track record of falling from things and hurting themselves.

Rose

Tue, 10 May 2005 14:30:36 -0500

Okay, so like some student is drunk and tall and it's night and the student forgets that there's a fence around the perimeter of the park and wants to go into the park and just goes right into the fence and tumbles over it and gets hurt and sues the City.

Effrt

Tue, 10 May 2005 12:17:56 -0500

But will they take down the huge security cameras? As long as they remove the big brother eye that has hung on the park for the last few years, I suppose a little sprucing up would be nice. Besides skateboarding as a kid (and great games of "all ground is hot lava!"), what the hell were those mounds for anyway?

K23

Tue, 10 May 2005 11:55:10 -0500

The park doesn't bother me in its current state; I'm just not against a potentially cleaner space, as opposed to you pseudo-hipsters who claim to love grime and crime but beg your parents for money to go shopping at Banana Republic. P.S. Tim, did I say I think you're SO cool for having hung out in (and survived) "dangerous" NYC in the 80s? P.P.S. There are bums (and prostitutes) occasionally in my 'hood; and I'd love to smash their heads in. Ever see Taxi Driver?

K23

Tue, 10 May 2005 11:46:49 -0500

*haha* 1) I'd love to go back to Paris, where I did work for a living. 2) I think you need to be in the library studying. Besides, your parents' allowance to you I think contribute less to the City than my spendings. TSQ is less important to me because it's further away; maybe with education you'll learn proximity and space definitions. P.S. Not a student my a*s. Or maybe you're just poor. Same difference.

Tim N.

Tue, 10 May 2005 11:46:06 -0500

There's a big difference between getting the bums off the benches and turning WSP into a generic greenspace. And bear in mind, the bums don't vanish. They might be moving to your stoop. PS: Also not a student. And if the park bothers you now, you wouldn't have survived the early 80's, when my friends and I first started hanging out there.

k23 sucks

Tue, 10 May 2005 11:33:07 -0500

K23, #1 Go back to Paris then, this is New York. Good luck finding work. #2 *YOUR* park? I think you meant to say "taxpayers of New York City". Something tells me with (at least the appearance of) crime on the rise, maybe that money would be better spent sending cops to the Bronx and Queens. Not Brooklyn though, apparently they kill innocent people in Brooklyn. I also like how you dig on Thompsons while arguing that WSP needs the work. What makes Thompsons less important than WSP? Note -> not a student.

K23

Tue, 10 May 2005 10:59:16 -0500

To those of us that LIVE here - read NOT you transient students that could give two sh*ts about the future of NYC - a nice park is a welcome change. Paris does this perfectly; if anyone's been to the Jardin de Luxembourg for example, you'd know that you can create an amazing space that's still cool for everyone. If I want to see bums passed out on benches I'd rather it not be at my local green space (or head to Thompkins SP).

Will

Tue, 10 May 2005 10:46:53 -0500

Isn't there a protest against the park's reconstruction coming up soon? Don't forget that this plan will remove the bocce courts and "stage" area from the south east side.

JP

Tue, 10 May 2005 10:29:57 -0500

I do think it's a good idea to add more green to the park by putting in more grass. Oh boy, I feel a pun coming on about washington square park and "more grass". :)

NOFENCE, um, 5

Tue, 10 May 2005 10:29:29 -0500

The nanny-ization of Manhattan continues.

Tim N.

Tue, 10 May 2005 10:20:56 -0500

Just call me No Fence Four. The park is in a real need of a sprucing up (and I'm not one of these people who's freaking out about losing the mounds), but this is just ridiculous. Why is there the sudden rush to make everything in the city look like everything else in the city? It's not going to make anything safer, just less special. A four-foot fence is going to accomplish absolutely nothing. Want to make the park safer? Put a couple of more cops in there. Wrecking the fountain isn't going to do it.

nofence3

Tue, 10 May 2005 10:03:42 -0500

To be fair, it won't end up like Gramercy Park, which is privately-owned and under lock-and-key. But the fence will be only 4 feet tall, which renders it useless as a security perimeter, if one was needed, which it isn't. I don't get the purpose of the fence other than as some sort of aesthetic means of conveying a sense of law and order. The park could certainly use some cleaning up and renovating, but this plan is ridiculous overkill. The history of the place alone should be enough to prevent such a radical redevelopment.

KeithS

Tue, 10 May 2005 10:02:21 -0500

"How many readers have been inside Gramercy Park? How many have been inside Washington Square Park?" Think it might have something to do with the fact that Gramercy Park is a private park while Washington Square is a public one.

Also-NoFence

Tue, 10 May 2005 09:31:39 -0500

Any word on WHY the fence? Is it to cut back on drug dealing at night, because that seems pretty drastic when the situation has already improved so much over the past decade or so. I walk through there alone at night all the time and never feel unsafe. The occasional drug dealer has no interest in hurting a random passerby. They only want to sell you drugs. Actually, I lied. One time I felt unsafe at night when I was sitting on a bench, minding my own business, when a huge rat charged my foot. I was kind of scared he had rabies for a minute, but he diverted his path at the last minute.

NOFENCE

Tue, 10 May 2005 09:09:58 -0500

Is there anything *wrong* with the park? I could care less about most of the changes (except fence, see below), but is it really worth all that money to fix something that really isn't broken? How about either (A) saving the money - novel idea, huh? - or (B) spending it on more needy areas of the city. Trust me, the Washington Square area aint broke. The fence - man this is a really bad idea. How many readers have been inside Gramercy Park? How many have been inside Washington Square Park? Uh huh, thought so.