Anonymous has left the following comment on the post "Public Park Or Private Enclave? Last Night's Public Hearing On Alternatives To Housing In Brooklyn Bridge Park":
To the last writer, no one disagrees that the city needs more affordable housing. We also need parks. We do not have to put housing inside our parks. Those who oppose housing want a park. A real park. Who is cleaning up because of the park? The businesses along Fulton Street and the River Cafe - and not one of these businesses puts one penny into the park's funding! Did you know that not one of the concessions inside the park contributes to funding the park? Did you know that the Park Conservancy raises money for their salaries and also puts not one penny into the park's funding? We don't need luxury or any other housing inside our parks to pay for them. And yes, the people who live in Brooklyn Heights who look down on this park from their brownstones on the promenade, who Martin Connor put on the park's board to design this park, and who didn't want an active park so they took all the recreational facilities out of the park in favor of landscaping - their property values have gone way up. So why not tax them for the privledge of looking down on a new green lawn from Columbia Heights? They certainly did a great job making sure there was no bridge into the park from Brooklyn Heights didn't they? But they have not opposed luxury housing! Far from it - the guys who have made off like bandits from this park's design are also the people who WANT HOUSING because they figure a bunch of rich folks living inside the park will prevent the rest of us from using it...and it is working. Thank Judy Stanton and the Heights Association for their efforts to get housing inside the park. Luxury housing!