December 5, 2005
Presenting Bryant Park, Sponsored By...
Public space that's privately sponsored? Bryant Park's current operating model is apparently the source of some neighborhood trouble, as some people are aghast that a public park has so many corporate events and charges fees for its use. The NY Times counts there was Olympus Fashion Week, there are summer movies sponsored by HBO, its wireless is sponsored by Google and its ice skating rink, The Pond, is sponsored by Citi, not to mention various product launches. But Bryant Park receives no money from the city, and the park's revenues were $4.2 million last year, juts from user and restaurant fees! It seems fewer events will be approved in the future. And there's even mention that neighbors of Madison Square Park are upset with how many events are being planned there without their knowledge (is Danny Meyer a good neighbor?).
What do you think of Bryant Park and its sponsorships? Now, Gothamist loves the quiet of other city parks devoid of sponsorships, but Bryant Park is such a sliver of park so near Times Square, it would have been inevitable that some companies would try to get their foot in the door there somehow. Just as long as we can sit there in the warm weather months, we're happy. And besides, if parks uptown and in the outer boroughs could be cleaner and more frequented by virture of sponsorship, we imagine they'd jump at the chance.
|
I'm all for it. I've been to Bryant Park more times in this past week than I have the 11 months leading up to it. According to the NYT article, Bryant Park doesn't receive any public money- yet many of the services offered are for the public. Sure, there are bound to be events that won't be accessible to the general public, but why not appreciate what is being offered? Free wireless, movies during the summer, skating during the winter- take advantage, instead of taking shots.
I agree with the above. There are enough events for the general public. The gravy is that the taxpayers don't even have to pay for it.
The summer movie series is great.
Let's put it this way. Would you rather a park that offers these free events at no cost to you or would you rather increase taxes to pay for a park that has no events?
I agree completely.
Unfortunately, in this city there often times seems to be a knee-jerk oposition to anything resembling private/corporate funds being anywhere near parks.
(Example: The "community group" getting up in arms for the restaurant plan that would have immensely spruced up the north side of Union Square, and given folks a beautiful place to enjoy a drink or a meal.)
15-20 years ago, Bryant Park was positively dangerous; now in the summer it is a benign sea of sunbathing laptoppers. People are eating lunch, playing chess, reading free library books and magazines, and generally not mugging or beating one another. Something has been done right.
I'm right there with these guys.....BP is doing well and ice skating there on your lunch hour ROCKS!!!! I'm all for what they've got going on. Enough complaining and more enjoying, people.
bryant park is safer because the city / police cleaned it up, not because a bunch of corporations have sponsored events. obviously, they're doing it because the park is already safe.
if corporations are going to utilize public land (which i don't think they should do), i hope that they pay through the nose for it. otherwise, it's simply free advertising.
Anyone interested in the history of Bryant Park or other information about it should look at the park's official website: http://www.bryantpark.org/
I'm with the majority on this one. Yes it's a drag when you want to sit on the grass but the Fashion Week tents are in the way. On the other hand the grass is new and the lawn resodded after the event.
BP got redesigned and rebuilt by the corporate sponsors of the NYPL. It's kept up because the surrounding commercial properties are taxed to fund Dan Biederman and the Bryant Park Restoration Corporation, that's the way a BID works. It's their rent-a-cops, not NYC's finest that keep the pushers away. It's their planners who come up with merry-go-rounds, Wi-Fi and free newspapers, not the Parks Department.
If Dan keeps his tax low and is able to increase services by pulling in $4.2 million from rentals, I'd say BPRC is doing a great job.
(If the corps are paying enough for the priviledge different debate)
Free WiFi and movies are good for Bryant Park. The line between sponsorship was crossed though when union square and madison square sold out park space for restauranteurs who claim to set up shop for the benefit of "the children." It's only a matter of time before the fuckers try to set up snack shops in tompkins and washington square. Bulldoze the Shake Shack.
Bryant Park is NOT a public park--look around and you will not see the parks dept. logo anywhere there. It's a private-public partnership, which reframes the issue, somewhat.
B'sillis Vertease, it's a public park managed by a private not-for-profit. The land is still owned by the public.
From the above link: "Bryant Park Restoration Corporation (BPRC) is a not-for-profit, private management company and a cooperating business improvement district of neighboring property owners. [...] It is the largest effort in the nation to apply private management backed by private funding to a public park, and it has been a success with public, press, and nearby institutions."