Not on the fence about fence

To The Editor:
Re “Villagers hit a wall over park fence plan” (news article, March 9):

Parks Commissioner Bill Castro’s words — “Now that we have a consensus” — prompted my question at the Community Board 2 Parks Committee meeting on March 2. I asked how in light of the overwhelming opposition against the fence at Alan Gerson’s meeting, that consensus would factor into Castro’s decision-making process. Despite numerous and varied objections to the fence, Castro seemed anything but on the fence about the fence.

Nobody I know wants the park securely closed at night. We’ve all snuck in a time or two, because cutting through the park is a lot easier on our tired ol’ bones. Many feel the drug dealing will simply move on to the streets where we live. And, my goodness, with a police van and dozens of cameras in the trees, why can’t the drug dealing stop? And I have never witnessed anyone trampling on the tulips!

I also inquired as to the price of the fence per square foot. At that time Castro did not have that information. Does he now have that figure? In answer to my question as to fence height, Castro answered 4 ft. I then asked about the height of the platform on which the fence stands. Castro answered 8 in., making the fence closer to 5 ft., than 4. He also stated that the first phase of construction would include the fence, and that Parks hopes to start in June.

This issue must be resolved before the “refurbishing” begins. Castro identified the two areas of consensus in which he is working with the public; dog runs and playgrounds. I suggested because of the objections raised against the fence at the Feb. 16 meeting, that logically the fence should be the third consensus. It is nice to have all these meetings to hear the views of the people who actually use the park, but nobody wants to feel like these meetings are merely a waste of time.

Those of us who have moved here from small towns consider the park our back yard. And original New Yorkers have a long history and love affair with the park. We need to know the views expressed are actually factored into the final decision that will benefit and reflect the wishes of those of us who actually use the park as a vital living space. We are happy to share our space with tourists and transient N.Y.U students. But regardless how much money is donated by other interests, it is, if there ever was one, a people’s park.
Greenwich Village is not known as a gated community! Dog runs and playgrounds are negotiable issues of size, location, type, etc. But either there will or there won’t be a fence. In view of your willingness and desire for consensus, which is it, Mr. Castro?

Sharon Woolums
Woolums is a public member, Community Board 2 Parks Committee, but her views expressed herein are independent of C.B. 2.