Editor’s note: At the Historic Preservation Commission meeting on Wednesday, May 16, Gail Hodges spoke in favor of the Forest Park Master Plan, and outlined how she has changed her position on stone amenities. GazeboNews asked Ms. Hodges to share the text of her presentation in the Reader Forum. Reader Forum articles represent the writer’s opinions and not necessarily those of GazeboNews. We encourage you to respond to this, but please include your full name per the GazeboNews comments policy on Reader Forums.
By Gail T. Hodges
The Forest Park Master Plan follows the standards for “Rehabilitation,” the treatment recommended for Forest Park by the Historic Preservation Advisory.
• “Rehabilitation” is defined as “the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical or cultural values.”
• Rehabilitation is often selected in response to a contemporary use or need. It may involve preservation of existing fabric along with new additions and alternations.
• Rehabilitation differs from “Restoration,” which involves restoring a landscape to a particular period of significance.
• Rehabilitation differs from “Preservation,” which involves ongoing maintenance and repair of the original and is not intended to accommodate new additions.
• Rehabilitation differs from “Reconstruction,” which involves replicating a non-surviving landscape to its appearance at a specific time and in its historic location.
“Rehabilitation” is consistent with the process used at Forest Park Beach and at Market Square. It is recommended because Forest Park is an historic property in need of structural repair as well as alterations and additions to accommodate contemporary use and address maintenance-costs.
Brief 36 of the National Park Service defines parameters for the four possible treatments of historic properties: “False historicism in every treatment should be avoided. This applies to individual features as well as the entire landscape. Examples of inappropriate work include the introduction of historic-looking benches that are actually new design, a fanciful gazebo placed in what was once an open meadow, executing an unrealized historic design, or designing a historic-looking landscape for a relocated historic structure within “restoration.”
The history of Forest Park documents it as a natural resource reserved for passive enjoyment from 1856 to the present day.
The landscape and gardening philosophies and plans of Almerin Hotchkiss and O. C. Simonds shaped Forest Park by conserving and enhancing the natural resources of its unique site between ravines on the bluffs of Lake Michigan.
Over the past 150+ years, Forest Park has changed from a landscape typical of 19th century Lake Michigan tableland to that landscape being cut through and cleared for timber and a road, planted or altered by an 1896-appointed Park Board authorized to “solicit funds, labor, and plants,” maintained and planted by City staff to meet City needs and requests from members of the community. Much of that history is undocumented. The remnant native landscape, the road, and the altered view sheds may be defined as its “features of historical or cultural value.”
The Hotchkiss Plan
The undeveloped native landscape of open woodlands, hardwood forest, and under-story species on the bluffs of Lake Michigan was designated as a place to conserve land for a park in the 1857 town plan by Almerin Hotchkiss. Hotchkiss planned Lake Forest as “a city in a park.” He used Lake Michigan, lake-front bluffs, ravines, and native woodland to define the layout of Lake Forest. The innovative plan set aside ten acres of tableland stretching between two ravines 3,200 feet parallel to the bluff and Lake Michigan as “Forest Park.” This created Lake Forest’s first conserved open space and the first North Shore public park north of Evanston.
The Simonds Plat
In 1896, the Lake Forest City Council commissioned O. C. Simonds to develop a plan for Forest Park. Simonds advocated that the best landscape design is inspired by nature, informed by local land-forms, and constructed using indigenous plant materials.
Simonds’ plat included:
• A 25-foot-wide Ring Road, from which the public could enjoy dramatic views of Lake Michigan while strolling or driving along the lakefront bluff. The Road included a turn-around on the bluff at its south end, a 600-foot shrub island dividing the Road into two lanes north of Spring Lane, and a triangular island of native-growth at the Spring Lane intersection.
• Elements of the Plat affirmed Simonds’ design and conservation philosophy:
o Placement of plant material to ensure visual engagement with a body of water, Lake Michigan.
o Retention of the significant native hardwood forest and ravines north and south.
o Open and limited views for visual engagement with the landscape.
o Minimal use of smaller plantings so that visual engagement is always drawn back to the dominant natural features.
o A west-to-east central walking path through the park, as well as a path down the bluff to the beach, both believed to follow existing footpaths.
The 1911 Survey
A May 13, 1911, “Plat of Re-Survey…” documents how Forest Park was actually built. This survey reveals that:
• The Ring Road was built 18.75 feet wide in the location specified by Simonds’ plat, and was paved with macadam.
• The south portion of the Ring Road along the bluff conformed to Simonds’ plat, ending in a turnaround on the south bluff and including a triangular island at the Spring Lane intersection. However, the shrub island shown dividing the Ring Road north of Spring Lane on the plat is eliminated, and the soft curve north is sharpened.
• No street lights existed in the Park. (The 1930 Street Lighting Report confirms recommendation for 15 lights to be installed in the Park.)
• Maple, cherry, and apple trees existed in the park woodlands, as documented by the surveyor’s notebook.
o There has been found no other documented inventory of specific plant material in specific locations within the Park until recent surveys undertaken by The City of Lake Forest. (Early 1900’s journals describe plants seen in the area, but are not specific as to location or relation to Simonds’ plat.)
o The following aerial photographs from the report of the Historic Preservation Advisory Committee contrast the condition of the Park in 1939 and 2007 with Simonds’ plat. As can be seen, considerable plant material shown on the Simonds’ plat was not in evidence in 1939 and there were significantly more views to the Lake than in the plat. By 2007, many of the 1939 views had been filled in by plantings in the intervening years.
Forest Park Today
Lake Michigan views are diminished by interruptions of recent plantings. The Ring Road, bluff, and plantings have deteriorated. Nevertheless, one is still drawn into the Park by the lake view.
The Master Plan’s Compatibility with Rehabilitation Standards
Forest Park today demonstrates deteriorated landscape, road, drainage, and infrastructure. The Master Plan considers these elements within the context of the Hotchkiss Plan, the Simonds plat, the design philosophies of both landscape architects/gardeners, and the 1939 aerial photographic evidence.
• The remnant native landscape, the road, and the remaining views are slated for restoration in the Master Plan, under rehabilitation standards, to include:
o Restoration of indigenous plant material that also will be low maintenance. Plant colonies are defined and reflect the layering patterns typical of Simonds’ plans.
o Restoration and rehabilitation of the road to repair deteriorated surface and solve drainage problems and bluff erosion.
o Restoration to open up obstructed views with reference to both the Simonds plat and the 1939 aerial photograph of existing conditions 30 years after the plat was drawn.
• The Park must meet contemporary and future needs to better accommodate pubic use, municipal budget constraints, pedestrian safety, accessibility, and ongoing maintenance. These are reasons why the Master Plan proposes, consistent with rehabilitations standards:
o Expansion of pedestrian walking paths beyond those suggested by Simonds.
o Accessible parking provisions on the road and in the parking lot and low-level path lighting.
o Seating, picnic, trash, bicycle, and other amenities designed to avoid “false historicism” through the use of stone and wood that relate to materials used at the beach level and historically throughout the community. These materials are low key to blend into the natural landscape, weather as natural resources, and achieve low maintenance costs for the City.
Specifically:
• The Ring Road follows the general outline of Simonds’ plat, with modifications to accommodate the required pedestrian path and draw the road back as appropriate to minimize impact on the bluff.
• Ring Road Parking allows for pull-over areas that can be adjusted to permanent accessible parking if determined needed by use.
• South Parking Lot and Redistribution of Parking Priorities During the Few Days of Peak Use will minimize Ring Road parking during peak use.
• Pedestrian Paths and Belvedere Landing provide the opportunity to separate pedestrians from traffic and centralize drop-off in an area treated with native stone to minimize wear and tear on the bluff edge.
• Amenities Designed Harmoniously for Natural Integration with the Site, and Scaled to the Acreage and Linear Dimension of the Site, to include:
• Benches, tables, bike racks, trash/recycling containers, drinking fountains designed to use stone and weatherized wood to blend with the landscape and minimize annual maintenance costs.
• Lighting designed to be consistent with the historic overhead lighting and minimize light spill into the neighborhood.
