HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2012/03/21 MinutesHPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 1
The City of Lake Forest
Historic Preservation Commission
Proceedings of the March 21, 2012 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on
Wednesday, March 21, 2012, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E.
Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois.
Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Chairman Kurt Pairitz, Commissioners Bill
Ransom, Fred Moyer, Susan Rafferty Athenson, Jim Preschlack, Mary Ellen Swenson
and Guy Berg.
Commissioners absent: None
City staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development
1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures –
Chairman Pairitz
Chairman Pairitz reviewed the meeting procedures and asked members of the
Commission and staff to introduce themselves.
2. Approval of the minutes of the February 22, 2012 meeting.
The minutes of the February 22, 2012 meeting were approved with one correction as
requested by Commissioner Athenson.
PETITION
3. Continued consideration of a Master Plan for Forest Park. Forest Park is located at
the top of the bluff, above the beach, on the east side of Lake Road, at the east end
of Deerpath. The Commission is not scheduled to take any action on this item at
this meeting. The Plan will be presented for Commission comment, questions and
direction. Public testimony is invited.
Owner: The City of Lake Forest
Representatives: Ralph Gesualdo, Forest Park Project Team
Stephen Stimson, Landscape Architect
Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte
contacts. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Gesualdo, 1418 Green Bay Road, 40 year resident of Lake Forest and Chairman of
the Forest Park Project Board stated that over the past 15 months, the Forest Park
Project Board has worked to research the history of Forest park and explore ways to
strengthen this unique landscape. He noted that various committees were formed
and each prepared preliminary findings and recommendations to help the Project
Board understand the history of the park and to understand established standards for
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 2
conservation, engineering, horticulture and the cultural legacy of the park. He stated
that the process was open and input was solicited from the public in many ways. He
acknowledged that not everyone agrees with the decisions made, but noted that all
have been heard. He stated that visioning sessions were held, public meetings hosted
and information and reports published on the Project Board’s website. He stated that
the public process helped shape the recommendations the Project Board made to
Mr. Stim son, the project architect and as a result, the solution presented is more a
“Lake Forest residents’ plan”, than a “Stimson plan”. He stated that as a result of the
public input, the plan has changed significantly since first presented to the
Commission over a year ago. He noted that over 50 volunteers were involved in the
various committees. He stated that the Project Board is eager to move forward and
has already started a fundraising effort. He stated that he and the other members of
the Project Board are proud of the process and the volunteers and look forward to
moving the park plan ahead. He introduced Stephen Stimson, landscape architect.
Mr. Stimson introduced the Forest Park Master Plan acknowledging that Forest Park is
nationally recognized as one of the earliest parks in the Country, and as a part of the
19th Century park movement. He acknowledged that the park is beloved by residents
and visited by many. He noted the many heritage trees, the table land and the views
to the Lake. He noted that the park’s formation dates from 1861 and Almerin
Hotchkiss’ vision for this unique parcel as a place from which to see the Lake and
connect with the surrounding ravines. He reviewed that in 1896, O.C. Simonds was
commissioned by the City and developed a plan with a meandering road much of
which remains today. He noted that Simonds plan likely identified vegetation that
existed on the site at the time the plan was developed. He noted that some of the
concepts shown on the plan were implemented, others were not. He stated that as a
culturally significant landscape, in the current planning process, great consideration
was given to all aspects of the park and to the history of the park. He reviewed an
overlay comparing Simonds’ 1911 plat of the park with what actually exists today
noting that the pavement of the Ring Road was expanded over time to
accommodate parking. He stated that the proposed Master Plan retains the road
with some slight adjustments noting that the road is pulled back from the bluff at the
north end where it is dangerously close to the edge and is expanded near the center
of the park to provide a pull off area for cars. He added that the right angle
intersection at the south end is softened to be more consistent with the curving road at
the north end and to recognize that the portion of the road extending south of the
intersection no longer exists. He stated that a graphic will be included in the Master
Plan showing the intended road and providing dimensions. He stated that the plan
recommends the addition of a pedestrian path system with 6 to 9 foot wide paths. He
described the north to south Bluff Walk noting that it will be curvilinear for consistency
with the naturalistic forms in the park. He noted that the existing east/west path does
not connect well with the stairway and belvedere explaining that it will be shifted to
the south to improve the connection. He stated that the exact alignment of the path
has not yet been determined noting that it may go between, or around, existing trees.
He stated that the east/west path is proposed as a 7 foot wide path. He noted that
east/west paths are also proposed along the roadway out to Lake Road. He
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 3
discussed the path proposed along the western edge of the park noting that all of the
paths together will provide a continuous trail system and the opportunity for a circular
route and will also get pedestrians off the road. He noted that public feedback led to
the proposed path system. He stated that all of the paths are proposed as a stabilized
granular surface with the landings at the top of the various stairways and ramps
surfaced with stones of irregular shapes to provide a naturalistic surface. He stated
that chip seal asphalt is proposed for the road and parking lot. He reviewed each
element of the proposed plan in more detail noting that each of the major
components is identified on the site plan provided to the Commission. He stated that
repairs are recommended for the stairway and belvedere, not replacement or re-
construction. He pointed out that the landing at the top of the stairway and
belvedere will be enlarged. He stated that the plan intends that the tree canopy in
the park will be restored and rehabilitated, opening up some of the spaces that were
originally more open but over time, became closed as a result of the planting of
memorial trees and growth of volunteer trees. He provided a detail of the bluff walk
and drop off landing at the top of the stairway. He noted that the road will be
narrowed from its existing width to 16’ to 24’ wide and will remain open to one way
traffic. He pointed out that at the center of the park, near the landing, the road will
widen to provide an adequate zone for moving cars to pass cars stopped to drop off
or pick up people. He noted that the 22 existing parking spaces will be removed from
the center of the park. He provided a photo of the existing center of the park and a
rendering of what it might look like after implementation of the plan. He noted that a
planting island is proposed between the road and bluff walk stating that it will not be
continuous. He stated the intention to bring the bluff landscape up on to the top of
the bluff. He noted that the bluff walk provides the opportunity for pedestrians to
enjoy the bluff, which is the exciting place to be in the park, without worrying about
traffic. He reviewed the area where the road will be widened near the center of the
park noting that a cross walk will be added to support the high activity in this area. He
stated that benches, bike racks, a drinking foundation and trash receptacles will be
located on the landing. He discussed tree plantings and removals commenting that it
is not the intention to open up the entire park. He stated that 102 trees are proposed
for planting and stated that about 30 trees are scheduled for removal or transplanting.
He stated that it will be important to look at a diversity of species and suggested that a
native planting palette is appropriate. He referred to a diagram illustrating areas of
five different plant communities on the table land in the park. He noted that currently,
there are some invasive species of trees in the park that compromise open spaces. He
stated that the plan proposes removal of these trees. He stated the intention to pull
the native bluff plantings up on to the planting median between the road and bluff
walk noting that the median will be planted with primarily low native shrubs and
flowering plants particularl y in areas where views are important. He stated that a
continuous hedge is not what is intended. He mentioned that there are 42
documented memorials in the park including trees, benches, planting areas and
drinking fountains noting that a database of memorials is being developed. He stated
that several memorials will need to me moved or upgraded and several declining
memorial trees will be removed. He stated that donors will be contacted before
removal of memorials. He suggested that the proliferation of memorials in the park
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 4
could be reduced by putting a life span on memorials and limiting them to a
designated area of the park. He reviewed the diagram showing the five plant
communities noting the intent to expand the northern oak upland woodlands at the
northern and southern ends framing the park. He noted that providing views of the
Lake was a critical consideration in developing the concepts in the plan to assure that
views are balanced with plantings. He noted that nine views over 3,000 feet are
proposed, each about 300 feet apart. He reviewed historic photographs with views of
the Lake from the Park noting diagonal views of the bluff itself. He noted that in some
of the photos the lake is framed vertically as well as horizontally, stating the intent to re-
create that concept through planting. He stated the intent to recreate some “peek”
views from Deerpath and Spring Lane. He stated that some the existing views from the
bluff are too open noting the intent to add vegetation to frame those views. He
stated that lighting is being considered comprehensively noting the variety of lights
that exist today in the park. He noted that the three streetlights on the walkway to the
south parking lot are proposed for replacement with low level lights in scale with the
pedestrian path. He stated that the low level lighting will also be used at the landings
of the stairways and ramps and at the access point from Deerpath. He stated that
rustic bollard lights are proposed, stone or bronze. He presented studies of potential
bollards. He noted that currently, there are various types of benches in the park. He
stated that a variety of styles of benches are proposed, all in keeping with a single
theme. He noted that there are currently 11 benches in the park and 18 are
proposed. He stated that stone and wood are proposed for the benches. He
discussed where stone benches would be appropriate set into the bluff noting that no
grade change would occur with the installation of the benches noting that the
benches would set into the landscape to provide a natural feel. He reviewed some
alternatives bench designs noting a lighter alternative with less use of stone. He
showed sketches of stone picnic tables noting that two are proposed at each end of
the park. He presented a concept of a monument that would recognize future donors
of the park noting that it may be appropriate at the south end of the park. He
reviewed sketches of other amenities: a bike rack, trash/recycling receptacles and
fountain noting that rustic stone, with a natural feel, is proposed for these elements.
He discussed changes proposed in the south parking lot to provide a bus drop off
area. He noted that about a third of the existing pavement will be removed with the
addition of a central bioswale to filter runoff from the parking lot. He concluded with a
slide of the overall concept plan.
Ms. Czerniak reviewed the process used to date to develop and review the proposed
Forest Park Master Plan. She stated that changes were made to the plan during the
process to balance the interests of various parties. She reviewed that Forest Park is
located in one of the City’s historic districts, in a National Register District and is a
cultural landscape. She stated that the park is under the purview of the Historic
Preservation Commission with respect to construction of alterations of structures in the
park. She added that the City Council requested the Commission’s review and
recommendation on the proposed Master Plan. She explained that the Master Plan is
intended to guide future decisions about the park and renovations and maintenance.
She stated that over time, incremental changes have been made to the park without
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 5
a guiding plan or consideration of the park as a whole. She commented that through
the process, many people have expressed how much they like the park as it is and an
interest in a “light touch” as it is rehabilitated. She recommended that the Commission
provide clear direction on the elements proposed in the plan and with respect to
expectations for the next meeting.
In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Ms. Czerniak explained that
the Master Plan is intended to guide future decisions about the park, but not intended
to present construction drawings. She noted however in this case some details are
provided about some elements going beyond the Master Plan. She stated for those
elements that are detailed, the Commission is asked to grant a Certi ficate of
Appropriateness.
In response to questions from Commissioner Ransom, Mr. Stimson reminded the
Commission that the original concept was to eliminate vehicles on the Ring Road. He
explained that the current plan preserves the Ring Road for vehicles but shifts it slightly
west to accommodate a walking path east of the road and to protect the bluff in one
particular area. He noted that the shift moves the road into the existing parking area.
He added that the road is widened to accommodate pull off areas. He explained
that a landscape buffer is provided between the walkway and the road for safety
reasons. He stated that the buffer will be 22 feet at the widest point and will be
planted with vegetation that is waist high and lower to allow views to the lake. He
confirmed that the views to the Lake will not be adversely impacted by moving the
road back 20 feet. He confirmed that at 16 feet, the Ring Road will feel like a one way
road but will allow room to pull around if a car breaks down. He noted that in the
summer, when parking is allowed on the reinforced turf adjacent to the road, it will get
slightly wider. He stated that the design for the road does not include any curbs or
painted lines. He stated that minimal signage is planned in the park and that
consideration will be given to size and materials. He confirmed that a signage plan
has not yet been developed and will be brought back at a later date.
In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Mr. Stimson confirmed that a
study was completed on the bluff and the road was deemed to not be a threat to the
stability of the bluff with the exception of a point near the north end. He explained
that the bluff walk will be laid on table land, after peeling off the sod and digging
down about 4 to 6 inches. He stated that the path will be a stable permeable
granular material. He stated that the grade will be considered carefully as
construction drawings are developed. He stated that the road is currently crowned
and as a result, some of the water is running off toward the Lake. He stated that the
flow of water can easily be shifted away from the bluff noting that planting the
median and constructing the path will further stabilize the bluff.
In response to questions from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Gesualdo noted that the original
plan removed all parking from the Ring Road. He pointed out that the existing parking
was left over from temporary parking put in at the time the beach was improved. He
stated that the road is being designed to allow cars to park along the road as
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 6
needed. He explained that a net loss of seven spaces results from eliminating the
existing parking spaces after other changes are made. He stated that the plan
provides the ability to park 70 cars along the road noting that when that is allowed will
be up to the City. He stated that feedback was received that the south parking lot
and the lower level parking lot are underutilized.
Commissioner Athenson noted confusion over the removal of the existing spaces to
improve views, but the provision for 70 cars to park along the Ring Road at times. She
questioned how parking will be controlled and its impact on views.
In response to questions from Commissioners Athenson and Preschlack, Mr. Gesualdo
explained that the intent is to encourage cars to park in the south parking lot, not on
the Ring Road. He stated that options were developed to provide parking spaces for
people with disabilities in the middle of the park. He stated that the north parking lot
originally proposed was eliminated and stated that in the south lot, the intent is not to
expand beyond the existing limits of the lot.
Chairman Pairitz observed that the north parking lot originally proposed was a
permanent parking lot and that this solution, to allow parking along the Ring Road at
peak times, is intended to allow parking only when authorized.
In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Stimson explained that a 50
foot vegetative buffer will be maintained between the west edge of the south parking
lot and Lake Road.
Commissioner Pairitz noted that breaking up the parking into two areas is an
appropriate response to meet the need for parking in this location.
In response to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Gesualdo stated that bus drop offs
and pick-ups are limited to the duration of summer camp and occur 10 to15 times per
day.
In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Mr. Gesualdo stated that ways
to retain the same number of parking spaces near the center of the park for people
with disabilities is being explored.
Commissioner Ransom stated support for retaining parking spaces near the center of
the park noting that the south parking lot is a long way from the center of the park for
some people.
In response to questions from Commissioner Ransom, Mr. Gesualdo confirmed that
there is not record of pedestrian/vehicle accidents in the park. He stated that the
addition of pedestrian paths was discussed with the Project Team volunteers and City
staff and it was determined that the park will be better utilized if paths are provided.
He noted that currently pedestrians use the parking lot and the road. He stated that
the first accident will be one too many. He stated that a path increase safety by
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 7
separating pedestrians and cars commenting that as more people use the park,
safety will increasingly become an issue.
Mr. Stimson added his observation that not having pedestrian paths in a public park
that is so revered seems strange. He noted that somebody in a wheelchair is only able
to use the road. He explained that if a path is designed correctly, 6 feet wide,
meandering and set into the grade, it will not be highly visible. He noted that as
people move through the world, paths are viewed in plan, not from a perspective at
eye level. He noted that the alignment of the paths is critical to assure that they feel
consistent with the naturalistic theme of the park. He added that paths can be fairly
benign visually and yet allow more people to enjoy the park in a safer way.
Commissioner Ransom pointed out that many streets in Lake Forest do not have
sidewalks.
Mr. Gesualdo pointed out that many parks in Lake Forest were originally designed
without paths noting that roadways and sidewalks were added later. He stated that in
this case, the plan proposes paths that fit with the natural character of the park in a
way that is less obtrusive then what was done in other parks.
In response to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Gesualdo confirmed that O.C.
Simonds’ plan presented a two lane road with landscaping in the center.
In response to questions from Commissioners Athenson and Ransom, Mr. Stimson
discussed the alignment of the east/west path and the triangular element noting the
intent to build upon the curvilinear theme. He noted that Simonds would not have
designed a road at the right angle and stated the intent to align the road and paths in
the spirit of the original Simonds’ plan. He discussed the proposed western path noting
the effort to balance the distance from the road without pushing too far into the lawn.
He added that enough of a buffer is provided to allow pedestrians to feel embedded
in the landscape and to provide shade in some areas.
Commissioner Swenson stated support for the uninterrupted lawn.
In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Mr. Stimson commented that
there is little hard evidence of what was intended by Simonds. He stated that he did
not approach every decision with the question “what would Simonds do?” He stated
that the rehabilitation standards were considered in the context of what is right for the
park and its contemporary use. He stated that the approach was to “nod” to history
while at the same time, looking at how experiences can be created that push the
park further while retaining its integrity. He stated that in his opinion, the human
experience in parks is compromised by the car however he acknowledged that in this
case, it is clear that the community values vehicle access in Forest Park. He stated
that as a result, a solution is proposed to retain vehicle access while creating a
pedestrian experience along the edge that capitalizes on the park. He stated that
studies of parks have shown that people like to meander and that it is a normal way to
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 8
move through parks. He stated that meandering paths are consistent with historic
parks designed by Olmstead, Manning and Simonds. He stated that a perfect curve is
a matter of judgment and art, and is not engineered. He suggested that in the final
design, the paths should be laid out on the site with paint, ribbons or flags to test them
and adjust them.
In response to questions from Commissioner Ransom, Mr. Stimson confirmed that the
existing streetlights are proposed to remain. He stated that if the roadway was
proposed for removal, he would recommend the tall fixtures also be removed. He
stated that low level lighting is important for safety at key access points and
connections in the park. He stated that lights would be considered in connection with
plantings. He discussed the proposed use of stone noting that alternatives will
continue to be considered. He discussed different types of park furniture noting that
wrought iron or steel have a more urban and contemporary feel. He commented that
stone and wood have a more organic look, appropriate for the edge of the Lake and
immersing in a landscape.
Commissioner Preschlack noted the importance of considering how the amenities
relate to the beach noting the relationship between the tableland and the beach.
Commissioner Berg commented that the stone as presented has a distinct
contemporary look. He stated that he understands the intent to incorporate organic
features in an Arts and Crafts way but noted as presented, they appear contrary to
the stated intent to not have the amenities look like they are “off the shelf”.
In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Stimson confirmed that
literature and old photographs were reviewed and a bench, in a Victorian style was
found. He acknowledged that the benches are a key area of concern and stated
that he is exploring alternative designs such as incorporating forms of the Victorian
bench, making the bench lighter, before giving up on the stone completely. He
explained that in order to avoid the off the shelve look, a weathered stone, rather
than a quarried stone must be used. He stated that the benches as proposed vary in
length and height and are proposed to be well integrated into the site.
Mr. Gesualdo pointed out that there are various types of benches in the park today
and the goal is to establish a consist theme for amenities through the Master Plan and
not leave it to chance.
In response to Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Stimson stated that the benches, if well designed
and crafted, will outlast the benches at the beach. He stated that the intent is to
carry the vision for the benches down to the beach in the future. He stated that the
stone offers a durable possibility requiring less maintenance.
Chairman Pairitz observed that the furniture on the beach was deemed compatible
with the surrounding structures when it was selected. He stated that the furniture in the
two locations does not have to be the same, but should be compatible.
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 9
In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson and Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Stimson
discussed the relationship between the proposed benches and the existing streetlights
noting that the streetlights are located to the west of the road while the seating would
be primarily to the east of the road. He acknowledged that perhaps placing them
close together should be avoided. He pointed out however that that the color of the
streetlight standards is close to the color of the natural stone.
Chairman Pairitiz commented that the focus on details of some of the elements may
be an indication that the Commission is getting comfortable with several points of the
plan. He noted that the discussion is focusing on the areas of concern.
In response to questions from Commissioners Preschlack and Athenson, Mr. Stimson
discussed the original planting themes reflected in Simonds’ plan noting the similarities
to the current plan. He stated that the northern end of the park was woodland, more
of the park than is wooded today. He noted that the iconic center lawn space
remains in the plan today. He explained that trees targeted for removal are in poor
condition or are non-native species. He stated that 100 plus trees will be planted to
reinforce the canopy.
In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Stimson discussed the views
to the Lake and how the landscaping relates to the views. He pointed out key view
shed and noted the alignment of open spaces with the views. He stated that
completely open views are not desirable, but rather, views framed by trees. He
pointed out that no views were indicated on the Simonds’ plan but noted that existing
views were considered in developing the present plan.
In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Stimson noted that there is
less car traffic in the park in the winter and therefore, plowing the paths may not be
necessary. He presented a sample of the proposed path surface noting that it is more
stable than granular material and added that it is slightly permeable. He confirmed
that the proposed path material could be plowed if desired. He offered another
option for the surface, a chip seal similar to what is proposed for the road.
In response to a question from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Gesualdo confirmed that it
is intended that the passive nature of the park remain.
In response to questions from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Gesualdo stated that reversing
the direction of the traffic in the park was considered noting the enhanced views
moving from north to south but noted that no change in direction is proposed in the
Master Plan.
Commissioner Berg commented that a sweeping entry is more appreciated by the
human mind. He stated that painters use right to left approach when designing a
painting and that this approach would be consistent with entering the park from the
north. He added that the moon rises in the south creating the potential for dramatic
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 10
views when entering from the north.
Mr. Stimson agreed that a north to south route along the Ring Road is more dynamic
and that the limited views when entering from Spring Lane is disappointing. However,
he stated about reversing the traffic on the road at this point noting that it could be
considered in the future. He noted that the current alignment responds to a natural
tendency for cars to pull right to drop people off. He acknowledged that the beauty
of the views seen traveling north to south cannot likely be created traveling south to
north.
Commissioner Moyer agreed that reversing the traffic is an interesting idea but agreed
with the natural inclination to drop off on the right side of the road.
In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Stimson confirmed that the
Master Plan speaks to repair of the belvedere. He noted that early on, options were
explored to widen the stairs or expand the layout but those were not included in the
plan. He agreed there is an opportunity to enhance the structure in the future.
In response to a comment from Commissioner Moyer, Mr. Stimson confirmed that since
the bluff walk was staked at the site, modifications were made to provide for a
minimum of a five foot buffer between the Ring Road and the walk.
Chairman Pairitz invited public testimony.
Basil Falcone, 930 Lake Road and a resident for 45 years, noted the City Council’s
acknowledgement two years ago that Forest Park is part of the East Lake Forest
Historic Preservation District. He stated that changes, renovations or enhancements to
an historic site must comply with preservation standards and ordinances. He stated
that the plan as presented by the Stimson Group conflicts with those ordinances and
standards. He urged Commission and others involved to assure compliance of the
plan. He reviewed the charge of the Commission. He noted that there appears to be
a consensus that the park needs care and improvement, but stated that
enhancements or changes should be kept to a minimum.
Sandy Ganun, 650 Northmoor Road, recommended that a comprehensive plan for
the park be developed including the ravines and the beach since all are interrelated.
He noted that the plan presented is a construction plan for the tableland only. He
stated that in his opinion, the modernist minimalist approach of Mr. Stimson’s design is
not consistent with O.C. Simonds’ concept. He noted that the Master Plan nearly
doubles the amount of hardscape in the park by adding pathways. He noted that
some of the paths are intrusive especially at the north end. He stated that today,
paths do not constrain where one walks and expressed concern that the park as
proposed will be more like a city park, rather than a naturalistic landscaped open
space. He stated that the proposed west path is intrusive into the open space. He
pointed out that the picnic area will be surrounded by pedestrian paths and stated
that the path along the bluff will be a visual scar. He expressed concern that the
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 11
edge of the bluff is getting too busy distracting from the simple view of the Lake. He
stated that the proposed seating and tables are inappropriate in both form and
material. He noted that the hard edged stone would never have been used by
Simonds and that the stone as proposed is disrespectful of the unique topography in
this area. He stated that stone wall seating is imposed on the site and questioned why
the steep slope regulations in the Code do not apply. He read excerpts from the City
Code. He stated that the proposed work will create liabilities and set precedent for
construction on other properties within the steep slope setback.
Virginia McTier, 975 Kirkland Lane, observed that everyone has worked together to
move the process forward over two years and complimented the progress to date.
Leone Falcone, 930 Lake Road, stated that she uses the park a lot. She offered that as
the population of Lake Forest ages many will be affected by the removal of the
central parking and forced to walk to enjoy the same view. She requested that the
central parking remain. She pointed out that some proposed pathways cut through
flowerbeds which may take years to restore. She noted that the proposed paths
interrupt the views and stated that the park will not feel the same if it is modernized.
She questioned the proposed tree removal and asked the Commission to assure that
there is a clearer Mas ter Plan before work is done in the park. She stated that she
would like to see the park cleaned up and nothing more.
John Drummond, 410 Woodland Road, a retired architect, commended the
Commission for the questions asked. He complimented the Garden Club, Mr. Stimson,
and Mr. Gesualdo for their passion for the Master Pl an. He agreed that the park needs
updating but believes the plan presented goes in the wrong direction. He pointed out
that 38 fewer parking spaces are proposed than exist today, a 60 % reduction which
may not be workable for the future taking into consideration the needs of the general
public, seniors or those with limitations. He discussed the walking paths stating that
2,200 linear feet of new paths are proposed covering an area of 16,000 square feet
with a semi-hard surface. He stated that today, the park is considered pastoral, a
romantic 19th Century park. He stated that proposed paths are not practical and that
the proposed surface will be difficult to manage and may eventually be covered with
asphalt. He noted potential difficulties with plowing the meandering paths. He stated
that as a result, there will be an increase in park maintenance costs. He stated that
with the addition of paths throughout the park, additional park furniture will be
needed at various locations; benches, signs and trash containers. He noted that the
bluff walk requires a slight relocation of the Ring Road in a manner not consistent with
the Simonds’ plan pointing out that few modifications have been made to the road in
100 years. He commented that the proposed plan is too busy, too contemporary, and
too corporate and asked that the park not be urbanized. He agreed that the Master
Plan should be comprehensive and address the entire park, including the beach. He
stated that the plan has not been fully vetted with the public.
Winnie Crawford, 676 Lake Road, stated that she lives directly across the road from
Forest Park. She stated respect for the time and dedication of all parties involved in
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 12
the project. She stated support for the plan noting that feedback has been
encouraged from the beginning of the project. She stated that she is impressed with
the process and noted that her questions and comments have been answered
appropriately, and in a timely way. She stated concern about the negative and
misleading information and encouraged people to call or make appointments with
appropriate parties to get accurate information. She stated concerns about safety in
the park stating that some of the conditions are dangerous and she has contacted
the Police Department on occasion. She noted that cars drive fast and that she came
close to being hit and as a result, is cautious walking in the park now.
Neva Ganun, 650 Northmoor, noted that on the peak usage days, both the beach
and the park are busy negating the ability to use one or the other for overflow parking
without impacting the users. She questioned the opening of three concentric circles
on the lawn noting that O.C. Simonds would not have used that approach. She
questioned why donors would install memorials if they have a life span knowing that
their loved ones are going to die twice, once in real life and once again in the park.
She stated that memorials should not be moved to one single area noting that the
park is not a memorial, but a park. She stated that one of the charming
characteristics of the Forest Park is that memorial plaques and trees are specific to
individuals and a one size fits all approach is not used. She stated that O.C. Simonds
was a sophisticated, but humble man, not rustic or “rusticated”, she added that
neither are Lake Forest residents. She shared several excerpts from the University of
Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment publications regarding O.C.
Simonds’ works. She noted that Simonds used thickets of native shrubs and trees with
gently sculpted land forms and water at Graceland Cemetery to make a quiet, restful
image of Midwestern landscape. She commented that Simonds became so famous
for his naturalistic designs that Chicago’s wealthiest families demanded his services to
design the grounds of their estates including some in Lake Forest. She noted
information provided to the Commission on landscape architects who designed
projects in Lake Forest. She stated that Simonds and Jensen are often grouped
together as both being prairie style landscape architects but noted that Simonds
preferred to be considered a landscape artist. She emphasized that the two are
different noting that Jensen’s work is about rocks and grasses while Simonds’ work is
about water, trees, shrubs and vistas. She stated that Simonds did not limb up trees,
but Jensen did as now proposed for Forest Park by Mr. Stimson. She stated that Mr.
Stimson’s plan will destroy a rare example of Simonds’ landscape artistry, Forest Park,
and one of rarest ecosystems in the world. She stated that the bluffs in this area of
Lake Michigan do not have rock outcroppings. She noted that Mr. Stimson proposes
placing layered limestone on a bluff and on the table land noting that is Jens Jensen’s
signature. She stated that Simonds’ jewel, Forest Park, has many facets noting that
changing one facet alters the entire jewel. She agreed that Forest Park needs to be
cleaned up and polished but agreed that it does not need to be reset to become
something else. She stated that the plan presented is a framework for destruction of a
park that has worked for over 100 years. She stated that residents will not benefit from
the proposed changes. She stated that history will judge the City of Lake Forest poorly
if this plan is accepted and an O.C. Simonds’ plan is destroyed.
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 13
Jan Gibson, 59 E. Franklin Place, questioned whether the road should be moved since
it was part of Simonds’ original design. She stated that as a resident and tax payer she
does not want to pay for moving the road. She stated she understands that moving
the road will involve moving the infrastructure beneath it at tax payers’ expense. She
stated that in her opinion, the proposed amenities are too modern in terms of design.
She stated that the stone does not belong on the southern shore of Lake Michigan, but
somewhere like Maine where there is a rocky coast. She agreed that the road needs
to be repaired due to neglect, but should be left where it is. She stated that benches
should be in the same “language” as those at the beach referring to a “living room-
family room” metaphor previously used by the Commission. She stated that the
Victorian bench design shown earlier is more in keeping with the site acknowledging
that maybe it is not the best design, but that it is better than what is proposed. She
recommended taking out the ugly concrete pads under the existing benches noting
that they have an institutional appearance. She stated that parking is needed at the
center of the park and should be screened so it is not visible from Lake Road.
Tom Swarthout, 978 Maplewood Road, acknowledged the time spent by both those in
support of and in opposition to the Master Plan. He stated admiration for the
committee working to make an ordinary park, great.
Rommy Lopat, 410 E. Woodland Road, stated that in reviewing the concept plan the
City needs to follow its own ordinances and guidelines. She noted that he staff report
states that the Commission is charged with balancing various interests but questioned
whether that is correct. She stated that her understanding is that the Commission is
charged with upholding the ordinances, not solving people’s problems. She stated
that the Master Plan must conform to the ordinances which among other things do not
allow alteration of distinguishing characteristics of historic sites and require
preservation of natural resources. She added that the ordinances require the
Commission to review land altering activities such as scraping, leveling and
compacting soil. She stated that will be hard to accomplish without any
accompanying text. She stated that a more detailed plan is needed. She stated that
the Master Plan must also comply with Cultural Landscape Guidelines for National
Register Properties including avoiding new elements until a thorough evaluation of
alternatives is completed. She stated that in this case, the public has not seen any
alternative solutions. She stated that the guidelines ask that the solution with the least
degree of intervention be used and noted that choices between preservation,
reconstruction, renovation and rehabilitation should all be considered. She stated that
words like “respecting historic character” are not a recognized preservation
treatment. She stated that the Master Plan should conform to City’s Tree Ordinance
and the City’s guidelines for preserving ravines and bluffs. She stated that the plan
should conform to guidelines for residential development and to the City’s own
website which supports the preservation of natural and historic landscapes. She
stated that this plan should conform to the 2012 National Register of Historic Places
which describes Forest Park as one of Simonds’ unique works. She stated that she was
a member of the Forest Park Project Board’s historic preservation subcommittee which
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 14
recommended maintaining and enhancing the existing park. She stated that the
committee recommended that the Master Plan comply with Simonds’ gardening
philosophy. She stated that among other things, the committee recommended that
seating that alters the existing appearance of the park be discouraged. She stated
that the committee left open the issue of paths waiting to see what was proposed
before weighing in on that topic. She stated that the subcommittee was never shown
the plan that is now presented and never asked for an opinion. She stated that the
landscape committee suggested that the landscape design of the park not be
subject to Simonds’ design philosophy because there is no mention, permission or
payment recorded in the City’s files in regard to any plantings in the park. She stated
that she was the volunteer doing the research in City’s records and confirmed that the
landscape committee is correct on that point. She stated that all receipts from 1896
to 1926 are missing in the City’s files. She stated however that she found an article
from 1906 which states that a beautiful park was being installed on the North Shore.
She stated that the article proves that plantings in Forest Park were done by Simonds
who was working at the Cemetery at the same time. She asked the Commission for a
discussion of the design philosophy and the differences between Simonds and
Stimson. She referred to a picture that Mr. Stimson drew in 2009 that showed view
sheds in the park noting that at that time, two and a half view sheds were shown. She
noted that in the present plan, nine view sheds are presented. She asked for an
explanation of the reasoning behind the nine view sheds now presented and the
relationship with Simonds’ design.
Prue Biedler, 20 S. Stonegate, resident for 36 ½ years, noted that her son’s children are
the fifth generation of her family to live in Lake Forest. She stated that all generations
have lived within walking distance to Forest Park and view it as a neighborhood park.
She stated that as a grandparent, Forest Park is the one place in Lake Forest that
explains what the City is about, the forest and the Lake. She stated that she does not
feel safe in the park riding a bike, pushing a stroller or walking because she too was
almost killed in the park by a car driving along the Ring Road. She stated that she did
not report the incident to the police, but does not feel at ease now when visiting the
park. She stated that if the park is to be enjoyed passively, it needs to be made as
safe as possible. She agreed that the park needs some infrastructure improvements.
She stated that she is the Lake Forest Garden Club liaison for this project and believes
that this project has parallels to the Market Square project in 2006 noting that she was
the president of the Market Square project. She stated that the City has a long and
successful history of public-private partnerships. She noted that the process provides
for public engagement, taking some risks and recognizing that even historic spaces
change over time.
Michael Ebner, 666 Greenview Place, a 37 year resident stated that he had the honor
of being the first Chairman of the Historic Preservation Commission after it was created
in the late 1990’s. He recognized the Commission’s diligence and patience through
this process. He stated that he was involved in the Forest Park project as the chairman
of the Historic Preservation Advisory Committee which was established in September,
2010. He acknowledged that the process can be contentious but most often leads to
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 15
productive outcomes with give and take on all sides. He noted that the City has a
history of public involvement noting that this project is so significant that it merits this
protracted debate. He noted that this community is not fearful of public debate. He
acknowledged that Mr. Gesualdo has encouraged differing opinions about the
project. He stated that he learned a great deal himself as a result of the public
comments throughout the process. He stated that this project is a wonderful
opportunity for the City and that the deliberative process of planning will continue to
reach the right solution.
Resident, 540 N. Mayflower Road, commented that she lives in a house designed by
Frost and Granger for a former Lake Forest Mayor. She agreed that traffic on the Ring
Road travels too fast. She suggested installing speed bumps on the Ring Road noting
that even City trucks speed through the park. She stated that she walks her dog in
Forest Park every morning and watches the sunrise. She stated that existing trees in the
park prevent the rising sun from blinding drivers traveling east on Deerpath early in the
morning. She stated that the park is simple, uncluttered and a wonderful setting for
Lake Michigan, especially at sunrise.
Alice Goltra, resident of Onwentsia Road and member of the Garden Club stated
confidence that the end result will be good. She noted that City staff needs the
guidance of a Master Plan so things do not happen in an unplanned way. She stated
that rules are needed such as what types of trees should be planted and noted that
desired features in the park need to be documented.
Peter Cherry, 449 E. Illinois Road, stated that he is treasurer of the Forest Park Project
Board and that his wife is past president of the Garden Club. He noted that four years
ago discussions began about the need for attention to Forest Park and noted that
improvement is even more sorely needed now. He noted similarities in the process for
improvement of Market Square fifteen years ago and the planning process for Forest
Park. He stated that the park needs to be renovated while keeping in mind the
historic character. He urged that although he does not agree with all the aspects of
the proposed plan, the process should move forward.
Hearing no further public testimony, Chairman Pairitz invited further questions from the
Commission.
In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that all
requirements of the Code will be considered as construction plans are developed and
reviewed for the various aspects of the Master Plan. She stated that the Master Plan is
not a set of detailed plans, but a framework on which to base future reviews of
detailed plans. She stated that the Code provides for Commission review and action
on permanently affixed structures such as benches and lights through a Certificate of
Appropriateness process but noted that in addition, the City Council directed the
Commission review and provide a recommendation on the full Master Plan. She
stated that the Master Plan is intended to set the framework for what should be
preserved, what should be rehabilitated and whether new elements should be
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 16
introduced and if so, within what parameters. She noted that the Commission
balances various interests in reviewing all petitions and through that process manages
change in the community. She noted that if buildings and landscapes in the City were
intended to remain unchanged, there would be no need for the Commission. She
commented on the steep slope setback regulations in the Code noting that the
required review process for construction with the setback area. She summarized that
the Commission’s role is to make recommendations to the City Council regarding the
Master Plan to help set the stage for how the park will be treated in the future.
Chairman Pairitz invited rebuttal to public comment from the petitioner.
Mr. Gesualdo responded that despite some difference of opinion, the process has
been positive. He stated that the committee has tried to be transparent throughout
the process, has appeared before City Boards and Commissions and established a
website. He noted that the current version of the Master Plan has been on the website
since last Friday. He stated as changes to the plan occur, the website will be
updated. He stated that feedback has been encouraged throughout the process.
He discussed parking in the center of the park noting that the original O.C. Simonds
plan did provide for parking. He pointed out that the parking was installed as
temporary parking during construction of the beach and was never removed. He
discussed the south parking lot noting that it will be reconfigured with 42 spaces and
an area for a bus drop off. He stated that there is flexibility to open up additional
spaces for cars when busses are not running. He added that there is consensus that
the parking lot down on the south beach is underutilized and stated that on peak
usage days, plans will be developed to allow greater use of that lot. He added that
the design of the Ring Road will allow parking for up to 70 cars if necessary to meet
demand. He stated that the details of the parking plan will be resolved by the next
meeting. He stated that the parking plan will provide parking spaces for people with
disabilities. He responded to comments about the cost of infrastructure improvements
noting that existing infrastructure in the park needs improvement. He stated that it
makes no sense to undertake repairs without having a Master Plan for the park in
place. He stated that the project will involve cost sharing with the City with the City
contributing money to improve the existing infrastructure which is needed with or
without other improvements. He stated that the new elements proposed for the park
such as benches, trees and redevelopment of the south parking lot, will be funded by
private dollars. He stated that the Forest Park Project Board is an approved for 501 C 3
organization. He stated that aggressive fund raising efforts are planned to support
improvements in the park. He commented that public/private partnerships and
funding through not for profit organizations are likely to be the mechanism for funding
park improvements in the future. He invited further rebuttal comments from Cliff Miller.
Cliff Miller, 1070 Meadow Lane, Chairman of the landscape and horticultural
subcommittee of the Forest Park Project Board and a member of the Lake Forest
Garden Club, stated that the mission of the Board is to be responsible for improvement
of the passive aspects of the park. He stated that the active areas of the park, such as
the beach, have management plans supported by the City’s Park and Recreation
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 17
Department. He stated that in the future, maintenance plans for the various aspects
of the park should be meshed together to include the ravines, the table land and the
bottom of the slope.
Mr. Gesualdo acknowledged the suggestions to include all areas of Forest Park in the
current plan including the ravines and slope of the bluff. He stated however that the
costs associated with improvement of those areas will be substantial. He stated that
plans for improvement of the bluff and other areas will be developed in the future,
possibly under the direction of another architect, designer or group. He stated that
there needs to be a starting point for the fund raising that will be necessary to
renovate the park.
In response to public testimony, Mr. Stimson stated that the plan is not a “Stimson plan”
but a Lake Forest plan noting that there was a great deal of community input
throughout the process. He stated that the original O.C. Simonds road was 18 feet
wide and over time, was increased to about 24 feet as it exists today. He noted that
the present plan reduces the width of the road closer to the original plan. He stated
that the additional walking paths proposed will all be permeable. He stated that
overall; a significant amount of hard surface will be removed from the park although
permeable paths will be added. He stated that the Master Plan no longer proposes
removal of the Hawthorn trees. He stated that non-native trees such as crab apples
will be removed and replaced with more hawthorns. He reiterated that he is aware of
the historic preservation and landscape guidelines and stated the intention to comply
with those guidelines.
Chairman Pairitz brought the discussion back to the Commission for general
comments.
Commissioner Preschlack stated that that Historic Preservation Commission needs to
provide input regarding the level of detail that should be included in the Master Plan.
He stated that there appears to be general acceptance of the overall concept for
the park, but noted that the success of the project will be determined by the details.
He suggested that the Master Plan include a table of contents listing the various
features and establishing guiding principles for each that can be reviewed for
consistency with the charge of Historic Preservation Commission.
Chairman Pairitz suggested that to assist Mr. Gesualdo and the project team,
members comment on each element of the Master Plan and give their impression of
the Master Plan as a whole. He stated that he is very conscious of the charge of
Commission and is not troubled that the technical issues such as drainage and the
stability of the bluff will be left to others. He noted that he is pleased to see that the
current Master Plan retains the Ring Road. He commented that the proposed addition
of a path along the west side of the park, a path that is not a sidewalk, may allow the
character of the overall park to be preserved. He observed that in his opinion, the
proposed pathway along the Ring Road is a historic anomaly and will present a
marked change to the overall concept of the park. He stated that the Ring Road walk
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 18
as presented is not consistent with the historic character of the park. He stated that
park furniture, lighting, signage represent the next level of detail and commented that
some of the public comments about these items are right on target in terms of raising
questions about how these features of the park work, or do not work together with the
elements of the beach or other historic locations in the community such as Market
Square. He stated that he would like to see some more work done on the design of
furnishings to achieve the right solution. He acknowledged the effort and time put into
this process to date noting that it shows that many care about the park and see it as
an important part of the community.
Commissioner Athenson stated appreciated for the categorization of the various
elements in the staff report. She stated that in reviewing any petition, there are historic
issues, but also modern day issues, and in this case, safety issues, which cannot be
ignored. She acknowledged that the addition of a Ring Road walk might be a
change to the historic character but stated that the safety issue, which keeps coming
up, cannot be ignored. She suggested that the architect work to more fully
understand what O.C. Simonds would have done in this situation. She stated support
for using the outline in the staff report as guideline for the Commission’s discussion in
order to stay focused on the each element.
Commissioner Berg acknowledged that the Ring Road is in need of resurfacing and
stated support for the idea of introducing some meandering and narrowing of the
pavement. He stated an understanding of why the Ring Road needs to be moved
away from the edge of the bluff and noted that the shift is not a concern. He stated
support for adding a “sweep” to the south corner to mimic the north end. He stated
support for the idea of designating and then protecting view corridors. He stated
concern about removing the parking spaces at the center of the park noting that
park users will lose a facility that is well used today. He observed that just because
something was not part of the original plan does not mean that it is not valued
particularly in the case of the parking which was put in 25 years ago and is relied on
by residents. He stated that he is uncertain of whether promoting parallel parking
along the Ring Road in lieu of the pull in spaces is a good idea because with parallel
parking, the entire length of each car will be visible from across the park. He stated
support for establishing a tree planting plan to guide future decisions. He agreed with
Chairman Pairitz that the park amenities need further work and stated support for
consideration being given to relationships between the park amenities, those at the
beach and those at Market Square. He stated that the benches on the beach and
those at Market Square are based on designs from Central Park. He stated that
introducing some pathways into the park is a nice idea but stated concern about how
it is done and the details of how paths are implemented.
In response to a question from Commissioner Preschlack, Chairman Pairitz confirmed
that the discussion of whether the changes to Forest Park should be a “polish versus a
reset” is within the purview of Commission. He stated that the Commission’s role is to
understand the changes proposed and then to weigh in on whether the changes are
appropriate.
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 19
Commissioner Preschlack stated that a key question for the Commission is whether the
plan is a reset or a polish noting that this concept is relative to the work of the
Commission. He commented on the proposed western pathway questioning whether
it would be used.
Commissioner Swenson sta ted concern that the Master Plan appears to call for a
corporate office park feel for Forest Park in the future rather than a clean and simple
design consistent with the original plan and without too many new elements.
Chairman Pairitz commented on the proposed pathways noting that there is a
pedestrian space at the beach and noting that there is not a parallel road the length
of the walkway. He stated that today, people walk on Lake Road on the west side of
the park which provides another way to experience the park and the adjacent
neighborhood.
Commissioner Athenson stated that she reluctant to see a pathway added on the
west side of the park but also recognized the safety concerns raised. She stated that
she is uncertain whether it would be more in keeping with the park to move the
pathway as far to the west as possible, to avoid disrupting the middle of the park and
preserve the historic view, or try to minimize its appearance by locating is away from
Lake Road.
Chairman Pairitz stated his opinion that the closer you push the pathway to Lake
Road, the more it is in your face interrupting views of the park. He noted that
alternatively, as the pathway is pushed into the park, without disturbing the open lawn
areas, it may become more a part of the lawn and be less visible.
Commissioner Swenson questioned whether the two pedestrian paths are needed.
Commissioner Ransom stated that the proposed paths are not historically part of the
park but acknowledged the safety concerns. He stated his opinion that the paths as
laid out do not address safety issues as described. He questioned whether the
purpose of the western path is to avoid people walking across the grass. He noted
that as laid out, the western pathway cuts through the picnic area.
Chairman Pairitz stated that in his 20 plus years in Lake Forest, he has not walked
through the grass, nor seem many others do so. He stated the pathways often
respond to an expressed need rather than be laid out to direct a route to walk on. He
stated however that to add an appropriately designed pathway through the park
would not be inconsistent with the historic character of the park.
Commissioner Swenson stated that she is concerned about the proposed landscape
buffer between the Ring Road and the bluff. She stated that the Ring Road is
historically the dominant element and commented that the landscape buffer will blur
that dominance.
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 20
Commissioner Ransom stated that the proposed 3,000 foot pathway element will have
a visual impact on the park.
Commissioner Pairitz suggested that if a path is desired, a modest path, without a
landscape buffer or benches along it, may be most appropriate since either would
call attention to the path rather than allow it to be more unobtrusive to the character
of the park. He stated that adding the path in a minimalistic way could be the better
approach. He stated that the proposed landscape buffer would be a purposeful new
feature in the park. He summarized that the Commission appears to support
continuation of the passive nature of the park. He stated that the belvedere presents
an opportunity for the future and detailed plans for any proposed changes to that
feature would require review at a later date.
Commissioner Swenson asked for clarification on the intended us of the enlarged drop
off area at the top of the belvedere stairs.
Commissioner Preschlack agreed that the belvedere presents an opportunity to
integrate the tableland park and the beach. He suggested that an outline of ideas for
future uses and changes to the belvedere could be helpful.
Chairman Pairitz commented that the top of the belvedere is a destination right now
and as proposed with bike racks and various activities taking place there. He stated
that the areas of open lawn and the concept of different “rooms” is presented well in
the plan.
Commissioner Athenson encouraged the architect to consider how O.C. Simonds
designed the lawn areas noting that the large lawn areas are one of the distinctive
features of the park. She noted that those areas provided for open vistas across the
park from Lake Road. She stated that instead of redesigning the park, consideration
should be given to O.C. Simonds’ design and how to enhance what exists.
Chairman Pairitz noted that original O.C. Simonds’ plan was for an area one-third
larger than the park as it exists today. He stated that the rhythm of the open areas as
proposed seems appropriate.
Commissioner Athenson reiterated that the framework for the Master Plan should be
the original O.C. Simonds’ plan.
Chairman Pairitz commented that overall, the Master Plan appears to follow the spirit
of the O.C. Simonds’ plan. He noted that the original view corridors in the Simonds’
plan disappeared over time as the vegetation grew.
Commissioner Ransom stated that although the Master Plan is not a carbon copy of
Simonds’ plan, the overall design appears to be in the spirit of the original plan.
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 21
Chairman Pairitz acknowledged the earlier comment from Mr. Stimson that it is hard to
reflect the specific location of the pathways on the plan and noted that they would
need to be laid out at the site to determine the exact locations. He stated that in his
opinion, the general concepts in the Master Plan are consistent with the historic
character of the park.
Commissioner Moyer noted that the view corridors as proposed are perpendicular to
Lake Road evoking thoughts of Fort Sheridan because they are in a military fashion.
He questioned whether there could be a benefit to varying the alignment of the
corridors. He observed that the difference in elevation between the Lake and the
park might affect the views.
Commissioner Berg asked for an explanation of the rationale for the location of the
proposed view sheds. He stated support for the open lawn areas in general.
Chairman Pairitz stated that he has not heard many concerns about the tree species
proposed but noted that comments were made suggesting that more detail is
needed on the tree planting plan.
Commissioner Athenson stated that she is not clear on the tree planting that is
proposed and whether the trees proposed for removal will be replaced. She
suggested that healthy trees not be removed and suggested that they should be
avoided when establishing the view sheds.
Chairman Pairitz stated that it appears that the intent of the tree plan is to remove
non-native and unhealthy trees. He noted that the largest tree proposed for removal is
an oak by the bluff to allow the Ring Road to be shifted away from the bluff.
In response to Commissioner Athenson’s comments Chairman Pairitz agree that it
would be helpful to have a written component of the plan as suggested earlier by
Commissioner Preschlack that establishes intent and the basis for the intent.
Commissioner Preschlack suggested that a simple ten bullet point statement is needed
as a guide for each subarea of the plan to clarify the intent for those preparing plans
and later implementing the plan.
Chairman Pairitz discussed signage, lighting and memorials noting that in his opinion,
these items can be dealt with at the next level, once details are developed. He
stated that it is important that the Master Plan have guiding principles, but not
detailed designs of the furniture, signage and other amenities.
Commissioner Ransom suggested however that it would be helpful for the Commission
to give the petitioner some direction on these items.
Commissioner Preschlack commented on the proposed benches noting that there
seems to be a consensus that stone is over used. He suggested looking at organic
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 22
forms and materials found in the surrounding area. He suggested that the Master Plan
could provide some direction for these elements, but not proposed an exact design.
Chairman Pairitz stated that the benches as currently presented are out of character
with the park.
Commissioner Moyer stated that the final design for the benches may take some time
and noted that the plan should not be criticized solely based on that element. He
commented that stone benches in some form, may be able to be done successfully.
Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for final comments on the issue of the
pathways.
Commissioner Preschlack stated support for the path adjacent to the Ring Road as a
minimalist, non-corporate style pathway. He stated that he does not see a strong
case for the western path.
Commissioner Ransom stated that he agrees with some aspects of the western path
for safety reasons but stated that as currently proposed, it appears to be overdone.
He stated however that the safety issue may be overstated since many areas of Lake
Forest do not have sidewalks.
Commissioner Athenson stated that the safety issue is compelling for the western path
stating that the need for a pathway in that area should be addressed in a
sympathetic way.
Commissioner Moyer stated agreement with the comments of the other
Commissioners with respect to the pathway along the Ring Road and agreed that the
safety issue supports the western path.
Commissioner Athenson stated that many pathways are proposed noting that they
may not all be necessary noting the path that extends all the way out to the north
point.
Commissioner Berg stated that he is concerned about the relationship between the
Ring Road and pedestrians. He noted that lessons should be taken from the narrow
green space at Market Square along the sidewalks and how often people use that
area as a “cut through” harming the vegetation. He stated that how the pathway
along the bluff is handled will be critical to the success of the proposed changes to
the park. He noted that the nature of the vegetation in the strip will be important in
determining whether
Commissioner Athenson stated that from a functional perspective, the central parking
area is necessary.
Chairman Pairitz offered a concept where the path transitions to east side of the park
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 23
at the north end to avoid the path fighting the Ring Road the entire length of the park.
He suggested that a pathway providing a route for pedestrians from the northwest
corner of the park to the southeast corner of the park could be provided. He stated
that such an approach may balance the desire for a safe pedestrian path with the
preservation of the historic character of the park.
Commissioner Berg made a motion to extend the meeting beyond then mandatory
adjournment time, to 11:15 p.m.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Moyer and it was unanimously approved
by the Commission.
Commissioner Swenson observed that the purpose of the bluff walk appears to be to
allow pedestrians to have a view of the water. She stated that assuring that the
vegetation barrier between the pathway and the road is visually and functionally
appropriate is important. She stated that the Ring Road may need to be moved
further to the west to allow the barrier strip to be properly sized.
Chairman Pairitz noted that the Commission has offered various comments and
observations and asked the petitioner if there are other areas on which input is desired
at this time.
Cliff Miller commented that there has been a great deal of discussion and different
ideas offered. He stated however that the ideas lacked clarification and expressed
concern that no consensus was reached.
Chairman Pairitz acknowledged that the Commissioners offered many ideas noting
that the intent was not for the Commission to design the various elements on the floor,
but only offer input from the Commission’s perspective and based on the
Commissioner’s role. He stated that the Commission is having difficulty supporting
some of the concepts, particularly the new elements being introduced into the park.
He noted that today, there is a wonderful path from the south parking lot which
connects with the Ring Road. He commented that as presented, in general, the
extension of the path would not necessarily be out of character with the park or with
O.C. Simonds’ design. He stated however, that there is a difference of opinion on
whether the proposed pathway should be extended to the north and on whether that
extension would be consistent with the historic context of the park and Simonds’
design. He stated that as a new element, from the historic perspective, at the least,
the pathway would need to be executed in a subtle manner to preserve the
character of the park. He added that there is a difference of opinion on the
Commission on whether or not the present proposal is subtle enough. He stated that
the Commission would like to get behind the plan and recognizes that there is an
interesting design concept presented that if done correctly, could be positive.
Mr. Gesualdo summarized that the Commission appears to view the changes to the
Ring Road positively. He stated that there appears to be some consensus around the
HPC Minutes – March 21, 2012 Page 24
concept of additional paths, but interest in seeing more work on the detailing and
configurations of those paths. He stated that he heard support for retaining some
parking, which is not parallel, in the center of the park. He stated that he heard some
questions about the benches, other park furnishings and lighting as presented noting
that some of those elements might be resolved and presented to the Commission at a
later date, after the Master Plan is approved. He stated that he heard support for the
drop off area noting that some further study of the elements included in that area and
the materials is needed. He thanked the Commission and public for the input
received.
OTHER ITEMS
4. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non-
agenda items.
There were no public comments on non-agenda items.
5. Additional information from staff.
There was no additional information presented by staff.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Catherine J. Czerniak
Director of Community Development