Protected Parkland?
December 3rd, 2006
“Thus, as it currently stands, the village could change the use of Harrington Park…” This is found because, “the land for Harrington Park was acquired free of any use limitations and the village has not manifested any intent that the land be limited to its current use.” You will find both statements on page ten of this July 18, 2003 memo entitled “Legal Status of Parkland in The Village of Riverside.”
I am unsure why this is of concern to the website directed toward the TIF district. There is an implication in the above statement that Harrington Park grounds are somehow linked to the TIF district. They are not. Harrington Park is not located in the TIF district and no TIF funds could be used to benefit this property.
The Parks and Recreation Board nor the Village Board have any plans (check Village’s 5 year capital plan and the Rec Dept. strategic plan on file w/i the department) to confirm.
Kathleen Rush, Village Manager, 708-447-9987
Perhaps this was directed to the TIF website because there is fear of a land grab on the green spaces, the inclusion of Swan Park in the TIF, and the fact that this lawyer’s memo was distributed at the TIF meeting (if I am not mistaken.)
The legal memo I read takes no consideration of the fact that Riverside’s National Historic Landmark designation consists only of its Landscape Architecture (as well as a couple of houses, and is overly concerned with the letter of the law than the spirit of the design of Riverside.
I want to know how Swan Park/Pond comes to designated vacant and blighted when it is perhaps the most important part of the Historical Landscape Architecture District, and what designs are had on it.
Ms. Love,
The Landscape Advisory Commission asked a few relevant questions; similar to your concerns which are addressed below. Also, the application that is on file with the NPS references the streets, the gas light system, the park land and the multitude of opens spaces. As you can see from the responses below, the improvements that can be accomplished in Swan Pond include the repair of the steps, the repair of the WPA wall, improvements on the drainage system. It is vacant (no buildings) and it is considered blighted under the definition of the state statute as it regularly floods (the qualifying standard). No where in the TIF documents is Harrington Park considered - it is not within the boundaries.
I encourage you to attend the community discussions that will be continuing attendant to how you would resolve and fund improvements in the Central Business District, and Swan Pond.
RESPONSE TO LANDSCAPE ADVISORY COMMISSION – TIF
Why are the parks included in the TIF?
The park areas were included in the TIF so that improvements can be made using TIF funds. The Village has not included the WPA wall repair, the swan pond drainage or step repair on our capital improvement program as there are no dollars available to do so. If there is TIF increment available, the Village Board has the opportunity to consider these improvements.
What are the intentions for park improvements since they are included in the TIF?
See above listing.
Will there be a formal assurance from the Village stating that development will not take place in park areas?
There is already a letter on file from the Village Attorney which resulted from a Task Force assigned to explore the restrictions on Park Land; the restrictions are significant. Chairperson Kunka was on this Task Force. This is available on the website. There is also the Preservation section of the Village Code which also protects park land.
10-2-7: RIVERSIDE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL DISTRICT:
The board, pursuant to resolution adopted March 20, 1972, has accepted the national historic landmark designation of the Riverside landscape architectural district and shall preserve, so far as practicable, and to the best of its ability, the historical integrity of this landmark through continued use of the public property therein for purposes and in a manner consistent with its historical character, and through the application, control, conduct and carrying out of all preservation activities, programs and grants involving, affecting or otherwise pertaining to the public property in this District and in the Village as a whole.
The district is legally described in the National Register of Historic Places as an area bounded on the north by 26th Street, on the east by Harlem Avenue, on the south by Ogden Avenue and the south bank of the Des Plaines River, and on the west by Forbes Road. The district boundaries, as outlined on a 1982 Riverside street map published by the Riverside Public Library, is set forth in Appendix B, Section 10-2-16 of this Chapter. (Ord. 1971, 12-2-1991)
10-2-11: THE PARK AND PARKWAY PLANTINGS:
The original natural prairie and forested area which became the Village contained a combination of plant species representing two (2) ecosystems: the river flood plain wetland forest community and the upland prairie and oak-hickory forest community. The landscape planting concept of Frederick Law Olmsted and the landscape architectural firm of Olmsted, Vaux and Company was to enhance and emphasize these existing natural forest features by plantings in a pastoral design to enhance the beauty of the public commons, parks, pocket or triangular parks, parkways and adjoining railroad landscape, and, in limited areas, plantings in a picturesque design along the river bank. The primary objective of this planting concept was to retain the natural beauty and green appearance of the landscape and produce a feeling of relaxation and an atmosphere of sylvan tranquility to those coming into contact with the same, without showing evidence of man’s role in such planting.
The interspersing of public landscaped spaces was part of the General Plan of Riverside; the commons, the public lands along the river, the extensive use of planted triangular islands and the irregular and expansive parkways along the roadway system provided a sylvan and peaceful environment throughout the Village. The overall scene, undisturbed by distractions, was to show the grandeur of nature and enrich the individual with its splendor. Such scene was not to be disturbed by the focus on or display of individual plants or plantings. Green was to be its summer color, uninterrupted by other hues that would demand attention upon themselves. The landscape was to provide a setting of peacefulness, relaxation and contemplativeness; a setting conducive to a rich and lasting domestic environment.
To achieve and maintain this pastoral design, a spatial composition of compatible species of trees of varying heights shall be planted and maintained in irregularly arranged, asymmetrical groupings interspersed among open and broad spaces of greensward to provide a break in the open space having uneven and indistinct boundaries, to provide shade, to provide windbreaks, and to provide beauty while creating a sense of the peacefulness of nature which soothes and restores the spirit.
In the use of the picturesque design, a limited degree of planting of a more densely massed area with a wilder and more rugged appearance shall be used for enhancement along the river bank.
To retain this natural and relaxed atmosphere of greenery, distracting elements such as plantings having vivid colors or of an exotic nature, flower beds, stone and wood-chip beds, roadways and structures such as benches, playground equipment, retaining walls, water fountains, fences and signage must be avoided or exceedingly minimized and so installed and arranged as to be inconspicuous, employing harmonious natural materials and dark brown, green or other colors suitable to the surroundings; provided, however, that planting such flowers as are approved by the Landscape Advisory Commission shall be permitted in the Central Business District of the Village.
The Board shall adhere to the landscape concept and characteristics set forth in the August 31, 1981 document entitled “The Riverside Landscape”, prepared by the Riverside Historical Commission, and to the guidelines contained in the November 25, 1985 Historic Landscape Evaluation and Conservation Plan prepared by Malcolm D. Cairns and Gary B. Kesler with regard to planting and maintaining the landscape and plantings in those public lands other than lands adjacent to Village entryways and perimeter roads.
Plantings within the park, and triangular or pocket park systems of this Village shall be undertaken and maintained in accordance with the master planting plan designated as “Proposed Plantings in Public Lands, Master Plan, Riverside, Illinois, 1991″, as revised and amended from time to time. The provisions of Section 2-14-4 of this Code, prescribing the duties of the Landscape Advisory Commission, shall be applicable to subsequent plans for park and parkway plantings in the Village.
To preserve the planting concept set forth in this Section, the Board shall avoid planting groups of trees or groups of bushes of a dissimilar single species; shall avoid planting species which are marginally adaptive to the area; shall avoid in-line, or evenly spaced or equal height plantings; shall avoid ornamental or exotic plantings and flower bed plantings; shall avoid plantings containing vivid rather than green summer colors; shall avoid use of wood chips or stone beds around trees and the placement of nonharmonious access paths in a straight line or placement of benches, water fountains, or other structures in such manner as to distract from the natural effect of the area. No existing plantings shall be removed from the public lands except for incurably diseased or dead species, or those species which have been incorrectly planted.
The property owners shall maintain the parkway areas adjacent to their private property lines and shall keep the same in good condition, free from any overgrowth of weeds or high grass exceeding a height of ten inches (10″). (Ord. 2226, 5-18-1998)
Ms Rush,
Thank you for the Village Code citations. It is in the nature of Swan Pond/Park to be vacant (and also to flood, I believe), yet both of these terms have negative connotations in the TIF document. But I believe the concern is that no buildings, even public ones, be put on it, nor that the walkway be artificially paved, nor any paved walkways be put in the interior of the park. Similarly, I believe people are worried about triangular green spaces near the tracks being compromised for parking or the building of new, even if public, structures. People want full disclosure of what precisely the TIF plans are, I would say, particularly owing to the bad architecture on display at Burlington/Longcommon.
Many cannot attend copious meetings in the evening. I think this is a good forum for you to answer questions as I do not like to call and ask you to answer questions others may be asking you as well. Thank you.
I agree with anonymous, as it has been my understanding that Ponds tend to be on the wet side. Is there a reason that the village wants to drain it? In my opinion, tax dollars diverted away from the schools to drain a pond seems silly. Should we change the name from ‘pond’ to something dryer sounding?
About the retaining wall, has anyone spoken to the corps of engineers? I may be completely off base here, but it was under my impression that those types of structures have been found to be terrible for the environment.
And on another note, Harrington Park is specifically mentioned in the TOD. On page 6-2 it states that it is a viable space for a community center. Whether that has anything to do with TIF, I don’t know, but it is part of the “mini-comprehensive plan.”
So Ms. Rush, we would appreciate greatly a response from you or the trustees on the succeeding Swan Pond and green spaces questions and statements. Thank you.
Catherine Love
Ms. Love and Anonymous,
On page 13 of the draft redevelopment plan, there is a statement “No Village park areas will be developed into resiential or commercial uses.” This is an absolute statement included in the plan by the Village Board to address the concerns raised initially that there was some inappropriate use implemented. The improvements contemplated for Swan pond would include a storm water management system to include river bank stabilization and riverfront improvements. The park area is used for soccer and other outdoor activities. It is a beautiful feature of the community, but when water persists on the surface subsequent to the River level being reduced, it results in a less than desireable condition for many weeks.
The Village Engineer was previously employed by the US Army Corp. He has not raised any issues about a potential repair of the WPA wall, but I am sure if and when we ever get to funding and completing that project, the Village will be heavily involved and consulting with the IDNR and the US ACofE. These entities will ensure that we will not do anything inappropriate that will result in issues that affect water quality.
Thank you Ms Rush. My concern was rather that the Village would develop or construct a building on Swan Pond/Park. Is there any plan for that?
Yes, it is certainly beautiful and the widest open space in town.
Ms. Rush,
Thank you so much for taking the time to answer these questions.
You stated above
“No Village park areas will be developed into residential or commercial uses.”
Which leaves open the availability for the “public use” option.
In many communities, “public use” has been defined as a museum, police station, library, community center and even parking structures.
Is it possible to add in the redevelopment plan language that NO structure will be built upon public land for ANY use, even that deemed for “public” use.
Thanks so much.
Kim Jacobs
Ms Rush,
Yes, thank you for your time. We await an answer as to what are the “riverside improvements” contemplated at Swan Pond down to the river and whether they include public structures.
I would also object to a new public structure at the Water Tower to make a Visitor’s Center and believe rehabbing the 1913 structure there would be a vastly preferable option.
The Village has no intention of building any structure in Swan Pond beyond stormwater management and repair of the structures that are already existing. I will be certain to request the Board consider a stronger policy statement when the Board revisits this in a few months. The Board recognizes the absolute need to preserve this resource.
There are no new buildings planned for Centennial. The SW well house is presently under rehabilitation with grant dollars to become the historic museum’s exhibit space. The Parks and Rec will be opening their rehabilitated new office and program space in early January.
There is a report/plan for the Historic Water Tower that provides that a visitor’s center would ultimately be a part of this existing space when it becomes the Museum, but that is not contemplated as we need the location at present for the Parks and Rec operations. I believe a copy of that report, done around 2000 by Antunovich Associates, is in the library.
Thank you Ms Rush. That is a great relief. I thought I read in the TOD that the 1913 structure was considered inadequate and needed to be replaced. Also, the riverside improvements were not enumerated.
I read in the paper that some Trustees were baffled by some of the opposition. Perhaps you would find it worthwhile to receive questions and add the answers to the FAQ section. I read in the paper they wanted to educate the public further. I think perhaps some drawings of what is had in mind would constitute that “plan” that was also found curious.
Best regards.
Ms. Rush,
There is a plan to re-landscape the Centennial park (it already has started around the museum). I heard that on the west side part of the park will be turned into parking. In other words: a part of the green area will be carved out to be paved over for parking spots. Is it true? If it is, how is it possible?
Thanks,
Anonymous 2
P.S. Whatever the differences between our ways of thinking - it is really decent of you to take time to discuss things on this forum. It is appreciated.
Anonymous 2
The Village received an Illinois Transportation Enhancement Grant (ITEP) to improve the grounds of Centennial Plaza, East Avenue and Pine Avenue in front of the train depot. This is an IDOT grant that will be completed in three phases. We have engaged our engineer to complete phase I and II. We are just starting design and no decision has been made regarding any additional parking. The opportunity has been raised and will be explored through design concepts. We have found alternative designs are easier to review than to forgo an opportunity and have hindsight planning kick in later. The aspect will be thoroughly discussed at the Village Board level with input from the Preservation Commission. The LAC will also have input on the landscape improvements.
The Water Reservoir (rectangular building)which was located at the SW corner was removed last year as a part of the decommissioning. At that time, there was a suggestion made that maybe we should consider some parking as a trade-off as the access road will be removed and additional green space created unifying the park area. I hope this explains the current status and how the process will work.
Katy Rush
Ms. Rush - thank you for your answers, but I must point out that you refer to Parklands and not all the open spaces in the center of town that people think are parks are in fact protected by that designation, For example, Centennial “Park” is not officially a “park.” It is, in fact, still designated as an industrial site, which is presumeably the technicality that is being used to justify “exploring the possibility” of cutting some parking spaces from it. This must not happen.
Similarly, the land south of the train depot is also not parkland (it used to be a lumber and coal business.) The issue of attaching it to Guthrie Park - which I’m sure would meet with favor by the vast majority of residents was raised last year at a Board meeting, but at that time I remember particularly Trustee Shields objecting to including it because “we might want to build something there.” Presumeably he meant a parking lot or structure. This must not happen.
On the river side of Riverside Road your TOD study shows a small building and parking lot south and east of the Swinging Bridge. Again, I think most people in the Village believe this land to be public park - it is shown in green on the Olmsted map, and as you know the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that what is green is parkland. Nothing - repeat NOTHING - should be built on that side of Riverside Road between the Town Hall and Blackhawk Grove, which is adjacent to Miller Rd.
At the EDC meeting on Thursday I asked Ms. Rush repeatedly what that small building and parking lot shown on the TOD study maps were, and she denied any knowledge of them, couldn’t recall what they were and said she didn’t remember any such building there. Later I looked at a copy of that study with one of the EDC members and sure enough, not only that small building and parking lot were right there on the map but also a much larger building where the police and fire parking lot is now.
I have to say that I find many of the machinations of our Village government to be totally disingenuous. When I pointed out to Ms. Rush several days ago that the Village Center building now seems to have grown or else has changed it’s look because it now has seven equal sized window openings on the second floor of the west facade instead of the six shown in the plan that has been widely circulated and which has been attached to the fence of the project by the developer, I have received no satisfactory explanation. Has this project grown even wider? Are there more apartments contained within? If there are changes to the exterior have they been approved by the appropriate committees and duly recorded with the building department? Who knows - Ms. Rush doesn’t appear to, or at least won’t say.