Free Readers Ensemble


Wm. B. Sullivan Realty & Co.

RAVINIA
"A Great time in a
Wonderful Place" SJC 


Adopt a Pet, Come for a Visit


CAGIS Archaeological
Consulting Services

Letters to the Editor Concerning Field Park

Local Activists Create Web Petition To Save Old Growth Trees in OAK PARK from Eminent Destruction (Click Here to Sign)

July 16, 2007

To the Ill. Department of Natural Resources

Dear IDNR: 

I share with you a communication earlier sent to the Oak Park park district suggesting a modification of their plan which would satisfy all interests.

-------------------------------

July 16, 2007


Dear Mr. Balling and Park Board:

The first concept I sent to you had the soccer field rotated clockwise.

Here is a second concept with rotation of the soccer field.  In this version, a minimum amount of asphalt is removed and only the right field side of the south baseball field in its original configuration is in the soccer field.  No trees need be cut down.  The gentle slope at the south end of the park is retained for use by the toddlers for safe tobogganing.

I've written a computer program which 1.  retains the 110 x 60 dimension and 2. can be oriented in any mode for visual examination.  I'm happy to share it with you and your staff.

Dr. Leslie M. Golden
Oak Park
 Not until I listened again to Mr. McManus' speech ( the designer of the New Field Park),that was videoed by the OakParkJournal .com editor (at last Thursday's special Board meeting), did I realize that he said something VERY important. He said that at the first two meetings there was little talk of trees. He said the focus was on the land and how to deal with some of the problems.(Please go there and view the video yourselves).

     Please tell me how the park board commissioners could blame people for not knowing what was going on as if it were a personal failure on the part of citizens therefore making their opinions worthless. It seems that, in fact, it wouldn't have mattered, because being there wouldn't have made a difference.

It confirms that when people have said that they were at those
meetings and it didn't come up, that this is being confirmed by Mr. McManus.

It wasn't a point of discussion. Anyone going to those first two meetings would have no inkling that tree removal was in the plans and No one would have been alarmed. No word would have been spread. No uproar would have been made because it wasn't discussed. To use residents' absence as justification
to go forward with a plan that has great opposition is bogus and deceptive.

In the conversations I had with several of the park board commissioners before Thursday's, I asked if I could see a copy of the so called flyer that was supposedly distributed in a 4 block radius of the park. These were supposedly given out by boy scouts.

I would like to know what boy scout leaders were involved with getting their troops to give out flyers. They said that they would have them at last Thursday's meeting. No mention of them and I forgot to ask again.

The onus was on them to say to the audience......many of you asked to see the flyers distributed during the process. Here they are.   Hopefully they will have them at this Tuesday's meeting.

Maybe the 1000 block of Belleforte is not considered within 4
blocks.Why not the entire Mann School District? Would have been more appropriate, but what does it matter because I didn't receive one. I'd love to see what it/they said and had I received them would I have thought I'd better get myself to a meeting.

Unfortunately, if your regular meetings are on Tuesday evenings, I would have had a chronic conflict with work.
Anyway, when was the "first" meeting that a plan for tree removal became a "real" possibility, and when next was that communicated to the residents in Northwest Oak Park and to Oak Parkers as a whole? To have something so serious as removing trees from a Park, have it voted on (was it voted on?) by just the people who happen to show up at a particular meeting - I'm not sure in what country that would be considered democracy.

There is clear lack of communication - a problem that needs to be solved in the future for sure. This does not justify going forward until it is clear that a majority of the community really wants this. I really really doubt this.
   
Please ask the DNR to continue to refuse financing this project until those in favor of it are willing to compromise with those of us who want the trees to remain. We can co-exist.
   
Also, the president of the Park Board chose audience speakers by alternating those in favor and those opposed to the plan. That left a long list of those opposing not having a chance to speak. It would have been appropriate for their to have been a count reported to the audience........for example, 100 people would like to speak in opposition to this plan, 35 are in favor, and we will only have time to hear 12 from each side. Gives a false appearance to anyone walking in late that views were
split down the middle.

Far from it.

Thank you

Diane T. Gordon, MSW, LCSW
1017 Belleforte
Oak Park, IL 60302



Nina and Chelsie Kowalski attend Mann School and play at Field Park. They have been taught to be friendly to the environment at an early age and do not want their park to be destroyed for a soccer field.

Nina and Chelsie live at 925 N. East Ave. in Oak Park

Editor
Oakparkjournal.com
 
Trees Trees and Deception !
 
We attended the Field Park rally on Sunday to save the grove of trees there and learned some interesting things.  Apparently, the entire soccer field project hinged on State Senator Don Harmon supporting the Park District application for $399,000.  The money came from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.  Their mission is to preserve and conserve, not cut down complete stands of trees.  We found out that Mr. Harmon had no idea that even one tree was to be cut down, let alone 28, and he apparently was angered when he found out.  So we are left with the conclusion that Mr. Harmon was hoodwinked by the Park District, which puts to question not only their honesty but his capability.  
 
Also, if he supported the $399,000 isn't it his role as our representative to be sure the money is well spent?  He didn't.  So, we are left with the second conclusion that Mr. Harmon acted irresponsibly in the stewardship of our tax dollars.  Either way, he got us into this mess and those of us in the neighborhood face the loss of all those trees and the beauty of our park. 
 
It seems to us that it's Mr. Harmon's job to contact the Illinois Department of Natural Resource and the Park District and get us out of the mess.  To even think that in Oak Park a 120-year 70 or 80 foot tall tree and a couple dozen others is to be cut down for a soccer field for 11 year olds is criminal.
 
Frank and Penelope Gervais
Oak Park

Editors Note:  Senator Harmon fully supports the DNR revrew

Dear Editor:
 
 
     As I learn more about what the park district of Oak Park is trying to do at Field Park, I become more and more convinced that their plan to put in an Olympic regulation size soccer field is based on pure deception.
 
     They deceived the Dept. of Natural Resources of the State of Illinois.  The grant of $399,000 was based on a soccer field of dimension 40 x 60 yards.  The grant administrator was not aware of the actual 110 x 60 yards that the park wants to put there.  The arborist at the Department was not aware that trees were going to be cut down.
 
      State Senator Don Harmon was deceived in not being told any trees were going to be cut down in his childhood neighborhood park.  The residents of the area were deceived by not being told of the cutting down of the stand of trees.
 
     The taxpayers of Oak Park have been deceived as to the cost.  Told that the state of Illinois was going to pay for half of the project was based on the initial cost of $798,000.  In fact, the cost overruns are a whopping 50% even before the project begins.  It's going to cost $1.2 million.  The state refuses to pay more, which means that Oak Parkers are going to have to pay, not $400,000, but twice as much, $800,000.
 
    The taxpayers were also deceived when the park district passed its referendum promising fiscal responsibility.  A 50% cost overrun and a tab of $800,000 to cut down trees and put in a professional soccer field for the small but very, very vocal lobby of soccer parents is wholly, totally irresponsible use of our money and betrays the trust we placed in them when we voted to pass the referendum.

     Even on the FOX t.v. broadcast on Sunday, there was deception.  The park district president was quoted as saying that the neighborhood residents were aware of the final plans for the project for 1 and one-half years and didn't complain.  How could that be?  The first public comment meetings, part of the initial process, was only held a year ago April !

     Scrap the project.  Fix and renovate what has to be done in the park.  Let the people have their park, trees, and shade.  Deception, deception, deception.  It makes you sick.  Who at the park district is accountable for this web of lies?
 
 
Alijia Stasiak
Oak Park

Dear Officials, Commissioners and Editors,

I received a very deeply disturbing email this morning regarding the removal of a grove of trees at Field Park in order to build a soccer field and parking lot.  This grove includes some of the oldest and most beautiful trees in Oak Park.

This is unacceptable to me as a long time resident of Oak Park and a citizen of a planet in crisis.

Trees are the most valuable resource we have right now.  Not only are they beautiful, but they are one of our greatest defenses against greenhouse gases.  It is imperative to preserve as much of this natural resource as possible.  It is no longer a question of aesthetics, it is a matter of survival for us and our children.  The trees absorb the carbon, release oxygen and keep the planet cooler.  Every tree matters.

I made a commitment this Saturday, during the Live Earth campaign, to fight to preserve this resource and to pressure government, officials and the media when I believe that our resources are being violated.  I remain strong and resolute in my conviction.

Stop and desist this action.  Instead of spending all this money on removing trees, try removing some asphalt and plant trees instead.  We will all benefit, even YOUR CHILDREN and YOUR GRANDCHILDREN.

Please look at the big picture.  Children need trees a lot more than another soccer field.  Stop this action NOW.

Sincerely,

Terry Mueller

Good Morning, dear Madam, dear Sir!

I am a resident of Oak Park moving here from Germany a good two years ago. With my 6 month-old son I NEED and ENJOY the green environment of all the parks in this village. A GREAT loss was the cutting down of all the lovely trees on the Marion Street Mall as is its destruction.  Malls are the key feature to attract tourists in every town in Europe as well as the parks with mature and ancient trees.

NOW here, in the Land of the Free, another family of beautiful and old trees in Field Park are planned to be cut down. My family of three attended the ralley to save them on Sunday and were shocked by the details. The children present who represented all the other school children who use the trees as outdoor shade and gathering points and who also play soccer DO NOT WANT A HUGE NEW SOCCER FIELD. They say it is not needed. Many soccer fields are not very well used anyway.
It is a matter of increasing the size of the athletic fields to the point where the park is restricted to the perimeter of the park, like a fence row on a farm field. It's a major change of character and use - to the very worse!

SO, who has planned this and for WHOM?? If this is a democratic community, which I have growing doubts about, then the people who live here, MUST have a say in decisions that affect them directly.None of the people who arranged for the planting of the memorial trees were contacted (according to the park district board and staff at the rally),  making this another example of disrespecting the wishes of residents.

 If Oak PArk has indeed signed a Green PAct then such cutting down of trees should be entirely out of the question in ANY plan. IF it is all about PRESERVATION and RENOVATION, the same applies.

Some trees are planned for removal and replanting. At this time of year it is likely that none of the trees will survive since they are not dormant  - trees are dormant from the late fall though the late winter.

We all pay taxes to support conservation and protection efforts by paying salaries  and we are outraged that $399,000 or even double this amount is being given to the Park District of Oak Park to destroy a stand of decades-old trees, destroy sloping hills, emasculate a wonderful winding path between the trees, and turn a green space into an global warming producing, barren Olympic size soccer field.
All our tax money will be ABUSED here. WE do not want it to be spend AGAINST our will.

What we need is a RESPONSIBLE and RESPONSIVE POLITICS here in Oak Park which works WITH and FOR the Community, not against them and for certain lobby or interest groups. Those decision makers have the duty to SERVE the community, that is their mandat. Else they have to go!

WE ask You to stand up against the DESTRUCTION of the trees and prevent their demise.

We demand support for this issue, we want a public investigation into the ways these decisions have been made and how the responsible parties probably DECEIVED the public by notifying them only "5 minutes to 12".

This park is public space and thus, belongs to the residents !
We depend on Your help and trust You will be supportive in trying to save those trees and help a compromise settling the issue.

With good faith in You I wish You a successful week!

Yours, sincerely
Mrs. Almut Roberts
Mr. Craig Roberts and Sherlock Alwyn


I was just informed by a friend of mine that grew up in Oak Park, just like myself, that fifty trees will be cut down in Field Park to make room for an Olympic size soccer field. While I support soccer fields and space for children to play, I must say we have more than enough in Oak Park already. And looking to the world outside of oak park; we need to sustain our old trees rather than have even more space for soccer fields.

I am currently working for Greenpeace, largely due to the activism and environmentalism I always felt was apart of my Oak Park childhood. I inform people of the constant deforestation throughout the world everyday. It would be a disgrace to me to know that Oak Park is taking part in global deforestation. This is my hometown. These are the trees of the planet. Keep them around. 

With hope,
Sophia Stith
Open Letter to Park Board Members

Mark and Gary,

I hope that the Park District has learned from the current situation with the Field Park planning process that residents know their parks, use their parks, love their parks, and need to be involved to a much greater degree in the initial planning.  It is clear from this process that interests other than neighboring residents were paramount.  I understand that parks serve the entire community, but it is critical to
for you to understand how parks are currently used and what they mean to the people who use them before sitting down with planning consultants to to start drawing up plans.  The central wooded part of the park - currently its heart with a well-used winding path meandering under the mature tree canopies - has been the key element of this park
for many many years.   To obliterate it and the surrounding hilly area for a soccer field - a radical long-term change while calling it a "renovation" -after only 2 public meetings where it was never revealed that all of these trees would be removed, does not serve the public interest.  I guarantee you that the vast majority of Oak Parkers would be as outraged as we are if they knew that $1.2 million is being spent
to destroy a perfectly beautiful, well designed, well-loved park.   I don't know if you were able to hear the children speak from where you were standing, but they know this park, it is their park, and they want to keep their mature trees.  The African-American girl, Mara, who lives at South Boulevard and Kenilworth, told us that she rides her bike to
the Park every day in the summer to read under shade of the historic honeylocust tree.  Her story is only one of the stories that you neglected to solicit during the planning process because you likely knew that you wanted an Olympic size soccer field before the public part of the planning process began. Civilized places, countries and towns, respect their history, their beauty and their memories.  While you may call what you are proposing progress, it is simply one more
instance of money (which is in short supply) being used to destroy part of our past, part of our memories, and part of what has always made Oak Park such a desirable place to live.

I am requesting that the Il Dept of Natural Resources review the $399,000 grant they approved for this work and that they come to Oak Park, along with Senator Harmon, to attend the Thursday evening Park Board meeting at the field house to answer residents' questions about the destruction of such a beautiful natural setting, made possible through state and local tax dollars.  We want Senator Harmon and the
IDNR to justify to us their approval of state money.  This isn't a project with broad support; it is a project that is supported primarily by a handful of soccer parents, not children and not current park users;  and its design was driven solely by the placement of that new soccer field squeezed into such a small park, and this is what necessitates the massive destruction of the existing area.  It is difficult to see how these funds comply with the spirit of the DNR's
mission and the purpose of these Open Space and Land
Acquisition/Development grants.

This park is currently used for soccer practice and has two baseball diamonds.  Half of the park today is taken up with athletic fields which are barren places as you saw yesterday while not being used for organized sports.  If your project is built as designed, the Park will be one large athletic field, with trees, benches, play lots, and walking path  simple after-thoughts, squeezed in along the perimeters of the park, adjacent to the streets and the alley.  This was all evident from the colored site plan you brought to the Park yesterday.

Please do not proceed with such an ill-conceived plan and do not use my tax dollars so irresponsibly.

I have copied the DNR and Senator Harmon on this e-mail.


Thank you,
Kathryn Jonas


Dear Editor:

It is obvious that the entire problem at Field Park involving the cutting down of numerous trees results from putting in a major league soccer field which will use about half of the available area.  It requires an auto drop-off, which means the south tot lot must be relocated to the north, which means the fir trees have to be cut down.  Relocating the south baseball field to the west means the south trees have to cut down, and increases the noise level many times for neighbors across the 10-foot wide alley.  Relocating the north baseball field to the east means the young Bronco and Mustang hitters will be looking directly into the sun during the spring, endangering them and placing the park district and its contractors under threat of significant liability litigation based on contributory negligence (no ball field of which I am aware is so oriented). The trees in the center of the park must also be cut down to accommodate the soccer field.

Everything results from the placing of the major league size soccer field.  I attended the neighborhood input meetings at Field fieldhouse and did not hear a large clamor for soccer.  People were concerned about saving the fieldhouse and the hilly berm, and there was a very brief assurance that trees would not be sacrificed.

The neighbors were never told of the destruction of the trees, they do not agree to it, and they did not demand the park being turned into a soccer field.

My question then is:  Who provided the movement for the soccer field?  It certainly did not come from the neighbors, but it is driving the entire project and unless the soccer field is shrunken in size the congenial sloping terrain will be flattened and the entire grove of trees will be cut down.  The wooded park enjoyed for 100 years by the neighborhood will become a barren, flat soccer field, used several months of the year for a small constituency while depriving, as was eloquently expressed by several children who spoke Sunday during the park rally, the Mann School students a shaded area under which to play during recess, and depriving the 95% of Oak Parkers who do not play soccer the year-round enjoyment and ambiance of their wooded, shady grove.

Les Golden

July 8,  2007
Dear Sir or Ms

For several reasons I strongly object to the plan for creating a soccer field for 11-12 years in Field Park in Oak Park.

1. It calls for cutting of 28 mature trees some of which are memorial trees. We should not destroy any trees in Oak Park unless diseased in this time of Global Warming. Even if new trees replace them they take years to grow.

2. Children of that age can use a smaller field. It is not reasonable to sacrifice the lovely trees and berm for a few people. We need the park as it is landscaped now to provide areas for children to play, for families to have picnics.

3. The park board did not have hearings and most Oak Park citizens as well as the neighbors of Field Park weren’t informed until July 6 with the plans to start being implemented as soon as Monday July 9.

4. This is not how I or the Illinois Dept of Natural resources who gave the money intends it to be spent. If sports are so important, let the sports organizations find places and money for their fields. I as a citizen want the amount of green parks and places increased, not decreased.

5. This is clearly another case of a few people and their cronies in Oak Park deciding what’s good for Oak Park and not having a clue because they don’t go to the taxpayers and citizens to see what they want. It makes me incredibly angry.

Sincerely yours
Karen Ard

Today I was shocked to find out that up to twenty eight trees in Field Park, the same ones I have grown up with and spent countless summer days underneath, are to be cut down to create an Olympic sized soccer field. Such trees include English Oak, a one hundred and twenty year old honey locust (the largest one in Oak Park), maple, walnut, pear, fir, pine, and other trees. These trees are the homes of dozens of birds and squirrels, and many are memorial trees, paid for by the families of lost loved ones. Children attending Mann School as well as others in the community play among these trees every day.
 
I spent the majority of my elementary school recess days underneath those trees. I remember meeting underneath them for shade when it was hot, playing hand clapping games around the honey locust, and pretending to be Christopher Columbus with my best friends by exploring all of the branches. The biggest tree by the rainbow park was prime gossip territory as well as meeting ground for anyone who wanted to play tag. I picnicked with my mom every Friday at lunch for my six years at Mann School underneath these trees’ shade. And, even though I have just graduated high school, these trees still hold the same strong emotional ties. I hang out with friends there and take walks almost every day down the path. I see families, day camp groups, dog walkers, and friends underneath the trees every day, enjoying the shade and space.

The emotional and environmental damage to the land and trees that is already planned to begin on Monday, July 9th is all part of a $399,000 “renovation” plan of Field Park-all in order to provide yet another soccer field. At the initial protest held in Field Park on Sunday, July 8th, many soccer players passionately stated their disinterest in cutting down trees for the sole purpose of having such a large playing space. In fact, it seemed that no soccer players, let alone any members of the surrounding community, were informed of such a decision until that very day.

I urge anyone who is concerned about the destruction of such a beautiful place to come to
the special Park Board Meeting at Field Center on Thursday, July 12th at 7:30 pm to discuss the Site Master Plan at Field Center/Park.

-Sarah Abarbanel
Age 18

Dear Park District Commissioners:
 
During the more than three decades that we have lived in Oak Park we have continually supported improvements and upgrading of Field Park.  The joining of the Mann School open space with the park was a natural enhancement along with the addition of baseball fields and soccer fields. 
 
And we support upgrading and improving the Field Center facility.
 
But we just learned of a proposal to eliminate the mature trees that give the park a unique character and natural shade area.  Don't do it.  Cutting down trees will not result in an upgrade of the park.  Destroying trees to create a giant open space void would be an absolute desecration.  And a huge waste of money.
 
We urge you to walk through the park and experience the pleasure it provides--and be sure to enjoy the shade the trees provide on these hot sunny days.  It is a touch of nature.  The small grove of trees creates an ever-so-brief "country feeling"
in our crowded village.
 
With all the positive efforts put forth in the past for the environment we can't believe that Oak Park has ever considered cutting down as many trees as now proposed. 
 
Please do not cut down trees and forever alter the park.  Looking forward to discussing further during the Thursday evening meeting at Field Center. 
 
Thank you. 
 
Roy and Nancy Hlavacek
Oak Park, Illinois





I am a 25 year resident of 834 N. Grove in Oak Park and I also run my consulting business out of down town Oak Park. My daughter attended schools in Oak Park.. On Saturday July 7 in the evening I got a flyer announcing the All the trees in Field Park by Mann School were going to be cut down in the next week. I have to say it caught my interest. For me trees are central to what makes Oak Park special. 

 

I attended the rally the next day. There is rhetoric on both sides. All the trees are not getting cut down but 14 are and some are being replanted. The park district is saying they had told everybody about this and the neighborhood is saying that they had no idea. Apparently Oak Park needs soccer fields and this neighborhood loves its trees.

 

 I do not think that the neighborhood or Mann School needs a state of the art soccer field; I think we are great with what we got. I vote for trees. I vote for a proactive approach from the park district where they are up front about cutting down trees in the name of park improvement and soccer fields. I vote for a process in which the park district clearly informs every household within four blocks of the park of that intention weeks in advance of beginning construction. 

 

 I vote for neighborhood input because this is a neighborhood park. I vote for trees and an improvement
in the process so that there is true input from the neighborhood and all of its constituencies.

Thank you for reading and thinking about my view

Bruce Hodes

July 8, 2007

To whom it may concern:

Yesterday I found out about the plans to remove many
trees at Mann School in order to put in a soccer
field.  I was peripherally aware that some changes
were going to be made to the playground area, to move
it away from the busy street.  I’d heard that some
trees were going to be cut down, but I thought that
the two mulberry trees that were removed as a nuisance
were the extent of the deforestation.  I wasn’t happy,
but it was something I could live with.  I haven’t
seen anything in the news or heard anything through
the school or the community. 

Since yesterday, I’ve talked to some people who live
closer and they said that they have been going to
meetings on this for about 9 months, but hadn’t heard
of a vote or any concrete plans.  I don’t have
children who play sports but no one I know has
complained about any inadequacies of facilities at
Mann.

Last year, one large Elm tree that shaded much of the
southeast corner of the playground was lost to Dutch
elm disease.  It made a huge impact on the playground.
 It is always hot there now and it seems that the
tempers of children flare more easily without the cool
respite.  How will lunch and recess go with more of
the big, established trees gone?  The trees add cooling
shade, keep more moisture in the air and provide oxygen while recycling carbon dioxide. 

They buffer noise and wind; they provide a pleasant rustle
and homes for many helpful animals.  Some of them
display riotous color every fall.  It will be generations
before the three trees that replace each of these trees even begin to approach the resources and esthetics that these grand old specimens do. 

Originally, I was against the demolition and rebuilding of the two middle schools, but after listening carefully to each side, I decided that there were benefits to the rebuilding.  I don’t feel like I have been given a chance to hear both sides of this story, make a decision and communicate with park board (and / or school board?) members.  This makes me feel that something underhanded is going on. 

Please take the time to give all of the stakeholders
the information they deserve to see why you have made
this decision and give them, us, me a chance to explain our points of view before unchangeable steps are taken.

Please sign me,
Not a Tree Hugger, but a tree lover.

(Please withhold my name)

At a time when we all know how much trees benefit the environment and help combat global warming, and  that children benefit greatly by playing freely out in nature, I am astonished that a community such as Oak Park, inhabited by educated people, would even consider cutting down healthy trees to create a soccer field in Field Park.  The
Park District should immediately abandon this ill-advised initiative.

Charlie Rossiter
Dear Mr. Balling,

Improving Field Park is a lovely idea.  Many of the suggested changes will be significant improvements.

However, there must be a way to enhance the park without cutting down the centrally located mature trees. I am hoping
that a design can be found that allows improvenents and works around the existing trees.

Our son is a soccer player and we certainly are aware of the need for more soccer fields; it would be more convenient for him to walk to Lindberg or Field, rather than carpool to Thatcher Woods twice a week for practice.  However, this inconvenience is insignificant compared to the loss of those gorgeous trees.

Yesterday, as I walked across the park in the intense midday heat, I  literally planned my path to move from shade tree to shade tree for relief from the sun.  Sports players and observers are so appreciative of the restful and relaxing places to sit or lie under the trees in the middle of the park, and listen to birds or lie back and look at the leafy branches.  It's a big park, and the thought of trees only being on the periphery along the fence, without natural shade in the middle, is deeply distressing.  Building a man-made shelter is simply not the same.

No one we have spoken with was aware of these plans until we received the flyer from a concerned citizen this weekend announcing yesterday's rally. I am pleased to learn that a special park board meeting is now planned for this Thursday.  I will be unable to attend so wanted to make
my position known.

I hope that the plan can be redesigned so that improvements can be made without destroying our most beautiful natural resources in the process.

Sincerely,
Geri Fox

We need new political parties in town to stop these boneheads from getting elected to office.  How could some
half wit run for a park board seat and not like trees and nature???  The press may be to blame for not asking these
people if they liked nature or not, or had them sign some
agreement that they would listen to the people and not folks who make their living at designing expensive things and
doing lots of work with taxpayers money...all with their own
pockets driving them forward.

name withheld by request

Dear Park Board of Commissioners:

Yesterday afternoon I received a phone call from a few neighbors in the Field Park neighborhood who had  just learned from a sign posted on the park fence that 28 trees marked with red X's were to be destroyed as part of the park renovation work scheduled to start Monday.  I viewed
the trees and was very concerned that all of the trees were healthy and, that included in the group, were many mature oaks, maples and a historic honeylocust that may be the largest of its species in Oak Park.  Some neighbors said they were aware that a renovation was taking place but had no idea that the central forested part of the park, with
a pedestrian path cutting through,  would be clear- cut for
a soccer field.  One man said he was aware of only 2 trees being removed.

I have talked to Mark Gartland twice and he said he believes that adequate public notice was furnished of the exact nature of the renovation.  I believe otherwise after talking to many people and urge you to delay any removal of these trees until the public has an opportunity to understand the full extent of the work and provide their input.  This project is not a simple renovation or upgrading of a park.

This is a beautiful park, likely the best maintained park in the system.  The proposed plan entails the total destruction of the central part of the park, with existing trees and new trees located exclusively along the north, south and west perimeters.  The "park" will be essentially athletic fields
with the addition of a new soccer field. 

This is one of the smaller parks in the system and if the plan is implemented as proposed, Field Park will have more of its area dedicated to athletic fields than any other park.  The new pedestrian path will be limited to the western part of the park along the alley and users will no longer feel part of the park.

A second concern is that the Park District is receiving $399,000 in Open Space grant money from the Il Dept of Natural Resources to destroy   28 healthy trees while the open space will actually be decreased somewhat with the
new vehicle drop-off.

If you recall, approximately 50 mature trees were removed
at Lindberg Park about 10 years ago to make way for a "prairie" garden and play fields there.  If the Park District policy is changing, favoring athletic fields over more traditional park uses, I think there needs to be a discussion with the community.  The current practice of getting input from 30 or so residents is not adequate.

Field Park has always been a favorite park of mine as it so beautifully combines such a diversity of uses and was designed to reflect a very natural setting, with rolling topography.  In addition to removing the trees, the majority of the park will be excavated and leveled with turf only - no trees, no benches.

Finally, as I stood out at the park last night, I was outraged as a citizen that the Board is spending $1 million of our hard-earned tax dollars to demolish such a well-designed and well-maintained park. 

Field Park would be considered a jewel of a park in any enlightened community.   This is another example of Oak Park's inability to make any meaningful commitment to sustainability and the environment.  What is out there now
is irreplaceable and I've heard no concern about the loss of so many trees.  We are  behaving as though climate change isn't real and we have no responsibility to conserve our very limited natural resources.  What kind of message is this sending to our children who are the first generation to face the real likelihood of life on this planet changing?  We should be asking ourselves if one more soccer field is a
good decision.  Or do we keep our heads in the sand?

fyi, I am on the Citizens Forestry Commission, am a certified arborist and have been active in promoting better tree maintenance practices in Oak Park for many years.


Kathryn Jonas

Greg Akers Senior Grant Administrator greg.akers@illinois.gov
Dave Sellman Senior Grant Administrator dave.sellman@illinois.gov
Steve Gonzalez Senior Grant Administrator steve.gonzalez@illinois.gov
Mick Rosendahl Senior Grant Administrator mick.rosendahl@illinois.gov
Sue Eubanks Senior Grant Administrator susan.eubanks@illinois.gov
Jan Nation Grant Administrator jan.nation@illinois.gov
Emilie Chezem Grant Administrator emilie.chezem@illinois.gov


July 7, 2007

Dear Grant Administrators of the Dept. of Natural Resources of the State of Illinois:

The Oak Park Park District posted a flyer Friday, July 6, at noon with their Master Plan for Field Park at Division and Woodbine in Oak Park.   No one in the community was aware of their plans until that time, literally 72 hours before construction is to begin.

The park has hilly terrain unmatched in Oak Park, variable elevation, a tasteful blend of many varieties of mature, HEALTHY shade trees, English oak, honey locust, maple, walnut, pear, fir, pine, and others.  Homes for dozens of birds and squirrels.  Many of those trees are memorial trees, paid for by the families of departed loved ones.  Field is serene, with brilliant landscaping providing nooks and crannies of shaded areas for picnics, frolicking with children, and quiet relaxation.  It is our nicest park.

The DNR has provided $400,000 to the Park District.  Their Master Plan shows the following:

1.  Every tree in the park, except those along the fence and behind the hill next to the fence, is to be cut down.  This includes a 120-year old honey locust referred to by generations of children as "The Field Playground tree."  28 trees healthy trees, with dozens of bird and squirrel nests, including that of an owl, will be killed.

2.  More than 1/2 the park space (excluding the berm), now free of trees, will become an olympic size soccer field, although Oak Park has 3 major soccer fields at Lindberg, Taylor, and Barrie Park.  It is to be used by junior high students, who could do with a substantially smaller field.

3.  About 3500 sq. ft. of currently open space is to be converted to an automobile drop off zone.

With the community now aware, a huge rally is to be held tomorrow, Sunday, at 2:00 at the park.  All the t.v., ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, have expressed their desire to be there.  The local press will be there.

WE, AS TAXPAYERS, AS TAXPAYERS, TO DIRECT THE OAK PARK PARK DISTRICT TO NOT USE DNR FUNDS FOR THE DEVASTATION OF OUR GREEN PARK SPACE.

YOUR STATED ROLE IS:  "Our mission is to manage, protect and sustain Illinois' natural and cultural resources; provide resource-compatible recreational opportunities; and promote natural resource-related public safety, education, and science."   NOT TO FUND THE CREATION OF SOCCER FIELDS AND DESTRUCTION OF HEALTHY, MATURE GROVES OF TREES.

Destruction is to begin Monday.  We provide relevant phone numbers and look forward to your rapid reply.

PARK DISTRICT OFFICIALS

Executive Director, Gary Balling
     garyb@oakparkparks.com, 383-0002 (w) , 386-9226 (h)
President, Mark Gartland,
     markg@oakparkparks.com, 386-4505
Commissioners
     Marty Bracco, martyb@oakparkparks.com, 524-2094
     Christine Graves, christineg@oakparkparks.com, 445-8357
     Lise Valentine, lisev@oakparkparks.com, 763-0702
     Jessica Bullock, jessicab@oakparkparks.com, 445-8194

cc:  State Senator Don Harmon
don@donharmon.org
Oak Park press corps

Yours truly,

Prof. Leslie M. Golden
708-848-6677

Kathryn Jonas, Certified Arborist
708-524-0036

Julie Samuels
Green Party Candidate for Illinois Lt. Governor, Oak Park

Are the people who run our town taking secrecy lessons from Dick Cheney or what??
 
If its is announced quietly 7/6 to start destruction on 7/9, then its too late to even get word in the local newspaper. Good planning on their part.
 
Did you see SICKO yet? Don't miss it. Write your U.S. Rep. www.house.gov  to support H.R. 676 for not for profit healthcare, submitted by Rep. John Conyers Jr. of Michigan with Rep. Dennis Kucinich as the first sponsor and many more. Write your rep to support HR 333 to impeach Dick Cheney, submitted by Dennis Kucinich. Write your rep to support HR6200 for transparent publicly supervised hand counted paper ballots only and make a statement by not using touch screen electronic election machines owned and operated and programmed by the GOP-- use the paper ballots with the scanners until HR6200 is passed.

Leslie Roberts
more letters are on the way




© Suburban Journals of  Chicago Inc.
published by Suburban Journals of  Chicago Inc.