Visions of nature: conflict and compatibility in urban park restoration

Although various disciplines have developed "objective" principles and prac tices for landscape restoration in recent decades, the concept of restorati on itself often rests on subjective questions of cultural value. Issues rel ated to restoring the naturalness of urban open spaces were explored in a p lanning effort for an area of parkland along Chicago's lakefront. Four diff erent "visions of nature" emerged through dialogue with stakeholders, each emphasizing a different set of characteristics related to the landscape's p erceived structure and function as well as its human values and uses: (1) n ature as designed landscape, where the concern was to restore the original 1938 naturalistic design for the site by a noted landscape architect; (2) n ature as habitat, where individuals sought to restore a hedgerow created du ring the 1950s that has since become a magnet for migrating birds; (3) natu re as recreation, where a variety of interests sought to balance nature res toration goals with the preservation of established recreational activities occurring on and adjacent to the site; and (4) nature as pre-European sett lement landscape, where individuals sought to restore the site as a reflect ion of the regional landscape as it may have existed before development of Chicago in the 1830s. It became clear during the course of the effort that the landscape features some individuals sought to restore had attained an i conic status, symbolizing for them meanings and values deeper than what mig ht be discerned by those not intimately knowledgeable of the site and its s ocial context, and that the preservation and enhancement of these features needed to be a central part of any final plan for the site. Trying to maint ain these icons in accommodating the various visions of nature did give ris e to some conflicts, but stakeholder negotiations also showed how the visio ns were compatible and how iconic features might "nest" within each other a s a result of different scales and locations of concern. Implications for l andscape design and management are discussed. Published by Elsevier Science B.V.