The Forbury Gardens officially opened to the public of Reading in 1856. A year before that, on 23 March 1855, the Borough Surveyor, Mr J B Clacy, was asked for his opinions on two designs for the prospective park that had been submitted to the council. There had been complaints and concerns about the state of the Forbury area since July 1854, and these designs were the first step in it becoming the area that we know today. The following details are taken from the reports of the borough surveyor and inspector of nuisances to the Local Board and its committees, July 1854-August 1861 (RBA reference: R/AS2/3/1).
The first design discussed by Mr Clacy was entitled Speranza (an Italian word meaning Hope). He commended the arrangements of walkways within the gardens and inclusion of arched trellises to form a bower. This bower was intended to be surrounded by ornamental flower beds, although Mr Clacy did raise concerns about the labour and money that it would cost to keep them looking good. He held the same misgivings about the proposal to divide the walkways with geometric pieces of turf.
The hill in the Gardens would have a terrace on a level with the outer wall and steps leading to it from the ground level. The outer walls themselves would be interspersed with iron railings. Mr Clacy was also strongly against retaining an entrance to the Forbury from the North, but the reasons for this objection are not clear.
Photograph above of the entrance to the Forbury Gardens, Reading, n.d [c.1931] ref. R/D134/3/2
The central feature of Speranza was an ornamental Italian style lodge building. Mr Clacy considered the designers estimate of £125 to be vastly below what it would cost to construct, and raised concerns that it would not fit with its surroundings. He instead recommended a building that was similar to the Abbey ruins ‘as there is a great quantity of materials which would be suitable to this style’ (Page 67). Presumably, Mr Clacy meant the stones of the Abbey themselves, with a view to save a bit of money on materials.
Mr Clacy estimated that carrying out this design in its’ entirety would cost the borough around £1525 - that's the equivalent of about £141,500 today (according to the Bank of England inflation calculator).
The second design was entitled To Be or Not to Be. Mr Clacy seems to have found more in this one that he liked, not least that the main building was a summerhouse formed from fragments of the Abbey ruins. There appears to have been more of a focus on fitting in with the Abbey in this design, as it also suggested using a part of the Abbey gateway as an entrance lodge. He also liked the idea of the hill being ascended by sloped pathways rather than steps. To Be or Not to Be also suggested using paths and turf to create a geometric pattern, but received the same criticism that Speranza did.
The figure estimated by Mr Clacy for this design was £1390 (about £129,000 today), although this did not include money required to purchase the Abbey gateway.
Both designs also featured a central fountain and diagonal pathways, which Mr Clacy recommended inclusion of. There was a desire for the Gardens to connect to the Abbey ruins, but the tunnels suggested in the plan were clearly not satisfactory. One would be 80 feet long and curved leading Mr Clacy to determine that it would be ‘dark and liable to become a nuisance’ (Page 67), whilst the other would be 60 feet long.
After providing his report on the two designs, Mr Clacy went on to suggest how the two designs could be combined and implemented effectively. Unsurprisingly, he suggested the inclusion of a central fountain, diagonal pathways and situating the main entrance gates to the south-west of the park. For the south and part of the west, he recommended a wall of flint interspersed with iron rails, but only a solid wall on the north and remainder of the west in order to save money.
Mr Clacy again praised the idea of a bower of trellises, and suggested that these be planted with climbers, roses, and more hardy plants in order to avoid a significant annual upkeeping cost. He expanded on To Be or Not to Be’s use of material from the Abbey ruins, proposing to use them to form an alcove in the north-east corner, as well as expanding the terrace with a rough wall. It was his opinion that these would allow the construction to go ahead ‘at a comparatively trifling expense’ (Page 69). He also adopted the sloped pathways going up the hill from the same design.
In Mr Clacy’s opinion, the best option for a lodge in the new gardens would be to purchase the Abbey gateway and restore that. He had already investigated this possibility and found that the gateway was split into two properties. The eastern half was owned by a Mr Weedon, whilst the west belonged to Colonel Blagrave and the Blagrave family. He also suggested that this split ownership made it likely that appropriate preservation would not take place, but that the borough could restore it for the same price as building an ornamental lodge within the gardens. In terms of connecting the wider Abbey to the gardens, Mr Clacy recommended going through some ground owned by a Mr Ringrove, to avoid the long, dark tunnels suggested in the two earlier designs.
Photograph above of the Forbury Gardens, Reading, with St James's Catholic Church at the rear, n.d. [c.1896], ref. D/EX1942/8/9
Mr Clacy closed by also making some recommendations on the suggestion of a gymnasium within the gardens, which would need to be in view of the lodge keeper to prevent it from becoming a nuisance, and for improving the look of the Abbey ruins with ferns and Alpine plants. He states that these ‘would not detract from the character of the Ruins and would form an additional feature of interest’ (Page 70).
Some of the details described in the initial designs were clearly approved of, as they can still be seen in the Forbury Gardens today. Next time you’re there, why not see which parts of Speranza and To Be or Not to Be can still be recognised?