There might be no such place at Apple. Controlling him etc would mean kicking him out of a leadership position but if the reports are even half true, he won't take comment or instruction from anyone which means he's not going to accept being in any position with someone over his head. Which might be what Cook tried to do, wanting to move Ive into his current role putting him as 'Forstall's boss' and giving Ive power to veto the cute crap Forstall was so fond of adding rather than focusing on QC with the base functions and so on. Forstall may have said no way, as he reportedly despises Ive for getting all the attention and for disliking the skeuromorphic touches as unneeded nonsense. Forstall may have been told his choices were this shift or he could stay until the release of iOS 7 as an advisor to give comment with no vote and then be gone all together and he choose the latter (which would allow him to be around for his bigger stock grant next summer)
I agree for the most part, but I think all this talk of a "controlled" Forestall kind of misses the mark a bit. What we want is a more mature Forestall, not a more controlled Forestall. Since when are any "controlled" workers, really productive workers? Especially in creative endeavours.
By all accounts, Forestall (at his worst) behaves much like Steve Jobs did in Apple's early days when he was an immature, angry egomaniac. IMO it was his years in the wilderness and the spectacular "failure" of being fired that started Steve Jobs on the path to being a more mature, rounded individual. If Forestall wants to be like Steve Jobs, he needs to focus on the lessons of "Steve Jobs 2.0" not 1.0. He needs to grow up. He needs to relax. He probably needs some time away from it all.
If all goes well, he might even come back in ten years and be a whole new person just like his mentor.