The Full Monty: 

Dear fellow neighbours, 

I finally find the time to give what I hope to be a meanginful contribution to the debate which has being going on, somehow subterraneously, somehow disconnected, over the garden, better, “the gardens”, the in-famous “tuinen” in “Tuinwijk Zuid ”,  in the hope to shed light about what’s going on and, most importantly, what coming.

I intervene in what is the on-going debate on the actual and future shape of our gardens, with a bit of background, which hopefully will shed some light on many rumours heard. This is in the will to bring the full debate in the open and in the attention of the whole community of twzuiders, the gardens are a common resource. 

I have noticed since joining TWZ, now over seven years ago, that the maintenance and, therefore, the design, the development, of the gardens seemed left to the wish, will and wit of a few: while it seemed the lawn was being mowed and somewhat randomly, the big bushes where never trimmed, only ONCE the large patch of Hortensia in the little “jungle” in my corner, and I seem to remember that created great discomfort in some.

I, in fact, came to understand that there was a part of the community who liked the gardens unkempt, “savage”, so to speak, or natural, if you prefer. Which is not “natural” for a garden, which is an artificial construct, I would like to remind everybody who forgot that. 

I did not have the luxury to follow all-things TWZ in the past few years and, hence, also the garden slipped by, but I did exchange a few comments with neighbours passing by and a few things became clear: Welna Buwalda had an own vision of the place, which is not bad per-se, and which I would like to define of “magical realism”: she liked high bushes which were able to “hide” someone walking around, a perspective I will reencounter later, since we live in a time when dragons (et al) are particularly popular (just ask HBO).

No surprise, thus, that my suggestion to cut bushes low near my own courtyards ended nowhere. The suggestion was, truly and still is, to allow “light and sight” to all those who did not, in fact, feel like playing hide&seek in the WHOLE garden (the central area, in my advise, should suffice to satisfy the “child within” in most of us), especially considering that ours is an INNER garden, meant to be surrounded by living quarters which happened to be, to our great fortune, beautiful enough to be considered “rijkmonumenten”, while the garden is not, I also would like to remember some.

So, should the houses be seen from the garden? Yes, that is what it is suppose to happen. Should people be seen as well? Not at all, that is what curtain are for. Even in Dutch there is a word for those: gordijnen. And they sell them in shops, and you can buy them! Wonderful things happen nowadays! Of course, the issue is different if you would like to be sitting in your backyard without being seen, in this case I would consider relocating in a place where gardens are less “communals”.

Because, let’s face it, there is NO WAY to hide your privacy while sitting in your terrace. And it is not enforceable: a backyard which opens to a common area is not supposed to be “reclusive”, and I am happy to hear the wisdom of the civil court on this point, if needed be. Certainly, I only need to climb one flight of stairs to look into most of the courtyards, two, if I really have to! 

Back on the story: I met the new “tuincommissie”, Otto and Renet, now I believe almost a year ago, and expressed my point of view on the garden, to which I had no meaningful replies, but a lot of smiles, which I believe now were supposed to console and suffice me. Unfortunately for the givers of such comfort I am a pretentious and demanding kind of mofo, hence the ensuing events. After having asked Renet first, Otto then, and both of them at once at one of the many “tuinavond-middag-borrell” by then organised and having understood that nothing was coming my way I started looking at the matter in the detail, and talking as well to my neighbours Jan and Fenna, but also Leo et al.

And we had a second, in-deep reading, to the document, approved by THIS community by its own majority vote, which should be describing and driving the maintenance and development process of both our inner gardens, the “Tuinvisie”. 

Obviously the matter got sour pretty soon because

1. We were demanding actions
2. The bestuur, Renet and Otto just wanted either to dodge any responsibility and/or to keep indulging in the gezelligheid: their choices, their designs (the infamous Westtuin Dragonbushes!) , their tuinbakkijes, their tuinavond, the ice creams, etc.
   

Until we decide to formalize our request and we to discuss further actions, to which we were proposed an encounter, also with a representative of the bestuur commissie. 

But before that we had a little candy, to sweeten our mouths (or so it was in the mind of someone who’d like to think of us in the guise of children, maybe a bit undisciplined!)

Since we were warned not to do any gardening before the meeting, which sounds reasonable, we were quite surprised when mvr. Welna Buwalda came to trim the bushes of…. around the big Ash in our corner! And in quite a “fancy” fashion, a RAMP of a bush! Because it had to be low for me and tall for Ellen, and the result is what you can see: ridiculous, in my opinion, but I do consider also ridiculous dragon-shaped bushes, so maybe it’s me! Who knows! I know that Renet wanted, again, to save the form trying to “come into our way”, without coming our way. Without also adhering to the Tuinvisie, by the way. Just a little trim, to show goodwill, to some people (us) who requested instead some SERIOUS chopping: as per the Tuinvisie, an “area of respect” of 5 meters where nothing can be taller than 1,5 mts. EXTRA, over the Tuinvisie, trimming the …. also shorter than the proposed 2,5 meters: the patch was left unkempt for 7 years, suiting just fine Ellen and those who, like her, like the garden “savauge”, now I wanted 7 years of my own gardening of choice. The rule of the Tuinvisie could be reinstated afterwards.

So, at the May 20th meeting we had another clash because we were asking things like: “The Tuinvisie clearly states that the bushes near the “rondgandepad”, for a distance of 5 meters from its inner edge, while it has not be done? And why nothing has been done in our corner (the one between Tuinwijklaan 1, 3, 5, 7 and Spaarnelaan 25)? 

The answer was always the same: “we are just volunteers, we do our best, we have dozens of issues ON our tables, etc”. Which would have been unprofessional and completely bureaucratic in any working context, not being this the case the only word which comes to my mind is: “childish”. Like when the teacher needs to check your preparation and interrogate you and you respond: “I did my best, that chapter was not mandatory and there were so many things to study!” but you still invited people for a tuinavondje, with ice cream, of course.

Or, like it happened during the May 20th meeting: you refuse the session to be recorded, claiming offense that there is no trust in you! YES, Otto, there is NO trust in you, for many for good reason, I do not expect you to admit it but there is no need: it is self-evident. And a word of wisdom: trust is a currency, you must earn it before being able to use it. When exactly you did earn our trust? Or, for you, it was “given”? Because we are neighbours?

A person who is true to his word has no problem whatsoever being recorded: his word is solid gold, can be printed on newspaper or sculpted in stone, there is NO NEED for trust. 

Instead: you mentioned to Fenna Politiek that our corner was not being maintained because you (meaning the two of you, of course) did not really fancy bearing the weight of another neighbour complaining about pruning, cutting, her privacy, etc. I do refer, of course, to Mrs. Ellen Swaalf, of Tuinwijklaan 5. Bad choice, Otto, now you have the nagging of a few more AND the one from Ellen to deal with! 

So we were asked not to register the session, to which request I refused to commit, until it was agreed that Joseph, in his quality of notaris and member of the bestuur, would continue to record the second part of the meeting. Second registration that we have asked, and more than once, and which, as for today, was NOT given to us. When speaking of trust, and lack thereof!

During the said meeting Otto&Renet proposed, sketched by hand, finally a strict adherence to the Tuinvisie: bushes at most 1,5 meter high for a band of 5 meters surrounding the walking path but bushes even 3 meters high at a longer distance! This because they wanted to be Solomon “The Butcher”, better both parties displeased that one happy and one displeased. Very, very silly. Low-effort, and silly.

And I stated, and will do so again and now: the Tuinvisie will be “enforced” exactly after all the years during which has not been enforced: 7. So, the bushes, which according to the Tuinvisie CAN be left growing taller than 1,5 meters could be left so AFTER I have cut them down to 1,5 for seven years, the amount of time the rest of the bushes which should have been kept and maintained, according to the TV, have NOT been kept and maintained. Either we ALL go “old testament” or nobody does, correct?

Or at least in my corner! Because one thing is clear: there are different “visions” for the gardens, and the democratic rule seems not to be prevailing: Ellen wants high bushes and thick foliage, or at least in the back (in the front Welna Buwalda completely balded my Platanus to allow Ellen to get the light that, THERE, she most desidered!) while Fenna, Jan, Leo and I (but there are more, just talking about our corner here) wants light and sight! And that’s what the TV describe and prescribe.

So, in conclusion: 

O&R are completely inadequate, for either lack or time, will or both. Certainly for lack of conscience. The fact that they spread “propaganda” in their own favour is just sad, simply and truly sad. 

Let’s leave the political bullshit where they belong, in those palaces where what is decided is several degrees of separation removed from the object of the decision and any of the consequences of such decisional process: here O&R have had, are having (I suppose) and will have quite a tough time, the subject of their decision lives right next door, and it is not going to submit to arbitrary decisions without a fight. A civil fight, a fight nevertheless. Which is not the bullshitting on twitter about neighbours being “tree haters”, Mvr. Van Zetten. The twitter post you so smartly diffused did not specify nor that it was, in fact, YOUR back garden you were talking about, hence the “boomhaters” were and are your neighbours nor that they are NOT tree haters at all and the status of the garden is CLEARLY showing it. Even in that specific patch, and after cutting the (sick!!!) buxus the patch can hardly be called “bald”.

Hence: seen that the procedure is stuck (garden improvement design, garden maintenance of the current design) and there is again no sign of a way forward but only communication dropped from above and propaganda leaflet, I decide to take matter in my own hands, within the guidelines imposed by the Tuinvisie and the written rules of the TWZ complex, for what I see them pertinent. Using my own judgement in any other case. 


—1. continue —

WORK IN PROGRESS

Further points:

-the ghost bestuurcommissie: they are mostly not there and when they are they’d like to be elsewhere.

The Bestuur is next in line as per scrutiny. Did not like their in-actions in this matter, want to know more of what they’re doing 

The tuin maintenance should we done properly, we have a budget for it!

-no registration, no commitment: planning, in writing, means commitment

-no following the tuinvisie, a blatant “i don’t give a fuck” to the whole

-interpreting the tuinvisie at their convenience: only richtlijnen when they must, the Holy Bible when they need. 

-Renet likes the Welna’s style, “hide&seek”

-according to them nobody but them can touch the garden, they claim is the law but, to this day, do not say which one, which is very bad. Worse, they claim is by statute, at first, and then, when asked to show the part of the statute where this is mentioned, they switch to: “we have a mandate, we do what we like”.

-salomonic solution if Solomon was to be known as “the butcher”, no justice at all, just making “everybody a bit unhappy” to be able to say that they did not favour anybody. 

-the garden are scarcely to be seen as bald, there are hence NO tree haters in the community

-the politicians are politicians, hence shameless person, they will still be shamed, the public condemnation has to be enforced 

The past: 

The present: the pamphlet and its meaning: the garden is not “our” to be handled, only to be “walked”, until permission will be granted, not even sitting is allowed. Issues are mentioned, what is in place to be tackled not, they’re just like that, “issues”, it is not given that anybody will do shit about it, life is tough, get a helmet!!

-the patch in our corner, because is not being maintained at all, it is being invaded by haagwinde, and it’s spreading. It was not present in the westtuin before, only in the voortuinen. 

-the peren are not to be eaten, if we’d like to follow the Tuinvisie, which says: “no herbs directly in the soil due to pollution”

The future: the rule of majority needs to be re-instated. Planning need to be in place. Discussion and involvement needs to be preventive. The idea is: tuincommissie sketches a plan in June for the following year, we discuss it until october/november, we seal it in details before december and it starts from Jan 1st.