Historical Gardens

Yesterday I made a flash visit to the Koepel van Stoop.¹ Having been there over a year ago, I thought I’d look how the then heavily pruned trees were holding up. I say heavily pruned, but I mean prepared for removal.
Continue Reading »

1. This building was built in 1840 for the Amsterdam banker J.B. Stoop, who intended to create an estate on this location. It was designed by architect J.D. Zocher jr. Problems with watermanagement on this location caused Stoop to choose an alternative location. In nearby Zeist he built Molenbosch, also a design by J.D. Zocher jr. [back]

In two previous posts I discussed the beech avenue in the flower exhibiton area of the Keukenhof. In both posts I wrote that the avenue was laid out as a result of the design efforts of architects J.D. Zocher Jr. and his son L.P. Zocher. I wrote that because it is mentioned in almost every article I read in relation to that avenue. The name Zocher is used to support the decision to cut down the complete avenue and plant new trees: their idea of a complete and uniform avenue would thus be respected.¹ Continue Reading »

1. The official website does not mention Zocher in connection with the avenue, by the way, it is just something that pops up in the press. Much like the interview with the former director of the Keukenhof in 1999, where he stated that the Zochers designed the garden in 1830. That has been repeated many times in the press, while old and recent publications invariably place their work in the 1850s. [back]

Really? Replace them? (message here)
Heh, this could become interesting…

Don’t get me wrong: I like that they replant the avenue and that they are using the same sort of tree. The removal of the trees has been approved by the local council (in this case: Lisse), who needs to at least give permission for that part of the process. Ten trees have already died and been removed over the last few years. Gradually replacing them would be an option, but the owners want to convey the effect of an avenue with trees of about the same age and height. They will replant the trees in two shifts.¹
The new beech trees are said to be of size 70-80 (girth circumference in cm at a height of 1m), which means they are 6-7 meters in height (? please correct me if I’m wrong here). That is quite a considerable size, but while calling this a replacement might be linguistically correct, visually it hardly is.

And historically?

The message contains interesting information, if the estimate of 180 year old trees is correct. There is no knowledge of changes in the layout around 1835-1840 (when an 1830 seedling would ‘usually’ have been planted). J.D. and L.P. Zocher are known to have worked at de Keukenhof in and around 1854.² This means that if the estimate is correct, the Zochers originally planted 20-25 year old trees in this avenue. We know that is -and was- possible, that is not the interesting part.
What interests me is that the current owners apparently choose to plant trees that are much younger than the current ones have ever been (on this location, ofcourse).

And thus create a beech-lined avenue the Keukenhof has never witnessed before, despite their efforts to ‘maintain the character of an avenue as Zocher intended’. History, being made as we sit behind our computer, typing. This might become more interesting than I thought…

Edit 21/10/2010 I may have jumped to the wrong conclusion here: a few hours after typing the above I took out a tape measure to see what a 70 cm circumference actually looks like. Those new trees at the Keukenhof could easily be of the same age the Zochers used in 1854. Ea-si-ly.
Hope to find out exactly how old they are soon…

1. I do not want to go into the current debate ‘should we replant an avenue gradually, or all at once?’, but I’d like to say this.
   It is a hot topic as many beech lined avenues dating from the first half of the 19th century run the risk of being completely wiped away by owners who care more about the safety of their visitors than about cutting away old trees. I do understand their choice, because they are responsible (or will probably be held responsible) when someone gets injured or dies after being hit by a fallen tree or big branch. But I would also like to stretch that there are many situations where the risk is low, besides the fact that the risk of getting hit by a falling tree is part of being outdoors.
   Whichever decision is made, it should not be insprired by a dogmatic stance, but by careful assessment of the situation and weighing of the risks. [back]
2. It is a pity that a garden magazine mentions J.W. Zocher, when the man was really called J.D. Zocher Jr., ánd worked together on this project with his son L.P. Zocher, but hey: we all make mistakes. [back]

The 150 year old orangery at Eikenrode in Loosdrecht will be demolished, sources close to Eikenrode say. The orangery (which might have been designed by J.D. Zocher jr) played an important role in the plans to revitalise the estate: it was to be restored and house care apartments. But it was set to fire in December 2007.

The damaged orangery in September 2008. Photo by HvdE.

In an initial response shortly after the fire, RACM concluded that although severe damage was done, restoration of the orangery was still possible. The orangery also kept its status as a monument of national importance (Rijksmonument). A few months later the whole future of Eikenrode was at stake, when banks decided to put the estate up for auction. These plans were curbed at the last moment, but the initial reason for this auction never became clear.

The plan to sell the orangery to a third party who will demolish the building, was allegedly induced by the discovery of large quantities of asbestos in the orangery. The associated costs to clean the site were too high for the current owners (which may explain why the banks planned the sudden auction).

The solution chosen is to have the orangery demolished, the site cleaned and a new building with care apartments erected by a third party. That same party will manage the new building and the surrounding garden in this part of Eikenrode for a period of about 30 years. After that, the care apartments and adjacent grounds should apparently return to the current owners of the estate.
We at HGblog expect RACM has worked with the owners to develop these new plans. A final decision is expected in the near future.

This looks like a practical solution for the owners of Eikenrode, who saw a vital source of income go down the drain when the orangery caught fire. And given the efforts they have put into the restoration of the house and park up till now, we’re certain the decision was made with pain in their hart. But still: what a shame of that fine orangery.