Green regulatory determination - Your opinion?

My husband is clearly of the opinion that it’s none of our business. I, on the other hand, think that planting the trees is especially important for the village’s natural character. Of course, the neighbors should be happy on their land, and I certainly have nothing against a pool. But it annoys me that the development plan requirements regarding planting are being ignored to such an extent.

I also find it somewhat difficult. On the one hand, I think “live and let live” and if I myself don’t suffer any disadvantages from it, then “looking away” is initially the obvious choice. On the other hand, if I stick to the rules myself and possibly find the regulation itself good for the place, then I’d find it kind of stupid if others don’t stick to it. By personality, I think I’m rather conflict-avoidant and would probably end up with the former in the end (just ignore it, it doesn’t hurt me). Maybe in the future there will be something for which I’d prefer if the neighbor doesn’t take it too seriously.

Anyway, I don’t really expect any changes from going to ask the neighbors “have you already decided which fruit trees you’ll plant?” while you can already clearly see that a large pool is being built there... Or is it realistic that there’s still enough space left for an “orchard” (I don’t know how realistic that is in terms of space).

I suspect that others here thought you want to go to the building authority because “talking to the neighbor” doesn’t sound very promising if they have such completely different ideas.

Thank you for your different points of view. I find that very interesting. Apparently, opinions on this are very different.

There are things that belong in a development plan. But the number of trees and the type go beyond that and can be debated.

In fact, the green planning regulations in many development plans take up extensive texts. I don't think that can be debated. The expensive expert who has thought about this in collaboration with other expensive experts did not come up with it to harass the population.

Thank you very much for your different viewpoints. I find that very interesting. Apparently, opinions on this are very diverse. Actually, the green zoning regulations take up extensive texts in many development plans. I don't think one can argue about that. The expensive specialist who thought about this in collaboration with other expensive specialists did not come up with it to harass the population.

And then a municipal council, which at the time represented the majority of the population, decided on it. However, by now there could be completely different majorities who want something entirely different but have not changed the plan due to lack of necessity. That means such a development plan is not set in stone and one can certainly debate it. For example, I believe such things do not belong there, just like many other things (e.g., the color of houses and roofs).

And then a municipal council, which at that time represented the majority of the population, decided on it. Meanwhile, there could be completely different majorities that want something entirely different, but have not changed the plan due to a lack of necessity. That means such a development plan is not set in stone and can certainly be debated. For example, I think such things don’t belong there, just like many other things (e.g. color of houses and roofs).

I think this way of thinking is somewhat short-sighted. Especially with ecological issues, cities have not just noticed since yesterday that the type of greening is essential to avoid overheating. They can’t just wait for each individual’s understanding either, but have to set that.

I think this way of thinking is somewhat shortsighted. Especially when it comes to ecological issues, cities have realized for quite some time that the type of greenery is essential for avoiding overheating. They can't just wait for the insight of every individual but have to set it in place.

You mentioned that it is a village. You are certainly right for larger cities.

Maybe he bought his way out? Are there any compensatory areas where he might sponsor the next 20 trees? Who knows. In any case, I would find it too much trouble. If you can't bear to let it pass uncommented: Just print out the development plan as many times as there are new buildings and send it to everyone (including yourself). Then the wrongdoer is warned in advance, you’re not outed as a snitch (or rather branded), and nothing is worse than their own idea of what the next escalation stage is.