High-Rise Housing in The Netherlands

High-Rise Housing In The Netherlands:
Past, Present And Sustainability Outlook
Date
25 October 2004
Authors
TNO Bouw (J.F.T. Roeloffzen, R. Lanting and Dr N.P.M Scholten)

Rigo Research en Advies BV (F. den Breejen, R. de Wildt, Hans van
Rossum)
Nationaal Duurzaam Bouwen Centrum (J. Blass, K.W. de Vries and
M.O.M. Willemse-ter Braake)
Project Coordination TNO Bouw

Postbus 49
2600 AA Delft
Contact person: J.F.T. Roeloffzen
tel no: 015 276 31 36
fax no: 015- 276 30 24
email: j.roeloffzen@bouw.tno.nl
Contact information
other parties
Rigo Research en Advies BV

Postbus 2805
1000 CV Amsterdam
contact person: F. den Breejen
tel no: 020- 522 11 37
fax no: 020- 627 68 40
email: femma@rigo.nl
Nationaaal Duurzaam Bouwen Centrum
Postbus 29046
3001 GA Rotterdam
contact person: K.W. de Vries
tel no: 010- 412 47 66
fax no: 010- 214 29 25
email: k.de.vries@dubo-centrum.nl
Opdrachtgever
Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieu

(Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment)
Postbus 30941
2500 GX Den Haag
contact person: H.S. van Eyk (DG Wonen, Director Policy
Development, Manager Unit Wonen Internationaal)
tel no: 070- 339 22 99
fax no: 070- 339 14 61
email: h.vaneyk@minvrom.nl
Preface
This High-rise (etc.) reader was compiled for the Directorate-General Housing of the
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM).
The purpose of the reader is to provide a concise overview of the high-rise situation and
the available expertise in the housing sector in the Netherlands, specifically for
interested foreign professionals. Special attention was thereby given to important
subjects, such as maintenance, sustainability and occupation. It also includes a
European comparison, which presents an interesting profile of the high-rise situation in
the Netherlands.
This reader was developed in partnership with the Ministry and the Nederlandse
Organisatie voor Toepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek (TNO), RIGO Research
en Advies BV, and the Nationaal Dubo Centrum.
I hope this reader will contribute to the discussion on high-rise buildings in the housing
sector and the restructuring of the new Europe. In addition, I trust it will provide
insight, in the European framework, into the level of expertise available in the
Netherlands, so that current and future occupants could benefit therefrom.
A.Th. van Delden

Deputy Director-General Housing
The Hague, November 2004
High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook
3 / 119
Table of contents
Executive summary; major conclusions and questions ............................................................... 5

1
Introduction.................................................................................................................... 7
History of high-rise residential buildings in the Netherlands .................................. 10
3
3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.3
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.4
Characteristics of high-rise building .......................................................................... 16

Current status of high-rise building in the Netherlands ................................................. 16
Housing ownership and housing management............................................................... 22
Management by landlords.............................................................................................. 23
Management by the Owners Association ..................................................................... 23
Management problems................................................................................................... 24
Living environment........................................................................................................ 25
Physical characteristics of the living environment in post-war high-rise districts......... 26
Social and economic characteristics .............................................................................. 27
Opportunities for sustainable improvements in the high-rise living environment......... 27
A European comparison................................................................................................. 28
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.4.3
Residents and dwelling use.......................................................................................... 31

Who lives in high-rise housing? .................................................................................... 31
Satisfaction and wishes of the residents......................................................................... 34
The demand for high-rise housing ................................................................................. 37
Social aspects and sustainability.................................................................................... 39
Example: Emmen, City Centre North............................................................................ 40
Resident participation .................................................................................................... 40
Example of participation in the Poptahof, Delft ............................................................ 41
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.4
5.5
5.5.1
5.5.2
5.5.3
5.5.4
5.5.5
5.5.6
5.5.7
Structural and financial aspects of high-rise buildings ............................................ 42

Building methods and technologies ............................................................................... 42
Modern high-rise construction techniques..................................................................... 49
Maintenance, refurbishment and demolition of high-rise .............................................. 50
Maintenance, refurbishment and quality of high-rise housing....................................... 50
Demolition or refurbishment of high-rise ...................................................................... 54
Costs and Benefits of Redevelopment ........................................................................... 58
The added value of sustainable solutions....................................................................... 59
The limited approach ..................................................................................................... 59
Social aspects of the limited approach........................................................................... 60
Other limited measures and strategy.............................................................................. 60
The drastic approach...................................................................................................... 61
Sustainable solutions under the drastic approach .......................................................... 62
Financial government instruments involved in the drastic approach............................. 63
Summarizing: sustainable solutions............................................................................... 63
6
6.1
6.1.1
6.1.2
Legal and policy aspects .............................................................................................. 65

Legislation and regulations relating to high-rise............................................................ 65
Apartment rights ............................................................................................................ 65
Allocation of housing..................................................................................................... 66
4 / 119
6.1.3
6.2
6.2.1
6.2.2
Structural aspects ........................................................................................................... 67

Policy aspects................................................................................................................. 70
Policy and effect on the surroundings............................................................................ 70
Sustainability in policy .................................................................................................. 71
7
7.1
7.1.1
7.1.2
7.2
7.3
7.3.1
7.3.2
7.3.3
7.3.4
7.3.5
7.4
Current developments and the outlook...................................................................... 74

Developments in demolition and refurbishment............................................................ 74
Technical developments ................................................................................................ 74
Sustainable demolition and reuse cycle ......................................................................... 74
Urban regeneration ........................................................................................................ 75
High-rise for specific target groups ............................................................................... 82
High-rise and housing for the elderly ............................................................................ 82
Refurbishment of complexes for the elderly.................................................................. 81
New build complexes for the elderly ............................................................................. 83
Future housing for the elderly policy............................................................................. 86
High-rise for younger people ......................................................................................... 86
Importance of and outlook for high-rise ........................................................................ 90
8
8.1
8.1.1
8.1.2
8.1.3
8.1.4
8.1.5
8.1.6
8.1.7
8.2
Important Dutch high-rise parties ............................................................................. 94

Players............................................................................................................................ 94
Knowledge centres and umbrella organizations ............................................................ 94
Major contractors........................................................................................................... 96
Architects....................................................................................................................... 99
Project developers........................................................................................................ 101
Designers and consultants............................................................................................ 103
Housing Associations .................................................................................................. 105
Government and banks ................................................................................................ 105
Foreign activities ......................................................................................................... 106
Appendix 1: Building methods................................................................................................... 107

Appendix 2: Definition of sustainable housing ......................................................................... 111
Appendix 3: Types of flats.......................................................................................................... 113
Literature..................................................................................................................................... 116
5 / 119
Executive summary; major conclusions and questions

High-rise in the Netherlands occupies a special position in the housing market. The
high-rise blocks dating from the nineteen-sixties and seventies are by far the most
uniform, the most direct and the most visible result of post-war spatial planning. Highrise has been making a comeback since the start of the nineteen-nineties. New high-rise
housing is more luxurious, is located in a sought-after location, offers prospects for
other groups in the population and, probably most important of all, over the years it has
acquired a different image.
High-rise is coming into the picture more and more in regard to providing urban
housing. Dutch policy is providing scope for building higher structures. This policy is
crystallizing at a local authority level. There is no specific high-rise policy at central
government level. However, the governments policy for the big cities places emphasis
on the integrated regeneration (restructuring) of urban areas. The advantages of highrise can be utilized optimally in regeneration, and the sustainable refurbishment of the
existing high-rise stock is an indispensable element in it. It is important to know in this
context what the current status of our high-rise is and which specific characteristics and
future expectations should be taken into account in this regard. There follows a brief
overview of the Dutch high-rise stock.
Thirty percent of homes in the Netherlands are multi-family dwellings. Of these 30%,
6.7% are in the high-rise category. The following can be said about them:
Most high-rise housing was built in the nineteen-sixties and seventies (60%)
Most high-rise housing is owned by housing associations (62%)
90% of high-rise dwellings are occupied by one or two people
The most common high-rise dwelling has three or four rooms and covers an area of
between 60 and 100 m2
The quality of the average high-rise flat is better than the quality of other types of
housing.
If these figures are compared with other European countries, one sees that while the
share of high-rise housing in the overall stock is low, the average Dutch high-rise home
is relatively large, there is little owner-occupation and the proportion of households
with one or two people is much higher than elsewhere in Europe. Dutch high-rise
housing is moreover somewhat newer that the rest of European high-rise housing, and
consequently also of better quality in many cases. The following can be said about the
occupancy of high-rise housing:
Dutch people prefer to live in a low-rise home. Many people live in high-rise for a
couple of years and then move on to a bigger dwelling in another environment.
High-rise flats are good for housing old people, young people and students.
There are relatively more ethnic minorities (western and non-western) living in highrise housing.
Sixty percent of the people living in high-rise have an income that is modal or below,
and there are therefore relatively many people from low-income groups in high-rise
dwellings.
Resident satisfaction with high-rise homes is as good as with low-rise homes.
6 / 119
The vast majority of Dutch high-rise homes were built using different concrete building
systems. Different versions of in situ, stack type and prefab still dominate the stock.
Steel structures are used on an incidental basis, but they are becoming a more and more
attractive alternative, particularly for buildings higher than 70 metres. Current
techniques are aimed primarily at light buildings and fast construction. Combinations of
a steel skeleton and concrete finishing are very common.
Over the last 15 years huge sums have been invested in the sustainable refurbishment of
homes, and maintenance has improved radically in order to keep the high-rise stock at a
high quality level. This has resulted in the disappearance of poor and mediocre high-rise
housing and the percentage of excellent high-rise dwellings has doubled. In the
Netherlands the choice between demolition and refurbishment is often made on a caseby-case basis. However, there is a growing trend towards opting for sustainable
refurbishment rather than the demolition of housing. Here too it has been found that
integrated refurbishment (physical, economic and social) works best. Involving the
occupants of the dwellings concerned at an early stage and continuing to communicate
with them during the refurbishment or demolition process is essential.
These factors relating to high-rise and associated issues give rise to positive
expectations for the future. There are enough possibilities for high-rise in the future,
despite the preference that most Dutch households always have for a single-family
home with a garden. Space in the Netherlands is becoming ever scarcer, and there is
growing demand for urban housing, new techniques are providing better dwellings, and
finally the policy makers are permitting higher structures to be built in the Netherlands.
Luxurious, slender, sustainably developed, good quality high-rise homes could provide
a good living environment, primarily for older people and starters with two incomes,
and possibly also for young people. More and more of the existing stock is also being
made suitable for a more diverse range of residents. Integrated refurbishment and
restructuring are being applied on a large scale. The 56 districts approach of the
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment is providing clear direction
in this regard. The first results, in the Bijlmer and elsewhere, are now emerging and
continuing positive results are expected.
A large amount of varied information is needed in order to be able to implement
developments and changes in the high-rise stock. Statements about the high-rise stock
can only be made if large-scale surveys are regularly conducted on the basis of random
samples. In the Netherlands the Housing Needs Survey (Woning Behoefte Onderzoek)
and the Housing Quality Register (Kwalitatieve Woningregistratie) are indispensable
instruments. The most important core data in these two overviews are updated every
four years in order to be able to formulate policy and take decisions. The sustainable
refurbishment of high-rise housing in the Netherlands can be seen as a market where
much has yet to happen. The right boundary conditions have been created. Over the
next few years it will be necessary for both public and private sector players to take on
and overcome the remaining challenges in close consultation with the residents of highrise housing, and to work on creating a sustainable high-rise housing stock in the
Netherlands, and possibly even elsewhere in Europe.
This document contains an overview of the important players in the Netherlands with
experience and expertise in high-rise.
7 / 119
Introduction
The goal of this reader is to present concisely a broad-based analysis of the current
position of high-rise in the Netherlands with a particular focus on sustainable
developments, and to take a brief look at the outlook. The reader also seeks to provide
an initial overview of the relevant expertise available in the Netherlands. The reader
consists mainly of quantitative information, but the quality of high-rise housing is also
discussed in depth here and there. In this reader the following definition is used for
high-rise housing (this definition stems in part from the lift limit, i.e. a lift is necessary
if a building has more than four storeys):
Definition of High-rise used in this report:

Residential buildings with 5 or more storeys
High-rise building appears to be becoming more and more popular in the Netherlands.
Nevertheless, high-rise housing dating from the nineteen-sixties and seventies is often
associated with social deprivation, an unsafe residential environment and criminal
activities. It is therefore not popular with the population and it no longer complies with
the technical criteria. It is also the case that urban living has remained popular with a
small group of people, primarily in city centres. There may be other opportunities for
high-rise housing for the elderly, youth, starters or people with high incomes (luxury
urban housing), and these opportunities can be followed up. The high-rise districts built
in the nineteen-sixties and seventies, the best-known example of which in the
Netherlands is the Bijlmer in Amsterdam, are more and more in need of major
refurbishment or restructuring. Over the last twenty years the quality of the high-rise
housing stock has improved.
The reader gives a brief but essentially complete analysis of the most important aspects
relating to the position of high-rise in the Netherlands. Chapter 2 outlines the history of
high-rise in the Netherlands. It describes its inception and how high-rise has developed
in the Netherlands. Chapter 3 describes the typical characteristics of high-rise in the
Netherlands, and chapter 4 gives an overview of the construction methods and
technologies employed. Where is the stock of high-rise homes, what are the
characteristics of these homes and the living environment, when were they built, who
owns these dwellings, are many such homes empty and what can be said about the
quality and maintenance of this housing? These questions are answered in chapter 3.
Chapter 4 addresses the residents and the use of the homes. What type of people live in
high-rise housing and which social classes are they in? Are the people who live in highrise housing satisfied with their dwellings and their living environment, and what are
their incomes. Input from residents and their wishes are also discussed. The discourse is
general, but a specific example will be described in some cases.
Chapter 5 answers questions about which construction methods and building techniques
were employed in the Dutch high-rise stock and the financial and sustainability aspects
of managing and maintaining high-rise buildings.
8 / 119
Chapter 6 addresses legal and policy aspects relating to and associated with high-rise.
Which requirements (technical and architectural) must high-rise buildings meet and
when are high-rise buildings safe (legislation)? The nature of the rental agreements and
contracts of sale are subjected to detailed attention. The chapter ends with high-rise
policy in the Netherlands, and policy trends are discussed briefly.
Chapter 7 considers whether high-rise has a future in the Netherlands. How does it
compare with low-rise building and what can be expected in the near future?
Developments in urban planning are incorporated and an analysis is made of whether
there is a place for high-rise in urban plans. Finally, this chapter reviews trends in
demolition and refurbishment, and high-rise housing for the elderly with special focus
on home automation.
The reader ends with chapter 8, in which the important players involved professionally
in Dutch high-rise building are listed.
The leitmotif in the chapters is the overarching theme of sustainability. This is
expressed in most chapters, in some cases in the form of a special example, but often as
measures or solutions that have been applied. Chapters 4 and 5 devote a few sections to
a deeper discussion of sustainable building and refurbishment. This reader uses the
definition of sustainability quoted in the Ministerial conference in Genval (see appendix
2).
Our vision of a sustainable approach is based on the Triple P concept. The expression
Triple P is derived from the concept of the triple bottom line as described by John
Elkington in his book Cannibals with Forks (Elkington, 1998). The triple bottom-line
means that in its operations, an organization has to give equal weight to the three
aspects of People, Planet and Profit/Prosperity. When translated into the building world,
this is an integrated process involving balancing:
People: this includes aspects like quality of the environment, quality of the
dwelling, quality of the amenities and access.
Planet: such aspects as water management, soil, waste and health
Profit/Prosperity: this involves local employment, local business activity, function
mixing, flexibility, IT and infrastructure
This is also known as doing business in a socially responsible way (MVO).

Profit was changed to Prosperity prior to the World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg (2002) in order to include social benefit in the equation
alongside economic profit. In recent years there has been increasing recognition that
sustainable building should not be solely concerned with the P of Planet (environment).
The Ps of People and Prosperity also need to be involved in the development of a
sustainable built environment, which certainly includes the living environment.
This line of reasoning is used in this reader in regard to the sustainable refurbishment of
high-rise, although this application of these principles is still relatively new. Elkingtons
books was only published six years ago and it focused on organizations, and not
primarily on sustainable building, so it is not surprising that the earliest projects, in
particular, were not always set up along these lines. The Triple P approach is most
suitable for describing the breadth of broadly based projects.
9 / 119
There are frequent references in the text to appendices; these can be found immediately
after chapter 8. The literature listed at the back of this volume includes all relevant and
used literature.
10 / 119
History of high-rise residential buildings in the

Netherlands
There are 6.6 million homes in the Netherlands, about five million of which were built
after the Second World War. The share of multi-storey buildings is considerable; about
thirty percent of homes are in this category1. Only some 6.7 % are high-rise buildings (5
or more storeys)
Share of dwellings in high-rise residential buildings in the housing stock (2002)
Total housing stock (all dwellings)
Total number of dwellings in multi-storey buildings
Number of dwellings in high-rise buildings
6,710,880
1,946,155
446,620
Figure 2.1: Share of multi-family residential buildings in housing stock
Between 1946 and 1980 approximately 610,000 dwellings were built in multi-storey
buildings in the non-profit sector. Of these, 67% are situated in estates with 100 or more
flats / apartments. No less than 40 % of all post-war housing is council housing or socalled Housing Act housing2. Many of these dwellings are located in multi-storey
buildings. The largest share of social rental housing has been built by housing
associations; a smaller share by the local authorities (municipalities).
In the Netherlands multi-storey residential buildings have been built to an increasing
extent since 1945, including in smaller towns and rural municipalities. In the early postwar period (1945-1965) roughly 400,000 dwellings were realized as multi-storey
buildings. Most estates consist of blocks with three to five storeys with the walk-up flats
as the dominant type. After 1960, when new construction techniques (see chapter 4)
were introduced, the gallery-access type flat was the most abundant type of mediumrise building3. Originally the flats were not equipped with lifts and central heating. The
size of the apartments is small compared to present standards. Although the quality of
these flats is minimal, their low rents still make them attractive to low-income groups.
An explosive development (later called the high-rise boom) occurred in the nineteensixties and early nineteen-seventies. The high-rise boom was caused by a combination
of factors. Architects and town planners, influenced by well-known international
opinion leaders such as Gropius and Le Corbusier, have long cherished the idea that
high-rise was the best solution for housing the urban working class. An important
contribution to the decision making process was a report of the Hoogbouw-Laagbouw
Commission instituted by the Netherlands Minister of Reconstruction and Housing at
that time (1961). The conclusions of this commissions report were generally
interpreted as being in favour of high-rise building. In combination with the government
building policy at that time, which was expansive encouraging industrial building (to
cope with the labour shortage and to meet housing targets), all conditions were met for
creating a climate favourable to high-rise building. More than 300,000 dwellings in
buildings with six or more storeys were built in the relatively short period between 1964
and 1974.
1
Housing Demand Survey 2002

Lanting; Multi-storey residential building in the Netherlands, TNO Bouw
3
Medium-rise buildings are defined as buildings that are 3 or 4 storeys high
2
11 / 119
Most high-rise buildings in this period were built by housing associations and by means
of industrialized or prefab construction methods (see chapter 5) on the outskirts of
existing cities and in some newly developed towns. Blocks or linked blocks with
gallery-access,
comprising
two and three bedroom
apartments, are the most
abundant type. These new
districts
of
high-rise
residential
buildings
are
characterized by their large
scale and uniform blocks in
straight rows. The buildings
dating from this period (19641974) are sometimes of poor
quality because of their rapid construction, new construction methods and the use of
building materials without know ledge of their long-term behaviour.
High-rise living never became very popular with tenants. It was criticized for its poor
construction, design and visual appearance. The high-rise building programme abruptly
came to an end in the mid-nineteen-seventies in response to such criticism. Looking
back at this period it can be said that the high-rise wave was a result of government
intervention (high volume building, housing subsidy schemes) and mistaken
architectural and planning ideologies, rather than realistic insight into the housing
demands and preferences of the population.
Period of
construction
Total housing
stock
Dwellings in
multi-family
buildings
High-rise
residential
dwellings
Low-rise
residential
dwellings
< 1945
1945-1960
1960-1970
1970-1980
1980-1990
>1990
Total
19.9
11.3
14.6
20.5
16.9
16.8
100%
17.9
13.1
16.3
18.0
17.7
17.0
100%
2.5
4.6
24.1
36.8
12.4
19.6
100%
21.1
11.8
14.0
19.3
17.2
16.6
100%
Figure 2.2: Age of the housing stock4
Two distinct developments can be noted in the period after the high-rise wave. A
remarkable change from isolated high-rise blocks (with balcony access and ground
floors containing storerooms) to linked medium-rise blocks with a range of shapes and
heights. The maximum height became five storeys, with apartments also on the ground
floor. The multi-storey buildings in a residential quarter were combined with many
more single-family houses than was previously the case.
From 1980 to 1990 most new building activities in the social sector involve low to
medium-rise multi-storey buildings, mainly situated in the rehabilitation areas of the old
city centres. High-rise buildings, although limited in number, were almost completely
confined to the private sector. There was a tendency to erect well-equipped, high-rise
4
12 / 119
residential buildings in the inner city. These high-quality flats were destined for an
emerging new target group consisting of people who prefer the city life style and can
afford to pay for the comfort.
From the nineteen-nineties until now much effort has been put into the refurbishment
and restructuring of the post-war multi-storey housing stock, which is still an important
reservoir for the social housing market. The medium and the high-rise housing stock of
the nineteen-sixties and early nineteen-seventies, in particular, is at risk due to its poor
quality. In several cases demolition is preferred to refurbishment for economic reasons.
Starting in about 1990, however, there was a change in Dutch thinking about high-rise
building. Whereas from the nineteen-seventies onwards the wealthy tended to move to
green city suburbs, or some preferably to a detached house in the country, during the
nineteen-nineties there was a trend to move into luxury high-rise flats in the city. The
occurrence of this opportunity was due in part to the so-called Key Projects. Their aim
was to regenerate some inner city locations, some of which had had an industrial use
until then, although in recent years they had no longer been actively used, such as the
Kop van Zuid in Rotterdam, the banks of the River IJ in Amsterdam and the Ceramique
site in Maastricht. The vision for these industrial locations, which are in or close to the
oldest parts of the city, was not only to give them a residential function but also to
achieve it in the form of high-rise buildings. Based on the realization that space is
becoming ever scarcer in the busy society of Netherlands and in response to the housing
needs of young people with high-pressure jobs in the city, luxury high-rise housing was
built together with amenities geared to the target group (such as cafs and theatres) in
locations where until then the cityscape had been defined by ageing factory and port
buildings. These projects also included the transformation of some old industrial
buildings. For example, in Maastricht a theatre was located in a former Ceramique
factory building, large attic flats (lofts) were created in industrial buildings in the Kop
van Zuid in Rotterdam, and the old Holland-America Line buildings were given several
uses, including a hotel, a concert hall and housing. This led to the creation of
multifunctional districts featuring interesting architectural and spatial concepts. A
change had taken place in thinking about living in the city and the Key Projects were a
great success.
This trend has been continued with the modern high-rise projects in recent years. Highrise buildings are used as landmarks. A striking high-rise building with an interesting
architectural personality is located at a prominent position in the urban landscape as a
means of creating the urban structure. High-rise buildings help people find their
bearings and provide a contrast with medium-rise and low-rise buildings. Inner city
high-rise housing has an attractive status and is clearly intended to provide the better off
with a prestigious living environment. Local authorities give high-rise a good status and
they want to show that they count and are attractive to the target group concerned by
means of spatial impact.
Alongside these new developments in city centres, during this same period there was a
completely different trend in the older high-rise districts. Originally built as social
housing intended to provide people on modest incomes with good accommodation,
designed in accordance with the concept at that time of ideal living and quality, and
built in huge numbers because of the housing shortage in those days, these districts
went downhill. In structural terms the dwellings declined into a mediocre condition, and
anyone who could afford a different residential environment moved elsewhere. During
13 / 119
the nineteen-nineties this resulted in the dilapidation of entire residential areas. Housing
managers saw that on average a dwelling that had been vacated remained empty for two
years and that vacancy rates of 20% of the entire housing stock were not unusual.
Faced with these problems, central government, local authorities and housing managers
went to work to rejuvenate the high-rise areas. This became known as the restructuring
of post-war districts. Since then some very successful projects have been initiated and
the old high-rise neighbourhoods are acquiring new lan, possibly in part because of the
prestige and impact of the more recent high-rise building projects. There is more about
the restructuring projects in the following chapters.
Focus on high-rise building policy and development went up a gear at the end of the
nineteen-nineties. One of the most important reasons for this is the intensification of
urban areas. The fact that high-rise living is becoming more popular in Amsterdam can
be deduced from the production characteristics of the annual new build plans. It was
noted in 1996, for example, in house building plans project documentation in
Amsterdam that the share of new high-rise dwellings (with more than six storeys) rose
from 32% in 1981 to 53% in 1993. These figures refer to all dwellings in buildings with
more than six storeys that are part of new complexes. The share of very high buildings
(more than 70 metres high) also increased. It rose from 4% in 1993 (166 dwellings) to
14.5% in 1995 (751 dwellings). These changes signal a fairly revolutionary trend as far
as Amsterdam is concerned, and one of the causes is the desire to optimize land use,
with the result that higher building densities are occurring more frequently. The
traditional use of medium-rise building as a structuring principle is being replaced more
and more by higher medium high-rise buildings with six to nine storeys and by really
high-rise structures.
The selection of high-rise as the form of new housing cannot be seen separately from
the social developments during the period concerned. In broadbrush terms in recent
decades we have seen preference changing from uniformity (function separation
between living, working and recreation) and multiformity (mixing functions). The
Nirwna development in The Hague, constructed at the end of the nineteen-twenties,
was the first block of flats in the Netherlands. This square residential block is a part of
earlier plans to build three or five linked blocks of flats at this location. Squares were
planned between the blocks. Apart from the fact that the project was an architectural
highlight at the time, thought had also been given to integrating housing with the
surroundings.
High-rise building became prominent in the Netherlands in the second half of the
twentieth century as a solution for cities with a growing population and a shortage of
housing. Many high-rise dwellings were built in the cities during the nineteen-sixties
and seventies, whereby the emphasis was on functionality. Housing had to be found for
many people quickly, cheaply and at the same time. Uniformity predominated. Wellknown examples dating from this period are the Bijlmer district in Amsterdam and the
Kanaleneiland and Overvecht areas in Utrecht. These same examples prove that
projects that were considered to be a successful formula at the time also have a
downside. For years these areas have suffered from neglect, crime and social problems.
After the rather reckless developments of the nineteen-sixties and seventies, the
nineteen-eighties were a period of smallness of scale and refurbishment. As was noted
earlier, high-rise dwellings became so unpopular that the high-rise construction
programme was scrapped. It was not until the nineteen-nineties that interest in high-rise
housing returned as a result of growing interest in public spaces and the development of
14 / 119
high quality contemporary architecture in the context of the city centre. Economic
growth contributed to stricter resident requirements as regards space and comfort, and
luxury apartment complexes were the upshot. Prices increased correspondingly.
Currently many cities are having to contend with substantial differences between
districts in terms of social living conditions. Generally speaking areas with many postwar high-rise buildings have not benefited as a result, and many people have left. Poor
maintenance, dirty streets and entrances, and declining shopping amenities are all trends
that amplify one another. Local authorities are trying all kinds of remedies, but in some
cases it would seem that district bureaus, social work and the police can do little to help.
There is greater variation in design in the more recent newly built VINEX. VINEX is
an acronym for Vierde Nota over de Ruimtelijke Ordening Extra (Fourth
Memorandum on Physical Planning Plus). The Memorandum proposes a plan designed
to beat the looming housing shortage through the construction of 635,000 housing units
in the period between 1995-2005. One of the concepts covered by that plan is the socalled Vinex housing projects, i.e. centrally allocated housing locations that normally
comprise more than 5,000 housing units, which are, through force of circumstance,
located at some distance from the peripheral areas of existing major cities. A good
example is the Utrecht - Leidsche Rijn project, the biggest of the Vinex locations in the
Netherlands, which is located west of the old city of Utrecht and the A2 motorway.
With a surface area of approximately 6x9 km, the project is designed to accommodate
some 90,000 inhabitants and provide 40,000 job opportunities). Single-family
dwellings, high-rise blocks, owner-occupied and rental housing are all mixed up
together. This type of area is turning out to be sought after. People who live
inexpensively in proportion to their income have the opportunity to move to a dwelling
that is more in line with their desired accommodation. For years there was no
alternative, but now there is once again cheaper social housing available for the true
target group, including high-rise housing. There is now greater focus on variation,
comfortable living and sufficient amenities. However, new residential districts are
mostly outside the cities. The approach to the housing stock is one of the most
important ways to prevent segregation in regard to urban regeneration. Many dwellings
in pre-war and early post-war residential districts no longer meet todays requirements,
and therefore the approach to this housing is based, among other things, on demolition
and replacement. Another measure, which is being promoted by the KEI - the
knowledge centre for urban regeneration - and other organizations, is concerned with
improving the quality of life in existing housing.5 The modification of existing homes
generally leads to dwelling differentiation and urban design variation. Unlike
demolition and new build, this measure moreover represents no extra burden on the
environment (extra building materials and demolition waste) and prevents a loss of
cultural and social value. As far as high-rise is concerned, here we are talking about
such methods as building additional storeys of dwellings, partial demolition, creating
extra dwellings or combining dwellings (see section 4.2 for more information).
However, the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment has observed
that the urban regeneration process has been stagnating, and extra effort is required to
accelerate urban regeneration. The Restructuring Action Programme (Actieprogramma
Herstructurering) is intended to achieve this.6 This programme contains a package of
interlinked measures aimed at accelerating urban regeneration in existing inner city
districts. The programme can be divided into general amenities that are suitable for all
districts and measures that are aimed at a select number of priority districts. These
5
6
See www.kei-centrum.nl
See www.vrom.nl
15 / 119
priority districts will be the subjects of extra attention from the government over the
coming years under the title the 56 district approach. Performance agreements have
been made between the local authority and local organizations, such as housing
associations, in 23 of these 56 priority districts so far. This is an important step on the
way to achieving the necessary differentiation in the housing stock in these districts.
Performance agreements are expected to have been signed in virtually all districts by
the end of this year.
The 56 districts are in the four large and 26 medium-sized local authority areas.
Between them these districts house over a million people in nearly 540,000 dwellings
(8% of the total Dutch housing stock). In these districts approximately 115,000 new,
often more expensive rental and owner-occupied homes are being added, and this
necessitates the demolition of some 95,000 dwellings. This densification combined
with restructuring is possible because these early post-war districts were by and large
very spaciously laid out. However, there is also thinning out in some districts as a
result of the creation of large areas of planting. A substantial part of the new build
consists of owner-occupied homes (60%) and more expensive rental housing (30%).
Some high-rise housing also qualifies for demolition and new build. For example, some
of the high-rise blocks in Southeast Amsterdam (the Bijlmer) are being replaced by new
build single-family homes with gardens.
16 / 119
Characteristics of high-rise building

High-rise differs architecturally from ordinary, more ground-hugging structures like
detached houses, terrace houses, shopping centres, hotels, hospitals and various types of
industrial buildings, in that it lacks a recognizable, more or less standardized building
typology. Nevertheless, typical aspects of high-rise buildings will be mentioned in this
chapter. Starting with the high-rise situation as it is at this moment, followed by highrise ownership and high-rise building management. Furthermore, attention is devoted to
high-rise and vacancy, and typical aspects of the surroundings of high-rise buildings.
3.1
Current status of high-rise building in the Netherlands

Over 30% of the total Dutch housing stock consists of multi-family dwellings. Based on
the definition that high-rise consists of five or more storeys of dwellings, high-rise
accounts for 6.7% of Dutch housing stock. Figure 3.1 gives a classification of the total
housing stock in terms of year of construction, number of rooms, rental or owneroccupied, and single or multi-family dwellings.
Before 1945
1945-1969
1970 and later
20%
27%
53%
1 + 2 rooms
10 %
3 rooms
19%
100 %
6,710,880
100 %
34 %
100 %
5 rooms
Rental
Total dwellings
100 %
4 rooms
45.8 %
54.2 %
37 %
71 %
29 %
Single family
Multi family
Owner
occupied
Figure 3.1 Subdivision of the total housing stock (WBO 2002)
The same classification was made specifically for high-rise. The following four tables
give insight into the size of high-rise homes, the ownership of high-rise housing
17 / 119
(division between rental and owner-occupied), the size of the households in high-rise
housing and the number of rooms per dwelling7.
Floor space
Total housing
stock
Multi family
dwellings
High-rise
residential
dwellings
Non High-rise
residential
dwellings
Up to 20 m2
20 - 40 m2
40- 60 m2
60 - 80 m2
80-100 m2
> 100 m2
Total
0.2
3.1
12.1
16.2
14.6
53.8
100 %
0.6
6.6
23
31
20.1
18.7
100%
0.7
4.9
18.1
27.6
25.1
23.6
100%
0.4
4.7
14.5
16.0
15.7
48.7
100 %
Table 3.1: High rise dwellings by size
Tenure structure
Total housing
stock
Multi family
dwellings
High-rise
residential
dwellings
Low rise
residential
dwellings
Public Rental
(state/municipal)
Social landlords
Private rental
Owner-occupied
Cooperative
1989
-
2002
-
1989
-
2002
-
1989
-
2002
-
2002
-
41.6
13.2
45.2
-
36.5
9.3
54.2
-
63.8
23.3
12.9
-
62.0
17.3
20.7
-
68.9
20.0
11.1
-
62.2
15.8
21.9
-
34.6
8.9
56.5
-
Total
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100%
Table 3.2: Tenure structure 1989 and 2002
Number of
persons per
household
Total housing
stock
Multi family
dwellings
High-rise
residential
dwellings
Non High-rise
residential
dwellings
1
2
3
4
5+
Total
31.7
34
13.1
14.5
6.7
100 %
59.5
28
6.8
3.6
2.1
100%
58.5
32.2
5.4
2.6
1.3
100%
29.7
34.2
13.6
15.4
7.1
100%
Table 3.3: Size of households
These tables reveal that most high-rise homes cover an area of between 40 and 100
square metres, that 62% of the high-rise stock is owned by housing associations and that
more and more high-rise homes are being converted from rental to owner-occupied. In
1989 only 11% were owner-occupied, whereas in 2002 this had almost doubled to
nearly 22%. The trend is towards converting more and more high-rise homes from
rental to owner-occupied. The government is encouraging owner-occupation among the
lower social classes and the housing policy is aimed at converting rental into owneroccupied dwellings. In order to stimulate this the Home Ownership Promotion Act
7
18 / 119
came into effect in 2001. Under this act subsidies are paid out in order to enable people
to buy their own homes. The schemes operating under the auspices of this act are
currently being evaluated. It can be seen from table 3.3 that very many high-rise homes
are occupied by one single person. Nearly 60% of the homes are being lived in by one
person whereas this figure is only just over 30% in the national stock. The remainder of
the high-rise homes are being occupied primarily by families of two or three people
(38%), which is comparable to the figure for the overall housing stock.
Number of
rooms per
dwelling
Total
housing
stock
Multi family
dwellings
High-rise
residential
dwellings
Non High-rise
residential
dwellings
1
2
3
4
5+
Total
1.1
8.2
19.3
33.7
37.7
100 %
3.3
22.4
43.3
24.9
6.1
100%
4.0
20.4
38.5
32.7
4.4
100%
0.9
7.4
17.9
33.8
40.0
100%
Table 3.4: Number of rooms per dwelling
There are two to four rooms in over 90% of the high-rise dwellings. The major
difference with the total housing stock (and therefore primarily with low-rise building)
is that 40% of the low-rise homes have five or more rooms, whereas this figure is less
than 5% for high-rise. It is not surprising that most high-rise homes have three to four
rooms because the vast majority of high-rise housing was built in the nineteen-sixties
and seventies, when it was thought that three to four rooms would be ideal for people
who would want to live in high-rise blocks. There was less interest in high-rise in the
nineteen-eighties. The available space in the Netherlands was utilized as much as
possible to provide larger dwellings. The building of high-rise housing has picked up
again since 1990, primarily as a consequence of less building land.
There are different types of high-rise
Westpoint Tilburg
dwellings in the Netherlands. The
most important types of high-rise are
gallery-access flats, hallway-access
flats and other flats. They jointly
account for 765,000 dwellings, which
represent 12% of the overall housing
stock8. More details about types and
some core information about these
sorts of blocks of flats are given in
appendix 3. There are further versions
of high-rise housing to be found in the
Netherlands. Generally speaking these
are special buildings that cannot be compared with one another. The tallest block of
flats in the Netherlands is over 140 metres high (Westpoint in Tilburg). There are many
buildings throughout the Netherlands that are over 100 metres high and have housing as
their primary function. Currently information about the number of homes in this highrise category and further details about occupancy etc. cannot be obtained. However, an
Referentiewoningen bestaande bouw, Novem 2001
impression of these buildings

www.skyscrapercity.com
can
be
obtained
19 / 119
by
visiting
the
website
A study of post-war districts was conducted in 19959. In this study post-war districts
were classified into different types. One of these types is the recent high-rise transit
district. A total of 515 post-war districts were studied (in the study post-war was
defined as districts that were built between 1946 and 1980). A substantial part of the
Dutch high-rise housing stock was built during this period, and it is therefore interesting
to see how many of these 515 districts still contain high-rise. The study showed that out
of the total of 497 districts (there was not enough information about 18 districts in order
to use them in the development of the types), 85 districts were of the recent high-rise
type.
10 or more residential
high-rise districts
5 to 10 residential
Groningen
Figure 3.2 High-rise districts in the Netherlands.

(source: naoorlogse wijken in beeld, RIGO research)
high-rise districts
4 or 5 residential
high-rise districts
3 residential
high-rise districts
1 or 2 residential
high-rise districts
Region Amsterdam
Region Utrecht-Amersfoort
Region Nijmegen/Arnhem
Region Hague/ Rotterdam
These districts contain a significant proportion of the high-rise housing built between
1946 and 1980. An examination of the geographical spread of these high-rise districts
9
Naoorlogse wijken in beeld by RIGO research en advies
20 / 119
reveals that very many high-rise buildings were constructed around the four major cities
(Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht). Besides the four major cities, there is
much high-rise housing to be found in and around Arnhem/Nijmegen, Groningen, the
three cities of Den Bosch, Tilburg and Eindhoven in Brabant, and around Sittard/Geleen
in Limburg. The remaining high-rise districts are distributed across the country, with
Groningen as the most striking exception.
Six other types of high-rise district were identified in addition to the recent type. There
are also high-rise blocks of flats in the six other types, particularly in the aged hallwayaccess district (see tables 3.5 and 3.6).
Number of districts
total number of dwellings
Districts build before 1946
198
757.000
Total number
inhabitants
1562000
Average dwelling
occupation
2,1
Number of households
per acre
31
Districts build between 1946 and 1980
515
1706000
3946000
2,3
17
Districts build after 1980
152
412000
1122000
2,5
14
mixed districts
152
496000
1119000
2,2
21
Other districts
2903
2855000
7755000
2,6
total
3920
6.226.000
15504000
2,4
table 3.5 households, inhabitants and number of districts by building period

Mixed districts are districts were both buildings build before 1946 and after 1946 are present in an equal of almost equal amount
Other districts are districts with a zipcode in places with less than 30.000 inhabitants and a density less then one household per hectare
Source of the table are Housing survey 1994 and WMD1991
Table 3.5: Households, inhabitants and number of districts by building period
Further discussion of the types of district is not appropriate in the context of reviewing
the status of high-rise in the Netherlands. See the original report for more information.
Table 3.5 shows the total number of districts designated in the Netherlands and table 3.6
presents information about how many post-war districts there are of each type. Post-war
districts represent about one eighth of the total number of districts designated in the
Netherlands. It is striking that they contain over a quarter of the Dutch housing stock
(more than 1.7 million dwellings).
Table 3.6 shows the numbers of districts in the post-war residential districts category
classified by type. The recent high-rise transit district accounts for 85 districts, which
represents 2.5% of the total number of designated districts in the Netherlands. However,
there is also substantial high-rise housing in the 65 districts (over 1.5% of the total
number of designated districts) of the aged hallway-access type of district. Hence 4% of
Dutch districts have typical characteristics of high-rise residential districts.
Type of district
Aged hallway-access district
Impoverished hallway-access district
Recent high-rise transit district
Recent low-rise family district
Prosperous low-rise district
Central early post-war terraced district
Average post-war district
Total
Number of
districts
65
53
85
86
45
74
89
49710
21 / 119
Total number of
households
279,000
191,000
307,000
299,000
90,000
221,000
300,000
1,678,000
Table 3.6: The seven types of postwar districts
The figures from tables 3.5 and 3.6 are taken from a study carried out in 1995 and they
could therefore give a distorted picture of the current situation. However, no new types
of high-rise district were built after 1994. High-rise buildings in cities are being used
increasingly as landmarks. Tall and slender towers are being built more and more and
they are often in urban centres where there is no residential district but a district with
work, living and recreation. The city of Rotterdam, for example, has formulated a
structure plan for high-rise in the city centre11. There are no longer districts but height
zones. High-rise buildings are used for living in and working in. Separate areas are no
longer designated. Information about the current distribution of high-rise buildings in
the Netherlands (see tables 3.7 and 3.8) shows that relatively speaking the provinces of
South Holland (12%), North Holland (8.8%) and Utrecht (7.3%) have the most highrise. These high-rise buildings are often in the larger cities.
High-rise per province
Groningen
Friesland
Drenthe
Overijssel
Flevoland
Gelderland
Utrecht
North Holland
South Holland
Zeeland
North Brabant
Limburg
Total NL
no high-rise
high-rise
total housing stock
95.7%
97.4%
97.7%
96.0%
98.1%
96.4%
92.7%
91.2%
88.0%
97.1%
95.8%
94.3%
93.3%
4.3%
2.6%
2.3%
4.0%
1.9%
3.6%
7.3%
8.8%
12.0%
2.9%
4.2%
5.7%
6.7%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Table 3.7: High-rise per province
10
The number of post-war districts adds up to 497 and not 515. This is because insufficient statistical data
could be found about 18 districts during the development of the types
11
http://home.wxs.nl/~stee8329/planning/planning.html
22 / 119
High-rise rise as a function of size of municipality (number of inhabitants in a

municipality)
less than 20,000
20,000-50,000
50,000-100,000
100,000-250,000
over 250,000
Total
no high-rise
high-rise
total housing stock
98.9%
96.5%
90.4%
90.5%
86.1%
93.3%
1.1%
3.5%
9.6%
9.5%
13.9%
6.7%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Table 3.8: High-rise rise as a function of size of municipality (number of inhabitants in a municipality)
In recent years (2000-2003) over three-quarters of new build homes were owneroccupied. Most of the rental homes that have been built are in the private sector. Much
has changed in the Netherlands in recent decades. Previously the majority of new build
homes were offered by the government as rental housing, including a great deal of highrise (particularly in the nineteen-seventies).
The proportion of new build homes in high-rise blocks has increased substantially (see
also figure 2.2 on page 8). Whereas previously virtually all new build high-rise homes
were rented, currently this percentage is around 50%. New build rental housing in highrise blocks is also largely built by the private sector.
Sixty-nine new homes are being built for every 100 being demolished.12 Demolition is a
small-scale phenomenon that is distributed very unevenly. It goes without saying that
the demolition and new build are concentrated in the cities, predominantly in pre-war
districts and the post-war compact districts. It can be said that as a rule demolition is
concentrated in areas where housing was built on a large scale and relatively cheaply.
This therefore applies to much high-rise housing. However, there are no precise figures
about the share of high-rise in demolition and new build activities.
3.2
Housing ownership and housing management

Table 3.2 showed that housing associations are the biggest owners of high-rise housing
(62%). However, the number of owner-occupiers of a high-rise dwelling has doubled in
recent years (from 11% in 1989 to 22% in 2002). Private tenants occupy approximately
15% of high-rise housing. Irrespective of the owner, all high-rise housing has areas that
are used by all residents, such as the entrance hall, the staircase and the lift. In some of
the high-rise complexes there are moreover common amenities that the residents of the
complex can use, such as a shared garden (present in 22% of all high-rise housing), a
social and recreational area (15% of all high-rise housing) or catering and care facilities
(6% of all high-rise housing). The occurrence in each form of ownership is shown in the
following figure. Other facilities that are to be found are the provision of somewhere to
put rubbish, window cleaning and the appointment of a caretaker, who is responsible for
daily supervision and who can be a focal point for residents. Approximately 35% of all
high-rise homes are in a complex with a caretaker13. Complexes with social rental
12
13
Manshanden et al (2003)
KWR, 2000
23 / 119
housing are more likely to have a caretaker than other high-rise complexes (see the
figure below).
50%
45%
40%
social landlord
35%
private landlord
30%
purchase
25%
total high-rise
20%
15%
10%
5%
ng or care
cilities
creational
a
ed garden
0%
Figure 3.1 Presence of common facilities in high-rise housing, by form of ownership (source: KWR, 2000)
The common areas and facilities have to be managed and cleaned, and services such as
the appointment of a caretaker or window cleaning have to be paid for. The law
stipulates that the maintenance of the common parts of a multi-family dwelling is the
responsibility of all flat owners14. In the case of rental housing this is arranged by the
landlord, who owns the complex, and in the case of owner-occupied housing, the
Owners Association has the responsibility.
3.2.1
Management by landlords
Housing associations and private landlords take care of the management of the common
areas in exchange for a contribution from the tenants. This contribution comes under the
service charges that may be charged to tenants in addition to the rent.
3.2.2
Management by the Owners Association

Flat owners in the Netherlands have a statutory obligation to cooperate with one
another. An Owners Association has to be set up and all owners of a flat in the
complex are members. The importance of management by Owners Associations is
increasing as the number of high-rise owner-occupied flats increases. It is not possible
for residents to terminate their membership of the Owners Association. Membership
does not cease until the flat has been transferred to a new owner. The Owners
Association has to appoint a manager/administrator who has to implement the decisions
of the meetings and draw up a budget and a statement of operating income and
expenditure. The manager draws up the budget and statement of operating income and
expenditure such that the association will have sufficient finances to fund future
14
Meijer et al, 1995
24 / 119
maintenance needs. The manager who is appointed may be one of the residents, but he
or she may also be external, for example from an estate agent, estate manager or
administration office. In many cases Owners Associations, particularly the larger ones,
recruit an external manager15. The Owners Association must meet at least once a year.
During the meeting there is voting about the management of the complex and the
statement of operating income and expenditure and the budget are discussed. The
contribution by each owner towards the management of the common areas is
determined on the basis of the statement of operating income and expenditure. In many
cases an amount is calculated that the owners pay every month. Using the finances that
have been collected, the Owners Association can purchase services, for example to
clean the common areas and for scheduled maintenance.
It is estimated that there are approximately 58,300 Owners Associations in the
Netherlands16. The scale ranges from complexes with two or three flats to complexes
with more than 100 flats. Approximately one third of Owners Associations are
concerned with both owner-occupied flats and rental flats. Most owner-occupied flats
are reasonably well maintained. A number of studies have revealed that the
performance of Owners Associations is uneven17. Some of the Owners Associations
are dormant. The members do not come to the obligatory annual meeting and there is
little communal maintenance. In 2002 33% of the Owners Associations surveyed had a
written long-term maintenance plan and 31% made a periodic contribution to a
maintenance reserve fund. In a bill that will be debated in the Lower House of the
Dutch parliament there is a stipulation that from now on new Owners Associations will
be obliged to set up a reserve maintenance fund that can be used to pay the costs of
maintenance that is not carried out annually. Currently it is often the case with new
build apartment complexes that the developer or selling estate agent sets up an Owners
Association and appoints a professional manager.
3.2.3
Management problems
It has been found in practice that the common areas can be a source of irritation for the
residents if they get dirty or are used as somewhere to store all sorts of materials. This
occurs primarily in post-war gallery-access flats. The management of semi-public
spaces is often awkward. It is not clear who has the responsibility. Furthermore,
vandalism is often a problem and there is little social control, particularly if there are no
dwellings on the ground floor.
In recent years this problem has been receiving higher priority in the Netherlands.
Future management is being taken into account more often at the design stage of new
build complexes. Clear demarcation between public and private spaces is desirable in
this regard. Initiatives are also being launched to involve residents in the management.
Social housing landlords, for example, have set up residents committees that jointly
supervise the complex and the immediate surroundings. The appointment of a caretaker
can also have a positive impact.
15
Meijer et al, 1995

Laagland Advies, 2002
17
Among others Laagland Advies, 2002 and Meijer et al, 1995
16
3.3
25 / 119
Living environment
There are two different sorts of living environments associated with high-rise. High-rise
built before the nineteen-nineties has a different living environment from the high-rise
built thereafter. These two living environments will be briefly described and some
typical characteristics will be identified.
High-rise living environment before 1990
The Netherlands was inundated by high-rise blocks of flats during the nineteen-sixties.
At that time nearly 70% of these flats were owned by housing associations. The highrise districts were designed as garden suburbs, characterized by high-rise blocks
surrounded by planting, individual blocks spread out over
the area, segregated infrastructure for different types of
road user, and parking in outdoor or indoor car parks
(CIAM18 idea). This resulted in a living environment with
an exceptionally large amount of public space. Between the
front doors of the flats and the public highway there are
many semi-public spaces in the blocks of flats. The
management of these spaces is paid for by the owner,
CIAM example De Bijlmer
usually a housing association.
The many public spaces around the blocks were intended to make it easier for people to
meet one another. They were in line with the times, but over the years they have lost
more and more of their lustre. Most blocks of flats were intended for a kind of social
structure that makes considerable use of both semi-public and public spaces, namely the
family. However, families turned out to prefer low-rise housing. Currently over 90% of
the households living in high-rise housing do not have children (see table 3.3). The
many one or two person households also often go elsewhere for their entertainment.
Life in a high-rise block is often anonymous. For many people a flat in a high-rise block
is a transit home, so the chance of becoming involved in the living environment is
small. The space and the planting are described as a major advantage of the high-rise
districts built in the nineteen-sixties and seventies, but the way this living environment
is appreciated and treated is most unsatisfactory. The planting is filthy, there are things
to vandalize everywhere, the outside areas are impossible to oversee, the massiveness
and uniformity make everything look like everything else, and the absence of watching
eyes makes people feel unsafe. The most important problems that crop up continuously
are safety, filthiness and vandalism (referred to in Dutch as the 3 Vs)19. Other major
problems associated with high-rise districts are the large empty spaces between blocks,
easy access to the buildings for strangers, the monotonous appearance, the relatively
high costs, the neglect of the surroundings, vacancies, high mobility and a poor image20.
On the other hand the quality of the high-rise buildings themselves is good and
consequently no structural problems have occurred. The urban layout creates more
problems. It many cases it leads to people feeling unsafe, vandalism and a negative
image.
18
Congrs Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne

Ruimte rondom hoogbouw; M. van Veghel and F. Wassenberg
20
High Rise Housing in Europe, OTB 2004
19
26 / 119
Many measures are necessary to tackle the living environment. All these measures have
been taken in the Netherlands in one or more high-rise complexes. One of the most
noteworthy measures, but also the most expensive one, is the integrated regeneration
approach. This approach involved implementing several measures simultaneously.
Demolition, refurbishment, new build, changing mobility and adding extra facilities in
the form of shopping centres, sports amenities etc. give a shot in the arm to the high-rise
environment. However, measures of a social nature are also being taken. Training for
local residents, appointing caretakers and gardeners, and close consultation with local
residents about all measures before implementation. Integrated and interactive are
currently the key words associated with the regeneration of high-rise districts in the
Netherlands. It is important to realize when regenerating the living environment that the
high-rise itself has an effect on its immediate surroundings. In particular the following
should be borne in mind.
Settlement. The loads associated with high-rise can be high and concentrated.
Depending on the subsoil, there can be substantial settlement. The area affected by
such settlement can extend to well beyond the construction site, and this can cause
damage to existing buildings21.
Wind nuisance. Wind speeds increase appreciably in the vicinity of high-rise
projects. This can be a considerable nuisance, particularly to cyclists and pedestrians.
The wind loads on existing buildings can change significantly as a result of the
construction of high-rise in the immediate vicinity.
Sunlight and shade. The amount of sunlight received by existing buildings will
change as a consequence of the building of new high-rise projects. The energy costs
of existing buildings will change as a result of this. There are moreover legal
agreements and rules that have to be taken into account (see chapter 6).
Transport during the use phase. The transport of people and goods to and from the
site during the use phase may cause nuisance to the surroundings. Good
infrastructural provisions are necessary in order to reduce this nuisance to a
minimum.
These effects and the architecture (CIAM and construction methods referred to above)
of high-rise districts make their mark on the characteristics of the area around high-rise
built before 1990. Besides the physical characteristics of the surroundings (what a
district looks like) there are of course also social and economic characteristics.
3.3.1
Physical characteristics of the living environment in post-war high-rise districts

The living environment includes public spaces and planting at ground level, and also
the semi-public spaces, such as covered car parking, covered pathways between
buildings, stairwells, lifts and galleries. The primary physical characteristics of the postwar high-rise districts are that they are spread out with a great deal of planting between
the blocks of flats and there is very considerable public and semi-public space. There
are often water features, but they were not designed for active use (playing, boating)
and the water quality is usually mediocre as a result of sewers overflowing, polluters in
the neighbourhood or the inflow of polluted water from elsewhere. The roads are wide.
In some cases this is a nuisance and unsafe because of traffic driving through the
district. Public transport is normally good and the location in regard to the city centre is
relatively favourable. The districts usually have a shopping centre, schools, nurseries, a
21
Hoogbouw, inventarisatie know-how en regelgeving
27 / 119
sports hall, a church and a park. Residents have to leave the district for other amenities,
such as restaurants or a cinema. The flats themselves can be of differing quality. The
later high-rise flats, in particular, can be large with reasonable facilities. In many cases,
however, the flats are small, they have poor thermal and sound insulation, and the
facilities, such as the heating system, kitchen and bathroom, are outdated. An important
feature of the living environment in post-war high-rise districts in the Netherlands is
that generally speaking there are no flats on the ground floor, and this is one of the
reasons why there are no private outdoor areas. Virtually all the space outside the flats
is public or semi-public, and consequently in the perception of the residents it does not
belong to anyone, and therefore they do not feel obliged to intervene in the event of
problems involving filth, safety or vandalism. Living, parking, enjoying water and
planting, sports - all these activities are physically segregated, as a result of which there
is a lack of social control. Only the flat itself is private domain. This is different from
low-rise housing, for example, where living, gardening, parking and direct contact with
what is happening in the street form much more of a whole.
3.3.2
Social and economic characteristics

High-rise flats no longer meet current requirements and therefore everyone who has the
means moves to a more modern dwelling, which by definition is outside the high-rise
district. Their flats, in some cases after standing empty, are taken over by starters, who
in turn move on as quickly as possible. The result is high mobility and little social
bonding. The people who remain behind older people and low-income groups,
including many ethnic minorities are often faced with problems. Long-term
unemployment, little education, drugs problems and personal financial problems are at
relatively high levels, and this is exacerbated by the fact that there are many households
with comparable problems concentrated together. Ethnic and ethnic-religious
organizations can play a very positive role in the social involvement and welfare of
these groups of residents. One of the characteristics of the high-rise districts, which is
entirely in line with the separation of functions, is that as a rule they can contribute little
to a healthy economic climate (Profit/Prosperity). The economic activities are usually
limited to the shopping centre.
Summarizing, it can be concluded that the different characteristics that have developed
over the course of time are displaying a downward spiral that cannot be stopped by
measures in only one sector of the Triple P approach. The answer is a sustainable,
integrated approach with a balanced distribution of environmental/physical, social and
economic measures.
3.3.3
Opportunities for sustainable improvements in the high-rise living environment

Over and above the improvements to the dwellings themselves, the structure of highrise districts also offers many opportunities. The generous amounts of space create the
option of building additional housing. This increase in density makes it possible to
create a differentiated living environment by means of a range of different types of
homes. The excessive amount of communal space can be used for new build or
additions to existing buildings. This in turn produces resources that can be used to
finance other items associated with the regeneration. Public areas can be divided up
among private individuals; anonymous areas on the ground floor (covered parking,
storerooms) can be transformed into homes or premises for small businesses. This
revives life and involvement at street level, and social control and the perception of
28 / 119
safety increase. Through traffic is kept out of the district, and there is priority for
walking, cycling and public transport. Road traffic is local and it proceeds slowly
through the district in the interests of the safety of children playing outside and old
people. Rainwater is no longer discharged to the sewer. It is retained in the district and
purified in reed beds. This reduces the chances of sewers overflowing and no water, that
may possibly by polluted, needs to be brought in from other areas. The banks are
constructed so that they are sloping, which is better for wildlife, children and the
microclimate. In some cases purified surface water can be used for flushing toilets.
Wherever it is possible to construct new water features next to the blocks of flats, the
idea of living on the water enhances the appeal of the district and it benefits the status
of the buildings and homes.
The participation of residents in the improvement processes at an early stage creates a
broad social support base and commitment, and the social structure is reinforced. See
also chapter 5.
The living environment of high-rise built after 1990
High-rise dating from the nineteen-nineties is concentrated primarily in city centres.
There are no longer high-rise districts, but separate individual cases. The CIAM ideas of
large scale, equality and function separation have been replaced by the concept of urban
regeneration, differentiation, smallness of scale and urban intimacy. The large green
spaces between blocks have disappeared and car parking is usually underground. The
living environment is characterized by a very varied urban area where living is
interspersed with work, where facilities play an important part and where there are
fewer open spaces. As a result, the feeling of being unsafe is often reduced. The image
of this type of high-rise is also much better that the situation described above of the
high-rise built in the nineteen-sixties and seventies.
The centres of large cities have made particular use of highrise, primarily over the last couple of years, with Rotterdam as
the most striking example. Buildings tens of metres high
provide space for people who want to live in the city and
moreover want to benefit from the amenities of the city
centre. This type of high-rise living has a good image and is
catching on in the Netherlands. The living environment is no
longer defined by the high-rise but by the location where the
high-rise is situated. The living environment can therefore no
longer be typified, because it is strongly dependent on factors
specific to the location.
3.4
A European comparison
The characteristics of the Dutch high-rise housing stock were discussed in the preceding
three sections. A concise comparison with the high-rise situation in the other European
Union member states is appropriate in order to create insight into the extent to which
the Dutch situation applies to other member states, and also to get a feel for the absolute
and relative figures that are quoted in the different tables. The following tables compare
the Dutch situation with the average of the fifteen European Union member states and
with the average of the ten new member states that joined in May 2004.
29 / 119
Dwelling type
Dutch Situation
EU 15
EU 10
Multi-family
High-rise
30.0
6.7
41.8
13.0
55.8
34.1
Table 3.9 Multi-family dwellings and high-rise dwellings share in total housing stock
One is struck immediately by the fact that the Netherlands has fewer multi-family
dwellings and above all fewer high-rise dwellings than the rest of Europe. In relative
terms the 10 new member states have much more high-rise. It should be pointed out
with regard to this table that high-rise is part of the multi-family category (for example,
of the 30% multi-family dwellings in the Netherlands, 6.7% are in high-rise blocks and
23.3% are in other sorts of buildings).
Floor space
Up to 20 m2
20- 60 m2
60-100 m2
> 100 m2
Dutch Situation
EU 15
EU 10
0.7
23
52.7
23.6
0.9
52.3
42.8
11.0
5.8
56.4
37.4
0.4
Table 3.10 Floor space comparison Dutch high rise situation with European average
Tenure structure
Dutch Situation
EU 15
EU 10
Public Rental
(state/municipal)
Social landlords
Private rental
Owner-occupied
Cooperative
14.0
20.8
62.2
15.8
21.9
-
9.1
49.2
1.6
10.2
35.5
31.2
Table 3.10: Tenure structure; high-rise situation; comparison Dutch situation with European average
Number of rooms per

dwelling
Dutch Situation
EU 15
EU 10
1
2
3
4
5+
4.0
20.4
38.5
32.7
4.4
22.9
43.5
24.1
9.7
5.8
17.5
39.8
38.2
4.1
0.2
Table 3.11: Number of rooms per high-rise dwelling; Dutch situation and EU situation
Period of construction
Dutch situation
EU 15
EU 10
< 1945
1945-1990
>1990
2.5
77.9
19.6
10.1
82.5
9.3
7.4
83.3
7.4
Table 3.12: Period of construction of high-rise buildings; Dutch situation and EU situation
It can be seen from the five tables above that the average Dutch high-rise home is:
30 / 119
significantly bigger than the average European high-rise flat. 23% of Dutch high-rise
flats are bigger than 100 square metres, whereas this figure in other member states is
only 11%.
There is much less owner-occupation in the Netherlands than in the other member
states. This difference is caused primarily by the absence of housing associations as
management structures in other member states. The proportion of private high-rise
rental flats in the Netherlands corresponds reasonably well with the rest of Europe.
One of the most striking differences is that there are many high-rise dwellings,
particularly in the old member states, with only one room (22.5%). This figure in the
Netherlands is only 4%, yet the average household size does not differ much in the
European member states. In the Netherlands there are many more high-rise flats with
four rooms (nearly 33% in the Netherlands compared with less than 10% in the other
member states).
The high-rise wave occurred in all member states as approximately the same time.
However, it is striking that in the other member states more high-rise was built
before 1945, so their high-rise housing stock is older.
Detailed information for each country and additional analysis of high-rise data can be
found in the study Sustainable Refurbishment of High-Rise Residential Buildings and
Restructuring of Surrounding Areas.22
22
Report for European Housing Ministers conference, Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning,
and the Environment in cooperation with PRC Bouwcentrum International; to be published
31 / 119
Residents and dwelling use

This chapter looks at the current residents of high-rise flats, how satisfied they are with
them, and the demand for high-rise. The 2002 Housing Needs Survey (Woning
Behoefte Onderzoek - WBO) can be used to identify the characteristics of high-rise
residents. This is described in section 4.1. Section 4.2 analyzes high-rise resident
satisfaction and the wishes of these residents with regard to living. Section 4.3 discusses
households that are interested in moving to a multi-family dwelling. The status of the
housing market is also addressed here. Finally, section 4.4 reviews the social aspects
and involving residents.
4.1
Who lives in high-rise housing?23

This section takes a look at the residents of high-rise housing. This involves classifying
the residents and the dwellings into different categories. A distinction is made between
high-rise homes built before and after 1985. Prior to 1985 high-rise housing was mostly
associated with gallery-access flats in the social rental sector, whereas after 1985 luxury
owner-occupied apartments grew in popularity and less high-rise housing was built in
the social rental sector. 18% of all high-rise rental housing was built after 1985,
whereas 40% of all high-rise owner-occupied housing was built after 1985.
59% of the residents of a high-rise flat live alone (see table 4.1). 28% of the flats are
occupied by two partners. Very few families with children live in high-rise flats. Only
7% of high-rise housing is occupied by families with children, whereas this category
accounts for 31% of all households. From a traditional point of view, families with
children in the Netherlands live in a single-family home with a garden. If we make a
distinction between owner-occupied and rented, we see that one-person households are
more likely to live in a rental home whereas couples without children are more likely to
own their flat. A logical explanation for this is that one-person households have to
survive on one income, whereas some couples without children will both have jobs and
will therefore have two incomes available.
household category
high-rise
other dwellings
total
oneperson household
couple
couple + child/children
lone parent family
non-family household
total
58.5%
27.6%
6.7%
5.9%
1.3%
100.0%
29.7%
29.9%
32.9%
6.5%
1.0%
100.0%
31.7%
29.8%
31.1%
6.4%
1.0%
100.0%
Table 4.1 Residents classified by household category
Relatively few people aged between 35 and 54 live in high-rise housing. There are
substantial numbers of older people living in high-rise accommodation. Nearly 23% of
high-rise residents are 75 or older (see table 4.2). More detailed analysis reveals that in
the Northern Netherlands, the least densely populated part of the Netherlands, the
existing high-rise housing has relatively many old residents. 56% of the high-rise
23
The information in this section was taken from the 2002 Housing Needs Survey (WBO2002).
32 / 119
occupants are over 65, whereas in the other parts of the country the figures are 39%
(Eastern and Western Netherlands) and 41% (Southern Netherlands).
High-rise flats are very suitable for the elderly because the rooms are all on one floor
and there is a lift. No fewer than 73% of high-rise flats can be classified as having
lifelong flexibility24. These are accessible without having to negotiate stairs and the
living room, kitchen, bedroom and toilet/bathroom are on the same floor. Only 24% of
the homes in the overall housing stock meet these requirements.
Age groups
high-rise
other dwellings
total
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 or older
total
5.5%
19.0%
12.2%
11.5%
12.7%
16.6%
22.5%
100.0%
3.3%
19.0%
22.8%
20.4%
15.2%
10.8%
8.5%
100.0%
3.5%
19.0%
22.1%
19.8%
15.0%
11.2%
9.5%
100.0%
Table 4.2 Residents classified by age
More non-western ethnic minorities live in high-rise housing than can be expected on
the basis of an even spread across the overall housing stock. Only 10% of non-western
ethnic minorities living in high-rise housing are owner-occupiers, compared with 22%
of all households. One of the reasons for this is the fact that many ethnic minorities live
in the cities, where the percentage of high-rise is higher than in other parts of the
Netherlands. The high-rise flats in the cities are moreover relatively large, and so ethnic
minorities with large families are eligible for these dwellings.
Ethnicity
high-rise
other dwellings
total
indigenous
non-western
western
total
78.5%
11.6%
9.9%
100.0%
84.2%
7.6%
8.2%
100.0%
83.8%
7.8%
8.4%
100.0%
Table 4.3 Residents classified by ethnicity
On average high-rise residents spend 479 a month on housing costs. The average
monthly housing costs for people living in other types of accommodation are higher, at
536. This is explained by the distribution of homes in the different price categories.
Much of the high-rise housing stock comprises rental flats with rents up to 479.
Expensive owner-occupied homes, with accompanying higher monthly costs, represent
a much bigger proportion in the rest of the housing stock. The distribution of homes in
the different price categories is shown in table 4.4.
24
A home with lifelong flexibility has been designed so that it is suitable (or can be made suitable) if the
resident has to cope with physical difficulties. The resident does not need to move in the event of a need for
assistance.
33 / 119
Price categories of homes
high-rise
other
dwellings
total
low rent (< 358)

medium rent ( 358 - 479)
high rent (> 479)
total rental
total rental, absolute numbers
36.7%
42.3%
21.0%
100.0%
348,000
53.3%
34.6%
12.1%
100.0%
2,686,000
51.4%
35.5%
13.1%
100.0%
3,034,000
low purchase price (< 150,200)

medium purchase price ( 150,200 -
214,500)
high purchase price (> 214,500)
total owner-occupied
total owner-occupied, absolute
numbers
41.3%
19.7%
20.3%
27.9%
30.9%
100.0%
31.4%
48.9%
100.0%
31.3%
48.4%
100.0%
98,000
3,494,000
3,592,000
Table 4.4 Homes classified by price category
On average high-rise residents have a slightly lower income than other households. The
average net monthly income of households living in high-rise housing is 1840 (in
2002) compared with a net household income of 2300 per month in the overall
housing stock.
Income groups
high-rise
other dwellings
total
up to modal
up to 1.5 x modal
up to 2 x modal
>2 x modal
total
57.6%
21.7%
10.1%
10.6%
100.0%
42.0%
21.6%
14.9%
21.5%
100.0%
43.1%
21.6%
14.6%
20.8%
100.0%
Table 4.5 Residents classified by income group
Approximately 58% of high-rise residents have an income that is below modal or

modal25, and only one household in 10 in high-rise housing has an income over twice
modal. One household in five in the overall housing stock has an income greater than
twice modal. On average housing costs for a high-rise household represent 32.8% of net
income, compared with an average of 28.8% of net income for all households.
There are far fewer couples with two incomes among high-rise residents. 45% of the
households in the total housing stock have two incomes. Only 27% of the households in
high-rise housing are in the two-income category. Because couples with two incomes
have more money to spend than households with one income, there are more two
income couples in the owner-occupied sector and in the newer, more luxurious flats
(which were built after 1985).
25
Modal income is a gross income of 28,000 (in 2002).
34 / 119
educational level
high-rise
other dwellings
total
primary education
technical school
basic secondary
education
advanced secondary
education
polytechnic, university
Total
16.4%
15.3%
12.8%
18.1%
13.0%
18.0%
17.5%
14.3%
14.5%
24.7%
26.1%
100.0%
29.1%
25.8%
100.0%
28.8%
25.8%
100.0%
Table 4.6 Residents classified by educational level
On the one hand there are relatively more high-rise residents who got no further than
primary education, and on the other hand the percentage of high-rise residents with a
degree (polytechnic or university) is relatively high. The percentage of residents with a
degree is particularly large in the high-rise stock dating from after 1985 (35%).
During the two years prior to the Housing Needs Study (2002), 23% of high-rise flats
had had new occupants, whereas this figure is 17% for the homes in the overall housing
stock. The relocation dynamic for high-rise flats was therefore somewhat higher than
for other types of dwelling. If we look at the origin of the residents who moved two
years before the study, a distinction can be made between starters (who had not had
their own home before) and people in transit (who had previously been living in their
own homes). Approximately 9% of all the starters on the housing market and the people
in transit moved to a high-rise flat. However, people in transit represent a larger group
in a number of ways. Of the 101,000 households that moved to a high-rise flat in the
2000-2001 period, around 66,300 households were in transit (66%) and 34,700 were
starters (34%).
57% of the households that moved to a high-rise flat came from a multi-family
dwelling. It is striking that 21% of the residents who had moved into their high-rise
home less than two years ago (at the time of the survey) quoted health or a need for care
facilities as a reason for moving. These reasons represented only 9% of the reasons for
moving in regard to the overall housing stock. High-rise flats are an option for
households with poor health or a need for care because, thanks to the fact that they are
on one floor and can be reached without climbing stairs, they are suitable for the
elderly.
4.2
Satisfaction and wishes of the residents

Generally speaking high-rise residents are satisfied with their flats. Only 6% are
dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. However, this percentage is slightly higher than the
figure for the rest of the housing stock (4%). No fewer than 94% of the residents of
high-rise flats built after 1985 are satisfied or very satisfied compared with 83% of
residents of high-rise housing built before 1985. The satisfaction correlates with the size
of the flat. More residents of small flats are dissatisfied than occupants of large flats
(8% of residents of flats smaller than 60 square metres are dissatisfied compared with
2% of residents of flats bigger than 100 square metres).
35 / 119
satisfaction with dwelling
high-rise
other
dwellings
total housing
stock
very satisfied
satisfied
not satisfied, not unsatisfied
dissatisfied
very dissatisfied
total
41.7%
43.8%
8.9%
4.1%
1.5%
100.0%
47.9%
41.6%
6.5%
3.0%
1.0%
100.0%
47.4%
41.7%
6.7%
3.1%
1.1%
100.0%
Table 4.7 Satisfaction with dwelling
Approximately nine out of ten high-rise residents think their home has a good
atmosphere. 88% of high-rise residents think that the layout of their flat is suitable. One
group of residents think their home is too small. This group represents 15% of people
living in high-rise housing. The figure for the rest of the housing stock is 13%. And
indeed the average size of high-rise flats is slightly smaller than the rest of the housing
stock. A small proportion of residents (4%) think that their current high-rise home is not
too small but too big. 12% of residents think that their high-rise home is poorly
maintained. This group is made up primarily of tenants (15% compared with 4% of the
owner-occupiers). Occupants of new flats are more pleased about the state of repair of
their flat than others are. Only 5% of the residents of high-rise flats built after 1985
think that their flat is poorly maintained. Nearly one high-rise resident in three thinks
that there is not enough outside space and would prefer a larger balcony or terrace.
Agree
High-rise
opinions
residents
Good atmosphere in flat

Suitable layout
Flat too small
Flat too large
Flat poorly maintained
Not enough outside space
Disagree
completel
Agree
do not disagree
20.2%
20.3%
3.5%
0.5%
2.6%
6.6%
69.2%
67.9%
12.5%
3.2%
9.6%
24.6%
5.7%
5.3%
4.8%
4.0%
8.2%
7.6%
Total
completely
Do not agree,
Disagree
4.3%
5.6%
62.6%
64.3%
60.6%
51.6%
0.6%
0.9%
16.6%
28.0%
19.0%
9.6%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Table 4.8 Opinions about some aspects of high-rise housing (WBO, 2002)
Satisfaction with high-rise

living environment
high-rise
other
dwellings
total housing
stock
very satisfied
satisfied
not satisfied, not unsatisfied
dissatisfied
very dissatisfied
Total
28.3%
49.6%
10.9%
8.8%
2.4%
100.0%
36.1%
48.7%
7.9%
5.8%
1.5%
100.0%
35.5%
48.8%
8.1%
6.0%
1.6%
100.0%
Table 4.9 Living environment satisfaction (WBO, 2002)
Most residents are satisfied with the living environment. However, approximately 11%
of high-rise occupants are not satisfied with the surroundings of the dwelling. Here too
residents of the newer flats (built after 1985) are slightly more satisfied than the others.
82% of residents of high-rise housing built after 1985 are satisfied or very satisfied
compared with 77% of the residents of older high-rise dwellings.
36 / 119
First improvement in living

situation
high-rise
other
dwellings
total housing
stock
nothing
quality of flats
living environment
facilities
social safety
road safety
social contacts
other
Total
25.0%
7.7%
16.1%
17.1%
10.2%
6.6%
1.9%
15.5%
100.0%
31.3%
3.4%
10.9%
18.3%
4.4%
14.4%
1.1%
16.2%
100.0%
30.5%
3.9%
11.6%
18.1%
5.1%
13.4%
1.2%
16.1%
100.0%
Tabel 4.10 First improvement in the living situation wanted by residents (KWR, 2000)
A quarter of high-rise residents believe that absolutely nothing needs to be improved in

their living situation. The other residents think that the most desirable improvements are
to the neighbourhood amenities (presence of shops, schools etc.) and to the living
environment (for example public planting and filth on the street).
37 / 119
Study of living in compact Amsterdam high-rise

In 2002 Amsterdam City Council published a report26 about how high-rise residents rate
their homes and their living environment. The occupants of thirteen high-rise projects that
were completed at the end of the nineteen-nineties were asked for their opinions. The new
build projects have at least six storeys and are in surroundings with a high density.
The researchers found that compact high-rise homes in Amsterdam are highly appreciated
provided that the flat and the living environment meet certain conditions. Some conclusions
and recommendations:
The size of the flat is one of the most important features. The higher the building, the
more crucial the role of the size of the dwelling.
The outdoor area belonging to the flat is also a decisive factor. The presence of a
terrace/roof terrace or two or more outdoor areas is highly appreciated.
The amount of daylight proved to be the most important characteristic of the indoor
area.
Good soundproofing is a very important element in how a dwelling is rated. This

relates to sound insulation in regard to the neighbours and the street outside.
The privacy of the indoor area is important. Dissatisfaction about the flat is fuelled if
people can look in.
Seven residents out of ten like the architecture of the residential district.
The proximity and the variety of shops for day-to-day purchases contribute to a high
rating for the living environment. The available of many amenities is expected in the
areas studied, which have a high density and are associated with urbanization.
An effective method for collecting rubbish makes a real contribution to the rating of the
living environment. Rubbish collection and management underground is much
appreciated.
Residents are irritated by poorly maintained street furniture and public spaces that are
not finished when the flats are handed over. A management plan can help to avoid
problems and the irritation they generate.
4.3
The demand for high-rise housing

In the Housing Needs Survey around 26% of high-rise occupants said they wanted to
move house within two years. The figure for the rest of the housing stock was slightly
lower at 20%.
Tendency to relocate
high-rise
other
dwellings
total housing
stock
inclined to relocate
new home already found
compulsory relocation
not inclined to move
Total
26.3%
1.8%
0.5%
71.4%
100.0%
20.1%
1.3%
0.7%
78.0%
100.0%
20.5%
1.3%
0.7%
77.6%
100.0%
Table 4.11 Tendency of residents to relocate (WBO, 2002)
Among the high-rise residents, it was primarily the younger generation (households up
to the age of 35) who intended to move. No less than 51% of this group wanted to
relocate within two years. Older people were the least inclined to move house. Only
26
Amsterdam City Council, Land Use Optimization Coordination Team, Wonen in Compacte
Amsterdamse hoogbouw, 2002
38 / 119
10% of high-rise occupants over the age of 75 wanted to move within the next two
years. Usually elderly people do not want to move because of the dwelling itself, but
because of health problems. Only 6% of the people over 75 who were inclined to
relocate gave their current home as the reason. Two-thirds of the over 75s who expected
to move within two years stated that health or the need for care was a reason. And
indeed, over nine out of ten people over 75 who were thinking of relocating wanted to
move to a dwelling specially intended for the elderly. These senior citizens probably
needed more care than was provided in their current high-rise housing. The over 75s in
the remainder of the housing stock quote health or the need for care even more
frequently than their contemporaries in high-rise housing as a reason for moving within
two years. The fact that this percentage is lower for high-rise is probably related to the
large stock of high-rise flats that can be classified as having lifelong flexibility (can be
reached without climbing stairs and the living room, kitchen, bedroom, toilet and
shower are on the same floor).
It is primarily one-person households, younger people (up to 35) and older people (65
and over) who are interested in moving to a multi-family dwelling. Actually these are
precisely the categories that are already well represented in high-rise flats. 42% of all
households inclined to relocate (including those currently in an independent dwelling
and those living at home or renting a room) state that they want to live in a multi-family
dwelling. Households in the age group between 35 and 55 are more interested in singlefamily homes.
Desired type of
dwelling by age group single-family home multi-family dwelling total
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 and over
Total
37.8%
66.1%
77.6%
69.2%
52.3%
33.7%
19.8%
58.5%
62.2%
33.9%
22.4%
30.8%
47.7%
66.3%
80.2%
41.5%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Table 4.12 Desired type of dwelling by age group (WBO, 2002)
Desired type of
dwelling by
household category
single-family home multi-family dwelling total
oneperson household
couple
couple + child/children
lone parent family
non-family household
Total
43.2%
69.1%
67.0%
57.5%
41.3%
58.5%
56.8%
30.9%
33.0%
42.5%
58.7%
41.5%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Table 4.13 Desired type of dwelling by household category (WBO, 2002)
Households who were inclined to move were not specifically asked whether they were
interested in high-rise, and so no separate figures can be given for high-rise. However,
they were asked on which storey their home should be. The households who wanted a
flat on the fifth floor or higher were studied in order to gain some understanding of the
demand for high-rise. However, this did not provide a complete picture because many
people stated that they had no preference as regards one particular storey and,
39 / 119
furthermore, the first four floors in a high-rise block are also occupied. People who said
they wanted to live on the third floor may well have a preference for particular high-rise
blocks, but would rather not live on the highest floors. Of the households who want a
multi-family dwelling and have a preference for a particular storey, 7% said that they
wanted to live on the fifth floor or higher. Of these households, 30% want to buy their
flat, whereas only 17% of the overall demand for multi-family dwellings is for owneroccupied homes. Households with a preference for the fifth floor or higher are also
more interested than others in a new build home (35% as against 25%). Generally
speaking it is fair to say that there is little demand for the gallery-access flats dating
from the nineteen-sixties, whereas the high-rise homes in the new, more luxurious
tower blocks are sought after.
There are barely any vacant homes in the Netherlands, despite the modest demand for
certain types of dwelling. This is because the 2004 housing market is very tight. A few
years ago, at the end of the nineteen-nineties, the housing market was reasonably
balanced. There was no significant housing shortage in terms of quantity. As a result of
economic growth and greater prosperity, many households looked to improve their
housing situation, and this led to strong demand for high quality and above all large
homes. Low mortgage interest rates and the prospects of rising house prices made the
owner-occupied sector very popular. The upshot was very high demand for luxury
apartments in city centres (VROM, 2004). There was a threat of vacancy in the less
sought-after segments, such as hallway-access and high-rise flats built in the nineteensixties and seventies. Plans were made to build more owner-occupied homes, whereas
social rental housing could be demolished because demand for these types of dwellings
had dropped significantly. Since then the market has changed. Owner-occupied housing
is no longer affordable for many people because of a poorer economic climate and
increased house prices. People are deferring their plans to move or are moving to other
rented property. Rents have gone up far less than house prices, and consequently the
rental sector has become more attractive. The predictions that rental homes would
become vacant have not proved to be correct.
4.4
Social aspects and sustainability

The Triple P approach emphasizes that the three Ps have to be in balance with one
another in order to achieve sustainable solutions. The social side (People) is just as
important as the physical (Planet) or the economic (Profit/Prosperity) aspect.
The approach taken by Hoogvliet, a borough of Rotterdam, is an example of this.
Hoogvliet was originally a fishing and farming village on the banks of the River Maas.
During the nineteen-fifties and sixties substantial quantities of high-rise housing were
built for people working in the nearby petrochemical industry. By the mid-nineties
Hoogvliet had the sorts of major problems discussed above. The atmosphere in this
dormitory town of 35,000 was characterized by vacant homes and social problems.
The borough council and the housing association succeeded through information and
consultation in persuading the residents of the need for integrated regeneration. There
was a high degree of acceptance. Residents who heard that their homes would be
40 / 119
demolished agreed wholeheartedly to the plans, despite the fact that they did not know
precisely where they would end up. Demolition parties were organized and the old
blocks of flats were dispatched with a degree of ceremony. The residents received
notification of when a block of flats had to be evacuated, and those who moved out
before an agreed date received a contribution towards the removal expenses. The
vacated homes are carefully looked after by the housing association. It even sees to it
that the curtains remain. Finally, those remaining behind are offered alternative
dwellings. The block of flats continues to look occupied until the last resident has
moved out. Only then does the demolition contractor arrive. Other towns and cities have
a similar 'social statute', Maastricht for instance, under which residents choose between
finding their own new accommodation and receiving a financial contribution, or
accepting a dwelling elsewhere in the municipality.
The social structure also changes as a consequence of such large, structural projects in
the districts that involve more or less replacing the existing buildings. Making a drastic
change to the social mix may even be one of the objectives, and demolishing old flats
and replacing them with new build may be the means of achieving it.
4.4.1
Example: Emmen, City Centre North

The problems in Emmen were not very different from those in other high-rise districts.
The quality of life and lettability of blocks of flats in City Centre North were under
considerable pressure. The number of empty dwellings increased and there were many
multi-problem families. It was more or less impossible to let the flats. The
opportunities for improving the urban design and the social structure are differentiation
of the living environment and, in addition to housing, social support for the current
occupants.
The City Centre North project involves more than just housing. It also includes social
participation, work and training pathways, parenting and personal problems, debt
restructuring etc. The special aspect of this project is the individual approach taken in
regard to the current 254 residents. There was a personal discussion with 244 of them.
In this way the support can be geared to the individual and quality can be excellent. The
project also encompasses a broad approach. Thought has been given to residents input,
sustainable use of materials, energy efficiency and the use of home automation (smart
electronics) in homes for the elderly. The blocks of flats are being replaced by new
housing, which is also aimed at new target groups in the district, namely handicapped
people, older people and people with higher incomes. The urban design structure is
being tackled at the same time.
4.4.2
Resident participation
Participation means to become actively involved or share. Participation is not the
same as formal consultation (provided for by law). It takes place at an earlier stage and
it encompasses interested parties playing an active part in the policy development
relating to government intervention, such as urban regeneration. There are degrees of
participation, from high to low, i.e. decision by citizens, joint decision making,
participating in the debate, being kept informed and non-participation. The goal of
participation is that interested parties feel jointly responsible for the results of a renewal
process as a result of their active and personal involvement. Participation is able to
ameliorate the stress field that is associated with urban regeneration and to increase the
degree of acceptance of solutions.
4.4.3
41 / 119
Example of participation in the Poptahof, Delft

The Poptahof approach is special because of the far-reaching degree of participation by
residents and their children in the redevelopment of the district. The Poptahof is a highrise district that was built in the nineteen-sixties. As part of its urban regeneration plans
the council wanted to reorganize the water management such that water would be
retained in the district and kept clean. One of the social objectives was to achieve
maximum consensus between the people responsible and the users. Participation by
children was used as the vehicle for this. The Poptahof is home to over 2700 people of
33 different nationalities. The children speak Dutch and they could act as interpreters
for their parents. A representative group of children was asked to interview their parents
about water use and water awareness. There were also invited to a children and water
afternoon in the mosque in order to come up with themes relating to water and play,
water and nature etc. The winning idea, a water playground, is under construction.
42 / 119
Structural and financial aspects of high-rise buildings

This chapter addresses high-rise building in the Netherlands from a structural and
financial perspective. The building methods and technologies employed are discussed in
section 4.1. Innovative technologies and building methods for high-rise are also
reviewed. Section 4.2 deals with the maintenance, refurbishment and demolition of
high-rise. Comparisons are made with the overall housing stock in the Netherlands and
costs and trends in refurbishment and demolition are described. Finally, section 4.3 is
concerned with sustainable developments. What impact does high-rise have on its
immediate surroundings and how can this be handled sustainably? This involves
considering physical, economic and social aspects, and a number of striking practical
examples are mentioned.
5.1
Building methods and technologies

The building methods and technologies employed in high-rise construction are strongly
dependent on when the building was done. Over 7% of the high-rise stock was built
before 1960. Of this, 2.5% was constructed prior to 1945. Over 60% of the high-rise
stock was built between 1960 and 1980 and most of the buildings were constructed
using building methods and technologies that were contemporary. The remaining 33%
of the high-rise in the Netherlands was built after 1980.
With a very few exceptions, high-rise prior to 1945 was built using traditional building
methods27. There was an initiative that emerged from the cities of Amsterdam,
Rotterdam and The Hague in 1920 to develop different building methods. This lead to
some experiments with such building systems as the Korrelbeton monolith system, the
Kossel monolith system and the Bron erection system (in which gantry cranes were
used). In 1925 the cost of building traditional dwellings dropped quite sharply, and
prefabricated modular building methods could not follow suit, with the result that
interest in such non-traditional building methods disappeared completely.
Interest in non-traditional building methods revived in the Netherlands after the Second
World War. A huge housing shortage had been created as a result of war damage and a
lack of activity in the building industry during the war. 1944 saw the foundation of the
Ratiobouw Trust, which stimulated the development of building systems. After the
liberation of the Netherlands, the Ministry of Reconstruction and Housing referred
everyone who wanted to submit plans for a new building system to this new trust for a
technical and economic appraisal. If a building system was approved in the first
instance, between two and ten trial dwellings could then be built (experimental
production). If the results of the experimental construction were positive, a series of
between fifty and a hundred dwellings could be built using the new system (mass
production).
The overview in 1947 was as follows. 128 Dutch and 45 foreign systems had been
investigated. Of these 21 were recommended for experimental production and 19
27
A traditional building method is characterized by floors made from timber made in situ, or concrete
poured in situ in non-standard formwork, and by a load-bearing structure made from bricks or sand-lime
bricks laid in situ or concrete poured in situ in non-standard formwork.
43 / 119
systems were recommended for mass production. In 1948 the following high-rise
building systems were operational in the Netherlands28:
Building system
Specification
Monolith type
Stack type
Prefab (load-bearing walls)
Prefab (frame construction)
Monolith core (erected parts connected
together by concrete poured in situ)
Miscellaneous
Korrelbeton, Kosselbeton
Bredero
Trabo, Bron, Elementenbouw,Bruynzeel
Systeembouw, Airey, Daalbouw
Welschen, Klein, RBM, Van Linge
Pont
Table 5.1 Building systems in the nineteen-forties
At the beginning of the nineteen-fifties the Dutch government was forecasting that the
housing shortage was more or less solved as far as quantity was concerned. However, in
1954 it became obvious that this was not the case and non-traditional house building in
the Netherlands received a major short in the arm. In 1956 long-term contracts were
signed in a number of places, so that the continuity of high-rise construction was
guaranteed for several years. By then the number of building systems in the Netherlands
has been reduced considerably. Of the 360 systems that were evaluated by the
Ratiobouw Trust between 1947 and 1957, and of the 60 of these that had been through
the experimental production stage, only six remained, which all achieved reasonable
production figures thanks to the long-term contracts. These six systems and the number
of dwellings built using them are given in the following table.
Building system
Number of dwellings
Korrelbeton (in situ)

Rottinghuis (large prefab)
Muwi (stack type)
BMB (large prefab)
BBB (stack type)
Pronto (stack type)
7985
2098
5635
7934
10,223
1294
Table 5.2 Building systems in 1958
The dwellings constructed using these systems also include a number of low-rise
homes. It was not possible to differentiate between low, medium and high-rise on the
basis of the documents found.
A number of other building methods reached the development stage during the
nineteen-sixties. The most important were Coignet, Larsen & Nielsen and the VAM
system. However, the focus of the building systems was now on in situ. Until then
Korrelbeton had been the only in situ system. In the meantime, however, experience
had been acquired in France and Sweden with much larger formwork panels. Within a
few years the Netherlands had adopted such mass production prefab methods as EBA,
ERA, Wilma II, RBM II and Sanders. A brief description of all the building methods
referred to here is given in appendix 1.
28
Source: Mazure 1948, pp 33 - 38
44 / 119
In the nineteen-seventies a lack of skilled labour and the intention of the Dutch
government to raise production substantially from between 40,000 and 60,000 to over
100,000 units per year gave a big stimulus to the development of labour and cost-saving
construction methods. In 1970 more than 30 systems were listed and accepted by
governmental bodies, and far more did not progress beyond the pilot phase or had
already been scrapped. The following construction methods were used:
Stack type: Related to the traditional method, the
stack type is characterized by the replacement of
bricks by blocks of light-weight concrete, gypsum,
lime-sandstone of foam concrete. Due to the size of
the blocks, the design had to be modular and most
companies supplied their own technical details. The
floors were made from smaller elements of lightweight or foam concrete, spanned between thin
prefab concrete beams or built up from 1.20 metre
wide (hollow) concrete floor slabs.
Example Stack type High-rise
In Situ (concrete): Increasing knowledge in the field of concrete technology

(deformation time, heating) combined with refined design calculation techniques
(computer models, stability analyses) gave a big impulse to the use of in situ concrete
in office buildings and also in multi-storey housing. Originally designed for singlefamily houses, two basic formwork systems were adapted for high-rise:
Tunnel formwork: A complete
steel formwork on wheels, either
module wide or half-module
wide, to be rolled up and placed
on the next storey after the
hardening of the concrete floor
and walls. This system requires a
high degree of repetition of
standard types of spans, although
many construction companies
have been very inventive in
providing some flexibility.
Wall and floor formwork: Wall
formwork (mostly steel) is
positioned and cast with
concrete; after hardening, the
formwork is removed and floor
formwork is positioned or prefab
floor elements are positioned.
During the early nineteennineties wall and floor formwork
was the preferred construction
method because it is better
adapted to design flexibility and
to smaller series of units.
Example in situ (Tunnel formwork) High-rise
45 / 119
Prefab (large element, Plattenbau, Panalaki) systems: These systems are

characterized by walls and floors constructed with prefabricated large elements
consisting of concrete or lightweight concrete and sandwich constructions for the
faades. The elements are provided with conduits, pipes, door and window frames
including glass etc. in the factory. The maximum size of the elements is mainly
restricted
by
the
means
of
horizontal
and
vertical
transport.
Example of Prefab High-rise
The development of these systems originates from the 1950-1960 period, in which
the government stimulated new techniques by subsidizing investments in nontraditional construction methods (as described above). The expectation was that, after
some years of depreciation, the costs of building this type of housing would decrease
and subsidies would no longer be necessary. Due to increasing transport distances
between the factories and the building site, smaller series and a tendency to allow
more flexibility in dwelling plans and architecture, this strategy never achieved its
economic goals. In the years between 1960 and 1975, however, a substantial part of
medium and high-rise buildings were constructed in this way, thus enabling the
government to achieve their anticipated volume (up to 150,000 dwellings per year),
without disrupting the labour and traditional building materials markets. In the peak
year 25,000 dwellings were constructed by six factories, all of them belonging to
large construction companies. Due to market conditions all six factories ceased the
production of large elements for housing in the late nineteen-seventies and early
nineteen-eighties. Some were closed and some were converted to normal prefab
concrete factories.
46 / 119
Although the mass-production in medium and high-rise building of between 50,000 and
60,000 dwellings per year during the nineteen-sixties and seventies was never repeated,
between 10,000 and 20,000 units per year were still being produced in multi-storey
blocks and towers in the nineteen-eighties.
Three to four storey blocks were particularly favoured in city renovation projects.
However, the series are limited, averaging 50 to 100 dwellings per complex. In many
cases they have a concrete structure (either tunnel or wall-floor formwork) with a great
variety in faade designs and materials (brick, metal cladding, sandwich and/or wood
panels, exposed concrete etc.). A large variety could be achieved in faade structures
and in the form and height of the block at acceptable costs if contractors and designers
cooperated in the design phase. High quality medium and high-rise buildings are still
preferred in the private sector for housing elderly people and small families in urban
areas.
Since 1990 steel has been used increasingly in
Dutch high-rise as a structural material.
However, steel was used from 1930 onwards in
high-rise projects (for the refurbishment of the
Bergpolder and Parklaan block of flats). Steel
was used in the Dutch building industry after
that, but until 1990 concrete was often selected
as a structural material because of steels
relatively high cost and longer construction times
in many cases. Generally speaking steel is used
in high-rise for the skeleton, and other building
materials are used for the rest. The structures
employed are actually all line structures
(columns and beams). The Rembrandtoren in
Amsterdam is a typical example of the use of
steel in the nineteen-nineties.
Rembrandtoren in Amsterdam
The advantages of steel structures are the high building speed, the modest mass of the
load-bearing structure and the possibility of creating large spans. The advantage of steel
structures has also enabled high-rise to rise to new heights. The tallest block of flats in
the Netherlands is over 140 metres high. Steel structures have become more popular in
the Netherlands over the last couple of years. Their modest weight makes it possible to
design higher buildings and create more storeys per building. Steel structures are also
being used with increasing frequency to build housing because of a shortage of space
and the need for more dwellings. However, this is only being done on a large scale in
Rotterdam. But it is expected that steel structures will be used more and more in the
near future.
The reason why one of the building methods referred to above was used for a particular
high-rise block is often not clear. Sometimes a client has a preference, and in other
cases the building method selected depends on the form of cooperation between the
client and the contractor. Based on the building costs, and in particular the differences
in cost between the different building methods, one is struck by the fact that the cost of
the shells produced using one method is barely different from the cost using the others.
47 / 119
It is therefore difficult to make a choice in this case on the basis of cost differences.
Steel skeletons are more expensive than concrete skeletons, but they have structural
advantages and possibly also better operational possibilities. Economic, architectural
and sustainability considerations play a major role in the choice between concrete and
steel. The specific circumstances of the project and the experience of the parties
participating in it are more likely to be the reasons for preferring or not preferring a
particular building method29.
In principle the design options are more or less determined in land use plans and, of
course, in existing situations. When selecting a particular building method the designer
will need to have a degree of insight into which building methods can possibly be used
to construct the dwellings concerned. In the case of in situ methods, it is important to
have enough space during the building process to drive the formwork out of the shells,
to use a heavy, and therefore large, construction crane to lift the formwork and to have
enough space for storing formwork (for cleaning and reconfiguring). This will not
always be possible in compact urban locations, for instance. In the case of prefabricated
construction and the use of prefab concrete elements (Plattenbau, Panelaki etc.), there
has to be sufficient space to maneouvre the units with a heavy crane and to deliver the
prefab parts.
The factors that play a part in determining an appropriate building method are therefore
largely dependent on the phase of the building process in which the choice has to be
made and on the input of the participants involved at that moment. The following
selection factors are important from the perspective of the production process30:
29
30
Number of man-hours in the factory (in the case of prefab);

Number of man-hours on the construction site;
Preparation time needed;
Production time available and needed on the construction site;
The season during which building has to take place and the degree to which weatherdependent activities have to be carried out;
Possibilities and constraints with regard to the use of plant and equipment;
Requirements relating to health, safety and the environment;
Possibilities and constraints of a logistical nature (transport, storage, removal);
The extent to which shell-related installation facilities have to be included during the
production of the shell.
Jellema, hogere bouwkunde, volume 8 chapter 11

Jellema, hogere bouwkunde, volume 8 chapter 11
48 / 119
Selection factors
Stack type
In situ
Prefab
Man-hours in the factory
Few
None
Many
Man-hours on the
construction site
Many
More than stack type
Few
Preparation time before

production
Short
Longer than stack type
Long
Execution time on the

construction site
Long
Shorter than stack type
Very short
Weather-dependent
activities
Gluing of blocks and

elements
Transport of formwork by
construction crane (wind)
Transport of formwork by
construction crane (wind)
Use of plant and equipment
Element positioner,
construction crane
Heavy construction crane
Heavy construction crane
Heath and safety issues
Work on scaffolding, lifting

heavy weights
Work on scaffolding, speed

of work
Transport of large items
Environmental issues: waste
Waste blocks, bricks
Waste from excess pouring
Logistical aspects
Varied, but straightforward
Use of tunnel formwork is

determining factor
Manufacture and transport

are determining factors
Shell-related facilities
Afterwards and in situ
Pouring (construction site)
Pouring (factory)
Table 5.3 Building method selection factors from the production process perspective
Comparisons between methods for building high-rise on the grounds of these factors is
only possible on the basis of a specific project. The best choice will have to be made for
each individual case. In situ is more appropriate for large-scale projects (high initial
investment, high transport costs for formwork etc.). It is prudent to select prefab
elements for a project that fills a gap in an otherwise fully built-up urban environment
because of the limited space required.
New building methods are being developed constantly in order to build as efficiently
and cheaply as possible. The following innovative techniques are important to high-rise
in the Netherlands.
5.2
49 / 119
Modern high-rise construction techniques

The Hybrid-High-rise. Designed by Jan Hoogstad, it is a new high-rise building
concept that meets the need for maximum flexibility in the design and construction of
high-rise buildings. Modular load-bearing structures moreover allow a wide variety of
architectural executions. The modules can be assembled in a variety of configurations
according to the project and situational requirements.
For example, they can be

stacked vertically or placed
side by side. They are
assembled using robotic
techniques like those used in
offshore engineering, which
would
be
particularly
beneficial on sites constrained
by natural barriers. Modular
building techniques also make
it vastly more efficient to
demolish high-rise structures
and recycle the units, thus
permitting
a
phased
depreciation
during
the
lifespan of the structure. A
striking feature of the HybridHigh-rise system is the
'glasshouse concept'.
Example of hybrid high-rise, de Hollandse Meester

(source: www.corsmit.nl)
Designed in the first place to save energy, the glass outerskin creates fascinating semiexterior spaces, produces a salutary daylight-flooded interior and helps shield the
occupants from weather and noise. The 'glasshouse concept' offers exceptional potential
for creating a comfortable, user-friendly interior layout. Interior gardens and pleasant,
well-lit meeting places become options in high-rise structures. The architectural
possibilities of the system are further expanded by the variations possible in the choice
of external cladding.
5.3
Maintenance, refurbishment and demolition of high-rise
5.3.1
Maintenance, refurbishment and quality of high-rise housing
50 / 119
Refurbishment is taken to mean all improvements to dwellings that lead to an

improvement of the quality of the dwellings concerned. Agreement by the current
occupant is needed, there has to be a building permit and there must be compliance with
the (Building Materials) Soil Protection Decree. In fact refurbishment is an investment
in the extension of the functional lifetime of a property31.
Maintenance is defined as all the technical and associated administrative activities
aimed at maintaining or once again achieving the original condition of a property or a
condition that permits the same utilization options. In principle the product
characteristics stay the same as a result of maintenance. The performance capacity of
the housing does not change. No building permit is required for maintenance. The state
of repair of the Dutch housing stock can best be expressed in terms of repair costs. The
repair costs per dwelling include the sum of the costs to be incurred per building
element for repairing the observed defects.
The distinction between refurbishment and maintenance is not black and white. In
practice there is a grey area containing work on the housing stock that can be classified
as maintenance or refurbishment. It is safe to say that substantial sums are associated
with the maintenance and refurbishment of the Dutch housing stock. For example, 24.3
and 21.8 billion euros were spent on maintaining and refurbishing the housing stock in
1990 and 1995 respectively.
Average investment per dwelling (in )
Total refurbishment costs ( in billion )
1990
1995
2000
1990
1995
2000
Social rental
before 1946
1946-1970
1971 and later
6200
3300
1300
3300
2700
1000
2200
1800
1000
1.1
3.2
1.2
0.9
2.8
1
0.6
1.8
1
Private rental
before 1946
1946-1970
1971 and later
10700
4000
1300
9400
4600
1200
5600
2800
1300
5.5
1
0.3
3.9
0.9
0.3
2
0.5
0.3
Owner-occupied
before 1946
1946-1970
1971 and later
9200
3500
1600
7800
4300
1600
5700
3000
1500
7.3
2.9
1.8
6.5
3.3
2.2
4.9
2.5
2.8
4200
3500
2500
24.3
21.8
16.4
Netherlands
Table 5.4 Average investment and total refurbishment costs
31
www.aedes.nl
51 / 119
It can be seen in table 5.4 that the average repair costs for the overall Dutch housing
stock fell 40% between 1990 and 2000 from 4200 to 2500 per dwelling. During this
ten-year period the repairs costs dropped significantly in the pre-war section of the
housing stock, and in particular relating to social and private rental homes. We do not
see the same decrease in homes built after 1970 because there is simply less that needs
to be improved. In 2000 the social housing stock had the lowest average repair cost per
dwelling ( 2200). Private rental and owner-occupied homes, particularly the pre-war
stock, had the highest repair cost per dwelling ( 5600). An examination of the repair
costs per building element reveals that the exterior window frames entail the greatest
repair costs. The substructure of the dwellings requires the least maintenance (source:
Kwalitatieve woningregistratie 2000). Thanks to the substantial improvement in the
state of repair of the housing stock, the overall repair costs dropped by a third between
1990 and 2000 from 24.3 to 16.4 billion euros.
Currency: Euro
Total
stock
Total investment
Number of dwellings
involved
Average investment
per dwelling
housing
Multi-family
dwellings
High-rise
residential
dwellings
16.4 billion
6,588,070
2.9 billion
1,972,364
900,000,000
835,100
2000
1475
1122
Table 5.5: Total need for investment in refurbishment of residential buildings
Approximately 18 % of the 16.4 billion euros (2.9 billion) is spent on multi-family

dwellings. Out of this, 18%, over 5 % (0.9 billion) is spent on high-rise homes.
Altogether almost 900 million euros is spent on refurbishing high-rise. However, the
average cost per dwelling is a function of the size of the dwelling. The bigger the home,
the bigger the volume and therefore also the greater the chance of higher repair costs.
The differences in the initial condition are eradicated by working with relative repair
costs, and this gives greater insight into high-rise quality trends between 1990 and
2000. The relative repair costs of a dwelling are expressed as a percentage of its new
build value. The new build value is equal to the cost of rebuilding the dwelling. Land
costs and regional price differences are therefore not included in the equation32. The
relative repair costs can be used to classify the quality of the high-rise stock into quality
classes. The following classification has been used.
Quality
Relative repair costs
Very Good
Good
Reasonable
Bad
Less than 1 %
1 10 %
10- 20 %
20 % and more
Table 5.6: Quality classes and relative repair costs
32
Basisrapportage kwalitatieve woningregistratie 2000, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment
52 / 119
Using this classification of relative repair costs, it can be seen from table 4.6 that 97%
of the high-rise stock is in the good or very good category. Only 3% is in a reasonable
state of repair. It is striking that high-rise homes are of better quality than the overall
housing total.
Total repair cost

versus cost of
comparable new
building
Total housing
stock
Multi-family
dwellings
High-rise
residential
dwellings
0 10 %
10 20 %
20 30 %
30 50 %
> 50 %
92.1 %
6.2 %
1.2 %
0.3 %
0.2 %
94.8 %
4.5 %
0.6 %
0.2 %
0
97.1 %
2.7 %
0.2 %
0
0
Table 5.7 Total repair cost versus cost of comparable new building
Over a ten-year period the relative repair costs of the overall housing stock have
dropped from an average of 8.5 % to 3.9 %. This means that there are progressively
fewer reasonable homes and progressively more good and very good homes. This
is also reflected in the high-rise stock. As a result of the investments over the last ten
years, many high-rise homes have reached the good category (this does not include
considerations relating to the high-rise surroundings and the social and economic
condition of the high-rise districts; for this see section 3.4 and chapter 5). There are
specific figures regarding the repair costs of owner-occupied high-rise housing. Tables
4.7 and 4.8 show the absolute and relative repair costs per apartment as a function of the
number of storeys and construction period.
distribution of housing stock by quality category in 2000

(source: KWR)
KWR 2000
high-rise
poor
mediocre
good
excellent
non-high-rise
0.3%
2.6%
49.1%
48.0%
100.0%
2.0%
6.8%
63.3%
28.0%
100.0%
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
excellent
good
medi
ocre
poor
high-rise
non-high-rise
Figure 5.1 Distribution of housing stock by quality category in 2000
53 / 119
High-rise development by quality category

(source: KWR 1995 and KWR 2000)
combined 1995 and 2000 high-rise

high-rise
1995
poor
5.0%
mediocre
10.5%
s
good
59.7%
excellent
24.8%
100%
2000
0.3%
2.6%
49.1%
48.0%
100%
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
excellent
good
mediocr
e
poor
1995
2000
Figure 5.2 High-rise development by quality category
It can be seen from the figures above that high-rise flats are in better condition than
other types of dwellings. For example, in 2000 48% of high-rise flats were of excellent
quality compared with 28% of the other categories of homes. In the other categories
8.8% of dwellings are of poor or mediocre quality, whereas in the high-rise sector this
figure is only 2.9%. Finally, it can be seen that the quality of high-rise housing has
improved significantly since 1995 (see figure 5.2). The proportion of poor and mediocre
flats fell from 15.5% to 2.9% and the proportion of excellent flats nearly doubled, from
24.8% to 48%.
Number of storeys
before 1940
1940-1970
1970-1990
After 1990
Total
Low-rise: 2-3 storeys

Medium-rise:
4 storeys
High-rise:
5 or more storeys
3400
2800
2200
1500
500
1000
300
400
2600
1500
2500
1300
900
300
1000
Total
3100
1500
600
300
1600
33
Table 5.8 Absolute repair costs per apartment as a function of the number of storeys
Number of storeys
before 1940
1940-1970
1970-1990
After 1990
total
Low-rise: 2-3 storeys

Medium-rise :
4 storeys
High-rise:
5 or more storeys
5.6 %
4.2 %
4.0 %
2.6 %
0.9 %
1.7 %
0.6 %
0.7 %
4.4 %
2.4 %
3.9 %
2.3 %
1.5 %
0.5 %
1.7 %
Total
4.9 %
2.7 %
1.0 %
0.5 %
2.6 %
Table 5.9 Relative (as % of the investment costs) repair costs per apartment as a function of the
number of storeys34
33
Source: KWR 2000
54 / 119
An initial observation is that the average repair costs per owner-occupied apartment, at
1600 euros or 2.6% of the new build value, are not very high. The repair costs of highrise apartments are significantly lower than low-rise ones (1000 compared with 2600
euros). The tables also make it abundantly clear that repair costs increase with the size
of the apartment. A more striking correlation is that the average repair costs per
dwelling decrease as the number of storeys of the complex increases. On the one hand
there is a scale effect (this certainly applies to common building elements such as the
roof and the substructure), while on the other hand differences in building method play
a role. Take, for example, the difference between traditional brickwork low-rise flats
and high-rise with a concrete skeleton and prefab elements35.
The type of maintenance carried out on high-rise is not different from maintenance that
should be carried out on low-rise and medium-rise. The difference is that the
breakdown of the costs for high-rise is different from low-rise. In broadbrush terms the
following types of high-rise maintenance can be identified.
Scheduled maintenance: Building managers monitor schedules that show when the
flats need to have maintenance work done on them. This is primarily concerned with
painting and roof maintenance.
Complaint maintenance: The resident complains to the manager that a part of his flat
requires maintenance. This is therefore not scheduled and happens on demand. This
type of maintenance is the most difficult one to get under control.
Change of tenant maintenance: There is change of tenant maintenance if people
move out of their flat. This may mean that the dwelling has to be redecorated but it
may also involve more drastic measures (installing a new kitchen, additional living
space etc.).
The frequency of this maintenance is not easy to define. Schedule maintenance is based
on a cycle of five years. Each part of a flat calls for a specific maintenance frequency.
The housing associations know a great deal about this area, but statistical information
about the frequency and type of maintenance in the high-rise stock in the Netherlands
could not be found.
5.3.2
Demolition or refurbishment of high-rise

If maintenance alone is not sufficient to provide the scope to keep the dwelling
habitable, there may be a need for refurbishment, or it may be decided to demolish it.
The choice between refurbishment and demolition depends on the specific
circumstances of each case. The reason for demolition may be that the condition of the
high-rise is too poor (there is simply no other choice). Extended and expensive vacancy
may be a factor, and in many cases demolition is chosen as a means of bringing about
change in the population of the surrounding area. The following factors play a part in
the decision to demolish or refurbish.
Focusing on the block of flats or the surroundings: In many cases the approach taken
to a block of flats results in measures that are often by no means beneficial for the
surroundings. Analyzing the local housing market and the demographic information is a
good way to establish which option is preferred - demolition or refurbishment. Besides
34
35
Source: KWR 2000

Koopappartementen in Nederland, Laaglandadvies
55 / 119
this issue, however, economic and project interests are determining factors in the
decision.
Focus on use now and in the future: The problem here is defining the timeframe that
has to be considered when planning the future of the high-rise blocks of flats.
Demographic trends often call for plans extending over 10 to 20 years, whereas the
block of flats itself may need solutions that will only work for a year or two. In any
event it is important to always involve the residents of high-rise housing in these
decisions.
Maintaining or changing the market position: It is important to know what the
current demand for high-rise housing is and how it may change. The conversion of
rental to owner-occupied is a particularly important element, for example. It is also
possible, for instance, to decide to refurbish a block so that the individual flats become
more expensive, and therefore the market position changes. The decision to demolish or
refurbish is strongly dependent on this.
As referred to above, refurbishment is indispensable for modernizing the Dutch housing
stock and getting it to meet current technical and social requirements. First and
foremost it is important to make a distinction between refurbishment that is carried out
collectively and individually. Collectively implemented refurbishment projects involve
the refurbishment of a number of homes at once. An individual project involves the
refurbishment of a single dwelling. Collectively implemented refurbishment projects
are primarily found in housing owned by housing associations and other landlords.
Individual refurbishment projects are implemented mostly in the owner-occupied
sector. A total of 2.2 billion euros was earmarked for refurbishment in the Netherlands
in 200336. Of this 0.8 billion came from housing associations and 1.4 billion from other
parties (0.1 billion from institutional investors and 1.3 billion from other landlords and
owners of owner-occupied homes). Some examples of high-rise refurbishment projects
are given on the following pages. The phenomena of building additional dwellings,
partial demolition, creating extra dwellings and combining dwellings are also described.
The following refurbishment activities take place regularly in the Netherlands37:
Work on the shell of the dwelling: architectural facelift, installing insulation (both
sound and thermal), fitting low maintenance window frames
Access: installing a lift, refurbishing the stairwell, enclosing or widening the gallery,
providing access for the handicapped, removing thresholds
Outdoor areas: enlarging balconies, installing anti-burglary safeguards
Built-in functions: replacing kitchen, replacing bathroom and toilet
Building services functions: replacing piping, cabling, hot water system and
installing data cabling
In addition to these items, refurbishment often involves building additional dwellings,
partial demolition, creating extra dwellings or combining dwellings. Formally speaking
building additional or creating extra dwellings are new build, and this is frequently done
in order to make refurbishment feasible. Building additional dwellings means adding
additional homes on top of the existing load-bearing structure. Creating extra dwellings
36
Innovation 4 renovation, TNO Bouw 2003

Duurzame renovatie van woningen (G. Klunder), Gereedschappen voor herontwikkeling (SEV), Strippen
zonder hinder handboek, Tijdschrift Bouwmarkt
37
56 / 119
involves converting or extended storage areas, or more generally creating extra homes
on the lowest storeys of the complex. Partial demolition means demolishing one or
more of the uppermost stories of a block of flats, and the remaining stories are
refurbished. In many cases partial demolition is used to improve the perception of the
district and remove the sensation of massiveness. Combining dwellings is done to create
larger homes. This option, and also partial demolition, always withdraws dwellings
from the housing stock. The types of refurbishment described above are as yet only seen
rarely in high-rise. Precise figures relating to their application in low-rise and high-rise
are not available.
If it is decided not to refurbish, demolition of the high-rise is the last resort. Dwellings
become outdated and peoples housing wishes change (there are no specific figures
about high-rise housing wishes in the Netherlands). The question of whether it is
prudent from a financial and social point of view to modify existing dwellings is
therefore being asked increasingly frequently. Demolition of housing that is no longer
wanted or that cannot be refurbished at a reasonable cost could possibly offer better
prospects as far as the future is concerned38. Central government policy with regard to
demolition and replacement new build can be described as cautious. There is no specific
demolition programme. However, local and provincial authorities have the ability to
make demolition financially feasible by granting subsidies. The literature and sources
consulted while preparing this document contained no overview of these subsidies or
the degree to which they are being used.
If the decision is taken to demolish a building, it is extremely important that this
decision is implemented effectively and efficiently. The right steps have to be taken at
the right moment and, unless there is cooperation from the parties involved, the
implementation of the demolition decision and the associated replacement new build
plan can be delayed significantly and, in extreme cases, may not even go ahead at all.
The landlords decision making with regard to demolishing high-rise housing will be
guided in the first instance by economic considerations. However, there are also serious
emotional and social aspects linked to a decision to demolish39. Demolishing homes is a
very drastic event in the lives of the occupants. A decision by the landlord to demolish
does not necessarily lead to actual demolition in all cases. The chance of
implementation depends primarily on the attitude of the residents and the local
authority, and the way the landlord makes preparations. It is therefore important that the
decision to demolish is properly underpinned. Reports and analyses need to be available
about40:
The quality of the dwellings to be demolished and the quality of life in them
The effect of demolition on the local housing market
The predicted effects of alternative measures, such as major maintenance and/or
refurbishment
The implications for the financial position of the landlord
The residents housing costs
The problems associated with rehousing
38
Sloop een reel alternatief, Woningraad Extra

For Dutch examples see the publication Ruimte voor verandering from stuurgroep experimenten
volkshuisvesting
40
Sloop een reel alternatief, Woningraad Extra
39
57 / 119
It is not possible to present cut and dried scenarios because the circumstances in which
a decision to demolish is taken vary from case to case. Communication with the
occupants is a critical factor in the demolition process. If this is not properly handled, it
can often be extremely difficult to execute demolition plans.
Finally there are different types of demolition and demolition techniques relating to
high-rise. First of all a distinction has to be made between partial and complete
demolition. In the case of partial demolition, the client specifies precisely what has to
be demolished and how the remaining structure or connection to the non-demolished
parts will be handed over. High-rise demolition activities can be classified by type of
material and structural function. Tiling needs a different demolition method from
reinforced concrete load-bearing walls. Finally, a distinction can be made in regard to
the location of the property in connection with the size of and access to the project site,
limiting damage to the building and the surrounding buildings, asbestos etc. Some
demolition techniques have been well known for many years - chipping away at a wall
with a chisel and hammer, the huge steel ball that knocks down an entire wall with one
blow, the reverberation of pneumatic hammers and drills, and the spectacular explosion,
which makes a whole building disappear in a cloud of dust. The Hanzewijk in Kampen,
complex 1, is a good example of demolition in the Netherlands41
The techniques can be classified and described on the basis of the tools and equipment
used. The most important demolition techniques are:
Hacking/chipping (with chisels, hammers, picks etc.)

Knocking down (using steel balls up to approximately 5000 kg)
Breaking up (with a breaking bin with teeth or with two crushing bins)
Drilling
Expanding (with explosives)
Cutting (with cutting torches)
This overview is not complete. For example there are sophisticated techniques using
laser beams, infrared and electric arcs. See also chapter 7.
Figures about the numbers of high-rise homes that have been demolished or refurbished
over the last few decades were not found in the sources and literature consulted for this
document. However, the following tables give an overview of the number of dwellings
that were demolished between 1961 and 1986 and the numbers of dwellings that were
refurbished in 1995.
41
See Sloop een reel alternatief, woningraad extra 42
58 / 119
Reduction of the housing stock through
total
Destruction
1961-1965
1966-1970
1971-1975
1976-1980
1981-1985
1986
retirement from use
Fire and other

disasters
Demolition
because of
dilapidation
Modificati
on
Declaration
of unfitness
for human
habitation
Change of
use
Other42
1303
1512
1365
1511
1024
140
32109
43016
41462
31240
31194
6469
3684
3843
4466
8676
8088
1680
14161
10889
4361
1806
749
80
9514
12217
11891
10276
7910
1215
6784
17376
18735
18414
11703
1932
67555
88853
82280
71923
60668
11524
Table 5.10 Reduction in the housing stock 1961-198643
It can be seen from table 5.10 that the vast majority of housing is demolished because it
is dilapidated. Most dwellings were demolished between 1966 and 1980, and there was
a sharp drop between 1981 and 1985. As stated above, a more detailed analysis of this
trend is not possible because of the absence of relevant statistical data.
Types of dwellings
Maintenance and repair
Face-lift and
refurbishment
Owner-occupied dwellings
Rental dwellings
Social rental dwellings
2,635,000
379,000
914,000
1,854,000
259,000
368,000
Table 5.11 Numbers of dwellings maintained and refurbished in 199544
Table 5.11 shows that relatively speaking, more dwellings had maintenance or repair
work done on them in 1995. The number of owner-occupied homes that were
maintained or refurbished was considerably higher, probably because of the fact that
more homes in the Netherlands are owner-occupied and people who own their own
homes undertake maintenance more readily.
5.4
Costs and Benefits of Redevelopment

Plans are being developed or implemented in numerous residential estates for the
renovation or replacement of existing housing. In some instances this concerns major
sections of the applicable neighbourhoods, which further entails massive costs,
including the cost of eviction, demolition and the redesign of the neighbourhoods for
buildings and public spaces. Parking space is also a growing issue in building
investment. In the case of demolition and renovation it is often also necessary to
devaluate the existing properties. The yield against the aforementioned devaluation is
normally the income realized from the new properties, either through direct sales or
capitalization from rentals. In many instances the plans present the developers with a
balance shortfall, which is subsidized by the municipalities and housing corporations.
The Ministry of VROM has compiled a manual for the distribution of the shortfall,
titled, De kosten in beeld, de kosten verdeeld (Overview and Distribution of Costs), in
which it provides a systematic overview of land use (land and properties) and the
42
For example because of dilapidation, urban development plans etc.

Sloop een reeel alternatief Woningraad extra 42
44
Source: Analyse bewoners en beheerders gerenoveerde woningen
43
59 / 119
related allocation to all parties concerned. Practise has proven the manual to be a useful
instrument for unlocking deadlocked discussions on shortfalls in the plans.
5.5
The added value of sustainable solutions

The central government has been actively implementing a sustainable building policy
since the beginning of the nineteen-nineties (see chapter 6). This had been adopted at
many levels. For example, many housing managers and local authorities have sought
and selected sustainable solutions for major maintenance, refurbishment and the
redevelopment of high-rise districts. The sustainable redevelopment of existing,
primarily post-war, residential districts involves a district-focused approach to
improving the housing, the living environment and the facilities. The refurbishment of
existing dwellings, additional new build and/or demolition and replacement new build
can be a part of it, but with due regard for nature and the environment, and not
forgetting a clear social approach. Gradually the conviction has grown that sustainable
solutions, including balance according to the Triple P approach, are the best solutions
and that they also stand the test of time.
Limited and drastic approach
A simple classification can be made by distinguishing between a limited approach and a
drastic approach. The limited approach is employed if the homes as such are of
adequate quality. The existing structural state is improved or refurbished. The drastic
approach is taken if limited measures are no longer able to keep the dwellings at a
satisfactory level and consequently they would remain impossible to let or sell.
5.5.1
The limited approach

Many of the measures associated with a limited approach involve energy efficiency, in
many cases combined with major maintenance. In the Flatstrook Groenewoud,
Spijkenisse, for example, energy improvements were made such that there is
compliance with the minimum requirements of the (Building Materials) Soil Protection
Decree. The dwellings concerned were gallery-access flats built in the nineteen-sixties.
This type of dwelling is usually poorly insulated. Window frames and above all the
rotating window parts have single glazing and the outdated central heating installation
uses a great deal of energy. The minimum requirements of the (Building Materials) Soil
Protection Decree therefore represent a substantial improvement for these dwellings
compared with the original situation. If the improvements are properly implemented,
the dwellings will meet the basic requirements for new build and they can take on the
competition with new build. The measures in Spijkenisse were:
glass membrane faade for the galleries (protection and insulation)

single glazing in windows and doors replaced by double glazing
faade insulation in places
interior wall insulation in places
roof insulation
water-saving shower heads
toilets with water-saving flush option
energy-saving lights in the common areas
A noteworthy feature of the improvements to the Flatstrook Groenewoud is that the

energy measures were not implemented properly in all the blocks of flats. In order to
60 / 119
keep costs down, the single glazing was not all replaced and part of the wall insulation
was not installed. In a number of blocks the floor insulation was installed in only a part
of the dwelling because according to the instructions only a part of the dwelling had to
comply with the new build regulations. It is interesting that the landlord now has a
problem with vacant flats because these dwellings cannot compete properly against well
insulated dwellings Too low an ambition level turned out not to be advantageous in the
long term.
5.5.2
Social aspects of the limited approach

A social aspect of the limited approach is that the current occupants can remain despite
temporary inconvenience, and the rent can stay at about the same level. The rent can be
raised to a limited extent because of greater comfort and lower energy bills. Residents
ask their housing association to refurbish and take energy measures because neighbours,
who have already been through a refurbishment, have received energy bills that are
lower than before.
5.5.3
Other limited measures and strategy

Other measures that come within the scope of a limited approach are:
replacing central heating boilers with high efficiency central heating boilers
improving draught exclusion around windows and doors
improving ventilation, for example self-regulating natural ventilation or, more
drastic, high efficiency ventilation
materials with limited emissions harmful to a healthy indoor environment (for
example interior paints and glues with limited emissions of volatile organic
compounds45, and low formaldehyde chipboard)
photovoltaic panels and/or solar thermal collectors
replacing old radiators by low temperature heating
It is very important, particularly in the case of the limited approach, to follow the right
strategy in order to apply sustainable solutions as efficiently as possible. In the
Netherlands the Three Step Strategy46 is commonly used for this. A building, structure
or even an entire district is considered to be one property, with an inflow and an
outflow. The strategy is based on an input to the property that is as small as possible
and as prudent as possible. After installation, try to prevent outflow as much as possible
and to manage waste as prudently as possible. The Three Step Strategy should be used
in regard to all sustainable building themes, such as materials, energy, water, and health
and interior environment. Using the Three Step Strategy, the sequence of steps for the
inflow is as follows:
1. Prevent unnecessary use
2. Use sustainable / renewable sources
3. Use finite sources prudently
45
Now a statutory obligation
46
Three Step Strategy: developed by BOOM and SOM-TUDelft
61 / 119
Step number one of the strategy as applied to the theme of energy, also referred to as
'Trias Energetica', involves trying to make the demand for energy as small as possible,
for example by means of insulation. In step number two the demand for energy is
satisfied as much as possible by using renewable energy, for example active and passive
solar energy. Finally, if there is still a residual demand for energy, provide this as
efficiently as possible using fossil fuel, for example a small high efficiency boiler. It is
essential that the steps are taken in the right sequence in order to achieve a sustainable
and financially feasible result.
Financial government instruments involved in the limited approach
The central government encourages energy saving measures and sustainable building by
means of some financial schemes (see chapter 6 for the subsidy policy). There is the
Energy Performance Advice (EPA) in order to identify and analyze opportunities for
saving energy. A certified EPA consultant inventories the existing status of one or more
dwellings and makes written recommendations with regard to the energy saving
measures that can be taken. The owner (private or housing association) is free to select
which measures in the recommendations he wants to implement. The central
government reimburses part of the EPA recommendation costs and it has a subsidy
scheme for energy efficiency measures47.
The EPA is expected to find more widespread application when the Energy
Performance Building Directive (EPBD), the European directive for the energy
efficiency of buildings, comes into effect. See chapter 6 for more information about
this.
5.5.4
The drastic approach

Many post-war high-rise districts had problems during the nineteen-nineties. Too many
of the same type of dwelling, outdated quality, the layout of the public space was no
longer in tune with current aspirations and perceptions, and a skewed population
distribution. Anyone who could get out did so, leaving behind the elderly and socially
disadvantaged.
However, these districts also have their positive features. Spacious urban design, plenty
of planting, good infrastructure, adequate public transport, cheap housing, sufficient
small-scale facilities and an attractive location in regard to the city centre and the
countryside, in many cases better that the modern VINEX (Fourth Memorandum on
Physical Planning Plus) locations.
It is therefore worth utilizing the positive aspects. The redevelopment of the district
prevents the irrevocable impoverishment of the area and the creation of a type of nomans-land, between the city centre and new residential districts, where nobody wants
to live. This redevelopment, particularly of the post-war districts, is referred to as
urban regeneration.
Social problems have played a major role in the regeneration. Right from the beginning
there was a high degree of uniformity, and as a result of the deterioration of the quality
of the dwellings, only the socially disadvantaged still live in them because of the low
rents. The housing owners are faced by the problem of empty flats that are impossible
to rent out. The image of the district and the atmosphere in it suffer because of high
crime rates and drugs problems. One of the solutions is to increase the differentiation of
47
This scheme has now ended in this form; see also policy developments in chapter 6.
62 / 119
the housing stock. The dwellings have to be attractive to a wider group of people
(large/small homes, cheap/expensive, with/without a garden etc.) and it has to be
possible to relocate within the district as preferences change.
Differentiation in the housing stock
Differentiation, or in other words a greater variety in the housing supply, can be
achieved in a number of different ways:
5.5.5
fitting in additional new build where there is sufficient space in the urban design
structure of the district
redifferentiation, i.e. refurbishing existing housing wholly or in part so that there
are different types of dwelling and, if appropriate, other use functions in a district.
This can be done by:
adding additional storeys of flats on top of the roof of the block
combining dwellings (vertical or horizontal)
utilizing the ground floor of high-rise blocks: there are often garages or
storerooms on the ground floor. If these are converted (restructured) into homes
with gardens or premises for small businesses (shops, offices) the social control
of the ground floor area is improved and the crime rate drops as a consequence
new build contiguous to existing blocks of flats: the existing stairwells and lifts
can be utilized; a relatively cheap expansion of the high-rise housing capacity
making housing accessible to the elderly: despite the presence of lifts, some
high-rise homes are difficult to access (thresholds, heavy doors)
a requirement for these actions in that as a result of the refurbishment the modified
or added homes achieve a quality that is comparable with new build
the last resort and most drastic method is demolition and replacement new build
Sustainable solutions under the drastic approach

Sustainable solutions are employed in all these drastic solutions. Besides measures that
we also find in the limited approach, such as energy efficiency measures, there are
aspects that are specific to a drastic approach:
stripping the shell, removing building components, reusing building components;

much demolition waste can be avoided by means of a large-scale approach
(example: the restructuring of Hoogvliet is part of a circuit for secondary building
materials; the window frames are reused as far afield as Eastern Europe).
if the faade is completely replaced, a better insulation performance be achieved in
many cases.
thanks to its large scale, high-rise offers the opportunity to utilize collective
renewable energy installations profitably (example: de Brandaris, Zaandam; a block
of flats with 14 storeys. De Brandaris has a solar collector with a surface area of
760 m, making it one of the largest on a single building in Europe).
nature and the environment in restructuring: The existing sewer system was
modified in the districts of Poptahof in Delft and Schalkwijk in Haarlem in order to
retain rainwater in the district. This water is purified in reed beds, after which it can
be used for flushing toilets and in washing machines. Construction of new lakes in
the parks with child-friendly banks, in other words with a gentle slope. They are
becoming more wildlife-friendly through the presence of reeds, cats-tails and
bulrushes. In this way the water improves the ecological / environmental value and
63 / 119
at the same time it enhances, as an added element, the appeal of the location
(recreation function).
other aspects of the drastic approach, usually at a district level, are traffic
restrictions (no through traffic in the district), social aspects (social plan for the
underprivileged), economic aspects (new opportunities for small businesses),
spatial aspects (improved public spaces), cultural and historical values of the
existing environment.
5.5.6
Financial government instruments involved in the drastic approach

The Green Mortgage is available for the completely sustainable refurbishment of
housing. This is a government financial scheme for stimulating sustainable building in
regard to both new build dwellings and the refurbishment of existing ones. A maximum
mortgage of 34,034 can be obtained for a period of ten years at an interest rate 1% to
2% below the market rate if a number of basic requirements are met and certain
measures are selected in regard to sustainable building.
5.5.7
Summarizing: sustainable solutions

As discussed above many sustainable solutions have been employed in the restructuring
of high-rise districts in the physical environment at building and district level and in the
social and economic area. The elements of this integrated approach reinforce one
another and cannot be successful without one another. In broadbrush terms these are:
Sustainable solutions in the physical environment (Planet):
1. Building:
a. measures to limit CO2 emissions, for example insulation of faades, roofs
and floors, fitting double glazing, energy-saving lighting in the common
areas, replacing old central heating boilers by high efficiency central
heating boilers, low temperature heating, solar collectors etc.
b. refurbishment measures to achieve dwelling differentiation
c. demolition and replacement new build
d. reuse of building components
e. drinking water savings
f. improved indoor environment
2. District
a. utilizing the strengths of the post-war districts, for example spaciousness,
in some cases even with space to spare, plenty of planting, good public
transport, relatively good position in regard to the city centre
b. creating extra planting, in line with current needs for nature in the living
environment, for example more green spaces, combining small areas of
planting and linking them to the countryside, connecting areas of planting
to water, promoting variety in flora and fauna
c. water; retaining rainwater in the district, water as a recreation area
d. traffic; no through traffic in the district
Sustainability in social solutions (People) and economic/wealth enhancing solutions
(Profit/Prosperity)
social plan for improving the living conditions of specific target groups, for
example training and education pathways for the long-term unemployed, debt
restructuring for the socially underprivileged, reinforcing the role of ethnic or
64 / 119
ethnic-religious organizations as part of reinforcing social involvement, and the

welfare of these groups of residents (see also the examples in 5.4)
counselling young people
promoting the integration of ethnic minorities
advising starter businesses
creating premises for small businesses
helping the long-term unemployed to get back to work and to find permanent jobs.
65 / 119
Legal and policy aspects

The numbers, design and size of high-rise dwellings have been largely determined by
regulations. Section 6.1 deals with the legislation and regulations of importance to highrise. Subsection 6.1.1 briefly discusses the apartment rights that are incorporated in the
Dutch Civil Code. Subsection 6.1.2 addresses the legislation and regulations relating to
the allocation of housing. Subsection 6.1.3 gives an overview of relevant structural and
technical legislation and rules (with which the building must comply). Section 6.2 looks
at policy aspects specific to high-rise.
6.1
Legislation and regulations relating to high-rise
6.1.1
Apartment rights
In the Netherlands the law makes a distinction between buying or selling a singlefamily dwelling and buying or selling a flat. An apartment complex has to be split up
in order to be able to sell the flats as separate useful parts. In regard to this splitting up
one talks about apartment rights rather than apartments. The division of the property
into apartment rights is addressed in detail in Book 5 of the Dutch Civil Code. It is done
by means of a notarial instrument, which is registered in the public registers of the Land
Registry. The deed of division of property can only be drawn up if there is a drawing on
which the parts for common and separate use are separately designated. The deed of
division of property covers in any event the:
1. Statement of the location: street, number and the Land Registry reference of the
plots.
2. Statement and description of the divided parts: what belongs to which apartment
right.
3. Separate statement of the Land Registry reference of the apartment rights and their
owners.
4. Property division regulations.
If a complex is being divided up and the separate parts have been sold, an Owners
Association is set up. Every flat owner automatically becomes a member (see section
3.2).
It is not permitted to divide up any housing complex just like that in order to sell the
apartment rights Every local authority has a property division bye-law. In it there is a
list of which buildings may be divided up without permission. Permission has to be
requested from the local authority for dividing up other buildings. This permission is
granted in the form of a permit for the division of property. Upon purchasing a flat the
occupant becomes a joint owner of the entire building. It is stated in the deed of division
of property which part is the private part of the purchaser and which parts are
communally owned. The owner-occupier is responsible for the management and use of
the private part.
The deed of division of property lays down the occupants fraction in the apartment
complex. This fraction determines the number of votes the occupant has if decisions are
taken by the meeting of the Owners Association. The share of the service costs is
66 / 119
usually also related to this fraction. The fraction is generally based on the quantity of
useful space in the flat or the value of the flat.
The property division regulations define the rights and obligations of the owners in
regard to one another and rules about how meetings are to be run, the decisions to be
taken and the appointment and dismissal of the committee of the Owners Association.
Every owner of an apartment right is obliged to comply with the property division
regulations. If a flat owner acts in breach of the regulations, the committee of the
Owners Association may take action against him.
The Owners Association is responsible for managing the complex. As described in
section 3.2, draft legislation has been drawn up for stricter regulations governing
Owners Associations. Among other things the draft legislation states that a new
Owners Association has to set up an obligatory maintenance fund and that in the event
of sales the Owners Association is obliged to provide information about the fund and
the individual contributions48.
6.1.2
Allocation of housing
Social rental housing in the Netherlands may not be rented out just like that. In principle
the local authority is responsible for the way in which available social rental homes are
allocated to people seeking housing. The local authority has authority under the
Housing Act to draw up rules about the allocation of housing. A local authority may
draw up housing regulations in consultation with the housing association that define
rules about the allocation of housing. A local authority may also decide to arrange the
allocation of housing through agreements with the landlords. The allocation of housing
can be organized by local authority or by housing market area (for example
Haaglanden, which includes The Hague and also the surrounding local authority areas).
The Housing Act defines as the primary goal of the allocation of housing that priority
for dwellings with a low rent is given to people with a modest income. The Housing Act
lists different criteria that can be used in the allocation of housing: - admission criteria
(which people seeking housing have access to the social rental housing market? For
example, regional ties requirements.), - suitability criteria (for which dwellings can a
housing seeker be eligible? For example, dwelling occupancy standards, rent-income
standards and labelling), - sequence criteria (to which candidate is a dwelling offered
first? For example, age, length of time on the list, duration of occupancy and length of
time searching for a home), priority criteria (definition of groups of housing seekers
who receive priority over normal housing seekers, for example urgency).
Local authorities often delegate the actual execution of the allocation to the housing
associations. A number of different systems have been used since the Second World
War to divide the scarce supply of housing among the applicants. For a long time the
distribution model was the generally accepted. According to this model homes that
became available were allocated on the basis of accommodation wishes defined
beforehand more or less in accordance with waiting times. During the nineteen-nineties
the supply model became dominant. Freedom of choice and transparency are among the
core values of this model. The initiative is with the housing seeker, who has to make his
selection on the basis of advertisements and inform the landlord.
48
Laagland Advies, 2002
67 / 119
In the case of social rental housing, the process of determining who lives in high-rise
housing therefore does not depend solely on the wishes of the households. It also
depends on the criteria described above that are applied to the allocation of housing. For
example, certain high-rise complexes can be reserved for older people because of their
suitability because of the design and location. In the first instance the dwellings are only
allocated to households with people aged 55 and above. On the other hand the relatively
large and affordable flats in certain high-rise complexes in the cities are often allocated
to large households with lower incomes, in many cases of foreign origin, because both
income and household size are important criteria49.
6.1.3
Structural aspects
The structural aspects are subject to continual change. Until 1992 they were primarily a
matter for local authorities. Attempts have regularly been undertaken to arrive at
national uniformity, but apart from financial schemes with technical boundary
conditions during the era that social housing was still financed to a significant degree by
central government, this was not achieved initially until 1992. The technical regulations
that were applicable on the grounds of financing legislation had an impact on high-rise
until the nineteen-nineties. After this these regulations were scrapped in their entirety by
changes in the financing of public housing and the advent of national uniform technical
building regulations.
Numerous developments have had an impact on high-rise, for example the development
of the fire safety regulations, initially primarily based on the Fire Service Act and the
1991 Housing Act, the soundproofing regulations originally based on the Noise
Abatement Act and the Aviation Act and the decrees based on these acts and, since
1992, on the grounds of the (Building Materials) Soil Protection Decree (2003).
However, the energy efficiency requirements that entered into legislation from 1982
onwards have also had an influence. Access regulations were introduced in 1997 as a
result of greater focus on the ageing of the population. Another socially noteworthy fact
is the introduction of regulations relating to anti-burglary safeguards with effect from 1
January 1999. Over the years many regulations have been tightened up. This is the case
for thermal insulation regulations, noise requirements and the requirements relating to
user-friendliness and better access in regard to people with a disability. It has been
possible, after a great deal of effort, to scrap regulations. This has involved the political
parties putting their trust in market players being able to provide facilities that were
considered until recently to be necessary, for example storage space outside the
dwelling, telecommunications, limited sagging of floors etc.
Below is an overview of the elements in the (Building Materials) Soil Protection Decree
2003 that relate directly to the height of the building.
49
Aalbers et al, 2003.
68 / 119
Table 6.1 Height-related regulations

Assessment aspect
Dept. 2.1 General
strength
Substantive element
Wind load increases with height
Weight of the structure increases
Dept. 2.2 Strength in

case of fire
Dept. 2.9 Gas supply
Dept. 2.11 Limiting
the chance of a fire
hazard
Dept. 2.12 Limiting
the size of a fire
Dept. 2.18
Emergency escape
routes
Dept. 2.19 Design of
smoke-free
emergency escape
routes
Dept. 2.20
Preventing and
limiting accidents in
a fire
Dept. 22.21
Firefighting
Dept. 2.23 Tall

buildings
30 min up to a safe area height of 7 m

60 minutes for 5 m <hSA 13 m
120 min for hSA > 13 m
Gas pressure at connections
Flammable roof
Faade over 13 m above ground level

class 1 or 2 according to NEN 6065 or
class A or B according to
NEN-EN 13501-1
The area requiring attention is the safe
place to which people can escape (related
to dept. 2.23)
Evacuation of the building (reception and
transit capacity)
Necessity of a fire lift at hSA > 20 m

above ground level
Necessity of a dry riser at hSA > 20 m

above ground level
Necessity of a pump for a dry riser at hSA
> 50 m above ground level (inadvertently
left out of BB2003)
Necessity of a fire hydrant booster
system for fire hose reels in tall buildings
Additional fire safety requirements to be
set for strength in a fire, occurrence of
fires, spread of fires, limiting the spread
of fires, limiting the dispersion of smoke,
emergency escape routes, design of
emergency escape routes, limiting
accidents during, firefighting in buildings
Comments
In the case of very high
buildings it is worthwhile
establishing the wind loads
more precisely on the basis
of wind tunnel studies
The regulations do not take
sufficient account of
specific local effects. This
relates primarily to the
fixings of the faade
elements
Tougher requirement after
01.07.2005 for hSA above
70 m.
The limit is a roof 5 m
above ground level
Which part of the building

has to be evacuated and
how quickly
The presence of plant and
equipment for emergency
services requires further
attention
Assessment aspect
Dept. 2.23 Tall
buildings
Dept. 3.6 Keeping

out external moisture
Dept. 3.7 Keeping

out internal moisture
Dept. 3.8 Removal of

sewage
Dept. 3.9 Removal of
rainwater
Dept. 3.10-3.13 Air
replenishment and
cavity ventilation
/combustion air
Dept. 3.14 Smoke

removal
Dept. 3.18 and 3.19

Drinking water
supply and hot water
supply
Dept. 4.2 Access
sector
Dept. 5.2 Air flow
Substantive element
Additional fire safety requirements to be
set for strength in a fire, occurrence of
fires, spread of fires, limiting the spread
of fires, limiting the dispersion of smoke,
emergency escape routes, design of
emergency escape routes, limiting
accidents during, firefighting in buildings
with hSA > 70 m
The higher the building, the bigger the
pressure differences across the external
partition structure that have to be taken
into account in order to keep the building
watertight
The regulations take no account of the
effect of height on the surface
temperature of the internal area.
However, this effect exists.
Conventional free fall solutions will no
longer work
Special requirements apply to aerating
and venting the system in tall buildings
The standardized design methods for the
different aspects of providing ventilation
air / combustion air take no account of
the height of the building, yet there is a
physical effect. The same applies to
cavity ventilation.
The effect of height is taken into account
for the calculation of the removal
capacity, albeit that the standardized text
applicable to very tall buildings is not
completely correct as regards physical
factors.
The height of the building plays a role in
the method for calculating the capacity
and the performance of the removal
system.
High buildings have to have a fire
hydrant booster system in order to have
sufficient water supply capacity at drawoff points.
At hSA > 20 m above ground level there
must be a common access sector and a
stretcher lift.
69 / 119
Comments
Currently the regulations

do not take sufficient
account of specific local
effects.
The taller the building, the

greater the specific
attention that needs to be
paid to access by lift and
lift technology
The pressure differences across the

faade will increase
In addition to the factors described above, the following should also be noted:
70 / 119
The effects of the wind on high rise buildings is relevant with regard to safety and to
comfort aspects inside as well as outside the building. Recent developments in the
Netherlands in regard to these effects are:
The development of the Dutch standard NEN 8100, which includes assessment
methods and criteria for wind around buildings. This standard is intended for city
planners, project developers and future users in order to achieve safe and comfortable
surrounding for buildings. NEN 8100 is the first official standard in the world
dealing with this subject.
A guideline for the use of wind tunnel results for the assessment of the wind loads on
buildings is being developed under the auspices of the CUR. Current building
standards do not give clear rules about how to deal with building situations that are
outside the scope of standards, including unusual building shapes and interference
effects. Experimental research is an important alternative, however no general
guidance on how to set up, carry out and analyze wind tunnel results is yet available.
The CUR C134 guideline is intended to provide a sound method for assessing the
wind loads on the basis of these experiments.
6.2
Policy aspects
6.2.1
Policy and effect on the surroundings

Around 1990, the Dutch government reconsidered its role in housing. The role of the
state was limited to the renewal of the old stock, and maintenance of post-war dwellings
was the responsibility of residents and owners. In the case of the high-rise housing
estates, these were mostly housing associations and their tenants. Another policy item
was the planning of new suburbs on the outskirts of cities. According to consumer
preferences and government policy, the majority of new dwellings were developed as
single-family and owner-occupied houses for middle and higher income groups.
Building in these new suburbs, called VINEX (Fourth Memorandum on Physical
Planning Plus) neighbourhoods, was delayed until the end of the nineteen-nineties.
There has been a lot of discussion about the possible effects of the attraction of these
new areas on the inhabitants of the old stock, for example the high-rise estates.
However, even though people continue to move, no dramatic consequences have been
observed. During the nineteen-nineties, it became clear that a more active role for the
government was still necessary in the cities. Cities became known more and more as
centers of poor people, poor housing and poor jobs (or no jobs), while the surrounding
region prospered. The cities were no longer the engines of the national economy and
their revitalization became a hot item. Physical renewal of old dwellings alone was not
enough and more attention was required for the needs of the people living there, and for
the economic performance of the city as a whole. The focus changed from solving
problems to acting on opportunities and potential.
A new urban policy, aimed at improving the quality of the living (including housing)
environment in urban areas, was put together in the second half of the nineteen-nineties.
It was based on three related cornerstones: physical renewal of neighbourhoods
(including, of course, housing), social renewal (more jobs, better education and
71 / 119
training) and economic renewal (including more employment, vital cities). Urban
renewal can be considered as the physical cornerstone of the urban policy. The most
important policy documents in this field are the policy papers on urban renewal in 1997
and people-wishes-housing in 200050. Physical renewal of neighbourhoods built after
1945 was considered to be particularly necessary in order to meet the demands of
present and future consumers. Restructuring the housing stock and transforming the
unpopular neighbourhoods into vital areas have become the main catch phrases.
Diversification of the housing stock is being achieved by demolition, new build,
refurbishment and upgrading (see chapters 5 and 7). This goes hand in hand with a
transformation of the area by restructuring the physical infrastructure, shopping centres
and other amenities, and green areas. These physical measures are accompanied by
social measures in the field of schooling and language programmes, programmes for the
elderly, youth and foreigners, crime reduction, pollution and vandalism.
6.2.2
Sustainability in policy
After the Brundtland Commission published the United Nations report 'Our common
future', the Dutch government adopted the underlying principles in its policy through
the National Environment Policy Plan Plus (NMP+, 1990). The construction industry
was designated as one of the important sectors that will have to make a contribution to
sustainable development. The concept of sustainable building was introduced.
Energy efficiency was the first sustainable building item to be incorporated in the
building regulations ((Building Materials) Soil Protection Decree (1992)). In the
(Building Materials) Soil Protection Decree a minimum requirement was set for the
exterior walls, roofs and floors of new dwellings, namely an Rc value of 2.5 m2K/W.
The Energy Performance Coefficient (EPC) was introduced in 1995. This is the result
of a computer calculation that, after the relevant data have been input, determines a
value for a building or a dwelling that expresses the joint energy efficiency of the
structure and the building service systems. The requirements only apply to new build or
drastic refurbishment. The EPC have been tightened up a number of times, which has
had major implications for the current energy measures relating to new Dutch buildings
and housing. No separate regulations were issued for high-rise in regard to these
matters.
Besides energy efficiency the Dutch policy was concerned with, among other things,
materials, water, waste and reducing the production and use of harmful substances.
Currently only 10% of all building and demolition waste is landfilled. The other 90% is
reused. Thanks to the Hydrocarbons 2000 covenant, which the government entered into
in 1986 with the coatings manufacturers and others, it was possible in 2000 to reduce
the emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to 50% of the 1980 level. There are
agreements with the manufacturers of zinc, copper and lead in order to limit leaching.
Not all attempts to build more sustainably have been successful. The research into a
scientifically valid assessment of the environmental impact of materials per building
(Dutch abbreviation mmg) has been stopped for the time being. Legislation relating to a
water performance standard and a radiation performance standard (radon) has not been
forthcoming.
50
Stedelijke vernieuwing (1997) and Mensen, Wensen, Wonen (2000), Ministry of Housing, Spatial
Planning and the Environment
72 / 119
Alongside the building regulations, the national sustainable building packages play an
important part that is linked to national government policy. These packages, which
include one for housing and one for commercial and industrial buildings and both for
new build and refurbishment, contain sustainable building measures that go beyond the
minimum requirements of the building regulations. The national sustainable building
package for housing differentiates between single-family homes (low-rise) and multifamily dwellings (medium-rise and high-rise). This differentiation results, among other
things, in a few measures for better soundproofing in multi-family dwellings.
If the government comes to the conclusion that the minimum level of the statutory
requirements is too low, in some cases measures from the national packages are
incorporated in the (Building Materials) Soil Protection Decree. For example the
requirement for structure-borne noise between dwellings was increased by 5 dB on the
basis of measure S407 of the national sustainable building package for housing and
measure S730 is being adopted in the (Building Materials) Soil Protection Decree by
raising the required headroom in areas where people remain for extended periods,
toilets and bathrooms from 2.4 to 2.6 metres. The required height of the entrances to
these areas is being increased from 2.1 to 2.3 metres. The underlying idea is that homes
and buildings have to remain suitable for a population that is becoming ever taller (the
Dutch are among the tallest people in the world). Stair lifts enable people to remain
living independently in their own homes longer. In this way premature demolition or
modification, with the associated waste and wastage of material, is prevented. During
the course of the nineteen-nineties it became ever clearer that crucial decisions relating
to sustainability in the built environment were being taken in the field of urban
planning. This resulted in the national sustainable urban design package (1999), which
included measures going beyond individual buildings and useful information about the
urban design process in local authorities.
The general trend in Dutch sustainable development policy is that there is a statutory
minimum level that every party involved in the building process has to meet. New
developments are adopted by the private sector if they have enough viability. Local and
provincial authorities play an important part in putting the main themes of sustainability
policy into practice. Central government is trying to reduce its own role as much as
possible.
In many cases the Dutch government plays an active, stimulating role in the
introduction of sustainable and energy efficient measures. Usually this is done through
subsidy schemes. However, it is not the intention to continue this for years and years.
The philosophy is to make new sustainable products and developments economically
attractive by means of a subsidy. Solar water heaters are an example. As a rule the price
of these products drops as a result of the growing interest of consumers and builders. As
soon as it becomes clear that the subsidy is no longer necessary, the scheme is
terminated and it is expected that the products are sufficiently attractive to compete with
other products in terms of price and quality. There can be a different outcome. In the
course of time it may become obvious that a sustainable measure cannot survive
without government support. If there is a sufficiently large political support base, an
appropriate measure is included in the building regulations, for example increasing the
height between storeys and less steep staircases in houses. Any subsidies are then
terminated.
73 / 119
A peculiarity of the Dutch sustainability policy situation is that on the one hand there is
central government policy that is the same for everyone who wants to build in the
Netherlands. This is considered to be a minimum level. In addition to this there is also
scope for local authority policy. A local authority may have more far-reaching
ambitions and try to find building partners with whom these ambitions can be realized.
However, this happens on a voluntary basis. From a legal point of view a local authority
cannot set conditions that are more stringent than those of the (Building Materials) Soil
Protection Decree, but by entering into a covenant with builders and project developers
who want to comply with the wishes of the local authority, for example, the ambitions
can be realized.
The national sustainable building packages referred to above for housing, commercial
and industrial building, urban development, and the civil engineering sector play an
important part in the formulation of agreements between local authorities and
construction partners. If, for example, a sustainable building covenant is being drawn up
and will be signed by the parties concerned, the covenant specifies the measures from
the national sustainable building package that will be applied in order to put the
agreements in practical terms.
A new European development is the advent of the Energy Performance Building
Directive (EPBD), the European directive for energy efficiency in buildings, on the
basis of which after January 2006 among other things everyone who builds, rents out or
buys a home will be obliged to provide an energy certificate. The certificate states the
energy performance of the property concerned and contains proposals for improvement.
The member states of the European Union have an obligation to amend their national
legislation and regulations in line with this new directive by 4 January 2006. The
Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment is currently
hard at work on this. The European directive stipulates that existing buildings also have
to be involved through certification. The existing Energy Performance Advice (EPA)
for housing in the Netherlands is therefore being linked to the European directive and
will be made obligatory.
Current developments and the outlook
7.1
Developments in demolition and refurbishment
74 / 119
The subjects of demolition and refurbishment were discussed at length in chapter 4. The
questions that have to be asked when considering whether to demolish or to refurbish
and the money that is spent annually on repair costs are addressed, and there is a short
overview of demolition and refurbishment techniques The developments in high-rise
demolition and/or refurbishment are reviewed briefly in this section. Besides new
techniques, new ideas are also mentioned, where possible with a specific example.
An important development that needs to be mentioned straightaway is that the need for
regeneration cannot be met by demolition alone or by refurbishment alone. In other
words ways need to be found to refurbish that are fully-fledged alternatives to
demolition.
7.1.1
Technical developments
There are many technical developments in the building industry. There are new
materials (for example high strength concrete and plastics) and also new methods for
achieving technical solutions. A few striking new refurbishment techniques are
summarized below.
Vertical combination. Vertical combination involves amalgamating three or four
storeys to produce one large residence. These residences can then be sold. Vertical
combination permits the creation of houses with gardens, or alternatively two levels
of maisonettes. They can be in one of several price categories. Vertically combined
dwellings are good value for money and provide opportunities for mobility in the
district. Vertical combination moreover represents sustainable utilization of the
housing stock, the shell is reused and there is no demolition waste. It also provides
opportunities to adapt older dwellings so that they comply with the current standards.
Vertical combination can be utilized together with other alternatives and can
contribute to improving the living environment. The construction of individual
gardens or terraces, for example, creates a clearer demarcation between public and
private areas, which is highly desirable from the point of view social safety. There is
an example of vertical combination in Hoogvliet, where small flats have been
converted into homes with several floors.
Upgrading. Upgrading here means modifying the homes for able-bodied people over
the age of fifty-five and people with a mild disability, for example people with a
rollator. The primary goal of upgrading is to improve safety in general and prevent
accidents in particular.
7.1.2
Sustainable demolition and reuse cycle

The Woonbron-Maasoevers Housing Association in Hoogvliet investigated whether
some five thousand dwellings in the Rotterdam borough of Hoogvliet could be
demolished in a sustainable way. It emerged that it is possible to recycle between 90%
and 92% of demolition waste. For example, concrete is crushed to produce a
replacement for hard core, window frames are disassembled and plastics are recycled to
75 / 119
produce new plastics. Glass wool is returned to the manufacturer to be used to make
new glass wool. Sanitary fittings and kitchens are disassembled and used to temporarily
improve dwellings that are not yet scheduled for refurbishment or demolition.
Every year approximately 19 million tonnes of construction and demolition waste is
produced in the Netherlands, and for the time being this is more likely to increase rather
than decrease because of the large amount of restructuring activity. Housing managers
who are involved in the restructuring of high-rise districts are trying to minimize the
environmental impact of demolition. Thanks to networking, a lively reuse cycle has
developed in which disassembled products from one housing association can have a
second useful lifetime in another housing association. In this way less waste is
produced, less new material is needed, employment, including training, increases and
cheap building materials are available.
Professional businesses have also been set up to provide specialized services such as
removing reusable components from buildings, stripping and sealing dwellings (antisquatting precautions), overhauling and cleaning building components and building
services products for reuse, and temporarily storing them. The traditional trade in old,
sought-after second-hand building materials, such as bricks and roof tiles, has been
enriched thanks to a lively disassembly and reuse offshoot.
7.2
Urban regeneration
The Dutch government has had a policy for improving urban areas since the nineteenseventies. This policy has changed its name and character a number of times. In 1995
the four major cities, fifteen other cities and the government signed a covenant that
formed the basis of the national urban policy. Later the number of cities involved grew
to 30. The objective of the urban policy is to reinforce the economic and social structure
and infrastructure of the cities. The policy concentrates on three areas of attention - the
physical cornerstone (primarily urban regeneration), the economic cornerstone (jobs
and the economy) and the social cornerstone (education, quality of life, safety, care).
During the nineteen-nineties there was an increase in the attention paid to the housing
stock in the cities. The government recognized that in certain parts of the city, with a
uniform housing stock and a correspondingly skewed population distribution, there
were very serious quality of life and safety problems. If there were to be too little
forward-looking regeneration in the cities, they would become progressively less
attractive as places to work and live compared with newly developed areas and nonurban areas (Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, 1997).
According to the Dutch government a broader approach was needed in order to change
this. This approach was urban regeneration. This policy was set out in the Urban
Regeneration Policy Paper (1997). Ultimately this paper and policy, which
subsequently arose out of it, resulted in the Urban Regeneration Act. The government
also allocated a budget, the Urban Regeneration Investment Budget, from which cities
can obtain a contribution on the basis of their urban vision and the urban regeneration
plans derived from it. The first budget cycle is from 2000 to 2004. The new period
begins in 2005. The urban regeneration policy has a predominantly physical focus.
When combined with the other cornerstones of the urban policy, this should result in an
integrated district approach in which the social and economic cornerstones feature
alongside the physical one.
76 / 119
The Dutch government considers a vital undivided city to be an ideal city. This city
consists of varied neighbourhoods with a differentiated housing stock and a mixture of
income groups (Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, 1997). The
policy is therefore focused on improving the quality of the living and working
environment in certain districts where uniformity dominates, or threatens to dominate,
by increasing the variety in the housing stock. The government believes that
restructuring is the solution for this.
Restructuring is an operation aimed at increasing the differentiation of living and
working environments where the quality of life and the living environment is under
pressure. It therefore encompasses more than modifying the housing stock and the
immediate living environment. Restructuring also involves infrastructure, commercial
activity, planting and other amenities inside the district (Ministry of Housing, Spatial
Planning and the Environment, 1997).
An indication of the scale of the regeneration challenge was given in the Living Policy
Paper published by the Dutch government in 2000. Almost all cities have areas where
restructuring will take place over the coming years. These areas have something in
common. They have many social rental homes, which are usually below average in
terms of quality of life and where relatively many ethnic minorities and low-income
groups live. These are primarily the districts that were built just before or just after the
Second World War and in which small single-family homes, hallway-access flats or
high-rise gallery-access flats dominate. Through restructuring some of the social rental
housing is replaced by a mixture of housing types, in which the emphasis is usually on
building owner-occupied and more expensive rental dwellings, in order to increase the
housing differentiation in the district. The encouragement of owner-occupation, which
is incorporated in the Living Policy Paper as central government policy, is also an
important reason for building owner-occupied homes in the regeneration areas.
Many local authorities embarked on plans for a large-scale approach to whole areas.
However, it proved to be difficult to make firm agreements. Many players are involved
and they all have their own interests. These include local authorities, housing
association, residents, project developers, business people, shopkeepers and welfare
amenities. In 2003 the Dutch government recognized that the implementation of plans
was proceeding with difficulty. Two important reasons for the delay were the complex
and time-consuming process and the stagnation of the transit process in the housing
market. The government therefore set up a Restructuring Action Programme
(Actieprogramma Herstructurering). The action programme contains various means
that the government is using to accelerate the restructuring, for example:
the deployment of teams of outside experts who can help cities and who have
knowledge relating to specific fields,
the restructuring cost allocation agreement framework, which offers guidance in

regard to making agreements about financing the operation,
the designation of restructuring zones with fiscal facilities, the inventorying of

critical issues in the legislation and regulations.
the transfer of knowledge, so that it is not necessary to keep reinventing the wheel,
In 2000 the KEI the knowledge centre for urban regeneration was set up for the
purposes of knowledge transfer.
At the end of 2003 it was decided to focus the action programme on 56 districts. These
56 districts were designated by the 30 local authorities that directly participate in the
national urban policy. It was decided to focus on 56 districts because the problems are
77 / 119
most manifest at district level. High-rise is the dominant type of dwelling in only a few
of the 56 districts. The Bijlmermeer in Amsterdam is an exception (Southeast
Amsterdam, see also the box about the Bijlmermeer below). However, there is certainly
high-rise housing in the 56 districts. A very common layout in districts dating from the
nineteen-sixties is to have high-rise housing (gallery-access flats) along the main roads,
with medium-rise housing (hallway-access flats) and low-rise in the central area.
Designated districts in which gallery-access flats are combined with other types of
dwellings include Groenoord/ Nieuwland (Schiedam), Wesselerbrink (Enschede),
Hoogvliet (Rotterdam), Vrijheidswijk (Leeuwarden) and Northeast Breda.
Besides demolition and new build, refurbishment is also an element in restructuring.
The programme in the Groenoord district of Schiedam, for instance, involves more than
just demolition and new build (KEI, 2004). 408 high-rise flats are being upgraded by
improving access to the housing blocks and the individual homes. The residents are free
to choose to have additional facilities installed in their flats so that they are better suited
to the over 55s. Possible measures include removing thresholds, raising the height of the
balcony floor or modifying the kitchen, bathroom or toilet. Two post-war residential
complexes in Groenoord are also being converted into housing that meets current
standards. The skeleton of the blocks is remaining, but virtually the whole interior is
being stripped. The project involves shell reuse, building additional storeys and the
vertical combination of a few dwellings. Previously the flats had storerooms on the
ground floor, with four storeys of flats above. The storerooms on the ground floor are
being combined with the first storey of flats to create maisonettes. On the top of the
blocks an extra storey is being built with luxury apartments. All the dwellings in one
block will soon be sold, and the others will remain in the rental sector. Restructuring is
also going on in districts other than the 56 designated districts. One of these is Poptahof
in Delft, which is described below.
During the initial years of the urban regeneration policy there was considerable
emphasis on large-scale physical regeneration and the creation of dwelling
differentiation. Greater attention for the social side of regeneration slowly developed.
Small-scale projects, such as Neighbourhood for Everyone (Heel de Buurt) and Our
Neighbourhoods Move (Onze Buurt aan Zet), were also started in restructuring areas
with the aim of involving residents in the district.
However, it proved to be difficult in practice to combine getting to grips with the
physical (housing) and social (welfare) aspects because of differences in, among other
things, working practices and financing structures. The Dutch government has started a
programme to stimulate the combination of the physical and social aspects of
restructuring the social-physical approach. Resident participation in the restructuring
is one of the issues that it specifically emphasizes. The question is how and to what
extent residents should be involved in developing plans. The first problem in this regard
is that in the restructuring areas there are usually many ethnic minorities, with whom
communication is difficult because of language problems and cultural differences.
Furthermore, the residents in the district prior to urban regeneration are not necessarily
the same people who will occupy the new dwellings. Are they therefore the right
representatives to discuss new build with? A number of different methods have now
been developed for involving residents in restructuring. In Hoogvliet (Rotterdam), for
instance, there are residents committees. There is a residents committees association
that represents the different district committees in dealings with the housing
associations and the council. The housing association has allocated a budget for the
residents committees so that they have the resources to organize activities, take courses
and conduct their routine operations.
78 / 119
The Bijlmer
There was an acute shortage of locations for building housing in Amsterdam at the
beginning of nineteen-sixties. A plan was made for a housing development to the
southeast, the Bijlmermeer, built according to the principles of separating living, work,
traffic and recreation. The first housing plan contained 18,000 dwellings, of which
13,000 were in honeycomb-shaped complexes eleven storeys high. There were large
green areas, with routes for cyclists and pedestrians, between the high-rise complexes,
and elevated roads were built for motorized traffic.
The last of the high-rise housing was completed in 1975. The district had a weak
position on the housing market right from the completion of the first high-rise dwellings.
Middle-class Amsterdam families, for whom the flats had been built, moved to singlefamily homes in surrounding towns. Instead of families, many single people, families
without children and lone parent families occupied the flats. Many people from Surinam
arrived in the Bijlmer as a consequence of Surinams independence.
A negative spiral was
created. It was caused,
among other things, by
extremely high
unemployment among the
population, overcrowding
of the apartments, drugs
problems, resident
dissatisfaction and the
departure of privileged
groups. The Bijlmermeer
became known and
notorious throughout the
whole country because of High-rise flats in the Bijlmer Amsterdam (source: www.kei-centrum.nl)
its social problems.
Measures were soon taken to improve the quality of life. The measures taken during the
nineteen-eighties proved not to be sufficient to get to grips with the quality of life
problems in the Bijlmer. In 1992 the Southeast Amsterdam Borough Council, the Nieuw
Amsterdam Housing Association and Amsterdam City Council therefore embarked on a
huge regeneration programme, in which a number of high-rise blocks in the Bijlmer are
being demolished and replaced primarily by low-rise homes, some of which are owneroccupied. In addition to demolition and new build, there are also high-rise block
refurbishment projects. As part of the regeneration, the management is moreover
devoting a great deal of attention to, and measures are being taken to tackle, the
anonymity and the feeling of being unsafe. The interior streets of high-rise blocks are
being sealed off, and the unmanageable and unsafe covered car parks are being
demolished or sealed off. The storerooms on the ground floor are being replaced by
dwellings or small businesses, so that there is more social control. The spatial structure
is being adapted and the Bijlmerpark and a number of shopping centres are being given
a facelift. At the same time social-economic regeneration projects are being started.
The goal of the regeneration is to make the Bijlmer a district where privileged people
want to continue living, rather than moving out to other parts of the city or the
surrounding districts. The complete regeneration of the Bijlmer is scheduled for
completion in 2009.
79 / 119
Poptahof in the city of Delft

The Poptahof is an area with a great deal of high-rise dating from the nineteen-sixties.
Eight eleven-storey blocks of flats dominate the district. There are also a few fourstorey blocks and 34 single-family homes. Altogether the district has over 1000
dwellings and nearly 2800 residents from more than 30 different cultures. Virtually all
the homes are managed by a housing association. The Poptahof is in an attractive
location in Delft, close to the historic city centre.
Regeneration
The local authority and the housing association concerned concluded some years ago
that the current Poptahof housing stock was not of sufficient quality for current and
future residents. There is a need for a greater variety of dwelling types. For example,
there is considerable demand for owner-occupied homes, larger homes and homes for
the elderly. The quality of life in this district also needs to be improved. There is quite
a lot of green space in the district, but the layout of the planting and the streets in the
district can be made much more attractive. The Poptahof is being completely
regenerated in order to make the district more attractive.
A management plan has been drawn up for the improvement of the Poptahof in the
near term. A start has already been made on implementing some of the measures in this
plan. For example, cleaning campaigns are organized periodically and litter is picked
up on a regular basis. In order to improve safety in the district, efforts are being made
to obtain the Dutch polices safe living environment quality mark. A committee
consisting of residents has been set up in one of the blocks. It is concerned with the
quality of life in the building and the surroundings. The committee members give input
about house rules, report defects, welcome new residents etc. If this committee works
out well, in due course similar committees may be set up in the other blocks of flats.
A long-term master plan has been drawn up. It will be implemented over the coming
fifteen years.
Scope
The master plan is based on the demolition of the 34 single-family homes and the 183
medium-rise dwellings. Because of Poptahofs urban character, it has been decided to
keep the eight high-rise blocks with lifts (a total of 800 flats) in the new Poptahof.
However, they will be radically refurbished. New dwellings of various types will be
built to replace the single-family and medium-rise homes that are to be demolished.
Currently there is only social housing in the district, but the intention is to have 40%
social rental housing, 20% social owner-occupied housing and 40% more expensive
owner-occupied housing. The regenerated Poptahof will have more homes, namely
1300 instead of the 1000 there are presently. This increase is possible by utilizing the
edges of Poptahof. After the regeneration there will be some 750 more affordable rental
and owner-occupied homes and 550 more expensive dwellings.
Decision to keep the high-rise
The decision to demolish a total of 217 homes (approximately one fifth of the stock) is
based on housing market surveys in which it is concluded that there is a surplus of
gallery-access and medium-rise dwellings in Delft, and that new homes are needed to
make the district attractive to new target groups.
The reasons for keeping the high-rise include:
There are better opportunities to reuse the high-rise shells than the medium-rise
80 / 119
81 / 119
82 / 119
7.3
High-rise for specific target groups
7.3.1
High-rise and housing for the elderly

The percentage of older people in the housing market will increase in the years ahead as
a result of ageing of the population. Older people moreover want to live independently
for longer. Generally speaking housing for older people is high-rise. This close link
between design and function arises in the first place from the desired type of dwelling,
namely a dwelling on one floor, or in other words without stairs. Over and above the
type of dwelling, there are arguments in regard to the scale and the living environment
that favour high-rise. Older people live under one roof because they need or like to use
facilities in the building that are easy to reach, i.e. the recreation area, a coffee room, a
restaurant. A certain scale is needed in order to implement these amenities at complex
level. The average size of a service complex with kitchen is over 100 dwellings, which
means eight to ten storeys.
Over the last few decades there has been a new development in housing for the elderly,
namely linking together living and care. The complex for the elderly that provides care
is also referred to as a residential care complex, and the independent version is the timehonoured old peoples home. The rapid growth in the number of residential care
complexes is also a result of the policy to limit the capacity of care homes, and in so
doing to reduce the costs of this collectively financed form of accommodation for the
elderly. The existing care homes are also primarily in high-rise buildings on the basis of
the scale arguments described above. See the following figure.
50%
45%
sh
ar
e
of
ca
re
ho
m
es
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1
5 or more
storeys
7.3.2
Refurbishment of complexes for the elderly

There are arguments for housing the elderly in separate complexes. This conflicts with
ideas about integration, but in this way special structural amenities are fully utilized and
it is easier to organize the provision of services. Some people moreover feel safer in
such an environment. However, there is the risk that the average age increases to over
83 / 119
80 and that the complex still takes on the character of a care centre. Sprightly old people
avoid an environment like this because they are not yet ready for it. The Te
Hoogerbrugge complex in de Rotterdam borough of Ommoord had reached this
situation. This large high-rise complex for senior citizens has been radically refurbished
in order to win back the original target group.
Te Hoogerbrugge (Photograph: Joost Brouwers)
Te Hoogerbrugge
The owner, the Rotterdam senior citizens housing trust (Stichting Ouderenhuisvesting
Rotterdam - SOR), found that it was difficult to get slightly less elderly couples with
good pensions to live in the small flats in Te Hoogerbrugge. This was the signal to
take action, because this complex was where SOR wanted to be able to provide for this
target group. Doing nothing would result in empty flats and further ageing of the
resident population. SOR wanted to reverse this trend.
The idea behind Te Hoogerbrugge is that residents enjoy an above average level of
comfort, thanks in part to the services. This is why the restaurant has to offer more
than a simple meal, for instance. However, the target quality level can only be
achieved if there are enough people at the location who actually make use of the
services. To attract this type of people the dwellings also have to meet tough
requirements. This, then, is the link between the structural and the managerial
elements of the housing supply. An understanding of the demand is needed in order to
maintain the level of the housing and to modernize it. During the redevelopment of Te
Hoogerbrugge, SORs property manager worked closely with the complex director,
who gave input based on his contacts with the residents and people looking at potential
new homes.
Participants:
Principal: Stichting Ouderenhuisvesting Rotterdam
AP Maatschap voor Architectuur en Projectbegeleiding, Rotterdam
Contractor: Kanters Bouwbedrijf, Puttershoek
Van den Berg BV, Bureau voor Bouwkunde en Constructie
84 / 119
Te Hoogerbrugge
The owner, the Rotterdam senior citizens housing trust (Stichting Ouderenhuisvesting
Rotterdam - SOR), found that it was difficult to get slightly less elderly couples with
good pensions to live in the small flats in Te Hoogerbrugge. This was the signal to
take action, because this complex was where SOR wanted to be able to provide for this
target group. Doing nothing would result in empty flats and further ageing of the
resident population. SOR wanted to reverse this trend.
The idea behind Te Hoogerbrugge is that residents enjoy an above average level of
comfort, thanks in part to the services. This is why the restaurant has to offer more
than a simple meal, for instance. However, the target quality level can only be
achieved if there are enough people at the location who actually make use of the
services. To attract this type of people the dwellings also have to meet tough
requirements. This, then, is the link between the structural and the managerial
elements of the housing supply. An understanding of the demand is needed in order to
maintain the level of the housing and to modernize it. During the redevelopment of Te
Hoogerbrugge, SORs property manager worked closely with the complex director,
who gave input based on his contacts with the residents and people looking at potential
new homes.
Participants:
Principal: Stichting Ouderenhuisvesting Rotterdam
AP Maatschap voor Architectuur en Projectbegeleiding, Rotterdam
Contractor: Kanters Bouwbedrijf, Puttershoek
Van den Berg BV, Bureau voor Bouwkunde en Constructie
DHV (building contractor)
Architectenbureau VillaNova
Over the last few years the experimental housing trust (Stichting Experimenten
Volkshuisvesting - SEV)51 has been implementing the upgrading programme.
Upgrading means improve existing dwellings and housing blocks so that older people
and people with a mild disability can live in an accessible, user-friendly and safe home.
A number of studies of elderly people and people with mild disabilities were conducted
in order to establish which requirements an upgraded dwelling has to meet. There was
also extensive consultation with focus groups. The package of requirements and
measures were ultimately finalized by a large supervisory committee. Examples of the
requirements include eliminating differences in floor levels (for example by raising the
floors of galleries in high-rise blocks and removing thresholds), and installing good
lighting, a handrail in the shower and a non-slip layer on the floor.
7.3.3
New build complexes for the elderly

Housing associations expect to build 82,000 new dwellings for older people over the
next few years. The plans call for a significant fraction of social rental housing, and in
order to attain the desired level of rents additional money is needed. This money will
come from the associations own assets, and in some cases it is possible to generate
income by building owner-occupied homes. The concept of a residential care complex
is a diffuse one in regard to this new build activity. Often the housing association has a
different product in mind than the service provider currently involved. The construction
51
http://www.opplussen.nl/index2.htm
85 / 119
of the Oklahoma residential care complex in the Amsterdam suburb of Osdorp is an

example of such a misunderstanding.
Oklahoma (source: www.beeldarchief.net)
Oklahoma
Oklahoma is a complex with 100 flats for older people in Ookmeerweg, Osdorp. The
building was completed in 1997 and has since become world famous for its design.
The design by architects MVRDV won prizes, including the Merkelbach Prize, and
Het Oosten housing association won the Pyramide Wonen, the Dutch government
award for excellent clients, in part because of this project. The building, with thirteen
protruding dwellings, has attracted criticism as well as praise. Some people have
called it hit-and-run architecture and the shape of the building is said to decrease its
practical value. For example, the residents see the outside world in shades of purple,
orange or green, depending on the colour of the glass used in their balconies.
Oklahoma was built to house people over 55. However, the average age of the current
occupants is over 80 and they are in a market segment with different living and care
needs. The building has the following disadvantages for this target group. The
protruding dwellings are not accessible to wheelchairs, the galleries are partially open,
there are no common amenities in the building and there is no infrastructure for
providing care. This residential care complex has proved to be more of a residential
than a care complex, and there is actually no good reason for people to move to this
complex on account of their care needs. The misunderstanding about the target group
to be housed arose during the development of Oklahoma as a result of an unfortunate
combination of the living and care institution involved and an inconsistent local
authority policy for converting care homes and for the allocation of residential care
complexes.
Participants:
Administrator Housing Corporation Het Oosten
Care provider: Antaris
Architect: MVRDV
Building contractor: ABT Arnhem
86 / 119
There is a growing desire among older people to continue to live independently as long
as possible. Home automation can help in this regard. Home automation is a collective
term for a high level of electrical and information technology amenities in the home and
for the automation of functions by means of electronics, so that such things as
ventilation, heating, lighting, burglar alarms and energy saving are or can be operated
integrally and usually remotely.
Home automation can ameliorate the rapidly increasing pressure on care for the elderly
in the Netherlands and it enables housing associations to satisfy the demand from senior
citizens for safe and comfortable housing. In this way care providers and housing
associations are responding to the wishes of the elderly to continue to live
independently as long as possible. Research52 has shown that the sustainable application
of home automation in housing for older people, with systematic attention for People,
Planet and Profit factors, can clear the way for its introduction on a large-scale.
Defining individual home automation packages on the basis of residents wishes and
ensuring there is a good supply of information (People) make it possible to achieve a
better result with user-friendliness and comfort for the occupants, thus avoiding wasting
money and energy on technical options that are not understood and therefore also not
used. The environment is protected and costs are saved through extra energy saving
measures (Planet). The lower costs and the better-tailored application options make the
package more profitable and affordable (Profit). It has emerged that older people are
moreover prepared to make a bigger financial contribution if the package goes further
towards satisfying their wishes.
7.3.4
Future housing for the elderly policy

In September 2003 the Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment and
the State Secretary for Health, Welfare and Sport published a policy letter announcing
that 395,000 homes without stairs would have to be built by 2015 in order to meet the
demand for housing for the elderly. This number includes a separate category of
115,000 homes where care is available on demand. These could be ordinary dwellings
spread throughout the district. But this is not likely for the reasons discussed above. The
requirement that it must be possible to be able to provide care quickly is a further
logistical argument for assuming that housing for the elderly will be provided
increasingly in high-rise complexes.
7.3.5
High-rise for younger people

Housing policy in the nineteen-fifties and sixties had concentrated on families, and
during the nineteen-seventies it was recognized that the supply on the housing market
had lagged behind the demand for new housing from people who did not live as part of
families53. This is why in 1975 the Housing for Single People and Two-Person
Households (Dutch abbreviation HAT) Policy Paper was drawn up. A varied supply of
simple and affordable housing for small households made up of people between 18 and
52
Research conducted under the NIDO programme In Eigen Omgeving Oud Worden ( getting old in your own environment ) /
NIDO is the Dutch abbreviation for the National Initiative for Sustainable Development
(http://www.ineigenomgevingoudworden.nl
53
A. van Zantvoort (1988), Hoed je voor HATS, over huisvesting van alleenstaanden &
tweepersoonshuishoudens in Amsterdam, UvA
87 / 119
65 could be created by means of flexible quality assessment and a separate subsidy

scheme.
Thanks to these schemes it was normal at the end of the nineteen-seventies and the start
of the nineteen-eighties to build HAT units in new build projects and above all in the
case of urban regeneration projects, whereby in many cases a fifth storey was added to a
block of hallway-access flats. The building regulations in force at that time stipulated
that a lift had to be installed in buildings with five or more storeys. However, they did
not apply when HAT units were constructed on the fifth storey. This was because they
were classified as being in the housing unit category rather than being dwellings, and
therefore the rule about the lift did not apply. The complexes with HAT units on the
fifth floor belong to the high-rise dwellings category, as defined in this reader, with the
exception of the absence of a lift.
HAT units have one or two rooms. Some of the units have shared facilities, such as a
kitchen, bathroom or toilet. Although the policy was aimed at small households
containing people between 18 and 65, in practice the HAT sector has developed
primarily into a form of housing for younger people.
Besides the HAT sector as a form of accommodation for younger people, there is also
housing especially for students. In the Netherlands there are approximately 490,000
students aged 18 and older. Over half of them live away from home (57%)54.
Amsterdam, Utrecht and Groningen have the biggest numbers of students living away
from home (27,700, 23,500 and 24,900 respectively). Every city with a university has
student accommodation.
Some students rent a normal dwelling together with two or three fellow students.
However, much housing is in the form of blocks of student flats, which have several
storeys and are especially for students. A number of students live together on one
corridor or in a department. The students have their own rooms and often share a
kitchen, living room and bathroom. High-rise is ideal for student housing because many
rooms can be built on a limited area of land and the type of accommodation suits the
wishes of many students. One or more departments can be created on each storey, and
the ground floor can be used for storerooms, bicycle parking and possibly some
amenities, such as a supermarket or hairdresser. The blocks of flats in Uilenstede
(Amstelveen) and Wageningen are examples of such student housing.
54
A. Oskamp en M. Hoppesteyn (2003), Kamers Tekort? Vraag en aanbod van studentenhuisvesting, ABF
Research
Uilenstede
The construction of Uilenstede in Amstelveen
started in 1964. Over the years this area in
Amstelveen has grown into a student district Uilenstede tower block (source:
www.intermezzo.org)
for students at the Free University Amsterdam.
In Uilenstede there are over 2,600 rooms, as
well as dwellings and cultural, recreational and
sports amenities.
There are different types of housing blocks in
Uilenstede. The landscape is dominated by six
double tower blocks, which are 40 metres high
and have 14 storeys.
There are 14 rooms on each storey. Each room
has its own bathroom cubicle with a shower,
toilet and washbasin. Each room also has a
balcony. On each storey there is one kitchen
with hobs and refrigerators. The average
waiting time is about two years.
88 / 119
Asserpark, Wageningen
The Asserpark housing block was built
around 1970 and it was the first radial block
of flats to be built in Wageningen for students.
Asserpark is the start of a row of five radial
blocks of flats on the edge of Wageningen.
Each block has 16 to 20 storeys. In Asserpark
there are 368 rooms with an area of between
12 and 14 square metres. A department has
seven or eight rooms plus a communal kitchen
and a bathroom area with two showers, two
toilets and two washbasins. The rooms are
rented out by the Wageningen social housing
trust
(Stichting
Sociale
Huisvesting
Wageningen SSHW).
The rooms in most student complexes have a
fast internet connection.
There are amenities on the ground floor. In
Asserpark, for example, there is a large bar
where social events are organized several
evenings a week. There is also lockable
storage for cycles and motorbikes.
89 / 119
Asserpark (source: www.sshw.nl)
Student accommodation has been given a great deal of attention in recent years. The
waiting times for a student room have increased substantially because of, among other
things, an increasing number of students, little new build and less relocation to other
dwellings. The Dutch government, local authorities and housing associations are
therefore launching all sorts of initiatives to provide more student accommodation in
the short term.
For example, in some local authority areas the supply is being increased by converting
care homes and other complexes that are due for demolition in due course into
accommodation that is suitable for students. In Utrecht a number of large-scale care
complexes have been rented to students in recent years. The rooms in the care homes,
which are generally small, are well suited to the function of student rooms. However,
90 / 119
this is a temporary solution. New build projects are also being implemented for the
longer term.
New build on the Uithof

Utrecht has long waiting lists for student accommodation. In order to do something
about this, student housing is being built on the Uithof, the university site. The first
complex was completed in 1999. It consists of two tall blocks of flats, each with 16
storeys, and 10 medium-rise blocks (four or five storeys). It was necessary to select
high-rise because this large programme of 1001 student rooms had a land area of only
one hectare. The high-rise section consists of two slender blocks containing dwellings.
These are connected on top by further dwellings. The housing units range in size from
two to eight rooms. With the exception of the two-rooms units, all rooms have a
washbasin. All rooms moreover have a fast internet connection. The kitchen and
bathroom are shared.
Another complex with around 500 rooms is scheduled for completion in 2005.
New build complex
(source: http://www.architectuur.org/uytenhaak01.php)
High-rise will continue to play an important part in new build student accommodation.
High-rise offers good opportunities to create a large number of student dwellings on a
limited piece of land.
7.4
Importance of and outlook for high-rise

High-rise in the Netherlands is a unique phenomenon. The high-rise blocks dating from
the nineteen-sixties and seventies are by far the most uniform, the most direct and the
most visible result of post-war spatial planning. High-rise has been making a comeback
since the start of the nineteen-nineties. New high-rise housing is more luxurious, is
located in a sought-after location, offers prospects for other groups in the population
and it has a different image. For many years Housing Needs Surveys have shown that
the number of people who would prefer to live in a block of flats is not increasing and
91 / 119
remains at around 15%. There is no more specific information available from the
Housing Needs Surveys.
What the future holds in store for the old high-rise in the Netherlands is neither good
nor bad. The quality of the dwellings is good, but the quality of the surroundings is
often worse. Despite large-scale refurbishment and improvements in high-rise districts,
high-rise neighbourhoods still have a poor image. However, it is important to point out
that not all high-rise should be lumped together. Much high-rise housing dating from
the nineteen-sixties and seventies is out of date and no longer meets current housing
requirements, but at the same time there are advantages to living in a block of flats. In
the first place the dwellings are generously sized, particularly if they are compared with
current single-family homes and high-rise flats in other European countries (see chapter
3). Communal areas can moreover be utilized to provide additional amenities and
contribute to social cohesion. Finally, in high-rise housing a lift is always profitable for
and attractive to the residents, unlike in smaller scale blocks of flats, and high-rise can
provide a high degree of privacy combined with splendid views55. It goes without
saying that this only applies to high-rise blocks that are not hemmed in by other blocks
and are in locations with a view that is perceived as being attractive. There are
opportunities for high-rise here in the near future and these underlying principles are
also the driving force behind the latest wave of high-rise construction in the urban
centres (primarily in Rotterdam).
In the near future new target groups can be accommodated in high-rise housing in
addition to the two current resident target groups, i.e. young starter households and the
remaining group of families with low incomes. It was pointed out in the preceding
section that high-rise can be made suitable for older people. Older people are not a new
target group for high-rise, but they were not recognized as such until the beginning of
the nineteen-nineties. More and more older people are looking for housing requiring
little maintenance and with more amenities. The ongoing ageing of the population,
continuing to live at home for longer, IT developments in the care sector and
government policy are all indicating that high-rise could be a good solution. This is
because high-rise is ideal for home care and extra common amenities, and current
technology can readily provide the desired quality of life. High-rise has everything it
takes to satisfy the housing wishes of older people. A housing market survey in the
Nijmegen district of Dukenburg56 revealed, among other things, that as far as the
dwelling is concerned, older people attach importance to a home that can be adapted to
their deteriorating health. This means that the living room and the bedroom are on the
same floor, a lift is necessary, there is often preference for one large living room and, if
possible, two bedrooms. Half of older people want to end up in a dwelling in a complex
for the elderly and there is a relatively acute need for a range of services (caretaker,
health alarm with the availability of care, surveillance system, odd jobs service,
communal area). As regards the living environment, older people want a safe, clean and
respectable neighbourhood, with shops within walking distance, good public transport,
measures to slow down traffic, easy access by car and sufficient parking.
It is clear that high-rise has many opportunities to provide for these wishes. High-rise
especially intended for older people fits the picture very well. The survey referred to
above reveals that the availability of care services is an important issue, and that above
all the really old (i.e. over 75) deem it necessary. This may mean that a relatively large
55
De toekomst van de flat, Stuurgroep experimenten volkshuisvesting

Marktsituatie van hoogbouw en woonsituatie van ouderen in Dukenburg; O&S Nijmegen, January 2001
(http://www.nijmegen.nl/Images/41_7867.pdf ).
56
92 / 119
demand for care facilities is arising in high-rise complexes. If the living environment is
also still appropriate, or can be made appropriate, it appears that there are excellent
opportunities for new and refurbished high-rise dwellings.
People who like to live in an urban environment represent a second target group. The
number of people who want to live in a city is increasing. Preferably close to the city
centre, and if at all possible actually in it. This target group contains working couples,
students (young people) and singles with a high income. High-rise can provide for the
wishes of this target group. In Rotterdam it has emerged that good quality high-rise
(large, modern apartments) in an urban environment (close to the station, shops and
other amenities) are sought after by this group.
It is not actually possible to discuss the outlook for high-rise. Firstly there is a
difference between existing high-rise and future new build high-rise. Existing high-rise
will have a variety of outlooks. A growing number of these uniform high-rise blocks of
flats will be given a different external appearance and interior, and also a different level
of rents and purchase prices. The expression high-rise is so tainted that future
prospects are often not described as being rosy, whereas that is by no means always
justified.
There are therefore enough possibilities for high-rise in the future, despite the
preference that most Dutch households always have for a single-family home with a
garden. In chapter 4 it was pointed out that the quality of high-rise housing is a match
for low-rise, and the dwellings are also sufficiently large and comply with current
standards. There is still a long way to go, but a start has been made. The most striking
example of this is the city of Rotterdam, where more and more high-rise residential
complexes are being built in the city centre. This trend could catch on elsewhere in the
Netherlands. The existing housing stock is also being tackled in a big way. Integrated
refurbishment and restructuring are being applied on a large scale. The 56 districts
approach of the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment is giving
clear direction to this, and the first results, for example in the Bijlmer, are now
emerging. Here too high-rise can be considered to have a bright future.
Finally it can be said that environmental factors very largely determine whether people
want to live somewhere or not. The environment is never exactly the same and the
approach to how the environment should be changed will always be unique and location
dependent. As stated above, the outlook for high-rise cannot therefore be expressed
unequivocally. However, the comment can be made that the signs are good and that
much more has to be done to give sustainable high-rise in the Netherlands a better
image. Major investments, close collaboration between central government, local
authorities and housing associations, and a sketchbook for residents, are needed in order
to bring about change. The switch from renting to buying (which is already on the
increase) and the identification of discernible resident groups (older people, younger
people, students and double-income couples) can help in this regard. High-rise homes
can then be better tailored to specific wishes, and in so doing go further in providing a
good, nice and special living environment. There are more and more technical options
available in the building industry, refurbishment techniques are well known, and there
is more than sufficient expertise available for enabling the successful restructuring of
high-rise districts. If there is good cooperation, it is safe to say that the prospects for
high-rise are certainly not dim.
93 / 119
94 / 119
Important Dutch high-rise parties

A number of players are professionally involved with high-rise in the Netherlands.
Builders, architects, designers, knowledge centers and housing associations work on
high-rise. This chapter contains a non-exhaustive overview of addresses with, where
possible, specific examples of projects involving the party concerned. Section 8.1 lists
the players and section 8.2 discusses the high-rise activities of Dutch players in other
European countries.
8.1
Players
A distinction is made between knowledge centres, contractors, architects, project
developers, designers, consultants and housing associations. For some groups only the
umbrella organization is listed because it has the most knowledge. Wherever possible
high-rise projects executed by a player are mentioned.
8.1.1
Knowledge centres and umbrella organizations

Bond van Nederlandse Architecten (BNA)
Keizersgracht 321, 1016 EE Amsterdam
P.O.Box 19606, 1000 GP Amsterdam
tel: 020 - 555 36 66
fax: 020 - 555 36 99
e-mail: bna@bna.nl
www.bna.nl
CUR
Postal address:
P.O.Box 420
2800 AK GOUDA
Office address:
Bchnerweg 1
2803 GR Gouda
www.cur.nl
tel: 0182-540600
fax: 0182-540601
e-mail: cur@cur.nl
Delft University of the Technology
Onderzoeksinstituut OTB
Jaffalaan 9,
2628 BX Delft
P.O.Box 5030,
2600 GA Delft
tel: (015) 278 30 05
fax (015) 278 44 22
e-mail: mailbox@otb.tudelft.nl
Habiforum
Habiforum
Postbus 420
2800 AK Gouda
tel: 0182 540655
fax: 0182 540656
www.habiforum.nl
ISoCaRP
International Society of City
and Regional Planners
Judy van Hemert - Executive Director
Willem Witsenplein 6, Rm 459a
2595 BK The Hague
The Netherlands
Tel: +(31-70) 346-2654
Fax: +(31-70) 361-7909
Email: secretariat@isocarp.org
KEI, kenniscentrum stedelijke vernieuwing
Kruisplein 25 r
3014 DB Rotterdam
P.O.Box 897
3000 AW Rotterdam
e-mail info@kei-centrum.nl
tel: 010 2825155
fax: 010 4130251
Nationaal Duurzaam Bouwen centrum
Stationsplein 45 Rotterdam
P.O.Box 29046
3001 GA Rotterdam
tel: (010) 412 47 66
fax: (010) 214 29 25
www.dubo-centrum.nl
k.de.vries@dubo-centrum.nl
Organisatie van Nederlandse advies- en ingenieursbureaus (ONRI)
Koningskade 30
P.O.Box 30442
2500 GK The Hague
tel: 070 31 41 868
fax: 070 31 41 878
e-mail: onri@onri.nl
www.onri.nl
95 / 119
Stichting Habitat platvorm

Nassaulaan 12
P.O. Box 30435
2500 GK Den Haag
Tel. 070-3738772
Fax 070-3738311
e-mail Habitat.Platform@VNG-Habitat.nl
www.habitatplatform.nl
Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting (SEV)
Kruisplein 25 R
P.O.Box 1878
3000 BW Rotterdam
tel: (010) 282 50 72
fax: (010) 411 42 11
www.sev.nl
e-mail: Krebber@sev.nl
TNO BOUW
Afdeling Bouw proces innovatie
Van Mourik Broekmanweg 6
P.O.Box 49
2600 AA Delft
tel: (015) 27 631 36
fax: (015) 27 844 22
www.tno.nl
e-mail: j.roeloffzen@bouw.tno.nl
Universiteit Utrecht
Faculty of Geosciences
Urban and Regional research centre Utrecht
P.O. Box 80.115
3508 TC Utrecht
tel: (030) 253 13 99
Fax (030) 253 20 37
Email: R.vankempen@geog.uu.nl
Useful site: www.restate.geog.uu.nl
8.1.2
Major contractors
Aanneming Maatschappij J.P. van Eesteren B.V.
Head Office in Rotterdam:
Zweth 2, Barendrecht
P.O.Box 1388
3000 BJ Rotterdam
tel: 0180 - 69 70 00
fax: 0180 - 69 71 11
www.jpvaneesteren.nl
High-rise projects: Mondriaantoren in Amsterdam
96 / 119
97 / 119
Ballast Nedam Bouw B.V.

Ringwade 1
P.O.Box 1558
3430 BN NIEUWEGEIN
tel: (030) 2 85 43 00
fax: (030) 2 85 48 70
info.bnb@ballast-nedam.nl
www.bnb.ballast-nedam.nl
High-rise projects: Prinsenhof The Hague, Westpoint Tilburg (highest block of flats in
the Netherlands), refurbishment of high-rise in Apeldoorn
BBF Bouwbedrijf Friesland
Neptunusweg 3
P.O.Box 579
8901 BJ Leeuwarden
tel: 058 284 66 66
fax: 058 288 13 64
e-mail: info@bbf.nl
www.bbf.nl
High-rise projects: Achmea office high-rise in Leeuwarden
Boele & van Eesteren bv
Laan van Vredenoord 11
2289 DA Rijswijk ZH
P.O.Box 3077
2280 GB Rijswijk ZH
tel: 070-4144200
e-mail: info@boele.nl
www.boele.nl
Dura Vermeer Groep NV
Orfeoschouw 30
2726 JE Zoetermeer
P.O.Box 7119
2701 AC Zoetermeer
tel: 079 343 80 80
fax: 079 343 80 90
e-mail: info@duravermeer.nl
www.vermeer.nl
ERA Bouw B.V.
Postbus 62
2700 AB ZOETERMEER
1e Stationsstraat 185
2712 HG ZOETERMEER
tel: 079 - 3 170 170
fax: 079 - 3 165 800
e-mail: info@erabouw.nl
98 / 119
Hurks Bouwgroep B.V.

Pastoor Petersstraat 3
5612 WB EINDHOVEN
P.O.Box 671
5600 AR EINDHOVEN
tel: (040) 26 26 100
fax: (040) 26 26 101
e-mail: hurksbouwgroep@hurks.nl
www.hurks.nl
High-rise projects: New ABN-AMRO Zuid-as office
Koninklijke BAM Groep nv
Runnenburg 9
P.O.Box 20
3980 CA Bunnik
tel: 31 (0)30 659 89 88
info@bam.nl
www.bam.nl
High-rise projects: World Trade Center in Amsterdam, World Port center in Rotterdam
HIB, Heijmans IBC Bouw, Almere
Heijmans IBC Bouw
Rooseveltweg 11
1314 SJ Almere
P.O.Box 10083
1301 AB Almere
tel: 036-5293000 - 529 31 00
fax: 036-5293000 - 529 31 31
www.heijmans.nl
Stam+deKoning
Limburglaan 24a
P.O.Box 7050
5605 JB Eindhoven
tel: (040) 250 43 00
fax:(040) 250 43 43
www.stamendekoning.nl
Strukton Groep nv
Westkanaaldijk 2
3542 DA Utrecht
P.O.Box 1025
3600 BA Maarssen
tel: (030) 248 69 11
fax: (030) 248 64 66
e-mail: info@strukton.com
www.strukton.com
High-rise projects: Primarily office market (including Rembrandt tower and Breitner
center, both more than 20 storeys in Amsterdam)
99 / 119
Van Hoogevest Groep

Amsterdamseweg 41
P.O.Box 161
3800 AD Amersfoort
tel: 033-4630494
fax: 033-4650332
info@hoogevest.nl
www.hoogevest.nl
High-rise projects: KPN office complex in Amersfoort
Van Straten Bouw B.V.
P.O.Box 582
5600 AN EINDHOVEN
tel: 040 259 76 59
fax: 040 251 17 25
mail@vanstraten.nl
www.vanstraten.nl
High-rise projects: Experience with refurbishing blocks of flats
8.1.3
Architects
AGS Architekten & Planners B.V. Heerlen
Oliemolenstraat 60
6416 CB HEERLEN
P.O.Box 2656
6401 DD HEERLEN
tel: 045-5712841
fax: 045-5716093
e-mail: ags@ags.nl
www.ags.nl
High-rise projects: Pegasus in Rotterdam
de Architekten Cie.
Keizersgracht 126
NL-1015 CW Amsterdam
P.O.Box 576
NL-1000 AN Amsterdam
tel: 020 5309300
fax: 020 5309399
e-mail: arch@cie.nl
www.cie.nl/
High-rise projects: Max Tower (Frankfurt), Koningin Wilhelmina plein (Amsterdam),
Two Towers (Almere)
Benthem Crouwel Architekten B.V. bna

Generaal Vetterstraat 61
1059 BT Amsterdam
P.O.Box 9201
10060AE Amsterdam
tel: 0206420105
fax: 0206465354
e-mail: bca@benthemcruowel.nl
www.benthemcrouwel.nl
High-rise projects: Hoge Maas block of flats, Rotterdam
Bonnema Architecten
villa Nova Pollesinnel 2
P.O.Box 15
9254 ZG Hurdegaryp
tel: 0511473635
fax: 0511475110
e-mail: bonnema@bonnema.com
www.bonnema.com
High-rise projects: Nationale Nederlanden and DWL block of flats Rotterdam
Engelman Architecten
ECI A1
6077 GJ Roermond
P.O.Box 369
6041 MA Roermond
tel: 047546810
fax: 0475464484
e-mail: mail@engelmanarchitecten.nl
www.e-arch.nl
HM Architekten
(architectengroep herenmarkt bv bna)
P.O.Box 14880
1001 L J AMSTERDAM
Korte Prinsengracht 91
1013 GR AMSTERDAM
tel: 020 - 6266179
fax: 020 - 6228179
E-mail: hm@hm.nl
www.hm.nl
High-rise projects: Wijnhaven eiland, Rotterdam
100 / 119
Hoogenstad architecten
Westkade 31
3016 CM Rotterdam
P.O.Box 818
3000AV Rotterdam
tel: 0104402121
fax: 0104402100
e-mail: info@hoogstad.com
KCAP
Piekstraat 27
P.O.Box 50528
3007 JA Rotterdam
tel: 010 4531010
e-mail: post@kcap.nl
www.kcap.nl
High-rise projects: Wijnhaven eiland, Rotterdam
MVRDV
Postbus 63136
3002 JC Rotterdam
Dunantstraat 10
Rotterdam
Tel +31.10.4772860
Fax +31.10.4773627
mailto:office@mvrdv.nl
Architectengroep
Naarding Straesser van der Linden
Nachtwachtlaan 22
1058 EA Amsterdam
Postbus 90059
1006 BB Amsterdam
Telefoon 020-5126464
Fax 020-5126465
E-mail: archgroep@nsl.nl
Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA)

Heer Bokelweg 149
3032 AD Rotterdam
tel: 0102438200
fax: 0102438202
E-Mail: office@oma.nl
www.oma.nl
High-rise projects: worldwide, for example Prada office, San Fransisco
8.1.4
Project developers
101 / 119
102 / 119
ABN AMRO Bouwfonds Nederlandse Gemeenten N.V.

Westerdorpsstraat 66
3871 AZ Hoevelaken
P.O.Box 15
3870 DA Hoevelaken
tel: (033) 25 39 111
fax: (033) 25 39 555
e-mail: contact@bouwfonds.nl
www.bouwfonds.nl
Delta Forte
P.O. Box 23031
1100 DM Amsterdam Zuidoost
Tel: 020 - 398 64 44
Fax: 020 - 398 64 00
www.deltaforte.nl
(involved in the development of the Bijlmer)
De Vereniging van Nederlandse Projectontwikkeling Maatschappijen (NEPROM)
Huize Middenburg,
Westeinde 28,
2275 AE Voorburg
Postal address: P.O.Box 620, 2270 AP Voorburg
tel: 070 386 62 64
fax: 070 387 40 89
www.neprom.nl, various publications
G&S Vastgoed
Johannes Vermeerstraat 9
1071 DK Amsterdam
P.O.Box 75030
1070 AA Amsterdam
tel: 020 673 37 79
fax 020 679 91 72
e-mail: info@ gensvastgoed.nl
MAB Group B.V.
Muzentoren
Wijnhaven 60, 2511 GA The Hague
tel: 070 3068400
fax: 070 3543618
www.mab.com
High-rise projects: De Rotterdam in Rotterdam
Van der Vorm Bouw B.V.

Veerweg 165
3351 HC Papendrecht
Postbus 16
3350 AA Papendrecht
Tel: +31 (0)78 6150177
Fax: +31 (0)78 6154734
Email: post@bouw-vorm.nl
Involved in the development of the Poptahof in the city of Delft
8.1.5
Designers and consultants

Aronsohn Raadgevende ingenieurs B.V.
Head Office Rotterdam
Lijnbaan 131
P.O.Box 2401
3000 CK Rotterdam
tel: (010) 280.80.80
fax: (010) 412.75.48
e-mail: rotterdam@aronsohn.nl
http://www.aronsohn.nl/
CORSMIT Raadgevend Ingenieursbureau B.V.
P.O.Box 208
2280 AE Rijswijk
Winston Churchill Tower
Sir Winston Churchilllaan 366
2285 SJ Rijswijk
Netherlands
tel: 070 3949305
fax: 070 3941396
e-mail: directie@corsmit.nl
www.corsmit.nl
Deerns Raadgevende Ingenieurs
(one of the five offices)
Fleminglaan 10
2289 CP Rijswijk (ZH)
tel: 070-395.74.00
fax: 070-399.33.71
http://www.deerns.nl/
103 / 119
D3BN Den Haag

(one of the three offices)
Neherkade 1a
P.O.Box 19054
2500 CB The Hague
tel: 070 - 336 74 55
fax: 070 - 390 71 34
denhaag@d3bn.nl
www.d3bn.nl
Huygen Elwako Raadgevende Ingenieurs b.v.
Oostplein 415
P.O.Box 42503
3006 DA Rotterdam
tel: 010 - 411 61 25
fax: 010 - 411 92 00
info@he-adviseurs.nl
www.he-adviseurs.nl
Ingenieursbureau Zonneveld b.v.
Max Euwelaan 23
3062 MA ROTTERDAM
P.O.Box 4398
3006 AJ ROTTERDAM
tel: 010 - 452 88 88
fax: 010 - 452 95 50
e-mail: info@zonneveld-rotterdam.nl
Kuiper compagnons
P.O.-box 13060
3004 HB Rotterdam
Schiegebouw,
Van Nelleweg 6060,
3044 BC Rotterdam
Telephone: 010 - 433 00 99
Telefax: 010 - 404 56 69
www.kuiper.nl
OD205 stedenbouw onderzoek en landschap bv
Oude Delft 205
P.O.Box 2890
2601 CW Delft
tel: 015 - 213 19 15
fax: 015 - 214 17 48
e-mail: od205@od205.nl
www.od205.nl
104 / 119
105 / 119
Rigo Research en advies

De Ruyterkade 139
1011 AC Amsterdam
tel: 020 - 522 1111
fax: 020 - 627 6840
www.rigo.nl
e-mail: femma@rigo.nl
Van Rossum Raadgevende ingenieurs Amsterdam B.V.
Hageland 132
1066 SB Amsterdam
tel: 020 - 6153711
fax: 020 - 6158238
e-mail: amsterdam@vanrossumbvl.nl
www.vanrossumbv.nl
8.1.6
Housing Associations
Aedes vereniging van woningcorporaties
Olympia 1
1213 NS Hilversum
P.O.Box 611
1200 AP Hilversum
tel: (035) 6268200
fax: (035) 6268211
www.aedes.nl
Important partner in the maintenance of high-rise buildings. Currently cooperating with
the Home Owners Association in the Netherlands.
8.1.7
Government and banks

Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment
Department DGW
P.O. box 20951
2500 EZ Den Haag
Netherlands
General telephone number:
Telephone: +31 (0)70 339 39 39
www.vrom.nl
e-mail: h.vaneyk@minvrom.nl
Dutch international guarantees for housing (DIGH)
Postal address of DIGH:
P.O. BOX 611
1200 AP Hilversum
The Netherlands
Phone number DIGH : +31 35 626 8383
Fax number DIGH : +31 35 647 0546
E-mail address DIGH : info@digh.nl
106 / 119
European investment bank

100, boulevard Konrad Adenauer, L-2950 Luxemburg
Telefoon: (+35) 243 79 1
Fax: (+35) 243 77 04
Internet adres: www.eib.org
e-mail: info@eib.org
8.2
Foreign activities
The foreign activities of Dutch high-rise players can be described as modest. BAM and
Heijmans have affiliated companies and subsidiaries in Germany, the UK and
elsewhere that have some experience with high-rise. Dutch architects, on the other
hand, are closely associated with high-rise projects in Europe. However, in many cases
these are building over 70 metres high that also have an architectural function for the
surroundings. Consulting engineers and designers therefore service primarily the Dutch
market.
107 / 119
Appendix 1: Building methods

A.1
Stack type
A stack type method features a wall structure and floor structure that are made up of
building materials that are placed in position in the building by hand. The walls usually
consist of blocks made from medium-weight concrete or gravel concrete, and a
commercially available flooring system is usually used for the floors. Generally
speaking the design of the wall is separate from the design of the floor. In many cases
there is not a complete stack type method. Instead there is semi-stack type method,
which is used only for the walls. In this case the floor is made from concrete poured in
situ or traditional timber joists.
A.1.1
MUWI
Stack type method for low-rise and
medium-rise in which the load-bearing
walls consist of hollow lightweight
concrete blocks that are laid in stretcher
bond and later on filled up with
concrete. The floors are made from
prestressed concrete beams and hollow
lightweight concrete filler blocks.
Everything can be handled by one or
two men. The system can also be used
for high-rise through the application of
concrete columns poured in situ in the
load-bearing structure.
Example of MUWI Building method
A.1.2
Pronto
Stack type method for low-rise and medium-rise. The load-bearing walls are made from
two-man blocks that are laid in stretcher bond using mortar and the floors use a
commercially available flooring system.
A.1.3
Airey
Stack type method for low-rise and medium-rise in which small faade panels are
installed in the faade by two men without the use of mechanical tools and without
scaffolding.
A.1.4
BBB
Stack type method for low-rise and medium-rise in which load-bearing walls consist of
concrete blocks that can be lifted by one man. The blocks are laid in stretcher bond and
mortared. Traditional wooden floors are used with the exception of a flooring system in
the kitchen.
A.2
108 / 119
In situ
An in situ method features a wall structure and floor structure that are poured in situ in
standardized formwork.
A.2.1
Korrelbeton
In situ method for low-rise and medium-rise that involves the use of standardized
timber formwork elements that are based on a fixed module and that can be handled by
one man. They are used to make load-bearing walls and interior cavity walls from
concrete poured in situ using single-size aggregate material as much as possible. The
floor is not part of the system.
A.2.2
EBO II
A hybrid version, in between in situ and prefab, that is suitable for medium-rise and
high-rise. Load-bearing walls that demarcate plots are made from gravel concrete
poured in situ, possibly as part of a framework of a portal comprising prefab reinforced
gravel concrete columns and beams, using steel wall formwork. The intermediate loadbearing structure is usually made from prefab slabs of reinforced gravel concrete or it is
poured in situ using steel table formwork.
A.2.3
R.B.M.
In situ method for low-rise,
medium-rise and high-rise in which
the load-bearing walls are made
from gravel concrete poured in situ
in steel formwork and the floors
likewise using timber formwork
with steel supports.
A.2.4
E.B.A.-gietbouw
In situ method for low-rise,
medium-rise and high-rise in which
usually the load-bearing walls are
made from medium-weight or
gravel concrete poured in situ in
steel formwork and the floors
likewise using timber formwork
with steel or timber supports. In
some cases the floors are made from
prefab gravel concrete elements.
Example of RBM building method
A.2.5
Wilma II
In situ method for low-rise, medium-rise and high-rise in which the load-bearing walls
are made from gravel concrete poured in situ in steel formwork and the floors likewise
using timber formwork with steel supports. Half tunnel elements are used as formwork
for the walls and floors as an alternative.
109 / 119
A.2.6
Sanders
In situ method for low-rise, medium-rise and high-rise in which the load-bearing walls
and floors are made from gravel concrete poured in situ in steel tunnel formwork.
A.2.7
ERA
In situ method for high-rise in which the load-bearing walls and floors are made from
gravel concrete poured in situ in steel tunnel formwork such that entire flats are spanned
(in other words there are no structural elements inside a flat).
A.3
Large prefab
Large prefab is characterized by load-bearing walls and floors that are made up of large
elements produced in a factory, usually from medium-weight or gravel concrete, that
are put in place using a crane. Normally these elements leave the factory with the
necessary openings, pipes, cables etc. already in them.
A.3.1
Brickwork large prefab (Baksteen Montage bouw - BMB)

Prefab method for low-rise, medium-rise and high-rise in which storey-high or halfstorey-high prefab concrete wall elements and vibrated gravel concrete floor slabs are
installed on site using a crane. These are then enclosed by completely prefabricated
faade elements, usually half a story high, which have a cavity wall structure with a
concrete inner cavity leaf and an outer cavity leaf made from mechanically mortared
bricks.
A.3.2
Rottinghuis
Prefab method for medium-rise in which prefab concrete wall and floor elements are
installed on site using a crane. Usually the faade consists of brickwork laid on site. The
wall elements are storey high and come in widths that correspond with the length or
width of a room. The maximum width of the floor elements is 2.50 metres.
A.3.3
VAM
Prefab method for high-rise and medium-rise in which prefab storey-high concrete wall
elements and room-wide floor slabs are installed on site by a crane. In the case of highrise (10 storeys) stability is obtained by means of prestressed load-bearing walls. The
front and back faades consist of wooden frames combined with prestressed concrete
elements.
A.3.4
Coignet-groep
Prefab method for low-rise, medium-rise
and high-rise in which the biggest
possible prefab wall, floor and faade
elements are made from medium-weight
or gravel concrete and carefully finished
in the factory before being installed on
site using a crane.
Example of Coignet building method
A.3.5
110 / 119
Larsen & Nielsen

Prefab method for low-rise, medium-rise and high-rise that employs storey-high and, if
possible, room-wide load-bearing wall elements, room-wide floors and storey-high
interior walls, all made from gravel concrete or medium-weight concrete, and timber
prefab windows above concrete breasts that make up the front and back faades. These
items are installed on site using a crane.
Prefab building method
111 / 119
Appendix 2: Definition of sustainable housing

Contained in paragraph 3 of the Final communiqu of the 3rd European Ministers
conference on sustainable housing, held in Genval (Belgium) on 27th and 28th june 2002
The Ministers acknowledged that the concept of sustainable housing was a global
concept encapsulating a wide variety of sectorial policies. They defined sustainable
housing in the following terms:
A construction perspective:
This aspect primarily refers to the quality of the construction and involves two main
elements:
Lifespan, closely linked to the quality of the building materials used, their utilization
and maintenance, and the ability of the managers to implement a continuous
maintenance;
Adaptability, which needs to be considered on two levels: the successive occupiers or
occupational uses within the same accommodation and the changing needs of the
same occupant in the same accommodation
A social and economic perspective:
This aspect refers both to the viability of accommodation for the occupier, whether
tenant or owner, and to the importance of housing for social cohesion which notably
includes:
Affordability, based on the actual financial means of the occupiers in order to enable
them to control the direct costs of the accommodation without having to neglect
other essential needs (nutrition, health, education, culture, etc.);
Access to housing, which means, for instance, tackling the various causes of
homelessness through a variety of policies;
Accessibility for the disabled and aged;
Indirect costs such as commuting and travel costs linked to the location of housing;
Impacts of housing, more specifically in term of indoor pollution, and the wider
residential environment on the physical and mental health of the occupiers;
Psychological and social function of the housing and the residential environment:
changing it from a place to live to home, while at the same time encouraging the
development and maintenance of social networks and various types of social
solidarity;
Improving the viability of the housing areas and especially underprivileged urban
areas, including the socio-economic fabric, via urban renewal programmes;
Supporting mixed housing through policies that fight segregation and promote a
balanced distribution of all forms of tenure and all types of buildings.
112 / 119
An eco-efficiency perspective
Aiming for an improvement in the quality of life and control of the quality and the use
of resources, based on the following elements:
Rational and efficient use of natural non-renewable resources, both in the
construction and the use of housing; these resources can be grouped under four main
headings;
Land use: the use of land, a limited key resource and whose efficient management
should be optimized in order to limit the use of land across a range of human
activities including housing, together with an assessment of the total ecological
impact of housing versus other uses; e.g. agriculture;
Energy: lever of energy consumption (direct and indirect) and type of energy used;
Construction materials and whole buildings: their renewable character and notably
their embodied energy as well as the ecological costs of disposal;
Water: level of consumption and the quality of the consumed water;
Ways to produce housing as ecological as possible
Achieving increases in comfort with less additional resources, particularly by the use
of technical innovations
In addition, the Ministers agreed that the many facets of sustainable housing have
numerous economic and socio-political implications for the construction and housing
policies of the 15 members of the European Union, and for the social development of
the applicant countries.
113 / 119
Appendix 3: Types of flats

The following flats are the most commonly found types in the Netherlands in both highrise and medium-rise.
Gallery-access flat:
The gallery-access flat
has four rooms (see floor
plan) and is in a block
with a lift. In these types
of blocks there is often a
separate storeroom for
each flat.
There are nearly 125,000
flats of this type in the
Netherlands, representing
2% of the total stock. The
most common type of
block has five storeys of
flats, each with nine flats
along a gallery. Nearly
65% of this type of flats
are social rental housing,
nearly 20% are private
rental housing and over
15% are owner-occupied.
The most common type of household occupying these flats is a single person with no
children. This type accounts for over 40% of these flats. The front and rear faades are
shown here.
114 / 119
Hallway-access flat:
A hallway-access flat has
three rooms. It is in a
block with four storeys of
flats (in other words not
high-rise). There is no lift
in the building and access
is via a closed hallway.
There are storerooms in
the block.
There are nearly 490,000
flats of this type in the
Netherlands, representing
8 % of the total stock.
The most common type
of block has four storeys
of flats, each with ten
flats. Just over 45% of
this type of flats are
social rental housing,
over 35% are private rental housing and over 15% are owner-occupied. The most
common type of household occupying these flats is a single person with no children.
This type accounts for over 40% of these flats.
Other flats:
The other type of flat has two rooms on
one storey. The flat is part of a block
with several storeys. Most of these
blocks have a lift. There are storerooms
in the block.
There are nearly 150,000 flats of this
type in the Netherlands, representing
2.4% of the total stock. The most
common type of block has six storeys of
flats, each with ten flats. Nearly 13% of
this type of flat are owner-occupied,
over 65% are social rental housing, and
nearly 20% are private rental housing.
The most common type of household
occupying these flats is a single person
with no children. This type accounts for
over 65% of these flats.
There is a large variety of this type of
flat and there are many different
versions in the Netherlands. Generally
speaking the external appearance is
similar and therefore these flats have been classified as one type.
115 / 119
116 / 119
Literature
Aalbers, M. et al, Large Housing Estates in the Netherlands, Overview of developments
and problems in Amsterdam and Utrecht, restate report 2nd, Utrecht 2003
Aftoppen; Onderzoek naar het aftoppen van Elementumflats in Maassluis (Setting a
ceiling on Elementum Flats in Maassluis), Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting
(SEV), Rotterdam, July 2001
Bestaande hoogbouw nader bekeken (A closer look at existing high-rise buildings),
Woningraad Extra 27, April 1984
Cannibals with Forks Elkington, 1998
Cijfers over Wonen 2002 (2002 Housing Figures), Feiten over mensen, wensen, wonen,
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, March 2002
Cijfers over Wonen 2004 (2004 Housing Figures), Feiten over mensen, wensen, wonen,
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, April 2004
De kwaliteit van de Nederlandse woning en woonomgeving rond de
millenniumwisseling (Quality of Dutch housing and living environment at the
millennium change a report); Basisrapportage Kwalitatieve Woningregistratie 2000,
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, April 2004
De toekomst van de flat (The future of the flat), woonkwaliteit 8, Stuurgroep
Experimenten Volkshuisvesting (SEV), Rotterdam, May 1990
Ecologisch bouwen (Ecological construction) Duijvestein, SOM-TUDelft, 1997,
including the Drie Stappen Strategie
Een tweede leven voor vroeg-naoorlogse flats (A second life for early post-war flats),
Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting (SEV), Rotterdam, February 1997
Amsterdam City Council, Wonen in Compacte Amsterdamse Hoogbouw (Living in
compact Amsterdam high-rise buildings), Cordinatieteam Optimalisering
Grondgebruik, April 2002
Delft Council, Delft Wonen en Van der vorm Vastgoed, Masterplan Poptahof, March
2003
Energiebesparing en stedelijke herstructurering (Energy saving and urban
restructuring), een beleidswetenschappelijke analyse; van der Waals, Vermeulen,
Vermeulen, Glasbergen, Hooimeijer; DGVH/NETHUR partnership 10, Utrecht, 2000
Gereedschappen voor herontwikkeling (Toolkit for redevelopment), Uitplinten,
Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting (SEV), Rotterdam, March 1998
Gereedschappen voor herontwikkeling (Toolkit for redevelopment), Optoppen,
Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting (SEV), Rotterdam, March 1999
117 / 119
Gereedschappen voor herontwikkeling (Toolkit for redevelopment), Verticaal

samenvoegen, Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting (SEV), Rotterdam,
September 2000
Herstructurering van stadswijken: meer dan woningen alleen (Restructuring of urban
neighbourhoods: More than housing alone), Priemus / Philipsen, Delft University Press,
1999
High-rise housing in Europe; Current trends and future prospects. R. Turkington, R.
van Kempen and F. Wassenberg (eds.), onderzoeksinstituut OTB, August 2004
Hogere Bouwkunde, volume 7 Bouwmethodiek bouwmethoden, Jellema
Hogere Bouwkunde, volume 8 Woningbouw bouwmethoden, Jellema
Hoogbouw in Nederland (High-rise buildings in the Netherlands), Egbert Koster and
Theo van Oeffelt, NAi uitgevers, 1997
Hoogbouw; Inventarisatie know-how en regelgeving (High-rise buildings: Overview of
know-how and regulations), Eindrapport Programma-adviescommissie 9 Hoogbouw,
CUR, September 1991
Housing in the Netherlands, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment
Innovation 4 renovation; Onderzoek naar problemen en behoeften binnen de
renovatiemarkt in Nederland (Study of problems and needs in Dutch renovation
market); A. Feijen, TNO Bouw, January 2003
KEI Kenniscentrum voor Stedelijke Vernieuwing, werkbezoek Schiedam (Nieuwland/
Ommoord), verslag 27 May 2004
Kwalitatieve woningregistratie 2000 (Qualitative housing registration) (KWR 2000),
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment
Laaglandadvies (2002), Koopappartementen in Nederland (Owner-occupied
apartments in the Netherlands), final report, volume 1, for the Ministry of Housing,
Spatial Planning and the Environment
Large Housing Estates in the Netherlands, Overview of developments and problems in
Amsterdam and Utrecht; Aalbers, van Beckhoven, van Kempen, Musterd, Ostendorf;
Utrecht University, Utrecht, 2003
Manshanden, W.J.J., O. Koops, S. Newrly en Y. de Kluizenaar, "Vernieuwing van de
woningvoorraad; sloop en vervangende nieuwbouw in detail" (Renewal of the housing
supply: Demolition and new replacement buildings), TNO Inro rapport 2003-28. Delft,
May 2003
118 / 119
Meijer, F. and A.C.W. van der Heijden (1995), Vereniging van Eigenaren: problemen
en praktijkoplossingen (Home Owners Association: Problems and Practical Solutions),
working document, Onderzoeksinstituut OTB, Delft
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (1997), Nota Stedelijke
Vernieuwing (Urban renewal policy document), The Hague, 1997
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, Beter Thuis in Wonen,
Kernpublicatie Woning Behoefte Onderzoek (Study on housing needs) 2002, 2003
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, Gescheiden Markten? De
ontwikkeling op de huur- en koopwoningmarkt (Seperate markets? Developments in
rental and owner-occupied housing), Themapublicatie Woning Behoefte Onderzoek
2002, December 2003
Multi-storey residential building in The Netherlands; A state of the art study, R.W.
Lanting for the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, November
1991
Naoorlogse wijken in beeld (Images of post-war neighbourhoods); Wijktypologie en
analyse lokale aanpakstrategien voor woonwijken uit 1946-1980, RIGO Research en
Advies B.V., November 1995
Nationaal Pakket Duurzaam Bouwen Woningbouw (National Sustainable Construction
Package Housing); SBR 1996, jaarlijkse update
Nationaal Pakket Duurzaam Bouwen Utiliteitsbouw (National Sustainable Construction
Package Utilities); SBR 1999, jaarlijkse update
Nationaal Pakket Duurzame Stedebouw (National Sustainable Construction Package
Urban development); Nationaal Dubo Centrum, 1999
Opdam, E., A. Voorburg and J. Kappe, Voorbeeldwijken, zes voorbeelden van sociaalfysieke wijkaanpak (Six example neighbourhoods), Ministry of Transport, Public Works
and Water Management and Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment, The Hague, November 2003
Opplussen; investeer in je woningen, investeer in de toekomst (Invest in housing, invest
in the future). Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting (SEV), Rotterdam,
November 2003
Oskamp, A. en M. Hoppesteyn (2003), Kamers Tekort? Vraag en aanbod van
studentenhuisvesting (Room shortage? Supply and demand in student accommodation),
ABF Research, for the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Ministry of
Education, Culture and Science
Questionnaire for European Ministers conference on sustainable refurbishment of
high-rise residential buildings and restructuring of surrounding areas; country: the
Netherlands, PRC Bouwcentrum international, 2004
Referentiewoningen bestaande bouw, Novem, April 2001
119 / 119
Refurbishment of residential areas in the Netherlands, TNO Building and Construction

Research, August 2000
Report for European Housing Ministers: Conference on Sustainable Refurbishment of
High-rise Residential Buildings and Restructuring of Surrounding Areas, Draft version
6 August 2004, Ministry of Housing, Spatial planning and the Environment in
cooperation with PRC Bouwcetnrum international (to be published)
Ruimte rondom hoogbouw; Mogelijkheden om het beheer van de openbare ruimte in
een hoogbouwwijk te privatiseren (Privatization options in management of public
spaces in high-rise neighbourhoods), M. van Veghel and F. Wassenberg, Delft
University Press, 1999
Ruimte voor verandering; Een inventarisatie van renovatie en transformatie in
naoorlogse wijken in Nederland en internationaal (Overview of Dutch and international
post-war renovation and transformation), Stuurgroep Experimenten Volkshuisvesting
(SEV), Rotterdam, October 2003
Sloop een reel alternatief (Demolition as valid alternative), Woningraad extra 42,
December 1987
Steeds Anders; Duurzame herstructurering van naoorlogse wijken (Sustainable
restructuring of post-war neighbourhoods); samenstelling Kelfkens, Stichting Natuur en
Milieu, Utrecht, 2000
Tellinga, J., De Grote Verbouwing, verandering van naoorlogse woonwijken (The big
reconstruction: transformation of post-war neighbourhoods), NAI, Uitgeverij 010,
2004
Tijdschrift voor de volkshuisvesting, Wijken voor verandering (Neighbourhoods for
change journal item), April 2004
Water in de stedelijke vernieuwing een participatieve strategie (Participation
strategies concerning water in renewal), van Eijk, TUDelft, Aeneas, 2002
Woningbouw, inspiratie en ambities; Kwalitatieve grondslagen van de sociale
woningbouw in Nederland (Qualitative basis of social housing in the Netherlands),
Noud de Vreeze for the Nationale Woningraad (NWR), Delft 1993
Woning behoefte onderzoek 2002, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the
Environment
Zantvoort, A. van (1988), Hoed je voor HATS, over huisvesting van alleenstaanden &
tweepersoonshuishoudens in Amsterdam (Housing for single and two-person
households in Amsterdam), UvA

High-Rise Housing in The Netherlands

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

High-Rise Housing in The Netherlands

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

High-Rise Housing In The Netherlands:

Past, Present And Sustainability Outlook

TNO Bouw (J.F.T. Roeloffzen, R. Lanting and Dr N.P.M Scholten)

Project Coordination TNO Bouw

Rigo Research en Advies BV

Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieu

A.Th. van Delden

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Executive summary; major conclusions and questions ............................................................... 5

History of high-rise residential buildings in the Netherlands .................................. 10

Characteristics of high-rise building .......................................................................... 16

Residents and dwelling use.......................................................................................... 31

Structural and financial aspects of high-rise buildings ............................................ 42

Legal and policy aspects .............................................................................................. 65

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Structural aspects ........................................................................................................... 67

Current developments and the outlook...................................................................... 74

Important Dutch high-rise parties ............................................................................. 94

Appendix 1: Building methods................................................................................................... 107

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Executive summary; major conclusions and questions

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Definition of High-rise used in this report:

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

This is also known as doing business in a socially responsible way (MVO).

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

History of high-rise residential buildings in the

Figure 2.1: Share of multi-family residential buildings in housing stock

Housing Demand Survey 2002

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Figure 2.2: Age of the housing stock4

Housing Demand Survey 2002

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Characteristics of high-rise building

Current status of high-rise building in the Netherlands

1970 and later

Figure 3.1 Subdivision of the total housing stock (WBO 2002)

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Table 3.1: High rise dwellings by size

Table 3.2: Tenure structure 1989 and 2002

Table 3.3: Size of households

Housing Demand Survey 2002

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

Table 3.4: Number of rooms per dwelling

Referentiewoningen bestaande bouw, Novem 2001

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

impression of these buildings

Figure 3.2 High-rise districts in the Netherlands.

Region Hague/ Rotterdam

Naoorlogse wijken in beeld by RIGO research en advies

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook

total number of dwellings

Districts build before 1946

Districts build between 1946 and 1980

Districts build after 1980

table 3.5 households, inhabitants and number of districts by building period

High-rise housing in the Netherlands: past, present and sustainability outlook