Sustainability measures threatening thousands of pre-war buildings in the Netherlands
Dutch buildings built before the Second World War are rapidly disappearing due to the housing crisis and the strict requirements to make homes more sustainable, AD reported on Wednesday.
Data from Kadaster, the Dutch land registry, indicate that 95,008 pre-war buildings have been torn down over the last ten years. As of October 1, 2013, the Netherlands had 1.67 million buildings dating back to before 1940. By the same date in 2023, the number had decreased to 1.58 million.
Heritage experts in the Netherlands are raising concerns over the trend of demolishing or extensively altering historical buildings instead of renovating them. As elections approach, they urge political parties to consider heritage in urban planning decisions.
Karel Loeff, head of the Heemschut Heritage Association, explained that pre-war buildings are at risk due to uniform regulations that may not suit their preservation, such as gas removal or solar panel installation. He added that the poor energy efficiency of pre-war homes often leads housing associations to favor demolition over costly renovations.
Hanneke Ronnes and Wouter van Elburg from the University of Amsterdam have documented the demolition of pre-war buildings in Amsterdam on a website. They expressed surprise at how many buildings lack protected status. "Many buildings in the city center are doubly protected, because of their monument status and because they fall under a protected cityscape, but in many cases, neither of these applies,” Ronnes explained.
"The protected status of buildings in the Netherlands is not regulated nationally," Van Elburg pointed out. “That is different per municipality. There are big differences in how people deal with heritage in different provinces or cities, and things go wrong more often in the big cities.
They call for a national policy to address what they see as a misguided direction in urban development. They criticize the lack of political engagement and adequate tools to counteract the financial incentives driving demolition.
The two researchers blame the housing associations. “They rely on the argument that residents want new homes, but residents often don't realize they may not be able to stay due to new construction or face significant rent increases,” Ronnes explained. She also linked this to years of neglect in less affluent neighborhoods. “Then the claim is made that buildings must be demolished because they're no longer quality, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
Aedes spokesperson Jolanda Maas told AD that housing associations consider demolition a last resort. "We don't readily resort to the wrecking ball. But standards are continuously rising. Consider all the sustainability measures that are necessary, as well as comfort. Tenants are involved in everything," she said.
Peter Boelhouwer, a professor of housing systems at TU Delft, believes that demolition should not be considered too rigidly. "The pressure against it is increasing," he pointed out. It's clear that more can be done with the existing stock, but when aiming for sustainable improvements, sometimes we must question whether choosing renovation is wise."
