the reclamation of a wasteland - cultural heritage agency · the reclamation of a wasteland over a...

The reclamation of a wasteland

Over a span of some 2,000 years, the wasteland that is now Dutch territory was brought under cultivation by human hands. The following series of maps shows the reclamation of the landscape in five phases.

200In the desolate wasteland, the Romans utilised alluvial ridges running along the Rhine River as a natural axis for land reclamation. These higher and drier sections of land, together with the river, formed an ideal combination as the frontier of the Roman Empire – the limes. Parallel to the Rhine, they built fortifications, the first cities and the main infrastructure on the land. In order to clear land for the different building projects, the forests on the alluvial ridges were rapidly cut down, a fate suffered later by the forests on the floodplain. This created a relatively open zone that sliced right through the thick forests growing on the peat and sandy soils. To the north and south of the limes, people lived as guests in the wilderness.

1200Fortified village centres grew into cities that served as concentrated centres of administration, trade and spirituality. The rulers tried to increase their influence in the region from their vantage point in the cities by bringing the land under cultivation. The surrounding countryside, in turn, supplied the city with food. The first cautious steps taken to tame the wasteland by means of dikes and land reclamation ensured that the sites of the cities became fixed and would remain so without change. During this period, the seeds were sown for a landscape that was to characterise the look of the Netherlands up until the middle of the 20th century. A country made up of many small, more or less similar cities surrounded by cultivated lands.

1650In the middle of the 17th century, all the large rivers were diked in. From the alluvial ridges, the development of the wasteland steadily proceeded. In the lowest areas, the land fell to a level at which natural drainage was not possible. So, beginning in 1400, polders were created. An ingenious system

of drainage ditches, boezems or drainage pools and windmills pumped the excess water away. The Dutch water machine was under way. In the meantime, many settlements developed into forti-fied cities. The Netherlands was strewn with small and large fortifications that controlled important roads and water routes. The early medieval urban centres formed the germ around which the cities grew. The outer reaches of the cities were given fortifications. For two centuries, these town ram-parts were to act as a corset for urbanisation.

1900At the end of the 19th century, the Netherlands was a man-made landscape in top form. The wet land had been made liveable through the creation of more than 3,000 polders (reclaimed land). The desolate soils on the now dry land were nearly all completely cultivated. Industrialisation led to the rapid growth of cities. Many of them were bursting at the seams and, thanks to the Fortress Act [Vestingwet], the city ramparts could be razed. To create an infrastructure, networks were built on a national scale. The cultivated landscape around 1900 displayed the work of art that is the Netherlands, as it had been carefully constructed over the course of 1,000 years, in all of its glory. The new networks and the first cautious expan-sions of cities were a harbinger of a new era. The reclamed, accessible, cultivated landscape served as the ideal medium for an unstoppable wave of urbanisation.

2010At the start of the third millennium, the Netherlands is a varied fabric of hybrid landscapes. The Zuiderzee Works and Delta Works were the final pieces in the large-scale waterworks. After 1950, in particular, large-scale urbanisation took off with a national network of motorways as the foundation. More than three million homes were built. Large seaports and airports now link the Netherlands physically with the rest of the world. The city of today has not one, but many cross-border physical and virtual networks. The distinction between city and outlying areas is increasingly vague. Old landscapes are now only present as fragments.

C. 200

C. 1200 C. 1650

C. 2010C. 1900

Sources

B. Colenbrander and Must Stedebouw, Limes Atlas, Uitgeverij 010, Rotterdam 2005Rijksdienst voor Cultureel Erfgoed [National Department for Cultural Heritage], tno

Geologische Dienst Nederland [Geological Department for the Netherlands], Deltares, Atlas van Nederland in het Holoceen, Landschap en Bewoning vanaf de laatste IJstijd tot nu, Uitgeverij Bert Bakker, Amsterdam 2011

Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed, Afdeling Landschap [Landscape Department], Baas, H.G., Kosian, M.C., Weerts, H.J.T., Landschappen van Noordwest Europa, 2011

A.J. Thurkow, Bewoningsgeschiedenis, volume 2 of: Atlas van Nederland, The Hague, 1984, map 16: Development of the cities up to 1795, map 22: Land reclamation since 1300, map 23: Expansion of the water surface of the Haarlemmermeer between 1250 and 1848

tno-nitg, Nederland omstreeks 1250 Reinout Rutte, Landschap vol steden. Over het ontstaan van de Nederlandse steden en hun plat-

tegronden van de elfde tot de vijftiende eeuw, from Over Holland 2, tu Delft, Department of Architecture, Uitgeverij sun, 2005

de.wikipedia.org, Liste deutscher Stadtgründungen, 2011nl.wikipedia.org, List of cities in Belgium, 2011University of Ghent, Landschapsatlas Vlaanderen, Traditionele landschappen van het Vlaamse

Gewest, Ghent 2002Nieut Kaert boeck vande XVII Nederlandsche Provincien, Republication of the atlas of the

Netherlands, published by F. De Wit in 1670–1672, Canaletto/Repro- Holland, Alphen aan de Rijn – University Press Leuven, 1999

International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam, Must stedebouw, Amsterdam, Eerste Systematische Polderkaart van Nederland according to Geuze, Jannink, Dorsman and Van der Ham, 2004–2005, from Polders! Gedicht Nederland, A. Geuze, F. Feddes, NAi Uitgevers, Rotterdam, 2005

Frits H. Horsten, Doorgaande wegen in Nederland, 16e tot de 19e eeuw, een historische wegenatlas, Uitgeverij Aksant, Amsterdam 2005

Topographical Service Land Register, Emmen, Topografische Militaire Kaart van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden (tmk), 1:50,000, 1850–1864

Topographical Service Land Register, Emmen, Bonnebladen 1:25,000, 1860–1940Geobasis nrw, Bonn, Karten des Deutschen Reiches 1:100,000 (kdr), 1868–1912National Geographic Institute, Brussels, Topografische kaart van België 1:100,000

(1906–1912)Must stedebouw, Hybride landschap, Nederland 1860-2010, Blauwe Kamer/NAi 2004Must stedebouw, Nederland omstreeks 2000, Basiscartografie Vijfde Nota Ruimtelijke

Ordening [Basic Cartography of Fifth Memorandum on Spatial Planning], from Ruimte maken, ruimte delen, Vijfde Nota over de Ruimtelijke Ordening [Fifth Memorandum on Spatial Planning] 2000/2020; Chapter 3: The Netherlands changes, Ministry of vrom/rpd, 2001

geconcentreerde bebouwing

open water, plassen en zee

waterlopen, kanalen en rivieren

verharde wegen en spoorwegen

primaire waterkering

natte ondergrond

onland

Legendaschaal 1 : 1.350.000

cultuurland

droge ondergrond

ontginning natte grond

ontginning droge grond

cultuurbos

!! !

Legend

Scale 1:1,350,000

Concentrated urban development

Paved roads and railway lines

Reclamation of wet ground

Development of dry ground

Cultivated forest

Primary dike

Watercourses, canals and rivers

Open water, ponds and the sea

Wasteland Cultivated land

Wet subsoil Dry subsoil

Notes

On the five maps, the Netherlands is shown in a topographic, straight-forward manner at five moments in time.

For the maps of 1900 and 2010, detailed information was available to make the production of these types of maps possible. From 1650 going back to 200, information is increasingly less available. The material that is available to construct a topographical picture is increasingly less precise. The maps of the Netherlands in about 1650, 1200 and 200 are therefore the best possible approximations of what the Netherlands probably looked like at those times. The difference in the information can also be seen in the graphics used. The map of the Netherlands in about 200 is fairly abstract, which can be seen in the use of patterned dots to designate the wasteland. The picture presented by the succes-sive maps becomes increasingly more precise, ending with the map of the Netherlands in about 2010. The graphics used at the same time show how the territory of the Netherlands and surrounding countries during the Roman era primarily consisted of expanses of natural waste-land. Over the course of centuries, people transformed this world into a finely woven, small-scale, cultivated landscape.

Character in FocusVision for Heritage and Spatial Planning

1. Introduction: room for modern heritage management

Image essay

2. Vision 2.1 Region-oriented focus: the character of the Netherlands A broad outlook Characterisation The Netherlands in four characteristics Land of abundant water Land of towns and cities Land of lots Land of freedom

2.2. Working with a region orientation: from collection to connection From collection to connection Connecting with profit, people, planet 1 profit: investing in the creation of value 2 people: giving space to citizens 3 planet: utilising and influencing sustainability issues

2.3 Region-oriented heritage management: who does what? Clear and simple Collaboration between governments National government Provincial governments Municipal governments District water boards

3. National government priorities 2011–2015 3.1. Five priority tasks 1 World heritage: guarantee connections, increase impact 2 Individual character & safety: sea, coast and rivers 3 New use for sites as (urban) regional task: focus on growth and population decrease 4 Living landscape: strengthening synergy between heritage, economics and ecology 5 Reconstruction: putting an era on display 3.2. Realisation Financial framework Knowledge A focused cooperation agenda

Image essay

Appendices Appendix 1 Overview of national government’s role and instruments Appendix 2 Maps Appendix 3 Characteristics of reconstruction areas

4

9

30

38

42

46

54

57

78


4 5

The modernised preservation of national heritage sites is development-oriented and region-oriented. It utilises the instruments of spatial planning. The Vision for Heritage and Spatial Planning [Visie Erfgoed en Ruimte] indicates how the national government guarantees our cultural heritage sites in spatial planning, what priorities the Cabinet has set in this area and how it wishes to collaborate with public and private parties. From a broad view of heritage, it zooms in on the most current and urgent issues of national interest. The vision comple-ments the National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning [Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte].

1. Introduction

Room for modern heritagemanagement

1. Introduction: Room for modern heritage management

6 7

the realisation of a spatial planning vision which place obligations on third parties.

Goal of this vision: clarity about own role, framework for cooperation

In this Vision for Heritage and Spatial Planning, the Cabinet places the cultural-historical interests of national significance in a region-oriented and development-oriented context. The strategy complements the National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning in which the Cabinet guarantees the unique cultural-historical values of national importance in the plans. The Vision for Heritage and Spatial Planning places these values in a broader context and indicates how proper care for these interests can also be sought via non-legal instruments.

The goal of this vision is twofold. Firstly, the national government makes it clear what interest it is promoting in the region-oriented preservation of heritage, what priorities it has set and how it wants to work with public and private parties. Secondly, with this vision the national government is laying the basis for a shared reference framework for region-oriented heritage management. Such a framework is necessary to make effective cooperation possible between different levels of government and between government and private initiatives.

The clarifying of State interests and priorities contributes to:

- the focus of the national government on cultural-historical issues of (inter)national importance, in part to implement international treaties and obligations;

- offering the possibility to introduce region-oriented prioritising of the use of subsidy resources for maintaining, restoring and finding new uses for national heritage sites;

- making choices with respect to the supply and development of knowledge, including the knowledge agenda of the Department for Cultural Heritage [Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed];

- a more aware and focused operation of the national government with respect to cultural heritage sites in its role as a principal, spatial planning investor and property owner;

- clarity about the agenda of the national government as a collaborative partner and the promotion of a complemen-tary deployment of governments.

The formulation of an inspiring reference framework for region-oriented heritage management contributes to:

- the preservation of the legibility and experience of the cultural genesis of the Netherlands by generating attention for the task of preserving and developing distinct regions, structures and properties as a whole;

- more effective region-oriented cooperation between different governments and between different spatial planning sectors.

Private initiative and public matterCultural heritage is a matter for people. People from the past, people in the present, people in the future. The essence of the preservation of cultural heritage lies in its careful transfer from one generation to another. We want to pass on the valuable culture that was left to us – or that is a product of our own time – to future generations in a good condition. Making this transfer possible in the future requires that we take proper care of this heritage today.

In many cases we can confidently entrust this care to the current owners and users. They know the heritage site the best and they love it. They also know better than anyone what is needed to shepherd a distinctive building or area through the present time. It is in their own interest to combine present use with sustainable preservation.

But leaving this care to citizens, private managers and companies is not always possible. Some heritage tasks lie beyond the benefit, the interests, the support or the knowledge of owners and users. When public interests or responsibilities come into play, the government enters the scene. The role of government supplements the role of owners and private initiators. The system of preserving national heritage sites in the Netherlands is based on this public-private interaction.

Aware that public interests are at play which require an attentive and supportive government, the Cabinet stressed in the coalition agreement that the preservation of our cultural heritage is and remains the responsibility of government. In fulfilling this responsibility, the Cabinet focuses on the cultural, social and economic value of the heritage site.

Embedding the preservation of our heritage in spatial planning

An important cornerstone of the modernised preservation of national heritage sites is embedding the preservation of cultural heritage in spatial planning. This embedment is necessary to ensure the careful handling of the heritage site within the rapid and far-reaching changes occurring to the layout of city and countryside.

The embedment of cultural heritage in spatial planning requires two things. Firstly, the interest of the cultural heritage site should be fully a part of the equation in the integral consideration of interests that takes place in order that the space in question can function properly. Secondly, we need to identify cultural heritage sites that have special significance, in order to take them into account in spatial plans and development processes.

The general guarantee in the processes of spatial considerations is strengthened by the revision of the Spatial Planning Decree ([Besluit Ruimtelijke Ordening], Art. 3.1.6.). When drafting a zoning scheme, project decision or management regulation, the government is required to take cultural-historical values in and above the ground into consideration.1 This means that they make an analysis of the cultural-historical values in a planning area and then substantiate the conclusions they arrive at with regard to the plan.2

The designation of valuable heritage means that governments make clear what cultural-historical values they find to be in the public interest. The instrument of spatial planning vision (Spatial Planning Act [Wet Ruimtelijke Ordening]) is suitable to reinforce the sectoral set of instruments used to preserve national heritage sites. In a spatial planning vision, region-oriented heritage values can be identified and choices can be made concerning how these values are handled in relation to other spatial planning interests. General rules can be established for

1 This concerns an extension of the extant obligation with respect to archaeology.

2 De Handreiking Erfgoed en Ruimte (www.cultureelerfgoed.nl/handreikingerfgoedenruimte) provides information on different possibilities for doing this.



8 29Character in FocusVision for Heritage and Spatial Planning

Demarcation: heritage sites at all scale levels

This policy vision is focused on heritage sites. For this type of heritage, the public issue is primarily a spatial planning question: how should the heritage site be handled in relation to other spatial planning interests and changes? Geographically, Dutch territory is the physical demarcation. This demarcation is primarily dictated by the administrative borders, not by the content of the cultural history, which extends beyond national borders. Besides, the current nation state only took on any significance in recent history.

For the Caribbean territories of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the significance of the vision differs from its significance for the rest of the Netherlands. The (legal) systems from which this vision ensues do not, or not all, have jurisdiction on the Caribbean islands. This does not alter the fact that the history of the overseas territories is a part of the history of the Netherlands and the region-oriented heritage management on the islands is also a responsibility of the State. For this reason, concise attention is given to the Netherlands’ Caribbean territories in this vision.


Kiezen voor karakterVisie erfgoed en ruimte

10 11Kiezen voor karakterVisie erfgoed en ruimte



1The Noordoostpolder [North-East Polder], an example of a modern large-scale polder with a rational system of land division. This polder was created within the framework of the Zuiderzeewerken [Zuider Zee works] (Plan Lely). The polder was dry in 1942. Most of the farm buildings with their characteristic prefab-concrete barns were built (soon) after World War II. Running through the middle of the photo is the Johannes Postweg, crossed by the A6 motorway; at the upper right on the horizon is the village of Nagele.Photo: 30-06-2011Municipality of Noordoostpolder, province of Flevoland

2Beltrum; the countryside landscape in the vicinity of Beltrum, a village in the National Landscape of the Achterhoek. The appearance of the current landscape around the village is the result of the land consolidations that were carried out in the 1950s according to the design of landscape architect Harry de Vroome.Photo: 30-06-2011Municipality of Berkelland, province of Gelderland

3Maastricht city centre, the heart of one of the oldest cities in the Netherlands; the layered result of a continual process of transformation from new build and renovation, demolition and restoration.The Basilica of Saint Servatius and Saint John’s Church (with red tower), in addition to being important relics of our religious heritage, are also the product of a series of large-scale restorations. The Vrijthof square was given a large underground parking garage many years ago and the Generaalhuis took on a new life as a Theatre.Photo: 15-11-2010Municipality of Maastricht, province of Limburg

4The district of Roombeek as it appeared after it was rebuilt following the fireworks disaster in 2000 (S.E. Fireworks). An overview of the district with, running diagonally from left to right, the Lonnekerspoorlaan and above it, in grey, the contours of the former Tollens-straat with the remains of foundations, the heart of the disaster. Characteristic of the redevelopment are the large participation of residents and the space provided for private initiative.Photo: 30-06-2011Municipality of Enschede, province of Overijssel

5The Blauwe Stad in the parcelled land in Groningen. The still undeveloped peninsulas of the ‘Het Riet’ district adjacent to the villages of Oostwold and Finsterwolde (right), with Eems and Dollard on the horizon. The Blue City project was launched in 2004 to give the region of North-East Groningen a new economic boost.Photo: 08-09-2009Municipality of Oldambt, province of Groningen

6The Bijlmermeer G-neighbourhood (in the vicinity of Ganzenhoef) with the two remaining honeycomb blocks of flats: Geldershoofd and Gravestein. The other high-rise flat complexes have been demol-ished and made way for apartment complexes and single-family homes. At the upper left, the Bijlmerdreef is visible.Photo: 17-06-2008Amsterdam Zuidoost, municipality of Amsterdam, province of North Holland

7Wind turbine park in Emmapolder, with the Eemspolder at far left and the eight-sided polder windmill De Goliath (built in 1897) in the fore-ground. In the background is the Wadden Sea with the Uithuizerwad and, on the horizon, the islands of Rottumeroog and Borkum. The energy park of the power company Essent is the largest wind turbine park in the Netherlands.Photo: 08-09-2009Municipality of Eemsmond, province of Groningen

8Oosterscheldekering, the storm surge barrier in the Oosterschelde between Noord-Beverland and Schouwen (upper left); placed in operation on 4 October 1986. At the bottom of the photo is the outer harbour of the artificial island of Neeltje Jans, with the control building ir. J.W. Topshuis. In the middle: the Schaar sluice, the artificial island of Roggenplaat and the Hammen sluice. Photo: 12-06-2009Oosterschelde, province of Zeeland

Photo captions


Demarcation: heritage sites at all scale levels

This policy vision is focused on heritage sites. For this type of heritage, the public issue is primarily a spatial planning question: how should the heritage site be handled in relation to other spatial planning interests and changes? Geographically, Dutch territory is the physical demarcation. This demarcation is primarily dictated by the administrative borders, not by the content of the cultural history, which extends beyond national borders. Besides, the current nation state only took on any significance in recent history.

For the Caribbean territories of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the significance of the vision differs from its significance for the rest of the Netherlands. The (legal) systems from which this vision ensues do not, or not all, have jurisdiction on the Caribbean islands. This does not alter the fact that the history of the overseas territories is a part of the history of the Netherlands and the region-oriented heritage management on the islands is also a responsibility of the State. For this reason, concise attention is given to the Netherlands’ Caribbean territories in this vision.



30 312. Vision2.1 Region-oriented focus: the character of the Netherlands

Region-oriented heritage management requires a broader outlook, with greater distance from individual heritage sites and structures. For the Netherlands as a whole, this outlook can be guided by four specific characteristics: land of abundant water, land of towns and cities, land of lots and land of freedom. These char-acteristics form an inspiring guideline for both the description of the country’s history of spatial develop-ment and for clarifying the cultural spatial planning challenges in the future.

2. Vision

2.1 Region-oriented focus: the character of the Netherlands

32 33

A broad outlookHistory does not occupy a demarcated space. We cannot draw lines on a map or in the field to mark the place where history ends and the present begins. The past cannot ever be a destination. At the same time, in the Netherlands there is no space that doesn’t have a cultural history. The country is leavened through and through with its cultural past. This is not a burden, but a benefit. This historical character is, after all, very valuable for Dutch society: a unique selling point for the economy and tourism, a rich reference point promoting social cohesion and identity, and an inexhaustible source for our cultural development.

The transition to a development-oriented and region-oriented preservation of heritage needs direction. And we will not find the right direction by focusing only on the best bits of cultural history. We need to broaden the perspective on the preservation of heritage sites. In space – by pointing to the valuable cultural history of regions and, more specifically, to the significance of historical properties and structures. And in time – by zooming in on the developmental history, the cultural biography, rather than merely taking care of those pieces which are most valued by our own generation.

The physical living environment provides opportunities to pose questions about the individual character of Dutch culture in a convincing and relaxed manner. The reality of spatial planning makes it immediately clear that a one-dimensional characterisation of the Netherlands will not suffice. This is not about sticking on our national identity for all to see. It is about the continual (re)vitalisation of the cultural character of the Netherlands, about keeping the soul of our country alive. And about the need to make clear choices with respect to certain development issues.

CharacterisingHowever, merely zooming out in space and time will not bring us to a (shared) agenda of priority tasks. For this we need a new focus – from a broader outlook. One way to achieve this is to refrain at the outset from assessing and instead concentrate (first) on characterising: summarising the distinctive details of a region to create an integrated picture. Looking for the most distinct and attractive characteristics in our culture of building and designing land, characteristics that have led to a landscape that we value and whose history people will want to continue reading. Taking a good look and deciding which historical characteristics deserve our special attention in the social and spatial planning developments that we are to encounter.

To do this for the Netherlands as a whole is no sinecure. Yet we are willing to take up the challenge because there seems to be fairly broad agreement in the country about what the specific character traits of the Netherlands are. We are not seeking to define the ‘true nature’ of the Netherlands, but rather to present a widely supported image of the special spatial character of the Netherlands – an image we can use as a reference point for the consideration, analysis and definition of cultural-spatial issues from a national perspective.

This vision is focused on the part of that area that, for nearly two centuries, we have called the Netherlands. This definition for the characterisation is, at one and the same time, both relevant and irrelevant. Irrelevant because many characteristics of the country and its people do not abruptly change at the national border and the ‘formation of character’ in past centuries is not even remotely related to current national borders. Relevant because the residents of the current nation state and their predecessors do and have done some things very differently from their neighbours.

The Netherlands in four characteristics

The exciting, complex relationship between order and variation is seen as the core of the Dutch landscape’s great attractiveness. The native urge for planning and organisation, brought on in part by physical circumstances, and the need to utilise the scarce space to the full have, in combination with particular regional preferences and never-ceasing creativity, led to an enormous variation in the physical landscape. Unity in diversity was not only the motto for our decentralised uniform state, it is also the result of our interventions in the realm of spatial planning.

Yet this character sketch is still too general. Within the complex, subtle and varied order that typifies the Netherlands, four characteristics can be discerned that have resulted from a cultural history that is unprecedented in its richness and which still determines the appearance of the country: the ever-present water that is restrained and utilised, the great density of strong, relatively small cities, the extremely intensive use of the landscape and the traces of free trade and political, religious and civil autonomy. These are four characteristics that are inextricably linked together. At the same time, they each have a special story to tell about life in the North-West European delta. These four characteristics represent a long history of human intervention in the living environment, with early manifestations that go back to prehistory.

These characteristics are described separately in the pages to follow. Each characteristic is considered from the perspectives of the past and the future. The cultural-historical character sketch describes why the distinctive feature in question has become so defining for the character of the Netherlands and in what physical spatial characteristics it is most clearly seen. A look is then taken at the cultural spatial planning issues that will come into play in the further development of these typical characteristics in the future.

2. Vision2.1 Region-oriented focus: the character of the Netherlands


34 35

Land of abundant water Cultural-historical character sketchIn all of the world’s delta regions, the inhab-itants that put down roots in these areas have had to cope with the capricious nature of water. But there are few regions outside the Netherlands where living with water has had such a strong influence on the nature of the land and its people. Through the centuries, the Dutch have not only defended themselves against the water, they have also profited from it in the obvious ways. There has always been an innovative interplay between the inhabitants of the Low Countries and water. For them, water became the source of administrative organisation, technological advancement and economic expansion.

The profound and creative link with water has left its clear trace in the design of our country. Making the most out of a difficult situation in the delta brought us dikes, land reclamation and delta works. Terps, boat canals and waterlinies, strips of land flooded as a natural defence. Landscapes of streams, windmills, harbours and mercantile cities. And hidden underneath were submerged villages, covered landscapes and the remains of a rich maritime tradition.

Cultural-spatial development taskIn the 21st century, as well, the struggle with water remains one of the most important spatial planning challenges. The water system does not lend itself to lingering over a rich history. We cannot compromise on water safety. In the face of predicted climate change and the enormous economic value that now lies below sea level in the Netherlands, the challenge to master the water is bigger than ever.

Upgrading the water management system generally takes place in the same locations where the valuable historical examples of water management have proven and continue to prove their worth. Merely maintaining the system will not suffice. We need to apply development strategies that do justice to the past as much as possible.

Land of towns and cities Cultural-historical character sketchThe density of historical cities in the Netherlands is unprecedented. After a long history of living in (fortified) settlements, a pattern of small and mid-sized cities developed at a rapid pace starting in the late Middle Ages. Distances between them were short and they maintained an intensive relationship with the surrounding countryside. In all parts of the country, distinctive cities developed in different phases of history. A number of them have become world famous – in some part due to our artists and cheeses. Most Dutch cities are beautiful display pieces of history in which time can be traced along a long timeline, from the oldest archaeological vestiges, via expressions of our typical civil culture, to the 20th century’s large-scale, planned urban expansions.

Behind the creation of this close-knit urban pattern lies a set of (a)biotic, geographic, economic and military motives. When, due to the explosive growth in the population and prosperity following World War II, the preservation of this ‘small town character’ was no longer a matter of course, so it became a part of conscious government policy. The suburbanisation, from the centres of urban growth in the 1960s to vinex districts and the consolidation policy, was guided so that towns and cities did not grow into each other and thus were able to retain their individual character and relationship with the green countryside. At the same time, there was a strong focus on the liveability of cities, ranging from urban renewal projects to urban districts of special attention.

Cultural-spatial development taskFor several years now, more than half of the world’s population has lived in cities and this percentage will continue to increase. Although this trend in many (young) urban regions is coupled with an enormous urban expansion, in the Netherlands a deviation from the trend is predicted – a transition from a long post-war period of explosive urban expansion to a period in which urban expansion in open areas within the confines of existing city limits and restructuring will predominate.

The Dutch population is also growing less rapidly than was the case in the last few generations. In combination with the trend towards urban concentration, especially in the 4-city conurbation of the western Netherlands, this means that the population will decrease in the coming decades in large parts of the country. The challenge facing us is to keep the habitation and urbanisation history of the Netherlands recognisable and liveable within all urban transformations, to include cultural-historical values and development potential in the regional development, and to take due care in the consideration of heritage of national significance in the event of urban compaction and population decrease.



36 37

Land of lots Cultural-historical character sketchThe fact that not a square metre of space in the Netherlands is left unutilised is now almost proverbial. The intensity of land use is high and the unceasing capacity of the Dutch to reclaim and cultivate land to guarantee their survival has determined the shape of the landscape to a high degree. Over thousands of years, the inhabitants of the Low Countries have successfully been able to subdue and cultivate the land on an increasing scale and with increasing intensity and, as a result, to achieve ever higher levels of agricultural production and power generation. Ever since we could afford to, recreation and nature management pursuits have been added as landscape-forming forces – from country estates to recreational forests, from the Naardermeer nature reserve to the National Ecological Network.

The intensive use of land, in its confront-ation with differences in geomorphologic, cultural and economic circumstances, has led to an exceptional diversity of cultural landscapes, in both high and low lying regions of the Netherlands.

Cultural-spatial planning development taskThe living landscapes of the Netherlands will once again undergo changes under the influence of the challenges facing us with respect to food production, energy, biodiversity, housing, water management, infrastructure and recreation. Although the period of large-scale ‘deforestation’ and urbanisation of the cultural landscape is behind us, over the coming decades large transformations in the countryside can be expected. They form new challenges for a character-building development of the historical cultural landscape. Developments in the areas of nature and water are also just as relevant as developments in urban development and infrastructure. Relevant as threats, but also as opportunities for regional development with a view to maintaining the historical character of a region.

Viewing the landscape as our cultural heritage, as a part of our own history, can contribute to greater appreciation of the landscape. Indirectly, this could possibly serve to throw light on the challenges we face with respect to funding, preservation and management via an increased feeling of ownership and connection.

Land of freedom Cultural-historical character sketchFreedom is in the Dutch blood. Of course, every country has its own heroic and mythic stories about successful resistance to foreign tyranny. And many peoples see themselves as stubborn, independent and non-conformist. But the Netherlands has a right to speak. Pragmatic actions (simply doing) and Calvinistic restraint (keeping a staid bearing) on the part of free farmers, citizens and country people form a definite undercurrent in our history. And this often resulted in trend-setting expressions of freedom on the world stage: free thinkers such as Erasmus and Spinoza, an early model of a free democracy (the Dutch Republic) and an active promotion of free markets and civil rights.

Yet freedom in our history has not always pertained to each and every person’s freedom: it is a history of inclusion and exclusion, of tolerance and repression, of (colonial) expan-sion and regression.

The struggle for (religious) freedom, the expression and channelling of differences, the benefit of an open attitude towards the world and the space for personal and regional preferences, all have left their physical traces in the Netherlands. They are visible in both the countless small variations in spatial use that are the result of individual choices, and in the large gestures that are the result of collective efforts in the service of trade, religion and land defence. They have brought us cloisters and churches, town halls and palaces, trade routes

and industrial landscapes, villas and recreation resorts, patterns of borders, fortifications and devastation and a unique collection of (segregated) collective buildings and facilities.

Cultural-spatial development taskThe formulation of a character-building development task for the ‘land of freedom’ includes something contradictory. At first glance, doing nothing and granting freedom seem to be the best recipe for developing this characteristic. But this is deceptive. The ‘large gestures’ require an active approach to retain something of the historical character. The considerable changes in society over the last half century in social-cultural, economic and technological respects have made many of the religious, military, industrial and institutional heritage sites seem very much like objects from a different era, in a figurative sense as well. The loss of their primary function has made the economic support for these sites disappear. Making space for new functions through rezoning and redevelopment is often the only way to preserve these heritage sites in a sustainable manner.

The further development of this characteristic also requires the will, in respect of new developments, to make the layout of the Netherlands conform to Dutch heritage. The proven skill to combine functionality and attractiveness should, towards that end, be given space and attention in public, private and individual spatial planning interventions.

Caribbean territories of the NetherlandsSince 10-10-2010, the islands of Saba, St. Eustatius and Bonaire have been public bodies and constituent parts of the Nether-lands. Geographically and physically, these islands differ vastly from native Dutch territory. And of course they have a respect-able history that predates the time when the Dutch set foot on their shores for the first time. Still, the history of these islands’ development contains sufficient ties with the Dutch mother country to make it interesting to look at these regions from the perspectives of the four characteristics. St. Eustatius, for example, has a history in which all of these characteristics come together at a micro level. The Netherlands as a land of freedom has a special significance here. As the headquarters of the West India Company, the island was for decades a gold coast, i.e. a linchpin in the slave trade. The Netherlands as a land of lots can still be seen in the typical plantations, with their main houses, the slave villages and even the graveyards. The Netherlands as a land of towns and cities is expressed in the capital city of Oranjestad and on the waterfront, where dozens of storehouses were built with IJssel stone brought from the Netherlands.

Saba is an island with a very different character. This island has no flat areas; it is a rock with a number of small settlements on top of it. Saba is surrounded by dozens of shipwrecks. Bonaire is the smallest of the three A-B-C islands. The influence of the Netherlands can be found in the layout and structure of Rincon, a mix of local influences and urban architecture principals from the Netherlands. Bonaire especially stands out because of its treasures of both natural and maritime heritage under the water.

The Cabinet placed Bonaire Marine Park and the island of Saba on the Provisional list of World Heritage Sites. Of the three islands, St. Eustatius is the most vulnerable. It has a lot of undeveloped area in relative terms, where large archaeological and scenic treasures can be found, while the pressure on the available space is considerable. With respect to supervising/leading spatial plan-ning processes and cultural-historical preservation tasks in the Caribbean territories of the Netherlands, the national government should therefore give priority to this island.




38 392. Vision2.2 Working with a region orientation: from collection to connection

A region-oriented approach to the heritage site requires the ‘big picture’ of characteristics to be translated into effective strategies for development and preservation. This can be done by tying the heritage tasks to tasks from other sectors and by exploiting the economic, social-cultural and ecological strengths of the heritage site better.

2. Vision

2.2 Working with a region orientation: from collection to connection

40 41

From collection to connectionCharacteristics as such cannot be protected like heritage sites. They are too all-encompassing and too diffuse. They are character traits that continue to develop, not ‘component parts’ that can be properly cared for individually. However, they do provide a ‘mental map’ with which we can determine which efforts of the national government and others are necessary to keep the Netherlands full of character and recognisable. They form a guideline for the preservation of time depth, the legibility of the history of development and a link between the cultural history, the current spatial character and the future spatial (design) challenges.

To be able to link a perspective on action to the characteristics, we must also scrutinise the nature of the future management of that heritage site. This will provide ways to find an approach to the cultural-spatial tasks sketched in 2.1.

The essence of the shift that is necessary to achieve effective region-oriented heritage management can be summarised by the motto ‘from collection to connection’. The success of the region-oriented preservation is not primarily determined by the question of to what extent we are successful in identifying and protecting a collection of valuable properties and structures, but rather by the question of to what extent we are successful in connecting heritage preservation tasks with other spatial planning tasks, other parties and other stories.

Connecting with profit, people, planetFor a strategy to connect heritage preservation tasks with other social interests and tasks, the trio of people-planet-profit provides a good framework. It makes it clear that, for a sustain-able region-oriented approach to heritage preservation, strengthened attention for the economic, social-cultural and ecological aspects is indispensable.

1. Profit: investing in the creation of valueAll cultural heritage was originally produced because people found it to be valuable. Their reasons were varied: from putting bread on the table and a roof over their heads to purely ceremonial functions and a wish to enrich life with beauty. So the future of the heritage lies in creating value. Without value creation there is no sustainable basis for preserving heritage and we will let opportunities go by to increase the economic profit of having this ‘gold in our hands’. For region-oriented development, this means that the focus should not only be on preserving values, but also on investing in new forms of appreciation. By seeking the connection with new public and private functions, and by expending a far greater effort to show off the beauty we have going for us.

It is all about connecting heritage preservation tasks to other development and investment tasks. It is about increasing the chances of a positive impact on (regional) development strength and the effective spending of (public) resources.

2. People: giving space to ordinary citizensHeritage belongs to everyone. How we deal with it in urban and rural transformation processes can therefore never be entirely determined by governments and experts. Public interest and value recognition always exist next to private interests and significance. This means two things for the government. Firstly, it means that in the integral spatial planning assessment process all relevant interests and opinions are given a voice. This requires transparent procedures, well-reasoned decisions and the active involvement of citizens in the consideration of interests. Secondly, it requires governments to refrain from advancing values from on high. A living culture profits from debates about values, quarrels about tastes and space for personal interpretation. Identifying (or even consciously not identifying) cultural significances is the shared domain of citizens, companies, interest groups and governments, which none of these parties can appropriate for themselves.

3. Planet: utilising and influencing sustainability issues

The preservation of cultural heritage is a sustainability issue. It is a part of our ambition to leave a liveable planet to future generations. Heritage issues are not yet linked with other sustainability issues as a matter of course. As a result, opportunities are missed to increase the significance of cultural history with respect to challenges in the fields of biodiversity, climate, energy and water – and vice versa. Nature rehabilitation, water management, energy transition and the preservation of heritage are certainly not always parallel interests. However, a lot can be achieved when the sectors involved make the possible synergy between their interests a priority. The desirability of gradual, well-considered spatial planning changes and a sustainable economic foundation under its management can serve as a connecting perspective in this effort.

2. Vision2.2 Working with a region orientation: from collection to connection

2. Vision2.2 Working with a region orientation: from collection to connection


42 432. Vision2.3 Region-oriented heritage management: who does what?

The changes in the preservation of heritage sites and in spatial planning give citizens and businesses greater space and bestow greater freedom and responsibilities upon local governments. Every layer of government faces the challenge of making its interests and prefer-ences known in advance as much as possible and, where necessary, securing them with rules. The national government, for its part, is responsible for ensuring the system functions properly. Provincial authorities are given a central role in the region-oriented consideration of interests. Municipalities connect consequences to a region-oriented analysis of heritage values in the draft-ing of spatial planning schemes.

Clear and simpleRegion-oriented preservation of heritage consists of guarding the public interest with respect to the cultural heritage within an integral spatial planning assessment. For this, two legal systems are important: the heritage site system and the spatial planning system. Both systems were recently modernised. The changes are aimed at serving citizens and businesses better and at improving the collaboration between different levels of government. Shorter procedures, simpler rules and greater clarity about what the government sees as important and what level of administration is responsible for what.

These changes will benefit the relationship between government and citizens. The government will back off to some extent and will give citizens and businesses more space, also in dealing with cultural heritage. At the same time, the government is clear about what public heritage interests it will actively monitor and what instruments it will use for this task. This clarity has several advantages. It will benefit owners and initiators because these interests can be assessed early on. And it makes it clear to citizens what heritage interests the government will champion and what interests they themselves will have to champion (if they so choose).

Collaboration between governmentsIn addition to government as a whole stepping back in some measure, the division of tasks between the different levels of government will also change. Securing cultural history via the formation of spatial planning requires each level of government to use its cultural history policy expertise in the service of developing and securing this vision at the front end of spatial planning processes – in a spatial planning vision, for instance. A special responsibility is also borne by the person who drafts the zoning plan. According to the amended Spatial Planning Decree (Art. 3.1.6), he is required to include in the notes to the zoning plan a description of the manner in which consideration is given to the cultural history values present in the region and the heritages sites present or expected in the ground.

The division of tasks between the provincial and municipal governments is a matter – within the frameworks of the law and the Administrative Agreement [Bestuursakkoord] – for these governments. The Monument and Historic Buildings Act [Monumentenwet] and the Spatial Planning Act/Spatial Planning Decree [Wro/Bro] provide the necessary scope for this division. In the region-oriented development of its priorities, the national government will

2. Vision

2.3 Region-oriented heritage management: who does what?

44 45

- management role in cross-municipality heritage tasks

- designation of archaeological attention areas

- supporting municipalities with knowledge and facilities (shared responsibility with national government)

By virtue of the National Monuments and Historical Buildings Act, the provincial governments have a responsibility with respect to archaeology. They are authorised to designate archaeological attention areas and have a repository function to fulfil.

MunicipalitiesAs the local government, the municipal government has the legal duty of supervising spatial development locally with spatial planning visions and zoning schemes. By virtue of the National Monuments and Historical Buildings Act, the municipal governments bear responsibilities to provide advice for the designation of national heritage sites and protected cityscapes or villagescapes, in granting permits (Wabo), setting up a heritage site commission, establishing protective zoning plans for designated cityscapes and villagescapes and various tasks and responsibilities with respect to archaeological heritage site preservation. Municipal governments therefore have the following responsibilities with respect to region-oriented heritage management:

- integral assessment of interests (core task of spatial planning)

- promoting the interests of heritage in this (cultural heritage in municipal spatial planning vision, zoning scheme and (management) regulations)

Municipal governments can strengthen their contribution to region-oriented heritage management by:

- promoting national and provincial interests in shared management;

- making region-oriented/thematic choices with respect to effective collaboration with both the provincial and national governments;

- participation in cross-municipal tasks;- integrating heritage tasks into their own

regional development processes.

District water boardsBy virtue of the Water Authorities Act [Waterschapswet] and the new Water Act [Waterwet], the district water boards bear integral responsibility for water, in respect of both water quantity and quality management. The district water boards are the owners and managers of a large number of valuable cultural-historical properties (e.g. pumping stations, windmills, sluices) as well as the keepers of the closely knit circulation system of our landscape: the water infrastructure. This infrastructure is often a main feature in the history of land reclamation in the different regions and is therefore important from a cultural history perspective. In both local and supra-local regional developments, the district water boards oversee – either as the prime mover or as party involved – the water and water-related interests such as ecology, biodiversity, cultural history and economics.

District water boards can make a contribution to region-oriented heritage management by:

- promoting the cultural-historical interests of the relationship between regional water management and the landscape;

- making region-oriented/thematic choices with respect to an effective collaboration with municipal, provincial and national governments in cultural-spatial planning tasks related to the interests of water;

- participating in shared municipal and provincial government tasks;

- integrating heritage preservation tasks in their own regional development processes;

- assessing the cultural-historical interests in applying the Water Test [Watertoets].

continually consider which other government levels should and wish to be involved.

Based on the inter-governmental division of tasks as set down in the Administrative Agreement, the National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning [Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte] and the Policy Paper on reforming the preservation of heritage sites [Beleidsbrief modernisering Monumentenzorg], the tasks, roles and responsibilities involved in the region-oriented preservation of heritage have been divided as follows.

National governmentThe national government is and remains responsible for properly functioning systems of spatial planning and heritage site preservation. As the legislator, the national government has the task of keeping these systems up to date by updating them at fixed times, guided by changing circumstances. This was done recently in respect of both the spatial planning and the preservation of heritage sites. Based on this update, the current Cabinet will further simplify the legal systems (Eenvoudig Beter [Simply Better]; revision of law governing physical surroundings).

The national government also has a responsibility to promote the national interests: unesco World Heritage (including the Provisional List of World Heritage Sites in the Netherlands), characteristic cityscapes and villagescapes, national heritage sites and maritime heritage. This responsibility will be met in different ways. In certain cases, the national government itself can take the initiative to realise desired developments (the Spatial Planning Act provides for this, e.g. through a land-use plan) or to arrange them directly (e.g. by an Order in Council, amvb). But in many cases, it is more efficient to ask or instruct other government levels to take responsibility for the promotion of these interests.

A third responsibility of the national government ensues from its role of initiator or land and property owner in spatial planning processes. As the owner and principal, the national government will decide how to pursue its own policy ambitions and give consideration to (region-oriented) policy priorities such as expressed in this Vision for Heritage and Spatial Planning. The national government will also make every effort to ensure a suitable use of the heritage sites in its possession in

a way that the creation of added social value and the strengthening of spatial quality are given top priority. The national government follows the National Government Protocol on Cultural Heritage for the National Government Property Services, associated with the National Government Property Council.

Fourthly, the national government has knowledge and expertise in the field of cultural heritage and how to handle it. The national government will share this knowledge and expertise with partners and promote the development of knowledge in this area.

From the perspective of this responsibility and understanding of its role, the national government will do the following:

- further simplify the legal systems;- provide clarity on the administrative

division of responsibilities for region-oriented heritage tasks (National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning, Order in Council and administrative agreements);

- specific facilitation of other governments for complex decentralised responsibilities, e.g. by co-funding, specific advice and knowledge development;

- good ownership and national government commissioning (rule framework and regional agenda mirt, protocol of national government property services, national government’s land-use plans);

- oversee the legislative system in the area of cultural heritage.

ProvincesThe provincial government occupies a central position in the domain of spatial development and the physical living environment. These are the core tasks of provincial governments and they are legally authorised in this domain. The province facilitates and coordinates in supra-local regional developments in which cultural heritage plays an important role.

With respect to region-oriented heritage management, the provincial governments have the following responsibilities:

- integral assessment of interests (core task of spatial planning)

- promoting the interests of heritage in this (cultural heritage in provincial spatial planning vision and regulations)

2. Vision2.3 Region-oriented heritage management: who does what?

2. Vision2.3 Region-oriented heritage management: who does what?

473. National government priorities for 2011–20153.1 Five priority tasks

46

For the coming years, the national government has chosen five priorities in its region-oriented heritage preservation policy:1 World heritage: guarantee cohesion, increase impact 2 Individual character and safety: sea, coast and rivers3 New use for sites as (urban) regional task: focus on

growth and population decrease4 Living landscape: synergy between heritage, economics,

ecology5 Reconstruction: putting an era on display

3. National government priorities for 2011–2015

3.1 Five priority tasks


48 49

1 World Heritage: guarantee cohesion, increase impact

National government priority on following grounds:

State responsibility for heritage of international interest.Strengthening the spatial-planning economic structure (attractive international tourism and business climate).Support of fellow authorities (knowledge and network development site holders of world heritage).

Within its borders, the Netherlands has a number of buildings and regions that the international community has declared to be of exceptional universal value. From an international perspective, they are ‘signboards’ for the cultural-historical character of the Netherlands. Following a recommendation by the Dutch State, unesco placed them on the World Heritage List. This noblesse carries its obligations: as a result of the ratification of the treaty concerning World Heritage, the Netherlands is required to ensure the protection, preservation (for future generations) and presentation of this cultural and natural heritage.

Pursuant to the treaty obligation to (continually) identify heritage of exceptional universal value, the Netherlands recently revised its Provisional List1 (see map of World Heritage, p. 82). From this list in the coming years, new sites will be nominated to be placed on the World Heritage List if, prior to this nomination, there is sufficient support and capacity for the preservation of the sites in the regions in question. Prior to placing sites on the list, unesco requires sufficient (planning for) protection.

The aim of the national government is to effectively protect the buildings and regions that have been placed on the World Heritage List or whose values have been identified as being of exceptional universal significance (the Provisional List), to present them to the current generation and preserve them for future generations. This will require using suitable instruments for protection (depending on the heritage site, via designation as a national heritage site, protected cityscape or villagescape, or guarantee via the Order in Council on infrastructure and spatial planning), sufficient financial instruments for preservation and more attention given to sustainable recreational and tourist access to the world heritage sites.

Instrument Development

Rules Guarantee of the cultural-historical values of the Defence Line of Amsterdam, Beemster, Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie and the Limes in the Order in Council on infrastructure and spatial planningProtection of other sites via the National Monuments and Historic Buildings Act as protected cityscapes or villagescapes or as national heritage siteGuaranteeing agreements laid down in the 3rd Memorandum on the Wadden Sea and the spatial protection of the Wadden Sea

Administrative agreements

Periodic updating of management plans by the involved governments in collaboration with the national governmentMonitoring preservation

Funding Priority for world heritage in the allocation of national resources for preservation and restoration Support umbrella organisation of world heritage managers Werelderfgoed.nl with the transformation to a professional network focused on knowledge exchange and public access

Knowledge Collaboration with National Department for Cultural Heritage in issues relevant to the preservation of world heritage sites

Against the background of the vision sketched in the previous chapters, the national government has chosen a number of regional tasks that will serve as a guide in the years to come for national government efforts with respect to region-oriented heritage management, both for its own actions and for cooperative agendas with other governments and private parties. With respect to these priorities, the characteristics of land of abundant water, land of cities and towns, land of lots and land of freedom have a twofold role. Firstly, these characteristics determine the scope for selecting the priority cultural-spatial development tasks in which the national government will play a role to strengthen the character of the Netherlands. Subsequently, they nourish a ‘broad outlook’ on the same tasks. Considering these (and other) heritage preservation tasks from the perspective of the characteristics naturally leads to a region-oriented and integral approach. The characteristics also shine light on these tasks from different perspectives, i.e., no one-to-one linking of characteristics and priorities. Such a link would always be undesirably restrictive, in view of the qualities of the characteristics (comprehensive, layered, overlapping geographically).

In choosing the priorities, three factors are therefore decisive. They concern tasks that:

1. are essential for preserving and developing the character of the Netherlands (land of abundant water, land of cities and towns, land of lots, land of freedom);

2. call for a connecting strategy with other interests and a strengthening of the economic, ecological and/or social-cultural perspectives on the tasks.

3. require an effort on the part of the national government, based on the inter-governmental division of responsibilities in the preservation of heritage sites and spatial planning.

In order to assess whether this effort by the national government is necessary and legitimate, attention was given to the following:

- are there (inter)national responsibilities, spatial and/or heritage interests at play?

- is the task important for the goals of the national spatial planning policy (see box)?

- do fellow authorities need rules, direction (e.g. with cross-provincial tasks) and/or support to promote these interests properly?

- does the national government itself have possibilities for making connections, e.g. as a principal or owner?

For each of the following priorities, concise reasons are stated why the national government is giving it precedence.

National spatial planning policyThe national government aims to make the Netherlands liveable, accessible and safe. Based on the developments and ambition for 2040, the main objectives of the spatial planning and mobility policy for the medium term (2020-2028) are:

- to strengthen the spatial-economic structure of the Netherlands;

- to improve, preserve and spatially guarantee its accessibility;

- to guarantee a safe, healthy and climate-proof living environment in which unique natural and cultural-historical values are preserved.

To achieve these goals, a number interests are named in the National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning for which the national government will take responsibility: the cultural and natural unesco World Heritage, characteristic cityscapes and villagescapes, national heritage sites and the maritime heritage (Appendices, pp. 80-85).

1 Reference to House of Representatives paper on provisional world heritage list 2010-2011, 32725



50 51

3 New use for sites as (urban) regional task: focus on growth and population decrease


Urgent tasks surrounding heritage of national importance: national heritage sites and protected landscapes.Support of fellow authorities: development and dissemination of (innovative) knowledge of region-oriented focus on rezoning and transformation.Strengthening spatial economic structure: transformation of characteristic regions/locations in top economic regions.

The Netherlands has highly dynamic urban functions. Coupled with social trends such as secularisation, individualisation and the development of a service economy, these lead to the considerable problem of new use for sites2 in respect of constructed cultural heritage. Large regional differences exist in the nature and scope of this transformation challenge. The large urban areas with quantitative and qualitative growth must make comparative assessments between space for housing, work and mobility and a sufficient quality of life (including facilities, green areas and cultural amenities). Cultural heritage plays a role in this that should not be underestimated. The presence of a historical city centre (measured by the number of national heritage sites) is one of the urban amenities that makes a living environment appealing and the urban environment attractive for the highly educated people that are necessary for a creative and innovative economy.3

In the regions that are confronted with decreases in population, qualitative loss of function resulting from changing social preferences is aggravated by a declining support for the use and preservation of buildings and sites as such. The impact of secularisation, an ageing population and migration to the cities is even greater if the population as a whole is also shrinking. This means that the regions with decreasing populations will become pioneering regions with respect to new uses for sites and the unorthodox choices that consequently might be unavoidable. A region-oriented approach is necessary to connect the scarce demand for space with the preservation of valuable and characteristic heritage.

The objective of the national government is to increase the anticipative, cooperative and performance capacity of public and private parties for a region-oriented effort in the area of new uses for sites. The focus lies, on the one hand, on increasing the attractiveness of top economic areas with the help of public and private investments in the new use of cultural heritage sites: preserving the character of the historical city centres, improving their accessibility, promoting (international) crowd-pulling heritage and investing in image-defining locations targeted for new use and redevelopment. On the other hand, the focus lies on the development of region-oriented strategies for new uses of valuable heritage sites (monuments, listed buildings, protected cityscapes and villagescapes, valuable cultural landscapes) in regions whose populations are decreasing. Special attention will be given to regions with a regional concentration of new use challenges.


Rules General: Monuments and Historic Buildings Act and Spatial Planning DecreeSocial Economic Council (ser) ladder (via change in Spatial Planning Office)


To be determined more specifically within the framework of the cooperation agenda with provinces and large cities/heritage site municipalities

Funding Priority of image-defining new use challenges in high-priority economic regions and regions with decreasing populations, within the set of financial instruments of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science for new use of sites

Knowledge National programme for new use for sitesPilot region-oriented heritage preservation & population decreaseBiennial new use for sitesParticipation of National Department of Cultural Heritage in the National Network on Population Decrease

2 Individual character & safety: sea, coast and rivers


The national government, as principal and owner: ensures the proper handling of cultural-historical values within national government projects/programmes in respect of management and strengthening of main water system/primary dams and dikes. Support of fellow authorities: vision development for overlapping municipal and provincial tasks.

In the National Water Plan and the Delta Programme, the national government has indicated where the most important water challenges lie for the coming decades in the pursuit to keep the Netherlands safe and attractive. From a cultural perspective, three regions should be given priority in the coming years: the North Sea, the coast and large rivers. These spacious, very dynamic regions also have an unmistakeable national character as cultural issues. The North Sea because of its size and the unique responsibility of the national government; the large rivers and the coast as line/strip shaped structures that connect the areas of a number of provinces. The IJsselmeer Dam [Afsluitdijk] serves – at the juncture of the sea and the IJsselmeer – as a special part of the coastal defences.

With respect to both the coast and the large rivers, there are – in addition to water safety – development potentials in respect of other functions in which both opportunities for and threats to the cultural heritage can lie hidden. On the North Sea, the cultural-historical value is hidden on or in the seabed in the form of submerged landscapes and shipwrecks. From a cultural perspective, the spatial interventions that will take place in these areas are important for two reasons: they form the next step in a long, special history of water movement and water defence and they can entail a threat to or a reinforcement for the cultural-historical values present in these regions (archaeology, constructed heritage objects, hydraulic and military works, dikes and other landscape elements).

The objective of the national government is to strengthen the cultural character of the coastal strip and the large rivers and to position heritage well in the assessment of spatial planning interests on the North Sea. Interventions made in the interest of water safety and energy, and raw materials extraction are an expression of the primary function of these regions (control over the water). Emphasising the cultural character of these regions cannot stand in the way of these interventions, but it can bolster their sensitivity for the historical context and attention to the design quality of new interventions. Historical structures such as waterlinies (strips of land flooded as a natural defence), fortified defence lines, old dike cores, etc., are used to facilitate existing and new functions and, at the same time, to open up the historical character of the regions.


Rules National Water PlanDelta Programme (delta decisions)National Coast Framework [Nationaal Kader Kust]Spatial Planning Vision for the IJsselmeer DamGeneral: Monuments and Historic Buildings Act and Spatial Planning Decree


To be reviewed further in the context of the cooperation agenda

Funding Co-funding of (pilot) projects

Knowledge Pilot project Coast & Heritage with provincesCollaboration of National Department for Cultural Heritage and Delta Programme, especially for the sub-programmes Coast and RiversKnowledge development of archaeological expectations for the North Sea

2 Several categories of heritage are facing a strong decline in the support function of the building or complex. The new use issue is growing rapidly, particularly with regard to reli-gious, agricultural, military and industrial heritage. This task has been placed on the agenda of the Policy Paper on Modernising the Preservation of Heritage Sites [Beleidsbrief moderniser-ing monumentenzorg], which has since led to a broadly supported National programme / National agenda for new use (for sites).

3 Stad en land, Henri de Groot et.al, cpb special publication 89, Centraal Planbureau 2010.



5352

5 Reconstruction: putting an era on display


National interest: legal responsibility for region-oriented protection of heritage of national significance.Support of fellow authorities: development and dissemination of knowledge.

Since the designation of the first protected cityscape and villagescape in the 1960s, the region-oriented preservation of heritage sites has focused on regions that were designed, developed and organised before 1940. The time has now come to establish which regions from World War II and the Period of Reconstruction that followed (1940–1965) are of such cultural-historical importance that they need to be addressed with very great care.

The spatial developments that have taken place during this turbulent period of our history have substantially changed the character of the Netherlands. War damage and restoration, mass housing construction in the early post-war years and the revolution in the use of agricultural land, car use and mass tourism, societal pillarisation and the Cold War, the Flood Disaster and, in response to it, the first Delta Works. In the design and set up of urban and agricultural regions after the war, the standardisation of the building process, division of functions and a strong belief in manipulability were of paramount importance. As a result, this architecture, urban development and landscape development – though still relatively young – are already very much from a different era from today’s perspective, which as a cultural-historical phenomenon makes them especially interesting. The appreciation of the buildings and regions has not always been widely held, though in recent years (public) support has risen for the preservation of this heritage.

The objective of the national government is for the period 1940-1965 to remain recognisably present at the regional level in the future design of the Netherlands. Despite – or perhaps thanks to – massive and sometimes uncompromising developments, many idea-rich, innovative and unprecedented designs were realised during this period, both in urban rebuilding and expansion and in the redesign of the rural area and the creation of new land. The special characteristics of these regions deserve more public attention and the most exceptional regions merit public protection.


Rules Monuments and Historical Buildings Act for protected buildings and complexes

Administrative Performance agreements

Agreements with governments involved concerning legal-planning protection of the core qualities of 30 regions of national importance

Funding Research and planning costs budget for reconstruction regionsCo-funding of (pilot) projects

Knowledge Knowledge function of National Department for Cultural Heritage

4 Living landscape: strengthening synergy between heritage, economics and ecology


Contribution to national goals with respect to biodiversity, energy transition and the economy.National Government as principal and owner: vision development of handling heritage in large/complex landscape tasks. Support of fellow authorities: knowledge of the transformation of the cultural landscape as a cultural task.

The landscape strongly defines the character of the Netherlands and is therefore an essential part of our cultural heritage. Character-reinforcing development of this landscape encompasses all the features and complications of region-oriented heritage management: comprehensive and distinctive values that cannot be preserved by freezing or isolating them. Landscape management is the management of change. For the cultural landscape, it is supremely necessary to seek connections with other spatial planning tasks and to create value.

In rural areas there are important issues at play in the realms of economics and ecology. In the economic sense they concern strong economic regions and space for (agricultural) businesses, living and recreation. In the ecological sense the issues concern biodiversity, the quality of soil, water and air, climate adapta-tion and sustainable energy supply. The focus of the national governments lies on top economic regions, nature networks (revised National Ecological Network) and energy transition (wind energy is particularly relevant here).

The objective of the national government is to strengthen the synergy between (public and private) efforts that are focused on the national interests with respect to ecology, economics and cultural heritage. In view of the strong role played by provincial and municipal authorities with respect to both of these interests, intergovernmental cooperation is the only way to achieve this goal. The national government sees two roles for itself in this effort: to influence European (financial) frameworks (including the Common Agricultural Policy) and the targeted use of knowledge and attention to characteristic cultural-historical regions with a biodiversity or energy issue to be faced.


Rules New frameworks of Common Agricultural PolicySpatial Planning Vision for wind on land + Order in CouncilSpatial Planning Vision for subsoil + Order in Council


To be determined more specifically within the framework of the cooperation agenda

Funding Co-funding of (pilot) projects

Knowledge Knowledge function of National Department for Cultural Heritage




54 553. National government priorities 2011–20153.2 Realisation

3. National government priorities 2011–2015

3.2 Realisation Financial framework

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science will make financial resources available within its budget to fund a cooperation programme for heritage and spatial planning that is focused on five spearheads from this vision. Agreements will be reached with provincial and municipal governments and district water boards, if necessary, on the joint allocation of resources. The available resources come to 0.5 million euros for the year 2012 (start-up year) and 8 million euros per year for the years 2013 up to and including 2015. The allocation of resources will take place in the form of additions to provincial and/or municipal funds based on further administrative agreements, and via the set of subsidy instruments.


KnowledgeA successful region-oriented approach to heritage requires a nationwide knowledge infrastructure in which governments, planning offices and research centres, regional centres and heritage centres, social organisations and private parties each fulfil their own specific role and make their contribution according to their capacity.

Within this whole, the National Department for Cultural Heritage serves as a knowledge centre with wide-ranging knowledge about cultural heritage and the same expertise concerning the preservation and sustainable development of heritage. The development and sharing of knowledge is closely connected with the performance of legal tasks related to the selection and designation of protected heritage, advising and subsidies, and is given shape from the knowledge programmes of the National Department for Cultural Heritage.

In addition to the efforts already being expended by the National Department for Cultural Heritage and other parties, the Vision for Heritage and Spatial Planning calls for the development of a specific knowledge agenda that zooms in on the issues and questions that arise from the region-oriented approach, the characteristics and the spearheads from this vision. The national government wants to further develop this agenda in the coming period together with other partners within the overall knowledge infrastructure on the cutting edge of heritage preservation and spatial planning.

A focused cooperation agendaThe national government wants to come up with a specific cooperation agenda with other governments and private organisations in accordance with the aforementioned division of responsibilities and based on its own priorities as outlined in Chapter 3 of this vision. This agenda will consist of administrative agreements, regions/themes for the joint development of vision, the co-funding of (pilot) projects and knowledge facilities. The intergovernmental agreements will be made within the frameworks of the Administrative Agreement and in conjunction with other future agreements concerning, among other things, the division of heritage site funds, knowledge functions and spatial planning regional agendas. The discussions on the cooperation agenda will commence after the summer of 2011. In 2012, the joint programme will be defined and a number of pilot projects will be launched. The actual programme will start in 2013.

3. National government priorities 2011–20153.2 Realisation



1The commercial park of Zandhorst (Broekhornpolder), the transformation of the landscape of the Heerhugowaard Polder. On the second plan, squeezed between the buildings, the nature reserve of Oosterdel is visible. This water-rich peat marshland area is the remaining part of the Rijk der Duizend Eilanden [Realm of a Thousand Islands] and part of the National Ecological Network.Photo: 14-07-2008Broek op Langedijk, municipality of Langedijk, province of North Holland

2The Westerpark in Amsterdam, new municipal park created on the cleaned up and redeveloped terrain of the former gas plant the Westergasfabriek. The industrial heritage site has been given a new cultural function. In the middle is a close-up of the remaining gas tank. The ponds in the foreground mark the foun-dations of the other gas tanks that have been removed.Photo: 16-04-2008Westerpark, municipality of Amsterdam, province of North Holland

3Kleine Driene, a reconstructed district designed in the 1950s, with repeated clusters of building units [stempelverkaveling] made up of straight building blocks with abundant (public) green areas. The section Klein Driene II is the more modern section with concrete structures and flat roofs.Photo: 30-06-2011 Municipality of Hengelo, province of Overijssel.

4Kattenbroek, the new residential development designed by architect and urban developer Ashok Bhalotra, looking towards the north-east. Visible in the background are the Nieuwland district and the Zeldert polder. Photo: 30-06-2011Municipality of Amersfoort, province of Utrecht

5De Groote Peel National Park, a largely excavated high moorland area on the border between the provinces of Limburg and North Brabant, now a nature reserve with remains of high moor peat and high moor marshland. De Groote Peel (covering some 15 km²) is what remains of the Peel, a region that once must have been extremely impenetrable.Photo: 15-11-2010Municipality of Asten, province of North Brabant

6De Blauwe Kamer, nature reserve next to the Lower Rhine that was named after an old brickyard. The original summer dike was purposely breached to make natural development possible. This river-bank landscape is connected with the landscape of the Grebbeberg [Grebbe Mountain] in the Utrechtse Heuvelrug [Utrecht hill ridge].Photo: 08-07-2010Municipality of Rhenen, province of Utrecht

7The Nieuwe Steeg fort, a part of the Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie [New Holland water defence line], with its bombproof barracks consisting of two buildings. The Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie was a flooded line of defence. Water was used as the defensive weapon. If an enemy was approaching, the strips of pastureland between Muiden and the Biesbosch could be flooded. This made the land difficult for the enemy to cross. The defence line served its purpose from 1815 to approximately 1940.Photo: 08-07-2010Municipality of Lingewaal, province of Gelderland 8The Deil interchange, a clover-leaf interchange named after the village of Deil nearby, now a part of the municipality of Geldermalsen. Junction of the A15 motorway (Rotterdam direc-tion Arnhem–Nijmegen) with the A2 motorway (Utrecht–Den Bosch). Running parallel with the A15 is the Betuwe railway line.Photo: 11-02-2008 Municipality of Geldermalsen, province of Gelderland

Photo captions


KnowledgeA successful region-oriented approach to heritage requires a nationwide knowledge infrastructure in which governments, planning offices and research centres, regional centres and heritage centres, social organisations and private parties each fulfil their own specific role and make their contribution according to their capacity.

Within this whole, the National Department for Cultural Heritage serves as a knowledge centre with wide-ranging knowledge about cultural heritage and the same expertise concerning the preservation and sustainable development of heritage. The development and sharing of knowledge is closely connected with the performance of legal tasks related to the selection and designation of protected heritage, advising and subsidies, and is given shape from the knowledge programmes of the National Department for Cultural Heritage.

In addition to the efforts already being expended by the National Department for Cultural Heritage and other parties, the Vision for Heritage and Spatial Planning calls for the development of a specific knowledge agenda that zooms in on the issues and questions that arise from the region-oriented approach, the characteristics and the spearheads from this vision. The national government wants to further develop this agenda in the coming period together with other partners within the overall knowledge infrastructure on the cutting edge of heritage preservation and spatial planning.

A focused cooperation agendaThe national government wants to come up with a specific cooperation agenda with other governments and private organisations in accordance with the aforementioned division of responsibilities and based on its own priorities as outlined in Chapter 3 of this vision. This agenda will consist of administrative agreements, regions/themes for the joint development of vision, the co-funding of (pilot) projects and knowledge facilities. The intergovernmental agreements will be made within the frameworks of the Administrative Agreement and in conjunction with other future agreements concerning, among other things, the division of heritage site funds, knowledge functions and spatial planning regional agendas. The discussions on the cooperation agenda will commence after the summer of 2011. In 2012, the joint programme will be defined and a number of pilot projects will be launched. The actual programme will start in 2013.

3. National government priorities 2011–20153.2 Realisation


78 79Appendices

Appendices Appendix 1 Overview of national government’s role and instruments

Role Instruments

Manages legal framework for the careful, development-oriented approach to heritage in regional processes

Monuments and Historic Buildings Act [Monumentenwet]Spatial Planning Decree [Besluit ruimtelijke ordening]Environmental Permitting (General Provisions) Decree [Wabo]Building regulationsRegulations pertaining to environmental impact reports

Designates / appoints cultural heritage of national significance

Monuments and Historic Buildings Act [Monumentenwet]National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning, and spatial planning order in council

Is responsible for world heritage and in this role sets rules / reaches result agreements

Spatial planning order in council [Amvb ruimte]Monuments and Historic Buildings Act [Monumentenwet]Administrative agreements concerning municipalities and provinces

Bears responsibility for well-reasoned, careful handling of cultural heritage (of national, regional and local significance) for national government property, government projects and (land-use) plans

Spatial Planning Act [Wro], Spatial Planning Decree [Bro], Road Route Act [Tracewet], Wabo, mirt Rule FrameworkNational land-use plans [Rijksinpassingsplannen]National Government Protocol for Cultural Heritage

Facilitates preservation and development of cultural heritage with money and knowledge

Programme funds for reforming the preservation of heritage sites [MoMo funds] (including government subsidies for the preservation of heritage sites [brim])Knowledge centre role of National Department for Cultural Heritage [rce]Regional centres

Is a partner to international treaties Agreement on World HeritageTreaty of GranadaTreaty of VallettaTreaty of Florence (elc)

80 81AppendicesAppendices

Heritage map

(draft National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning [Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte], Chapter 3, From national goals to national interests, 3.3. Guaranteeing high-quality living environment, Cultural history and natural qualities)

International heritage

Natural heritage on unesco World Heritage List

Cultural heritage (regions) on unesco World Heritage List and

Provisional list of world heritage in the Netherlands

Cultural heritage (buildings and ensembles) on unesco World Heritage List and

Provisional list of world heritage in the Netherlands

National heritage

Cityscape and villagescape

Reconstruction region

National heritage site

Simplified topography

* The boundary of the Limes and the New Holland Water Defence Line [Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie] is

indicated by way of reference

Appendix 2 Maps


Appendices

World heritage map

World heritage, property

Heritage site on unesco World Heritage List

Heritage site on Provisional list of world heritage in the Netherlands

World heritage, region

Natural heritage on unesco World Heritage List

Cultural heritage on unesco World Heritage List

Cultural heritage on Provisional list of world heritage in the Netherlands*

Heritage on Provisional list in Caribbean region

Designated:

1. Schokland, 1995

2. Defence line of Amsterdam, 1996

3. Windmill complex at Kinderdijk-Elshout, 1997

4. Willemstad, 1997

5. Ir. D.F. Wouda pumping station, 1998

6. Droogmakerij De Beemster, 1999

7. Rietveld Schröder House, 2000

8. Wadden Sea, 2009

9. Ring of canals in Amsterdam, 2010

Provisional list of World Heritage in the Netherlands:

10. Van Nelle plant

11. New Holland Water Defence Line [Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie]

12. Koloniën van Weldadigheid [Colonies of benevolence]

13. Royal Eise Eisinga Planetarium

14. Teylers

15. Sanatorium Zonnestraal

16. Limes

17. Bonaire Marine Park

18. Plantation system in West Curaçao

19. Island of Saba

* The boundary of the Limes and the New Holland Water Defence Line [Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie] is

indicated by way of reference.

Appendix 2 Maps

Appendices


Map of reconstruction regions

(draft National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning [Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte], Appendix 4 National Landscapes, unesco world heritage and reconstruc-tion regions.)

Rural area

Postwar residential districts

Redeveloped city centres

Simplified topography

Rural area:

1. Beltrum, I/II Berkelland

2. De Scheeken, St. Oedenrode

3. Haskerveenpolder, Skasterlân

4. Maas en Waal-West, Western Meuse and Waal

5. Noordoostpolder, Noordoostpolder

6. De Groep e.o., Veenendaal

7. Vriezenveen, Twenterand

8. Walcheren, various municipalities

Post-war residential districts:

9. Westelijke Tuinsteden, Amsterdam

10. Plan Kerschoten, Apeldoorn

11. Heuvel expansion plan, Breda

12. ’t Hool, Eindhoven

13. Emmermeer, Angelslo, Emmerhout, Emmen

14. Mariahoeve, the Hague

15. De Wijert Noord, Groningen

16. Vrieheide, Heerlen

17. Klein Driene I and II, Hengelo

18. Plan Zuid, De Pettelaar ’s Hertogenbosch

19. De Heuvel and Prinsenhof, Leidschendam-Voorburg

20. Pottenberg, Maastricht

21. Nagele, Noordoostpolder

22. Ommoord, Rotterdam

23. De Halve Maan, Utrecht

Redeveloped city centres:

24. Rhenen, Rhenen

25. Eastern city centre, Rotterdam

26. Strip of Atlantic Wall, the Hague

27. Strip of Atlantic Wall, Katwijk

28. City centre of Hengelo

29. City centre of Nijmegen

30. Oostburg, Sluis

Appendix 2 Maps


1. Reconstructed city centres / regions

Rhenen (Rhenen) - Characteristic urban development

layout within the green structure of the original fortifications

- Characteristic height differences due to the location on the high steep edge

- Traditionally designed buildings (restored war damage)

Eastern city centre (Rotterdam) - Part of largest reconstruction region

in the Netherlands, with historic national network of broadly built roads with green strips and high-rises

- Northern section: residential neighbourhood with strip building bordering green garden areas

- Southern section: combined residential/commercial building with characteristic shared office buildings around around delivery yards

Strip of Atlantic Wall (The Hague) - Connection zone between Ockenburg

and Scheveningsebosje on former defensive strip of land

- Division into three zones with individual character (residences in low-rise, residences in high-rise and combined residences and com-mercial space)

- Combination of road network (park-way), water and green network and historical buildings

Strip of Atlantic Wall (Katwijk) - Rebuilt fishing village with enclosed

buildings - Family seaside resort on boulevard - Individual and small-scale buildings

in traditional and restrained style

City centre (Hengelo) - Reconstruction plan with modern-

ised, urban character and spatial division of functions

- Variation and cohesion in individually designed buildings

- Entirely surrounded by greenbelt

City centre (Nijmegen) - Restoration plan with improved

traffic plan - Restored historic buildings as bearers

of identity - Added new building types in modern

style

Oostburg (Sluis) - Renovated and expanded village

centre - Improved traffic network and

restored historic buildings and fortifications for tourism

- Traditional construction and architecture

2. Residential districts

Westelijke Tuinsteden (Amsterdam) - Characteristic repetition of block of

houses and a mix of high-rise and low-rise buildings, according to the ciam urban development principles

- Hierarchical layout of infrastructure and green network with associated planting design

- Balanced relationship between built-up and open areas

Kerschoten (Apeldoorn) - Urban development plan according

to Scandinavian example - Variation in building types and build-

ing heights - Buildings in green setting within the

main road network

Expansion plan Heuvel (Breda) - Combination of modern and

traditional urban development and architecture

- High quality of architecture and layout of open space and green areas

- Grouping of neighbourhoods around squares

‘t Hool (Eindhoven) - Urban development architecture,

coherent design of houses and dis-trict, private and public green areas

- Robust yet detailed expression of form and material

Emmermeer, Angelslo, Emmerhout (Emmen) - Composition of three districts around

woodland in former marshland area - Hierarchical street pattern with

centrally located shopping strips - Experimental residential housing and

spacious green areas

Mariahoeve (‘the Hague) - District lot division in free

composition - Division of the district into six neigh-

bourhoods by a system of main roads - Detached buildings in green

surroundings with varied house characteristics

De Wijert Noord (Groningen) - Repeatable module of the living unit

[stempelbouw] as a basis for the lot division

- Variation between low-rise and medium-high-rise

Vrieheide (Heerlen) - Modernistic mineworkers colony - Course of streets grafted into height

differences in the terrain - Technologically modernised

architecture

Klein Driene I and II (Hengelo) - Repeated clusters of building units

[stempelverkaveling] in green setting - Combination of modernistic and

traditional architecture and urban development

Plan Zuid, De Pettelaar (‘s Hertogenbosch) - Spaciously designed middle class

district with careful attachment to the historical city centre

- Modern urban development plan with traditional architecture (Bossche School)

- More refined architecture in various house types with special detailing

De Heuvel and Prinsenhof (Leidschendam – Voorburg)

- Rare large-scale blocks surrounding courtyards

- Relationship between built-up areas and open areas based on anthropo-logic principles

- Exceptional buildings/facilities within the courtyards

Pottenberg (Maastricht) - One of the four expansion shells

with a hierarchical layout in four quadrants

- Parish district with a mix of working-class homes and homes for the better off

- Facilities located in centre of the district at intersection of roads

Nagele (Noordoostpolder) - Structure and buildings according to

the principles of the Nieuwe Bouwen - Grouping of clustered buildings with

flat roofs around a central open green area

- Village enclosed by trees

Ommoord (Rotterdam) - Example of home production

at zenith of standardisation and industrialisation

- Residential district according to three main principles: infrastructure, hous-ing units and green planting

- High-rise zone with large-scale knikflats (block of flats) in park-like surroundings

De Halve Maan (Utrecht) - Post-war interpretation of pre-war

urban development plan - Varied buildings in a traditional

urban development setting with main structures and sightlines

- Special functions in green setting

3. Rural area

De Groep and surroundings (Veenendaal) - Open and half-open landscape with

(indirect) traces of war damage and restoration during ww ii

- Many farms from the early reconstruction

- Coherence and contrast with Grebbelinie defence line

Walcheren (Veere) - Reconstruction of large-scale inun-

dated region with central open area and peripheral enclosed zones

- Restored country estates and woods, planting, partially with coulisse character

- Mixed appearance of old buildings and reconstruction

Beltrum I/II (Berkelland) - Small-scale land consolidation

landscape with pastures, wooded area, arable fields

- Partially preserved coulisse land-scape with winding roads

- Scattered appearance of reconstruc-tion and older buildings

De Scheeken (St. Oedenrode) - Small-scale landscape with pastures,

wooded area, arable fields and tree nursery

- Compartmentalised landscape cre-ated by varying lines of trees

- Peripheral clusters of reconstruction and older buildings

Haskerveenpolder (Skasterlân) - Very open marshland regions with

converging strip land division - New access roads running perpen-

dicular to lots with young farms - Linear green structures, duck trap

pen, dikes, waterway

Maas en Waal - West (Western Meuse and Waal)

- Strongly altered, very open, large-scale area of pastures and farmland

- Integrated duck trap pens, scattered woodland planting

- Quasi organic structure of access roads, drainage and lines of farms

Vriezenveen (Twenterand) - Radical land consolidation with

turned and enlarged pattern of lot division and still recognisable high moorland reclamation

- Lines of young farms, partially with rich green country avenues

- Region full of contrasts: open/closed and old/new

Noordoostpolder (Noordoostpolder) - Large-scale polder with scattered,

rationally ordered agricultural build-ings and grounds

- Ring of villages around the central city of Emmeloord

- Functional pattern of roads and waterways with associated plants

Appendix 3 Characteristics and reconstruction regions

Based on research conducted by the National Department for Cultural Heritage [Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed], 30 regions were selected from the 1940–1965 period that have national cultural-historical significance. The regions were assessed, among other things, on the quality of the original plan and/or design, the design principles of the time, the current urban development integrity and singularity, the ability of the design and execution to serve as an example, the (inter)national significance and their current cultural-historical value. Three types of regions were distinguished: → 1. the actual reconstructed city centres / regions (repair of war damage); → 2. postwar residential districts and → 3. rural areas (reconstruction after war damage, land consolidations and new land).

In this appendix a number of physical qualities are listed for each region that describe the essence of the characteristics that make the region of national significance. These descriptions are indicative in nature and shall be further inter- preted and developed in consultation with the municipalities concerned.


88

Colophon

Character in Focus (Kiezen voor karakter) is the national government vision for heritage and spatial planning that was submitted to the House of Representatives and the Senate on 15 June 2011 by the State Secretary of Education, Culture and Science and the Minister of Infrastructure and the Environment on behalf of the Cabinet. (TK 2010-2011, 32 156 no. 29)

TextTjeerd de Boer in collaboration with the Visie voor erfgoed en ruimte project group

Project management publicationMarieke TreffersEric Dil

Cartography ‘De ontginning van Nederland’Must stedebouw, Amsterdam

PhotographyFotografie Siebe Swart, Amsterdam

Graphic designLUST, Den Haag

Printing assistancevijfkeerblauw, Rijswijk

ProductionDrukkerij De Bink bv, Leiden

Edition500 copies

ISBN978-90-5910-146-3

Character in Focus (Kiezen voor karakter) is the national govern-ment vision for heritage and spatial planning that was submitted to the House of Representatives and the Senate on 15 June 2011 by the State Secretary of Education, Culture and Science and the Minister of Infrastructure and the Environment on behalf of the Cabinet. (TK 2010-2011, 32 156 no. 29)

ISBN978-90-5910-146-3

the reclamation of a wasteland - cultural heritage agency · the reclamation of a wasteland over a...

Documents