Price drops in and around Rotterdam
More homes in and around Rotterdam whose asking price was recently cut.
Save this search and turn on alerts for new price cuts.
BETA: Below are risk factors that can negatively affect this home's value. Note: the underlying data and figures are indicative and may be incomplete, outdated or incorrect; no rights can be derived from them. Always do your own research.
Karel Doormanstraat 382 N
Apartment at Karel Doormanstraat 382 in Rotterdam (Cool neighbourhood). The home was built in 2012 and has 90 m² of living space, 2 bedrooms and energy label A+. The nearest railway station is Beurs (280 m). The nearest primary school is Rotterdamse Schoolvereniging (438 m).
Price & status history
- Relisted30 Jul 2026€ 559,000−€ 26,000
- Listed for sale3 Jun 2026€ 585,000
Property details
- Living area
- 90 m²
- Construction year
- 2012
- Property type
- Apartment
- Bedrooms
- 2
- Energy label
- A+
- WOZ value
- € 613,000
- Ownership
- Freehold
- Estate agent
- —
WOZ value over the years
Fetching WOZ history…
Age composition of the neighbourhood
Share of residents per age group in Cool, compared with the Dutch average. Source: CBS.
Features
- Share of renewable energy
- Low share renewable0%
- Residents in 100m grid cell
- Very densely populated255 persons
- Liveability Meter: nuisance and safety
- Much more nuisance/unsafety than average-0.2531 score
- Hospitality within 25 m
- Hospitality within 25 m1
- Catering within 300 m
- Very many catering businesses, nightlife area107
- Crimes per 1,000 residents
- High crime476 per 1,000 residents
- Parking tariff
- Very high rate€ 6.42
- Satisfied with the property (neighbourhood)
- Bottom 25% (lowest satisfaction)81.9%
- Satisfied with the residential environment (neighbourhood)
- Bottom 25% (lowest satisfaction)80.6%
- Permits <500 m (12 months)
- Much building pressure53
- Permits <500 m (3 months)
- Very high construction activity19
- Distance nearest E-PRTR facility
- Very close (<500 m)393 m
- Road traffic noise
- Strong nuisance20.9%
- Noise load
- Loud68 dB
- Road traffic noise exposure (Lnight)
- Severely disruptive59 dB
- Odour nuisance sewerage/water treatment (% seriously bothered)
- High3%
- Odour nuisance from road traffic (% seriously affected)
- High4%
- Apparent temperature on a sunny day
- Extreme heat stress45 °C
- Large industrial businesses within 5 km
- Heavy industry nearby17
- Heat stress class
- Extreme heat stress (level 1)extreem_1
- PFAS measurement above norm (closest)
- Above the standardYes
- Urban heat island effect
- Strong heat island2.4 °C
- Can find cooling outside the home
- Few people find cooling outside29.1%
- Able to find cooling in the property
- Few people can cool off indoors33.2%
- Masts within 300 m
- Many transmission masts nearby7
- Foundation risk
- High risklarge
- Max. flood depth (LIWO)
- Very deep (above 2 m)2.02 m
- Flood risk class
- High flood risklarge
- Shared plot
- Shared plotYes
- Share of homes with solar power
- Few solar panels1%
- Distance to nearest emission source
- nearby393 m
- Distance to nearest transmission mast
- Transmission mast nearby (<100 m)82 m
- Distance to airport
- Nearby5.1 km
- Serious noise nuisance from neighbours (neighbourhood)
- Above-average nuisance8%
- Fine dust (PM2.5)
- Elevated10.7 µg/m³
- Odour nuisance from businesses/industry (% seriously annoyed)
- Elevated1.4%
- Industrial emitters within 2 km
- Multiple sources3
- PFAS standard breach within 10 km
- Limit exceeded within 10 kmYes
- Plot area (cadastral plot)
- Generous plot497 m²
- Calculated CO₂ emissions
- Low emissions19 kg/m2/yr
- Energy index (primary fossil)
- Efficient (label A/B)100 kWh/m²/yr
- Energy label
- EconomicalA+
- Avg. natural gas consumption
- Economical140 m³
- WOZ value year-on-year change (municipality)
- Rising property values9.4%
- Number of hazardous businesses within 1 km
- None in the neighbourhood0
- Background concentration SO₂
- Very low1.183 µg/m³
- Distance to waste incineration facility
- Far away21.2 km
- Distance to biomass plant
- At distance (>3 km)26.4 km
Stations
Construction plans & permits in the neighbourhood
Tap a category to show or hide it.
47 permits within 500 m · 35 zoning plan amendments within 5 km. Click the map for each permit’s description.
Schools
99th percentile: high · LIB · grade 8: 48 pupils · total 355 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
66th percentile: average · IEP · grade 8: 85 pupils · total 638 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
47th percentile: average · LIB · grade 8: 45 pupils · total 284 pupils
Disadvantage score 77: more disadvantage than 95% of schools
48th percentile: average · LIB · grade 8: 38 pupils · total 405 pupils
Disadvantage score 28: more disadvantage than 69% of schools
50th percentile: average · LIB · grade 8: 28 pupils · total 198 pupils
Disadvantage score 77: more disadvantage than 95% of schools
27th percentile: average · DIA · grade 8: 28 pupils · total 109 pupils
Disadvantage score 40: more disadvantage than 79% of schools
53rd percentile: average · IEP · grade 8: 30 pupils · total 201 pupils
Disadvantage score 23: more disadvantage than 63% of schools
74th percentile: average · LIB · grade 8: 42 pupils · total 339 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
54th percentile: average · LIB · grade 8: 38 pupils · total 332 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
31st percentile: average · IEP · grade 8: 29 pupils · total 193 pupils
Disadvantage score 54: more disadvantage than 87% of schools
97th percentile: high · 100% passed · CE avg 6.8 · HAVO/VWO · 36 exam candidates
no exam results · PRO
98th percentile: high · 97% passed · CE avg 6.9 · VWO · 176 exam candidates
no exam results · VBO/MAVO
no exam results · HAVO/VWO
no exam results · VWO
8th percentile: low · 86% passed · CE avg 6.1 · VBO/MAVO · 55 exam candidates
no exam results · HAVO/VWO
48th percentile: average · 90% passed · CE avg 6.5 · HAVO/VWO · 170 exam candidates
5th percentile: low · 81% passed · CE avg 6.1 · VBO/MAVO · 70 exam candidates
Source: DUO Open Education Data · raw figures, not adjusted for the pupil population.