Price drops in and around Amsterdam
More homes in and around Amsterdam whose asking price was recently cut.
BETA: Below are risk factors that can negatively affect this home's value. Note: the data below may be incomplete (some homes are missing data), may contain errors and is not always up to date. Points of interest in the neighbourhood may be missing or incorrect. The figures and estimates are indicative and open to interpretation. No rights can be derived from them. Always do your own research.
Marco Polostraat 91 3
Apartment at Marco Polostraat 91 in Amsterdam (Columbusplein e.o. neighbourhood). The home was built in 1929 and has 147 m² of living space, 2 bedrooms and energy label A. The nearest railway station is Jan van Galenstraat (1.5 km). The nearest primary school is Oecumenische basisschool de Visserschool (113 m).
Price & status history
- Relisted11 Jul 2026€ 525,000−€ 25,000
- Listed for sale3 Jun 2026€ 550,000
Property details
- Living area
- 147 m²
- Construction year
- 1929
- Property type
- Apartment
- Bedrooms
- 2
- Energy label
- A
- WOZ value
- € 597,000
- Ownership
- Municipal leasehold
- Estate agent
- —
Age composition of the neighbourhood
Share of residents per age group in Columbusplein e.o., compared with the Dutch average. Source: CBS.
Features
- Share of renewable energy
- Low share renewable0%
- Serious noise nuisance from neighbours (neighbourhood)
- Much neighbour nuisance11%
- Odour nuisance sewerage/water treatment (% seriously bothered)
- High2.1%
- Odour nuisance from road traffic (% seriously affected)
- High3.2%
- Apparent temperature on a sunny day
- Extreme heat stress44 °C
- Large industrial businesses within 5 km
- Heavy industry nearby22
- Heat stress class
- Extreme heat stress (level 1)extreem_1
- Urban heat island effect
- Strong heat island1.9 °C
- Can find cooling outside the home
- Few people find cooling outside37.1%
- Able to find cooling in the property
- Few people can cool off indoors31.7%
- Building status
- In useBuilding in use
- Energy index (primary fossil)
- Efficient (label A/B)140 kWh/m²/yr
- Energy label
- EconomicalA
- Avg. natural gas consumption
- Economical620 m³
- WOZ value year-on-year change (municipality)
- Rising property values11%
- Number of hazardous businesses within 1 km
- None in the neighbourhood0
- Background concentration SO₂
- Very low0.645 µg/m³
- Distance to waste incineration facility
- Far away5.6 km
- Distance to biomass plant
- At distance (>3 km)4.3 km
- Distance nearest E-PRTR facility
- Well away (>2 km)3 km
Stations
Construction plans & permits in the neighbourhood
Tap a category to show or hide it.
62 permits within 500 m · 48 zoning plan amendments within 5 km. Click the map for each permit’s description.
Schools
91st percentile — high · LIB · grade 8: 36 pupils · total 250 pupils
Disadvantage score 5 — more disadvantage than 28% of schools
13th percentile — low · LIB · grade 8: 33 pupils · total 264 pupils
Disadvantage score 60 — more disadvantage than 90% of schools
66th percentile — average · LIB · grade 8: 59 pupils · total 391 pupils
Disadvantage score 47 — more disadvantage than 83% of schools
86th percentile — high · LIB · grade 8: 34 pupils · total 286 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
94th percentile — high · LIB · grade 8: 54 pupils · total 435 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
85th percentile — high · LIB · grade 8: 49 pupils · total 351 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
37th percentile — average · LIB · grade 8: 20 pupils · total 226 pupils
Disadvantage score 27 — more disadvantage than 68% of schools
34th percentile — average · LIB · grade 8: 20 pupils · total 208 pupils
Disadvantage score 22 — more disadvantage than 62% of schools
56th percentile — average · LIB · grade 8: 40 pupils · total 266 pupils
Disadvantage score 30 — more disadvantage than 71% of schools
75th percentile — average · LIB · grade 8: 24 pupils · total 272 pupils
Disadvantage score 15 — more disadvantage than 52% of schools
10th percentile — low · 86% passed · CE avg 6.1 · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO · 94 exam candidates
18th percentile — low · 89% passed · CE avg 6.2 · VBO/MAVO · 99 exam candidates
0th percentile — low · 59% passed · CE avg 5.6 · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO · 29 exam candidates
no exam results · MAVO/HAVO
no exam results · VBO/MAVO
no exam results · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO
1st percentile — low · 67% passed · CE avg 5.9 · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO · 102 exam candidates
35th percentile — average · 93% passed · CE avg 6.3 · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO/PRO · 93 exam candidates
5th percentile — low · 84% passed · CE avg 6.0 · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO · 138 exam candidates
no exam results · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO
Source: DUO Open Education Data · raw figures, not adjusted for the pupil population.