Price drops in and around Diemen
More homes in and around Diemen 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.
Theo van Doesburghof 50
Apartment at Theo van Doesburghof 50 in Diemen (Holland Park neighbourhood). The home was built in 2017 and has 64 m² of living space, 2 bedrooms and energy label A. The nearest railway station is Diemen Zuid (207 m). The nearest primary school is Openbare Basisschool Het Atelier (434 m).
Price & status history
- Relisted5 Jun 2026€ 475,000−€ 10,000
- Listed for sale3 Jun 2026€ 485,000
Property details
- Living area
- 64 m²
- Construction year
- 2017
- Property type
- Apartment
- Bedrooms
- 2
- Energy label
- A
- WOZ value
- € 456,000
- Ownership
- Freehold
- Estate agent
- —
Age composition of the neighbourhood
Share of residents per age group in Holland Park, compared with the Dutch average. Source: CBS.
Features
- Calculated CO₂ emissions
- High emissions2,571 kg/m2/yr
- Distance to railway line
- Very close to railway73 m
- Can find cooling outside the home
- Few people find cooling outside42.3%
- General practitioners within 1 km
- No GP within 1 km0
- Residents in 100m grid cell
- Very densely populated115 persons
- Liveability score
- clearly below average-0.1156 score
- Satisfied with the residential environment (neighbourhood)
- Bottom 25% (lowest satisfaction)86.7%
- Ground subsidence (estimated, mm/year)
- Significant ground subsidence-23.3 mm/yr
- Average highest groundwater level (GHG)
- Very high groundwater19 m above sea level
- Groundwater table (Gt)
- Very wet (high groundwater level)IIa
- Zoning purpose (main category)
- Residential designationresidential
- Building status
- In useBuilding in use
- Plot area (cadastral plot)
- Very generous plot3,545 m²
- Energy label
- EconomicalA
- Avg. natural gas consumption
- Economical0 m³
- WOZ value year-on-year change (municipality)
- Rising property values7.4%
- Number of hazardous businesses within 1 km
- None in the neighbourhood0
- Background concentration SO₂
- Very low0.555 µg/m³
- Distance to waste incineration facility
- Far away13.7 km
- Distance to biomass plant
- At distance (>3 km)11.1 km
Stations
Construction plans & permits in the neighbourhood
Tap a category to show or hide it.
5 permits · 1 construction plan within 500 m · 33 zoning plan amendments within 5 km. Click the map for each permit’s description.
Schools
44th percentile — average · ROUTE 8 · grade 8: 12 pupils · total 384 pupils
Disadvantage score 7 — more disadvantage than 35% of schools
5th percentile — low · LIB · grade 8: 43 pupils · total 360 pupils
Disadvantage score 33 — more disadvantage than 74% of schools
5th percentile — low · LIB · grade 8: 20 pupils · total 253 pupils
Disadvantage score 65 — more disadvantage than 91% of schools
44th percentile — average · LIB · grade 8: 35 pupils · total 264 pupils
Disadvantage score 28 — more disadvantage than 69% of schools
6th percentile — low · LIB · grade 8: 26 pupils · total 179 pupils
Disadvantage score 77 — more disadvantage than 95% of schools
19th percentile — low · LIB · grade 8: 39 pupils · total 241 pupils
Disadvantage score 32 — more disadvantage than 73% of schools
75th percentile — high · LIB · grade 8: 41 pupils · total 353 pupils
No measured educational disadvantage
77th percentile — high · LIB · grade 8: 38 pupils · total 227 pupils
Disadvantage score 64 — more disadvantage than 91% of schools
12th percentile — low · LIB · grade 8: 39 pupils · total 222 pupils
Disadvantage score 84 — more disadvantage than 96% of schools
28th percentile — average · LIB · grade 8: 28 pupils · total 208 pupils
Disadvantage score 12 — more disadvantage than 46% of schools
no exam results · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO
25th percentile — low · 95% passed · CE avg 6.1 · VBO/MAVO/HAVO · 38 exam candidates
2nd percentile — low · 79% passed · CE avg 5.8 · VBO/MAVO · 33 exam candidates
4th percentile — low · 81% passed · CE avg 6.0 · VBO/MAVO/HAVO/VWO · 282 exam candidates
no exam results · PRO
no exam results · HAVO/VWO
1st percentile — low · 72% passed · CE avg 5.9 · MAVO/HAVO/VWO · 158 exam candidates
no exam results · BRUGJAAR
17th percentile — low · 87% passed · CE avg 6.2 · VBO/MAVO · 101 exam candidates
83rd percentile — high · 100% passed · CE avg 6.5 · VBO/PRO · 20 exam candidates
Source: DUO Open Education Data · raw figures, not adjusted for the pupil population.