Transformation Possibilities of Inner City Railway Yards

Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Machiel Broeren / 29 October 2010

Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards “Which transformation possibilities give a feasible result for the transformation of inner city railway yards into multifunctional inner-city living areas?”

Graduation research of M.M.F. (Machiel) Broeren 1088548

Willem Buytewechstraat 123c 3024 XC Rotterdam T: +31 (0)6 24214216 E: [email protected]

Urban Area Development Real Estate Management and development Real Estate & Housing Faculty of Architecture Delft University of Technology 12 October 2010

Supervisors

Ir. W. (Wout) van der Toorn Vrijthoff First mentor Delft University of Technology T: +31 (0) 15-2784884 E: [email protected] Real Estate Management and development Real Estate & Housing Faculty of Architecture

Ir. S.W. (Sjoerd) Bijleveld Second mentor Delft University of Technology T: +31 (0) 15-2781364 E: [email protected] Building Economics Real Estate & Housing Faculty of Architecture

Drs. M.J.C. (Mattie) Busch Supervisor Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM) T: +31 (0) 70- 3391390 E: [email protected] Integrated Area Development Directorate Spatial Development Portfolio

Drs. J.J.S. (Zjèf) Budé Mentor Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM) T: +31 (0) 70-3390735 E: [email protected] Integrated Area Development Directorate Spatial Development Portfolio

Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Preface

This report is the final report of the graduation research of Machiel Broeren. This graduation research is performed at the faculty of Architecture of the Technical University of Delft in cooperation with the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM).

At the faculty of Architecture the research is performed in the graduation laboratory Real Estate Management with a specialisation in Urban Area Development. This laboratory is part of the master Real Estate and Housing. At the Ministry of VROM, the research is performed under the supervision of the program “Spoorzoneontwikkeling”.

The program “Spoorzoneontwikkeling” is a collaboration between Dutch Railways (NS), ProRail, the Ministry VROM and the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (VenW). These parties are committed to a joint effort to give the restructuring of rail track areas a significant impulse, by participating in five pilot projects to accelerate the process and by sharing the knowledge and lessons of these pilots with other municipalities. The five pilot projects are located in Nijmegen, Groningen, Amersfoort, Zwolle, and Roosendaal.

I would like to seize the opportunity to thank ir. W. van der Toorn Vrijthoff and ir. S.W. Bijleveld for their guidance and supervision at the TU Delft during my graduation research. Furthermore, I thank drs. J.J.S. Budé and drs. M.J.C. Busch for their guidance at the ministry of VROM. Next I would like to thank ir. R.P. de Graaf of the TU Delft, for his help on translating an algorithm into visual basic for applications. And finally, I would like to thank my colleagues of the Integrated Area Development Directorate at the Ministry of VROM, especially the members of the “spoorzoneontwikkeling”-team, for the pleasant working environment in which I was able to perform my graduation research.

The Hague, 29 October 2010

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / I Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

II \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Abstract

Inner city railway yards disrupt the urban functioning of inner city areas and these inner city railway yards do not exploit the full development potential of these inner city areas. To solve this problem the following main question needs to be answered: “Which transformation possibilities give a feasible result for the transformation of inner city railway yards into multifunctional inner city living areas?” In order to answer the main research question three end products are created:

1. A calculation tool specific for railway areas based on feasibility to support the decision making on the transformation of inner city railway yards; 2. A method to create a transformation variant for inner city railway yards which gives the best result on the feasibility. The calculation tool is used to generate this product; 3. An overview of feasibility factors, which are factors influencing the feasibility of the transformation of inner city railway yards into multifunctional living areas. The developed calculation tool and the method are used to create this overview.

A railway yard, in this research, indicates a complex series of railway tracks for storing, sorting and loading or unloading, railway cars and locomotives which can be moved form an inner city location into the periphery, because it lost its function. When transforming railway yards, NS Poort is most likely to be involved, because of the relation between NS Poort and ProRail. NS Poort has the first right of refusal on land of ProRail. This way NS Poort is the largest land owner in these areas.

In order to create the calculation tool which can be used for judging the feasibility of the transformation of rail way yard areas, theory is studied. Based on this theory RICARDO is chosen as the base of the calculation tool, because it complies with most of the demand set for the calculation tool. But RICARDO needs to be adjusted in three ways in order to be adjusted to the characteristics of these transformations. First, the design part of RICARDO is adjusted to environmental regulations. The design part has to offer the opportunity to enter the regulations which have a significant influence, regulations on sound and external safety. Second, the calculation part is replaced in order to adjust the tool to the two characteristics of this special type of urban area development, time and high land development cost. Third, the output of the tool is adjusted to give a clear image of the financial as well as the qualitative feasibility the variant delivers. Therefore, the output has to be able to judge the following feasibility indicators:

1. Financial feasibility: The Main variant has to be as financial feasible as possible; 2. Urban type: The Main variant has to have a urban type like the reference railway area; 3. Green: The Main variant has to be as green as a the reference railway areas; 4. Parking: The Main variant has to have a parking ratio matching the reference railway areas; 5. Function mix: The Main variant has to be a multifunctional living area.

The first end product, the developed calculation tool consists of two parts, a design part and a calculation part. The output of the design part is the input for the calculation part. The tool needs to be filled with input. The input of the tool consists of data and variables. The output of a calculation is as reliable as the less reliable input. To increase the reliability of the output of the tool an expert team is included, which performs a final check on the input.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / III Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The design part of RICARDO is adjusted in a way that environmental data creates zones indicating the developable area, the areas with extra costs and the area with a lost of design flexibility, as well as a maximum density. In order to implement the influence of these zones in the tool the overlap of a zone with the design, entered on a map using real estate variables, is calculated. The output of the design part is the amount of Gross Floor Area (GFA) per function and the effects of the different zones on this GFA.

Second, the calculation part of RICARDO is replaced with a new developed calculation part. The land value will be the base of the calculation part. The financial feasibility is calculated as the balance between the residual land value and a value based land value. The most important difference is the calculation of the real estate value using an NPV-method, in order to implement time. The calculation part calculates the feasibility based on the output of the design part and the operational data.

Third, in order to be able to judge next to the financial, the qualitative feasibility the output of the tool is adjusted. The tool is adjusted in a way that the output of the tool can indicate the qualitative feasibility indicators, using indexes and ratios. The Spacemate program is used to give an overview of the urban type. The research shows that these three adjustments of the tool have a significant added value.

The second end product, the method to create a feasible transformation variant is developed using a variant study on the location Zutphen. The method gives a description of the actions that need to be taken to create a feasible Main variant using the developed calculation tool. In the variant study three sub variants are used to determine the characteristics of the Main variant. These three sub variants cover a functional range from a social variant to a profit variant. Based on the strengths of these three sub variants a feasible Main variant was developed. A scenario analysis shows that the Main variant is durable.

Also this variant study of Zutphen led to an overview of feasibility factors, the third end product. Conclusions are drawn on the influence of the real estate variables on the financial and qualitative feasibility of the variants. In general the feasibility is influenced by the real estate function. The urban type is also influenced by the building height. But, different real estate types create contradicting results on the financial and qualitative feasibility. To achieve an optimal and feasible Main variant, it was concluded that the function mix is the most important variable.

Next, the general applicability of the developed calculation tool and the method is tested on two other locations, Amersfoort and Nijmegen. On these two locations, a Main variant was created using the developed calculation tool and the method. The research concludes that the developed tool needs to be adjusted in order to calculate the overlap between the environmental zones which restrict the development of residential real estate. The method also needs to be adjusted for this overlap. Further, the input of the railway infrastructure in the method has to be changed and a check of the Main variant with the market research needs to be added. With these adjustments the calculation tool and the method are general applicable.

IV \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The applicability check also led to another feasibility factor: the ratio between the railway yard and the development area. This was also tested. In the research it was concluded that a decrease of the ratio between the railway yard and the development area increases the feasibility of the land development.

The conclusions of the research are:

1. The developed calculation tool, the method and the feasibility factors can be used to create a feasible variant; 2. The calculation tool and the method can be seen a general applicable; 3. The adjustments to the tool for the specific characteristics have a significant added value: a. The implementation of environmental regulations in the design part has a significant effect on the design; b. The implementation of a NPV-method to calculate the real estate value in the calculation part offers the best opportunity to implement time in the real estate value; 4. The adjustment of the output of the tool creates the ability to judge the feasibility, which in this research is indicated as a balance between financial and qualitative feasibility: a. Financial feasibility is defined as the balance between the residual land value and a value based land value; b. Qualitative feasibility is defined using demand on the urban type, green, parking and function mix and is judged using indexes and ratios; 5. There are two important factors influencing the feasibility: a. The function mix is the most important real estate variable influencing the feasibility, because the function mix creates a balance between the contradicting effects of the other real estate variables; b. Decreasing the ratio between the railway yard and the development area increases the feasibility.

Base on these conclusions some recommendation can be made:

1. The ratio between the railway yard and development area needs further research. 2. The link between the presence of a living area close to the railway station and the amount of railway passenger on this railway areas needs further research; 3. The interface of the tool needs professionalization if the tool will be used in a professional context; 4. The insights on qualitative feasibility can be optimized by increasing the amount of reference projects for the qualitative feasibility; 5. Increase the reference database in Spacemate to make more specific references on the urban type.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / V Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

VI \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Content

Preface...... I

Abstract ...... III

1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. Main problem ...... 1 1.2. Research question ...... 2 1.3. Research method...... 2 1.4. Application possibilities end products ...... 6 1.5. Outline...... 7

2. Theoretical framework ...... 9 2.1. Definition of railway yards...... 9 2.2. Stakeholder analysis ...... 12 2.3. Characteristics of the transformation of railway yards ...... 14 2.4. Environmental regulations...... 14 2.4.1. Regulations on sound ...... 15 2.4.2. Regulations on external safety ...... 17 2.5. Feasibility ...... 18 2.5.1. Financial feasibility ...... 18 2.5.2. Qualitative feasibility ...... 22 2.6. Financial calculation tools...... 25 2.7. The theoretical framework for creating the calculation tool...... 27

3. Developed calculation tool ...... 29 3.1. Adjusting the design part for environmental regulations ...... 29 3.2. Introducing a new calculation part...... 30 3.3. Adjusting the output of the tool to judge the feasibility...... 31 3.4. Added value adjustments...... 33 3.5. Input for the calculation tool...... 34 3.5.1. Environmental data ...... 35 3.5.2. Real estate variables ...... 35 3.5.3. Operational data ...... 36

4. Method & feasibility factors...... 41 4.1. Variant study Zutphen...... 41 4.1.1. Sub variants Zutphen ...... 42 4.1.2. Main variant Zutphen ...... 49 4.1.3. Scenario analysis of the Main variant ...... 53 4.1.4. Conclusion variant study Zutphen...... 54 4.2. Method to create a feasible transformation variant...... 54 4.3. Feasibility factors...... 55

5. Testing applicability calculation tool & method ...... 57 5.1. Variant study Amersfoort ...... 57 5.2. Variant study Nijmegen ...... 63 5.3. Adjustments to the calculation tool and method ...... 69 5.4. A new feasibility factor ...... 69

6. Conclusions and recommendations ...... 71

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Appendix I. Literature list ...... A Appendix II. Experts ...... C Appendix III. Zones based on regulation ...... E Appendix IV. Overlap regulation zone and building areas ...... I Appendix V. Calculation tool...... M Appendix VI. Input...... S Appendix VII. Draft method to create a transformation variant ...... U Appendix VIII. Final method to create a transformation variant ...... MM

Financial appendix I. Three sub variants Zutphen ...... EEE Financial appendix II. Main variant Zutphen/Functional area ...... OOO Financial appendix III. Main variant Zutphen/Stamps ...... SSS Financial appendix IV. Three sub variants Amersfoort ...... WWW Financial appendix V. Main variant Amersfoort/Functional areas...... GGGG Financial appendix VI. Main variant Amersfoort/Functional areas ...... KKKK Financial appendix VII. Three sub variants Nijmegen ...... OOOO Financial appendix VIII. Main variant Nijmegen/Functional areas...... YYYY Financial appendix IX. Main variant Nijmegen/Stamps ...... CCCCC

\ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

1. Introduction

In the upcoming years, six railway station areas including those of the four biggest cities of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht, are restructured in order to serve high speed rail. Because of this, the restructuring and transformation of inner city railway areas has gained much attention. This can also be seen by several symposia at which the restructuring and transformation of railway areas was the main subject.

During my studies at the faculty of architecture at the Technical University of Delft I got interested in urban area development and especially in the transformation of inner city areas. As a student with a student public transport card (OV-studentenkaart), I passed many railway station areas. During my journeys I noticed that almost all the time work was in progress, but the work in progress was mainly on the railway infrastructure and not on development of real estate in the railway areas. The reason why has greatly aroused my interest. Therefore, the focus of my graduation research is : the transformation of inner city railway station areas.

This chapter discusses the main problem, the main research question, the research method in combination with the end products and the application possibilities of these end products. This chapter ends with an outline of this report.

1.1. Main problem

In the last decades more and more people in the Netherlands have been moving from the periphery to the city1. This urbanisation has lead to the fact that more and more railway station areas, which used to be located at the edges of the city, became located in the inner city. Railway yard areas, mostly located at the backside of the railway station, can create a barrier in between the inner city located at the front and living areas located at the back of the railway station2.

Further, objectives of the Dutch national government in combination with this urbanisation of the Netherlands puts a large pressure on the Dutch municipalities, and creates a demand for real estate in Dutch cities in the near future. The national government wants to prevent cluttering, defined in the program “mooi Nederland” of the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), and want to realize 25 to 40 percent of all new dwellings within the boundaries of cities3. These two objectives of the national government determine that the more than before building has to take place within the inner city area.

As indicated, railway yards located in the inner city because of the urbanization can split a city in two, but have functions, such as train workshop, which can conflict with functions of an inner city. Dutch inner cities enclose over 1600 hectares around railway yard areas, which in potential can be transformed to durable, high quality multifunctional living areas. This way the transformation of these railway yards can lead to the solution for the increased pressure on inner cities caused by the urbanization. This leads to the main problem:

“Inner city railway yards disrupt the urban functioning of inner city areas and these inner city railway yards do not exploit the full development potential of these inner city areas.”

1 http://www.cbs.nl 2 Coeveringen, P. et al., (2009) 3 Ministry of General Affairs (2007)

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 1 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

1.2. Research question

The main problem consists of two interrelated parts. Solving the first part, the disrupting of the urban functioning, increases the possibilities to solve the second part, optimizing the use of the potential. The disrupting of the urban functioning of inner-cities areas is caused by the location and function of the railway yards. They can split a city in two and their industrial function no longer fits in an inner city. The way of solving the disrupting functioning is determined by the fact that the railway yard has lost his function or not. When a railway yard has lost his function, the railway yard has to be dismantled and the polluted soil has to be cleaned to become useable for transformation. When a railway yard still has a function, the yard has to be moved to another location before the polluted soil can be cleaned. Railway areas mostly have polluted soil because of their former industrial function. Both options lead to extra costs, the costs of the second option are disproportionately larger than the costs for the first option.

Another important issue is the location of the areas. The fact that these areas are located close to railway tracks can cause problems with regulations on environmental issues. Guidelines on vibrations and regulations on sound, particle matter and the transport of hazardous substances create two kinds of restrictions. First, these restrictions determine the developable area. For example they determine the maximum amount of sound on a façade. Second, these restrictions impose demands on the quality of buildings in these areas. For example the maximum amount of sound inside a building. The first restriction decreases the amount of revenues and the second restriction increases the amount of costs.

This analysis shows that barriers and the location are two important issues that have to be dealt with when transforming railway yard areas into multifunctional areas. These issues can be translated into monetary terms. This leads to the main research question:

“Which transformation possibilities give a feasible result for the transformation of inner city railway yards into multifunctional inner city living areas?”

1.3. Research method

In order to answer the main research question a research method is developed in which three end products are developed, which are:

The research consists of three phases. Figure 1.1 shows the research method, the numbers indicate which sub question is answered by which phase. The first phase of the research is creating the calculation tool. The second phase of the research is doing a variant study using the calculation tool in order to develop the second and third end product, the method and feasibility factors. The last phase is testing the general applicability of the tool and method.

2 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Figure 1.1. Research method

The first phase, in which the new calculation tool is developed consist of three interrelated parts: creating a theoretical framework, obtaining the needed data and developing the final tool. The theoretical framework is used to gain insights into calculation tools, characteristics of railway areas and needed input. For every phase of the research sub questions are developed.

The interface and applicability of the tool needs to be investigated. By investigating the interface and the applicability, it also becomes apparent to which demands the tool has to comply and which existing tool, based on these demands, and is the base for the developed calculation tool. This is researched by doing a literature research.

This gives an answer to sub question 1:

1. How can a tool be used to support the decision making on the transformation of inner city railway yards into multifunctional inner city living areas?

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 3 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The developed calculation tool is adjusted to the specific characteristics of these types of transformations. In this part the theory needed to adjust the output of the tool is studied to produce the information needed to answer the different sub questions. The adjustment of the tool to the specific characteristics of these types of transformations is what distinguishes the tool from normal calculation tools. The adjustment of the tool answers sub question 2:

2. What is the effect of the characteristics of these transformation on the feasibility the different phases of the development process?

To answer the main research question the feasibility of the output of the tool needs to be judged. The way to judge this feasibility and how the output of the tool needs to be adjusted to give a clear view on this feasibility has to be determined. This lead to sub question 3:

3. How can feasibility be judged using the calculation tool?

Next, the calculation methods used need to be defined. Research on the calculation methods is based on literature on modelling, finance and economics. The definition of the calculation methods answers sub question 2:

4. Which calculation methods is the most suitable for the calculation of the financial feasibility of the transformation of railway yards in this tool?

When the theoretical framework is completed the new tool is developed simultaneously with the gathering of the needed input (see figure 1.2). An appropriate case study needs to be found for the development of the end products. In order for the developed tool to be general applicable there are four conditions the case study has to meet:

• It has to be located in the inner city area of this city, around the city centre; • The railway yard must not be linked with the five largest railway stations of the Netherlands; • An exploration of the real estate market has to be present; • The needed location specific parameters must be available.

The preferred railway yard used for the first case study is Zutphen. This location was determined in consultation with VROM and NS. The insights generated in the theoretical framework and the case study Zutphen are the base for the new tool.

During the creation of the final tool the input needed to operate the tool becomes apparent. The input needed to operate this tool can be divided into operational data, environmental data and real estate variables. The biggest part of the operational data needed, will come from finance and economics of the real estate market. The data is gathered by studying literature and interviews with experts. The collecting of the operational data answer sub question 5:

5. Which operational data is needed to operate this tool?

Environmental data is data linked with the railway infrastructure and environmental regulations. Environmental data is gathered by studying literature and interviews with experts. The collecting of environmental data answers sub question 6:

6. Which environmental data has an effect on the feasibility of the transformation?

4 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Real estate variables are data which can be variable on one location and are used to define the design. The real estate variable area gathered using literature and interviews with experts. The overview of the real estate variable answers sub question 7:

7. Which real estate variables have an influence on the feasibility?

In the second phase of this research, a variant study of the rail yard area Zutphen is presented (see figure 1.1) using the first end product of the research, the developed calculation tool. In this variant study a feasible Main variant for the rail yard area Zutphen is developed in order to create the second and third end product, the method to create a feasible transformation variant and an overview of the feasibility factors.

Three sub variants are created to determine the characteristics of the Main variant. Based on the strengths of the sub variants a Main variant is developed. Then, this Main variant is fine tuned by increasing the level of detail of the design. By doing this, this part of phase answers sub question 8:

8. Which different variants can be distinguished as transformation possibilities?

At the end of this phase the factors influencing the feasibility are studied. The overview obtained will be completed by factors obtained from the last phase, in which a final test will be performed on the developed calculation tool and the method. The overview of factors from phase 2 and 3, gives an answer on sub question 9:

9. Which factors have an influence on the feasibility of transformations of railway yards?

The final phase of the research consists of a test of the end products (see figure 1.1). At this point in the research, the general applicability of the developed calculation tool and method is tested by cross checking them on two other locations. Thereby, this final phase answers sub question 10:

10. What is the general applicability of the end products in this research?

In table 1.1 the complete research method is summarized.

Table 1.1. Research methods Sub question Method Description 1 Literature study Researching tool options 2 Literature study/Modelling Developing a tool 3 Literature study/Modelling Developing a tool Calculation 4 Modelling Developing a tool tool 5 Literature study Studying Reference projects 6 Literature study Studying Reference projects 7 Literature study Studying Reference projects Variant study 8 Case study Variant study Zutphen 9 Case study Gaining insights in the feasibility End products 10 Case study Reliability of the end products

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 5 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

1.4. Application possibilities end products

In urban area development processes, such as transformations of railway yards, the following phases can be distinguished: initiatory, planning, realisation and management4 (see figure 1.2). When the management of an urban area is finished and the area is redeveloped, the urban area development cycle starts over again.

Figure 1.2. Urban area development cycle

Verlaat, J. van ‘t (2005)

The developed calculation tool, the method as well as the feasibility factors can be used in the initiatory and planning phase of an urban development process. In the initiatory phase the vision for the development area is formed. In the planning phase the vision for the area is translated into a master plan and a final design. Decisions about the program and layout for the area will become definitive. The developed calculation tool, the method and the feasibility factors can help to guide the development from vision to final design into a financial feasible plan.

Urban transformations are complex, time consuming and demand the involvement of both private and public partners5. The end products of this research are interesting for private stakeholders as well as public stakeholders. Especially stakeholders involved in the financial decision-making of the urban area development can benefit from these end products.

Private stakeholders are mainly interested in the financial feasibility, because they only participate in a transformation process which gives them a financial feasible result with a certain profit margin. Public stakeholders are next to financial feasibility also interested in qualitative feasibility, like social housing and green areas. The end products therefore have to give input for the negotiations between the stakeholders on the financial as well as qualitative feasibility of the transformation.

The stakeholders in the transformation process are elaborated on in section 2.2.

4 Verlaat, J. van ‘t (2005) 5 Ministry of VROM (2006b)

6 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

1.5. Outline

In Chapter 2 the theoretical framework is discussed. It gives an overview of the theory used to create the calculation tool in this graduation research. This chapter starts by explaining the term railway yard and giving a stakeholder analysis. Next, theory on environmental regulations, the use of calculation tools and the determination of feasibility are discussed.

Chapter 3 presents the developed calculation tool and how the tool is adjusted to the specific character of railway yard areas and how the tool is adjusted to judge the feasibility based on the output of the tool. The tool calculates the feasibility based on input. Last, the input is discussed.

Chapter 4 discusses a variant study using the developed calculation tool. The variant study is used to create the second and third end product, the method to create a feasible transformation variant and an overview of feasibility factors. In this variant study, also a Main variant for Zutphen is developed.

Chapter 5 describes the testing of the end products. The applicability of the end products is tested on two other locations, Amersfoort and Nijmegen. These variant studies also lead to another feasibility factor. Chapter 6 gives the general conclusions and recommendations.

The developed tool is supplied on CD and the final method is presented in appendix IX.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 7 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

8 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

2. Theoretical framework

To create a calculation tool which can be used for judging the feasibility of the transformation of railway yard areas, a theoretical framework is developed. This framework focuses on characteristics of these transformations. Theory on environmental regulations, feasibility and calculation tools are discussed. But first the term railway yard is defined and the stakeholders are discussed.

2.1. Definition of railway yards

A railway yard is a complex series of railway tracks for storing, sorting and loading or unloading, railway cars and locomotives. Railway yards have many tracks in parallel for keeping rolling stock stored off the connecting railway tracks, so that they do not obstruct the flow of traffic.

During this research the term railway yard is used to indicate the railway yard areas which can be transformed into multifunctional living areas. Railway yard areas which can not be moved, because their functions are still needed on that specific location, will be left out of the scope of the research. The costs for moving these railway yards are at this moment too large to settle in the land price. But when there is an infrastructural reason for moving the railway yards they are included, in this situation a large past of the costs are covered by other organisations, like the ministry of VenW.

Figures 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 show the railway areas of Amersfoort, Groningen, Nijmegen, Roosendaal and Zwolle. The pictures show the railway areas and indicate the dispensable railway yard area (green), the indispensable rail infrastructure (red) and the inner city (blue).

Figure 2.1. Railway area Amersfoort

Railway yard area

Indispensable rail infrastructure

Inner city area

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 9 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 2.2. Railway areas

Groningen

Nijmegen

10 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Figure 2.3. Railway areas

Roosendaal

Zwolle

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 11 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

2.2. Stakeholder analysis

This section presents the different stakeholders in the transformation of railway areas into multifunctional living areas. The stakeholders are split up into four groups: the government, the railway sector, the real estate sector and the users of the area. Figure 2.4 indicates the relations between the different groups of stakeholders.

Figure 2.4. Relation stakeholders

The government has a relation on the railway sector by steering the railway sector, since most of the stakeholders in the railway sector are owned by the national government. The real estate sector is guided by regulations made by the government and a lobby of the railway sector influences these regulations. The users influence the government by elections. The government influences the satisfaction of the users by the decisions they make. The users’ relationship with the railway sector is influenced by the satisfaction of the users on the services provided by the railway sector. The relation between the users and the real estate sector is determined by the market. And last, the relation between the real estate sector and the railway sector centres on the division of land and the lobby to get the possession of this land.

The most important relation for the transformation of railway yards areas is the relation in the railway sector. In the Netherlands the organisation operating the railway infrastructure and the organisations operating the railway services are separate and run on a commercial basis6.

6 European Council (1991)

12 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

ProRail is the company responsible for operating the railway infrastructure. The main tasks of ProRail are the maintenance, exploitation and the extension and diminishing of the railway network. Besides this, ProRail is responsible for the division of the capacity of the railway network to the different transportation companies and for the traffic control of the railway network. When a part of the railway network becomes superfluous and is transformed to building land ProRail has the ownership of this land. ProRail manages around 6500 kilometres of Railway track and has the economic ownership of the land on which these tracks are located.

The NS is one of the railway companies which use the railway network maintained by ProRail to operate their railway services. The NS is a company with the structure of a limited company; all shares are owned by the Dutch national government. NS is the owner of 48 km² of land around railway station in the Netherlands and also works as a real estate developer and real estate operator in Railway areas. NS has the first right of refusal of land from ProRail. This has an influence on the transformation of railway area, because due to this NS has a large influence in most of the railway area in the Netherlands.

Table 2.1 indicates which stakeholder is active in which phase in the building cycle. Sometimes stakeholders are active in other phases. For example, the users can be involved in the initiatory phase by participation groups.

Table 2.1. Stakeholders in the building cycle Initiatory Planning realisation Management A Municipality x x x B Province x X x C National Government x x x D Politics x E Land owners x x F RE developers x x x x G RE investors x x H ProRail x x x x I NS x x x x J Cargo K Users x

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 13 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

2.3. Characteristics of the transformation of railway yards

Railway yards have specific characteristics, which have to be taken into account when transforming them into multifunctional living areas. These characteristics are.

1. The costs are higher due to: a. Restrictions on environmental regulations. Regulations on external safety can determine the developable area and give qualitative demands, which create extra costs b. Solving the disrupting function of the railway yards. To solve the disrupting function the railway yards has to be dismantled and the soil has to be cleaned, which again leads to additional costs 2. Transforming railway yards is a very time consuming process. The involvement of a large amount of stakeholders makes the decision-making on these complex transformations very time consuming; 3. Both financial and qualitative feasibility are important. Since public stakeholders are also involved, insights into the qualitative feasibility are needed to complete the information for decision-making.

When creating a calculation tool which has to be able to judge the feasibility these characteristics need specific attention. In the next sections these characteristics are elaborated on in order to create the required theoretical framework. This theoretical framework translates these characteristics into requirements for the calculation tool.

2.4. Environmental regulations

This section presents the environmental regulations which have an influence on the transformation of railway yard areas. There are four types of regulations which are operative when constructing close to infrastructure: guidelines concerning vibrations and regulations on sound, external safety and air pollution. In this research the first two are taken into account and are elaborated on in the next sections:

• Regulations on sound; • Regulations on external safety.

There are three reasons to motivate this choice. First, in railway areas these two have a significant effect7. Second, railway yards do not significantly contribute to air pollution8. Third, based on interviews with experts (appendix II), it was concluded to focus on sound and external safety, because the effect of the other two is not significant.

These final regulations have to be implemented in the developed calculation tool, in order to adjust the calculation tool to this type of area developments.

7 Korenberg, J.E.B. (2007) 8 Ministry of PHEH (1979), section 5.16, sub section 1, part c

14 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

2.4.1. Regulations on sound

There are two types of regulations on sound which can determine extra costs. Regulations on the maximum amount of sound on the building façade, defined in the Noise Abatement Act (Wet Geluidshinder), determine the developable area. And regulations on the maximum of sound inside the building, defined in the Building Decree (Bouwbesluit), give qualitative demands. To determine the amount of sound produced by the railway track the ASWIN tool is used. This tool is elaborated on in chapter 3.

The Noise Abatement Act determines the amount of sound which is permitted on the façade of dwellings, other buildings sensitive to sound and grounds sensitive to sound (see table 2.2). For other functions there are no limitations in the Noise Pollution Act.

Table 2.2. Noise Abatement Act Other buildings sensitive to sound 1 Educational buildings, excluding gyms 2 Hospitals and nursing homes Health care buildings, other than intended at number 2, appointed by an “Algemene 3 Maatregel van Bestuur“. Grounds sensitive to sound Grounds belonging to other buildings sensitive to sound number 3, as far as they are 1 reserved or used for the care which is provided in these buildings 2 Trailer parks

The act determines a bandwidth, by setting two target values for the buildable area. A preferred amount of sound permitted on the façade which is 53 dB, and the maximum amount of sound permitted on the façade which is 68 dB. The preferred amount can be deviated from till the maximum amount using well-founded arguments. This bandwidth is calculated using “Standaardrekenmethode I” (see figure 2.5) 9.

Figure 2.5. “Standaardrekenmethode I”

LAeq = Es + Creflection – Ddistance – Dair – Dsoil - Dmeteo

LAeq Equivalent sound level Es Combined noise emission level Creflection Correction factor for the reflection on buildings or other vertical surfaces Ddistance Debilitation term due to distance Dair Debilitation term due to air absorption Dsoil Debilitation term due to effects of the soil Dmeteo Debilitation term due to meteorology

9 Ministry of VROM (2006c)

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 15 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

In a simplified situation the terms Dreflection, Dair, Dsoil and Dmeteo can be considered as non influential10. This leads to the formula in figure 2.6.

Figure 2.6. Simplified “Standaardrekenmethode I”

LAeq = Es – Ddistance

LAeq Equivalent sound level = calculated Es Combined noise emission level Ddistance Debilitation term due to distance = 10 lg r

LAeq = Es - 10 lg r

The Building Decree defines the maximum amount of sound permitted inside a building. These regulations centre on user functions. The Building Decree defines demands for different functions. The functions for which demand are specified are shown in table 2.3. Functions which are not mentioned in the Building Decree have to comply with a demand of 40 dB.

Table 2.3. Demands on sound in the building User function Demand 1 Residential area in a residential function not being a trailer 35 dB General categorized or academic hospital, nursing home 1. Residential area for night stay for bed bounded patients 35 dB 4a 2. Residential area for research or treatment of patients 30 dB 3. Other residential areas 35 dB Other health care functions 4b 1. Residential area for night stay for bed bounded patients 30 dB 2. Other residential areas 30 dB 6 Residential area in an office function 40 dB Educational function 8 1. Residential area as meant in the Noise Pollution Act 30 dB 2. Other residential areas 35 dB

The assumption is made that a “standard” façade blocks 25 dB. This way all buildings built in the area in which the sound pollution is below the preferred value on the façade defined in the Noise Pollution Act can be built using standard building material. Subtracting 25 dB from the preferred amount on the façade of 53 dB gives 28 dB, which is lower that all the demands for inside a building (see table 2.3). Building built in the bandwidth area need extra measurements to prevent sound from entering the building. Subtracting 25 dB from the maximum amount on the façade gives 43 dB, which is higher than all the demand for inside a building (see table 2.3). When this is taken into account in an early stage of the design process, this will not create extra costs but only a loss of design flexibility11.

10 Ministry of VROM (2006c) 11 Ir. D.G. de Gruijter/ Spatial Development Portfolio/Living Environment Directorate

16 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

2.4.2. Regulations on external safety

The regulations on external safety on railways are lain down in the regulation on the transport of hazardous substances. In the near future the “basisnet”-regulation for the transport of hazardous substances by rail is implemented12. It was chosen to implement the “basisnet”-regulation, because this offers more possibilities for area development around railway station areas.

The main objective of the “basisnet”-regulation is twofold: prevent people from living or working in areas with too high risks and reduce the chance of accidents with many victims. The first objective is achieved by focussing on the maximum utilization space of the transport of hazardous substances; a safety zone is linked with the utilization space. The second objective is achieved by controlling the group risk and indicating pool fire attention areas (plasbrand-aandachtsgebied). The three main elements of the “basisnet”-regulation, the safety zone, group’s risk and pool fire attention are explained using figure 2.7.

Figure 2.7. Regulation on external safety

First, the “basisnet”-regulation indicates the utilization space per section of the railway track for the transport of hazardous substances. The utilization space indicates the maximum transport of hazardous substances allowed on this section of the railway track and a maximum permissible risk level. The regulation determines that the chance one civilian dies due to an accident caused by a hazardous substance has to be lower than one in a million; this is called the endemic risk. This leads to a 10-6 outline along all railways in the Netherlands, the safety zone. In the safety zone building of vulnerable objects is prohibited. Limited vulnerable objects can be built in this area provided there is a justification for it (see table 2.4 and 2.5) 13. Thus, the utilization space determines the safety zone.

Table 2.4. Limited vulnerable objects No. Description 1 All buildings excluding vulnerable objects Objects with a high infrastructural value, which in any case include a phone or electricity 2 exchange building or a building for flight control equipment, measure have to be taken to protect these buildings to an accident with a hazardous substance.

12 Ministry of VenW (2006) 13 Ministry of VROM (2008

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 17 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 2.5. Vulnerable objects No. Description Dwellings, house boats and trailers with a density more than two objects a hectare and not 1 being a company dwelling Building intended for accommodation of minors, elderly, sick people or people with physical or mental limitation, which in any case include: I. Hospitals

2 II. Old people's homes III. Nursing homes IV. Schools, excluding gymnasiums, pools and playgrounds V. Buildings or parts of buildings, intended for the day care of minors 3 Refugee centres 4 Penitentiary institutions and prisons Buildings in which generally large amounts of people are present for a large part of the day, which in any case include: I. Office buildings and hotels with a Gross Floor Area of more than 1500 m2 5 II. Complexes of more than 5 shops with an total Gross Floor Area of more than 1000 m2. III. Shops with a Total Floor Area of more than 2000 m2 a shop, as far as these complexes include a supermarket, a hypermarket or a department store. Camping sites and other recreational sites reserved for the stay of more than 50 people 6 for several consecutive days.

Second, the group risk is defined as the cumulative chance that 10 people or more a year per kilometre railway die as a direct result of an accident with the transport of hazardous substances. The risk is defined as an orientation value. Municipalities can deviate from this orientation value provided there is a good foundation for this. The influence area is defined as the area in the zone between the railway and a 200 meter line from this railway (see figure 2.7).The group risk leads to a maximum for the population density of an area. The population density can be calculated using the RBMII-tool, discussed in chapter 3.

Third, when highly flammable liquids leak from a tank and ignite this is called a pool fire. If a substantial amount of highly flammable liquids is transported on a railway, the area around this track becomes a pool fire attention area. A pool fire attention area is the area between the railway and a line 30 meters form the railway. In this area it has to be underpinned why there has to be real estate in the area. Besides that, measures have to be taken to prevent pool fires from happening. The location of real estate in a pool fire attention area causes extra costs.

2.5. Feasibility

In this research feasibility of the design has to be judged based on the output of the developed calculation. Feasibility is defined during this research as a combination of financial and qualitative feasibility. To create a feasible Main variant using the tool both feasibilities have to be in balance.

2.5.1. Financial feasibility

In this graduation research the feasibility of the transformation of railway yards into multifunctional living area is the central theme. This transformation brings across a lot of extra costs, such as outplacement of the railway yard or extra costs linked with environmental regulations and are very time consuming. Because of the extra costs, the calculated land value is compared with the actual

18 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard cost for land development14. Three methods for the calculation of the land value can be used: The land quote method, the residual land value method and the value based method.

The land quote method calculates the land value based on the real estate located on the land by taking a percentage of the costs of the real estate located on top of the land. A different percentage per function type can be used.

The residual land value method calculates the land value based on the real estate located on the land as the residue of expected future revenues and costs, excluding land costs. First, the value of the real estate has to be calculated. Thereafter the development costs of the real estate are calculated and subtracted from the value of the real estate. The value which is left can be used to buy land.

The value based method determines the land value based on the total costs of land. The total costs of land consist of the acquisition costs, the costs for site preparation, the costs for preparing the land for house building and additional costs. All these costs must at least be covered by the sale of the land. There is often a distinction by house type. A detached house can pay more per square metre than a terraced house.

In table 2.6 the advantages and disadvantage of all three methods are given.

Table 2.6. Advantages and disadvantages land value calculation methods

The landowner also profits if the real estate prices increase due to better conditions on the real estate market, this also works the other + way around when the conditions on the real estate market decrease. The land owner and the developer share the influence of the fluctuations on the real estate market. Additional quality is not self-evident. The real estate developer tries to Land quote keep the quality of the real estate as low as possible, while still preserving the value of the real estate property. This reduces the construction costs and increased profits for the real estate developer. - Increase of the construction costs, at constant real estate value, decreases the profit of the real estate developer. Using the land quote method can create problems when calculating the land value of hull houses, lofts and private commissions. The land owner has a good negotiation position in the negotiation process about the land value. Discussion possibility about the values used in the calculations. Clear picture about the financial feasibility for the different parties. + Open and transparent way of calculating the land value. Residual land value Additional quality is self-evident. If the land value is agreed upon the real estate developer will try to increase the quality of the real estate. This increases the value of the real estate and does not affect the land value. Market conditions create a risk for the land value. Low real estate - value and high construction costs result in a low land value. Total land costs are recaptured. + No expertise needed on finance other than of the land development Value based phase. Land owner does not profit from the development potential of the - land.

14 ECORYS, 2006

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 19 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

On the basis of the advantages and disadvantages of the different methods, it was decided that the residual value method is the preferred method, since this method gives a transparent insight into the composition of the land value and the costs and revenues of the project. This way this method creates an open and transparent way of discussing the land value.

In order to calculate the land value the value of the real estate located on top of the land also has to be calculated. The two most important methods used for calculating this value of real estate are, the Gross Initial Yield (GIY)-method and the Net Present Value (NPV)-method.

The GIY method is a method used in the real estate sector to express the (market) value and quality of property. The GIY is expressed in percentages and is calculated by dividing the first year’s rent by the total investment costs (see figure 2.8).

Figure 2.8. GIY calculation First years rent GIY = Total investment costs

GIY Gross Initial Yield

On the other hand, the NPV method is a method of valuing a project using all future costs and revenues and the concept of time value of money. All future cash flows are estimated and discounted to give their present values (see figure 2.9). The discount rate used reflects two things:

1. The time value of money (risk-free rate), investors would rather have cash immediately than having to wait and must therefore be compensated by paying for the delay. 2. A risk premium (risk premium rate), which reflects the extra return investors demand because they want to be compensated for the risk that the cash flow might not materialize after all.

Figure 2.9. NPV calculation n Cashflow NPV = t ∑ t t =0 (1+ i ) NPV Net present Value Cashflowt Net cash flow at time t t Time of the cash flow i Discount rate n Total period of cash flows

20 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Both methods have advantages and disadvantage. These are summarized in table 2.7.

Table 2.7. Advantages and disadvantages land value calculation methods

Relatively uncomplicated method with a limited amount of variables. + The result of the calculation is easy to communicate. The method does not give any insight into cash flows, mostly suitable GIY method for long term rental real estate with relatively stable cash flows. - No complete certainty about the definition of the GIY method. The GIY method does not take into account the exploitation costs, this disadvantage can be solved by using a Net Initial Yield (NIY). It will give the correct outcome assuming a perfect capital market. It will also give correct ranking for mutually exclusive projects. + NPV gives an absolute value.

NPV method NPV allows for the time value of the cash flows. It is very difficult to identify the correct discount rate, due to unpredictable changes. - NPV as method of investment appraisal requires the decision criteria to be specified before the appraisal can be undertaken.

Both methods, GIY and NPV, can give a good estimation of the financial feasibility, but the NPV method offers the best opportunity to incorporate phasing. Because the transformation of railway yards is very time consuming, this method gives the most accurate result in an urban area development process. The NPV method is therefore the preferred method in this process and is implemented in the developed calculation tool.

To calculate the total financial feasibility of the design both preferred methods are combined. The land value is the base for the calculation of the financial feasibility. The land value is the link between the land development part, the real estate development part and the real estate operation part. These are successive parts in the urban transformation cycle. The output of the land development part is the input for the real estate development part and the output of the real estate development part is the input for the real estate operation part (see figure 2.10).

To determine the feasibility the residual land value is compared with the actual land development costs, the outcome of the land development phase. The residual land value is calculated by subtracting the real estate development costs excluding the land costs, which is the outcome of the real estate development phase, from the maximum price the real estate operator can pay for the real estate, which is the outcome of the real estate operation phase. In the real estate operation phase the operation costs are subtracted from the operation revenues. In the real estate development phase construction costs of the real estate and the additional costs are calculated. The costs and revenues in all phases are calculated using a NPV-calculation. If the residual land value is lower than the land price calculated in the land development phase, the transformation is not financial feasible.

The final calculation system is implemented in the tool to be able to judge the financial feasibility.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 21 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 2.10. Urban transformation process Land Real estate Real estate operation development development

revenues for land department

purchase soil cleaning, costs site preparation

selling revenues real estate

land costs developer

construction costs

selling revenues net rental income

major repairs investment real estate owner

Presentation of F. Koppels AR1R070 (2008)

2.5.2. Qualitative feasibility

In this section insights are gained into qualitative feasibility for real estate in order to adjust the output of the tool. Reference projects are used to gain these insights. To determine the qualitative feasibility of these reference projects indexes and ratios are used. The indexes and ratios used are the Floor Space Index (FSI), the Ground Space Index (GSI), The Open Space Ratio (OSR), the Green Space Ratio (GSR), and the Space Parking Ratio (SPR). The reference projects used in this research are ‘s-Hertogenbosch and Tilburg. Each analysis of a reference project gives a bird’s-eye view picture of the railway area. Further, a fact sheet of the design and the qualitative feasibility of the railway area are made.

22 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Figure 2.11. Railway area 's-Hertogenbosch

Developable railway area

Indispensable rail infrastructure

Inner city area

Table 2.8. Facts railway area 's-Hertogenbosch Real estate Units GFA (m2) Residential 1,200 143,972 Retail - 5,562 Office - 100,729 Services - 27,199 Total real estate - 277,465 Parking Units GFA (m2) Cars 3,555 23,780 Bicycle - - Total parking - 23,780

Table 2.9. Qualities railway area 's-Hertogenbosch Area of the plan 180,918 m2 FSI 1.53 Parking places 3,555 Units GSI 0.31 GFA 277,465 m2 OSR 0.45 Footprint 56,407 m2 GSR 0.30 Green area 83,443 m2 SPR 78

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 23 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 2.12. Railway area Tilburg

Developable railway area

Indispensable rail infrastructure

Inner city area

Table 2.10. Facts railway area 's-Hertogenbosch Real estate Units GFA (m2) Residential 1,642 195,466 Retail - 10,662 Office - 73,371 Services - 52,923 Total real estate - 332,422 Parking Units GFA (m2) Cars 5,312 132,788 Bicycle 1,625 3,290 Total parking - 136,078

Table 2.11. Qualities railway area 's-Hertogenbosch Area of the plan 504,781 m2 FSI 0.65 Parking places 5,312 Units GSI 0.68 GFA 332,422 m2 OSR 0.47 Footprint 166,735 m2 GSR 0.16 Green area 54,284 m2 SPR 63

Although, these reference projects are not located on former railway yards, they do show some interesting insights in qualitative feasibility. For example the research shows that the average function mix is 60 percent residential and 40 percent non residential. Also, the areas analyzed all have a suburban character with high levels of green and parking places. The analysis of these precedents gives insights of railway area complying with the demands for the case study location.

24 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Based on the analysis of the reference projects it was chosen to determine the qualitative feasibility on the following four quality indicators:

• Urban type: The urban type determines the living environment; • Green area: The amount of green increases the living quality15; • Parking places: Railway station areas are multi modal infrastructure hubs16; • Function mix: The railway yard will be transformed into a multifunctional living area.

2.6. Financial calculation tools

Financial computerized calculation tools are used to gain insights in the financial consequences in each phase of complex integral area developments. Such financial calculation tools calculate the expected costs and revenues based on data and variables.

These tools are the most useful in the phases where the area development plans are still flexible and no final design decisions have been taken. In these phases simulation calculations can be executed to gain insights in the financial consequences of different urban designs. Variants and phasing options can be used to create the optimal area development. The use of calculation tools has one large disadvantage, the dependence on input. The output of a tool is as reliable as the most unreliable part of the input.

The tool used in this research has to comply with three demands to serve the end results of this research;

• Input method in line with the phase of the development, different levels of detail in input method; • Transparency, the tool has to give all the stakeholders the same information. This way discussion on the feasibility is the most fair; • Adjustable to the characteristics of railway yard areas.

Since RICARDO appeared to be compiling with the first two demands, RICARDO needs further research. RICARDO is a commonly known calculation tool for integrated area development, developed by ir. S.W. Bijleveld. The tool uses the design-and-calculate-method (tekenen-en- rekenen-methode) and is implemented in the computer by using Microsoft Excel 2003 and Visual Basics for Applications.

RICARDO consists of two parts, a calculation part and a design part. The calculation part of RICARDO uses a dynamic end value calculation method; the future value is calculated and converted to the present value. The Gross Initial Yields (GIY) is used to calculate the real estate value. These methods are explained in the next section. An important point in the calculation part of RICARDO is time. The aspect time is translated into the planning of the different phases, the land development, real estate development and real estate operations. In the tool it can be indicated how the different phases are connected to each other. The function and the amount of square meters of land use and the Gross Floor Area (GFA) per function are used to calculate the financial feasibility, this is the output of the design part.

15 Ponse, M.L.H. (2008) 16 VROM-raad (2009)

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 25 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

In the design part, variants can be drawn on a map of the development area which is loaded in the Excel model. The tool has a drawing tool, which makes it possible to generate design variants in this design part. There are three ways to specify the design in the drawing part: building masses, stamps and functional areas.

Building masses are used at the end of the design process, when much information about the design is present. In this method the design has to be specified in very high detail. All the characteristics of the design have to be specified separately, like the amount of parking place and the amount of green areas.

The other two methods use predefined characteristics for buildings. In RICARDO a building can be defined as one object, like a detached house, or as a group of objects, like an apartment complex. An object consists of a gross and net floor area, a plot size, a parking area, an area needed for access roads and an area needed for green. These characteristics are defined in RICARDO per object type and included in the library of RICARDO.

A stamp is the space use of building objects on one or more contiguous plots. A stamp is defined by the amount and type of objects in the stamp. Based on the characteristics of the objects in the library of RICARDO, the tool calculates the land use and the floor areas of the stamp and draws the stamp. This stamp can be placed on the map of the area.

A functional area is an area drawn on the map. In this functional area object types are defined as a percentage. The tool first calculates the amount of objects per type possible on the total area and calculates the amount of objects per square meters. The tool uses predefined configuration of stamps defined in the library for this calculation. This information is used to calculate the amount of objects per types based on the defined percentage.

These three methods determine the qualitative and quantitative input for the calculation tool. Because of the three different methods the level of detail can be increased during the process. This is one of the advantages of RICARDO.

Next to the input method the transparency of the tool is a large advantage. The first way of transparency is the fact that the tool offers the possibility to visualize the different plan variants and expresses this way the urban qualities of each variant. But the main goal of the design part is the supply of data for the calculation part. The second way is that the tool gives all the stakeholders the same information about the feasibility of the project. The results of the calculations are interesting for all stakeholders responsible for budgets, investments and yields. To create transparency on the calculation for all stakeholders, the revenues and yield are calculated per phase. Figure 2.13 shows the interface of RICARDO.

26 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Figure 2.13. Picture RICARDO

Design part Calculation part

Based on this research RICARDO was chosen as the based on the calculation tool. RICARDO needs to be adjusted in order for to comply with the specific characteristics railway yards.

2.7. The theoretical framework for creating the calculation tool

With RICARDO as the base of the calculation tool, three adjustments have to be made in order to create a calculation tool which complies with the characteristics of railway yards.

First, the design part of RICARDO has to be adjusted to environmental regulations. The design part has to offer the opportunity to enter the regulations which have a significant influence. In order to implement the environmental regulations in the tool a simplified version of the regulations is made.

The regulations on sound are divided buildings into four categories: hospitals, educational buildings, residential building and other functions. Other building functions do not have to comply with demands on their façade, but there is a demand of 40 dB for inside the building, because a ‘standard’ façade blocks 25 dB, the demand for inside buildings with an other real estate functions is levelled with the demand for the maximum sound on the facade for function 1, 2 and 3. The regulations on external safety indicate the presence of pool fire attention areas, the safety zone which indicated areas in which building is prohibited and the group risk which defines a maximum density. The factors on external safety are location dependent (see table 2.12).

Table 2.12. Final regulations Sound External safety No. User function Sound on the façade Safety Group Presence Preferred Maximum zone risk of PFAA 1 Educational function 53 dB 68 dB LD LD Yes/No 2 Hospital 53 dB 68 dB LD LD Yes/No Residential function 53 dB 68 dB LD LD Yes/No 3 Infrastructural function 53 dB 68 dB LD LD Yes/No 4 Other user functions - 68 dB LD LD Yes/No

Second, the calculation part has to be replaced in order to adjust the tool to the two characteristics of this special type of urban area development, time and extra land development cost. The land value will be the base of the calculation part. The residual land value, in which the real estate value is calculated using a NPV-method, is compared with the actual land development costs.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 27 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Third, the output of the tool has to be adjusted to give a clear image of the financial as well as the qualitative feasibility the variant delivers. Therefore, the output has to be able to judge the feasibility on the five following subjects:

28 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

3. Developed calculation tool

This chapter presents the first end product, the developed calculation tool. As indicated RICARDO has to be adjusted in three ways to incorporate the unique character of this type of transformations. Like RICARDO the developed calculation tool will consist of two parts; a design part and a calculation part.

The first section discusses the implications of the environmental regulations on the design part. The second section describes the calculation method used in the new calculation part. The third section discusses the adjustment on the output of the tool. This section defines the method to judge the feasibility on the output of the developed calculation tool. The fourth section of this chapter discusses the added value of the three adjustments on RICARDO. The last section discusses the input.

The developed tool is presented in appendix V and supplied on CD. The actual input is presented in appendix VI.

3.1. Adjusting the design part for environmental regulations

To adjust the design part of RICARDO to railway areas, environmental regulations on sound and external safety need to be implemented in the tool. These regulations have to be translated into the design part, because the regulations determine different zones with an impact on the developed real estate as well as the maximum inhabitant density. This is done by making two adjustments. First, the ability to create zones linked with the infrastructure in order to determine the developable area, the areas with extra costs and the area with a loss of design flexibility is implemented. Next, the tool needs to calculate the density of the design and check if this density does not exceed the maximum density linked with the group risk of the railway infrastructure.

In order for the tool to calculate the different zones, two steps have to be taken. The first step is entering the railway infrastructure in the developed calculation tool. The second step is entering the environmental data: the amount of noise pollution (dB), the safety zone (meter), the group risk (inhabitants/m2) and the presence of a pool fire attention area. The steps are presented in figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1. Environmental regulations

Map of railway area Enter railway infrastructure

Enter environmental data Zones

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 29 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Based on these two steps the tool first has to calculate the distance from the railway to the preferred and maximum sound value on the façade, before it can determine which different zones can be created. The tool uses the outcome of the calculated distance for the regulations on sound and the information on external safety to create a maximum of 6 different zones. The technical part of the creation of zones is included in appendix III.

The impact of the zones has to be translated into the design. To do so, the overlap of the design with the zones has to be calculated. The calculation of the overlap is based on a FORTRAN algorithm17, which is described in appendix IV. The described calculation method is not implemented in the tool, because the implementation is a highly technical time-consuming procedure and can be simulated in a research setting18. When an overlap between the design and the different zones appears, different actions have to be taken depending on the characteristics of the zone (see table 3.1).

Table 3.1. Zones

Zone Description 1 Not developable area for all real estate functions Not developable area for residential functions 2 Loss of flexibility by regulations on sound for other real estate functions Extra costs for pool fire attention areas for other real estate functions Loss of flexibility by regulations on sound for other real estate functions 3 Not developable area for residential functions Loss of flexibility by regulations on sound for all real estate functions 4 Extra costs for pool fire attention areas for all real estate functions 5 Loss of flexibility by regulations on sound for all real estate functions 6 Extra costs for pool fire attention areas for all real estate functions

Overlap with one of these six zones and real estate variables determine the output of the design part, the Gross Floor Area (GFA) of the different real estate functions and the locations which have extra costs or a loss in design flexibility. This output serves as input for the calculation part.

For the second adjustment to be made the tool has to calculate the density of the design (inhabitants/m2). In order to translate the square meters of GFA per real estate function into the density of the design, the building efficiency (m2/inhabitant) per real estate function has to be entered in the calculation part. In the calculation part the match between the maximum density linked with the group risk and the density of the design needs to be checked manually.

3.2. Introducing a new calculation part

In order to implement planning in the calculation of the real estate value, the old calculation part is replaced by a calculation part in which the real estate value is calculated using a NPV-method. This is done because planning is one of the most important elements in time consuming area developments, such as the transformation of railway yards. As a result the new calculation part consists of three parts linked with the three successive phases in area development processes: land development, real estate development and real estate operation.

17 Zerzan, J.M. (1989) 18 To implement the algorithm in Microsoft Excel 2003 the algorithm was translated in an algorithm for Visual Basics for Applications by ir. R.P. de Graaf of the TU Delft, faculty of architecture.

30 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

The NPV-calculation method is used to calculate all costs and revenues in the new calculation tool. In the NPV-method all future cash flows are estimated and discounted to give their present values. In order to calculate the NPV of the design two ways of calculating the present value need to be implemented in the tool. Which present value method is used depends on the presence of periodic payments. Figure 3.2 and 3.3 show the two methods to calculate the present value which are implemented in the calculation part.

Figure 3.2. Present value calculation C+s*(1 )t PV = (1+r )t PV Present value C Net cash flow at time t t The time of the cash flow i Discount rate s Annual increase in cost (inflation + increase of the costs above inflation)

Figure 3.3. Present value calculation of a periodic payment amount

n ⎛⎞⎛⎞1 + s t ⎜⎟1 − ⎜⎟ ⎛⎞Cs*(1+ ) ⎜⎟⎝⎠1 + i PV = ⎜⎟* ⎜⎟t ⎜⎟⎛⎞1 + s ⎝⎠()1*(1)++is⎜⎟1 − ⎜⎟⎜⎟1 + i ⎝⎠⎝⎠ PV Present value C Net cash flow at time t t Time till the first cash flow i Rate of return s Annual increase in cost (inflation + increase of the costs above inflation) n Total period of cash flows

The outcome of this new calculation part determines the financial feasibility of the design. This feasibility is obtained by comparing the NPV of residual land value with the NPV of the costs of the land development. In this way the maximum price that the real estate developer can pay for the land is calculated and compared with the actual costs for preparing the land.

3.3. Adjusting the output of the tool to judge the feasibility

Based on the output of the developed calculation tool the feasibility of the variants can be judged. Feasibility is defined during this research as a combination of financial and qualitative feasibility. To create a feasible Main variant both feasibilities have to be in balance. The financial feasibility was discussed in the previous section. This section will focus on qualitative feasibility. The qualitative feasibility was determined by the following qualitative indicators:

• Urban type: The urban type determines the living environment; • Green area: The amount of green increases the living quality; • Parking places: Railway station areas are multi modal infrastructure hubs; • Function mix: The railway yard will be transformed into a multifunctional living area.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 31 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The first three of these indicators are determined using indexes and ratios. They are used in the first phases of the urban area development process because the detail level of the design is in functional areas and ratios and indexes offer the opportunity the make a fair comparison between the variants. The last indicator, the function mix, is indicated by a percentile division of real estate functions.

The urban type is defined by combining the following ratios and indexes: Floor Space Index (FSI), Ground Space index (GSI) and Open Space Ratio (OSR, see figure 3.4). The green area is defined using the Green Space Ratio (GSR). A high GSR indicates a high percentage of green in the area. The amount of parking places is defined using the Space Parking Ratio (SPR). A low SPR indicates a high amount of parking places per square meter. The last quality indicator is the function mix. The function mix determines if an area corresponds with a multifunctional living area. The function mix is indicated by a percentile division of real estate functions. The calculation method of all ratios and indexes are given in table 3.2.

Figure 3.4. FSI, GSI, OSR

SPACEMATE / PERMETA

Table 3.2. Quality parameters Parameter Description Floor Space Index, a higher FSI means a FSI GFA/area of the plan higher density. Ground Space Index, a GSI closer to 1 means GSI footprint/area of the plan more built-on area in the plan. Open Space Ratio, A lower OSR means less OSR (Area of the plan-footprint)/GFA open space in the plan. Green Space Ratio, A lower GSR means less GSR Green area in the plan/GFA green space per square meter GFA. Space Parking ratio, a lower SPR means less SPR GFA/amount of parking places parking places per square meter GFA.

32 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Also, the Spacemate program is used to translate the FSI, GSI and OSR into a description of the urban environment using reference pictures19. As an example figure 3.5 shows reference picture for the urban type of design for the transformation of the railway area of Tilburg. When the detail level of the design is increased, using stamps or building masses (section 2.6), the developed calculation tool offers the possibility to give a description of the urban type by generating a 3D-picture of the variant.

Figure 3.5. References railway area Tilburg

Nieuwpoort Betondorp, Amsterdam/Watersgraafmeer

Betondorp, Amsterdam/Watersgraafmeer Ypenburg, Den Haag

The standards for the feasibility are determined by analyzing reference projects. The analysis of these projects was presented in the previous chapter and leads to the following demands:

3.4. Added value adjustments

The transformation of railway yards into multifunctional living areas is a special type of area development, which takes a very long time and is restricted by environmental regulations on sound and external safety. The incorporation of the unique character of this type of transformations in the developed calculation tool is the added value of this tool. In order to create this unique calculation tool RICARDO was adjusted in three ways.

19 http://www.spacemate.nl (PERMETA architects in cooperation with Bureau Parkstad, Amsterdam)

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 33 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The three adjustments can have a significant added value. Including the new calculation part makes it possible to give a more precise outcome of the financial feasibility. The adjustments on the output of the tool offer the opportunity to analyse the qualitative feasibility. To check the added value of the implementation of the environmental regulations a check needs to be made if an overlap with a zone has an influence on the final design. To check the influence of an overlap with a zone, two extreme variants are created and entered in the developed calculation tool.

The first variant only has residential real estate located in the extra cost zones, zones 2, 4 and 6, and all non residential real estate is located in the remaining area. The second variant is the opposite and has all non residential real estate located in the extra costs zone and all residential real estate located in the other area.

Table 3.3 shows the impact of a location of real estate in the extra cost zone. The table indicates that locating real estate in an extra cost zone influences the residual land value of the real estate located in the zone. In some cases, especially offices and services, the residual land value even changes from positive into negative. In order to create a financial feasible design the difference in residual land value influences the function mix. This thus has a large impact on the final design.

Table 3.3. Residual land value Residential in cost Non residential in Difference Real estate functions zone cost zone €/unit €/m2 €/unit €/m2 €/unit €/m2 Residential Social -38,696 -352 -18,824 -171 19,872 180 Apartment High 97,043 735 121,125 918 24,082 183 Rental Ground Social 39,374 331 58,689 494 19,315 163 bound High 88,925 498 118,388 663 29,463 165

Medium 89,119 810 104,214 947 15,095 137 Apartment Owner High 119,140 903 138,159 1,047 19,019 144 occupied Ground Medium 41,324 348 55,996 471 14,672 123 bound High 64,197 360 87,467 490 23,270 129 Retail 101,195 515 67,830 343 33,365 172 Offices 28,398 56 -68,178 -134 96,576 192 Services 73,254 122 -36,574 -61 109,828 182

As well as extra costs, an overlap with zones 2, 3, and 4 can indicate a loss in design flexibility. This lost of design flexibility is created by an overlap with a zone linked with regulations on sound and by the fact that in some areas only non residential real estate is allowed. An overlap with one of these zones has a large impact on the design.

These two different types of overlap show that the implementation of the regulations has a significant impact on the final design of the variant.

3.5. Input for the calculation tool

The input, that needs to be collected, can be divided into data and variables. Data is input for the tool which is not variable on one location, like construction costs. There are two types of data: environmental data like noise pollution of the railway, and operational data like construction costs. Variables are input which can be variable on every location, like building height.

34 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Based on interviews with experts (appendix II) and the study of literature, a list of input was created. The output of the developed calculation tool is as reliable as the less reliable input. To increase the reliability of the input this list of input was sent to the experts for a final check. The remarks and comments of the experts were incorporated and the input was made final.

3.5.1. Environmental data

Environmental data on sound and external safety is data which is the input for the environmental regulations. The sound data is needed to determine the areas which are not developable or have a loss of design flexibility. The sound data consists of the amount of sound pollution of the connecting railway track. The sound data can be gathered using ASWIN20, a computer program published under supervision of ProRail. The formula in figure 3.6 translates the amount of sound pollution into a non developable area.

Figure 3.6. Simplified “Standaardrekenmethode I”

LAeq = Es – Ddistance

LAeq Equivalent sound level = calculated Es Combined noise emission level Ddistance Debilitation term due to distance = 10 lg r

LAeq = Es - 10 lg r

There are three types of data on external safety which have to be entered in the developed calculation tool: the safety zone, the presence of a pool fire attention area and the group risk.

Data about the group risk can be calculated using RBMII21. The development of RBMII is commissioned by the Ministry of VenW. RBMII provides a relative simple and standardized calculation method for the calculation of the risks of the transport of hazardous substances. RBMII calculates the risks based on some input data, like population data, accident frequencies and the amount of transports of hazardous substances. The calculation shows if a specific railway track complies with the regulations on external safety. The outcome of this calculation is a maximum density.

To the “basisnet”-regulation an appendix is attached which indicates safety zones and the presence of pool fire attention areas for specific locations. Although the “basisnet”-regulation is not yet implemented at this moment, data on pool fire areas is already present and the data on the safety zones can be generated using RBMII.

3.5.2.Real estate variables

Variables are input which can be different on one location, like the amount of floors a building has. In this research the design of the variants is determined using real estate variables. By adjusting the real estate variables different variants are created. The four real estate variables used in this research are: Gross Floor Area (GFA), the amount of floors, the function mix of the real estate and the type of real estate. In table 3.4 a description of these variables is given.

20 http://www.deltarail.nl 21 http://rijkswaterstaat.nl

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 35 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 3.4. Real estate variables Variable Description Gross Floor Area (GFA) Total amount of realized real estate Floors Low rise, high rise Function mix of real estate Retail, housing, offices, services Type of real estate Rental, owner occupied

3.5.3. Operational data

The operational data consists of four parts, general operational data and operational data for the three phases of the urban transformation process, land development, real estate development and real estate operations. The four parts are presented in separate tables, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8. The last column of every table indicates if the data is influenced by the specific location of these types of transformations close to the railway track.

The most important operational data are the rate of return and the annual increase of costs. The rate of return consists of two parts, a risk-free rate, compensation of the time value of money, and a risk premium rate. The information can be gathered using specialized websites22 and interviews with experts. The annual increase of cost consists of inflation and increase above inflation. The annual increase of cost is used to include the increase of future value. These factors are determined by figures of statistics Netherlands23.

The other part of the operational data for land development, real estate development and real estate operation is gathered by studying reference projects, interview with experts and websites and publication of consultancy firms24. The data gathered from other sources is indicated above the tables. The actual data is presented in appendix VI.

22 http://www.dtz.nl 23 http://www.cbs.nl 24 http:// www.twynstragudde.nl and http://www.vitruvius-consultancy.nl

36 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 3.5. General operational data Operational data land development Input factor Unit rate Description Specific Website statistics Netherlands 1 Inflation rate % - (CBS)

2 Price level Years Set on 2010 -

Amount of public contribution 3 Subsidies € x to the redevelopment.

Table 3.6. Operational data land development Input factor Unit rate Description Specific Information from specialized 1 IRR land development % - websites and experts. Information on the acquisition 2 Acquisition costs €/m2 land - costs by the land owner. Soil clean up Lightly polluted These costs are split into lightly 3 €/m2 land x costs Polluted polluted and polluted area. Information on the cost of 4 Outplacement costs €/m2 land x moving a railway yard. Cost for demolition of roads 5 Demolition costs €/m2 land - and structures in the area. These costs are split up is cost Site For building for preparing the land for 6 preparation Pavement €/m2 land - building, costs for pavement costs Green and costs for green. The additional cost consists of the later five points and will be expressed in one percentage 7 Additional costs % (Preparatory costs and - supervision costs/Charges/ Insurance/Start-up costs /Unforeseen expenses).

Website statistics Netherlands 8 Increase above inflation % - (CBS)

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 37 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The extra costs for environmental regulations (5) are based on a document of the Interprovinciaal Overleg (IPO) 25.

Table 3.6. Operational real estate development Input factor Unit rate Description Specific Information from specialized 1 IRR real estate development % - websites and experts. Parking €/unit The construction costs are influenced by the specific Dwellings location of these areas. These Construction 2 Retail extra cost expressed in a - costs €/m2 GFA Offices percentage. The construction costs are split per function Services type. The surface of the dwellings in 3 Surface Dwellings m2 GFA needed to calculate the - efficiency. Parking The additional cost consists of the later five points and will be Dwellings expressed in one percentage Additional 4 Retail % (Preparatory costs and - costs Offices supervision costs/Charges /Insurance/Start-up cost Services /Unforeseen expenses). The extra costs are caused by 5 Extra costs External safety % x regulations on external safety. Parking Dwellings The factor between the Gross Factor Floor Area (GFA) and the 6 Retail % - GFA/LFA Lettable Floor Area (LFA) is Offices split per function type. Services Website statistics Netherlands 7 Increase above inflation % - (CBS)

25 IPO (2010)

38 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

The extra revenues for buildings close to a railway station (9) are based on a paper of the CPB26.

Table 3.7. Operational real estate operation Input factor Unit rate Description Specific

Information from specialized 1 IRR real estate operation % websites and experts. The IRR - is split per function. Parking Dwellings The Gross Initial Yield (GIY) is used to calculate the rest value 2 GIY Retail % - of the real estate. The GIY in Offices defined per function. Services The surface of the dwellings in 3 Rental Period Years needed to calculate the - efficiency.

The friction vacancy rate reflex Friction continues vacancy. This rate is defined per function, the start 4 Vacancy rate % rent vacancy rate reflex the vacancy - in the first three years. This Start rate is defined per year and function.

The yearly maintenance is Yearly defined per function type. The structural maintenance is 5 Maintenance % CC - conducted every 10 year. This Structural rate is defined per function and 10 year Maintenance Pavement These costs are covered by the 6 €/m2/Y - public space Green municipality. Dwellings The building efficiency is Retail needed to check the design 7 Efficiency m2/inh. with the maximum density - Offices linked to the transport of Services hazardous substances.

8 Operation cost % Costs for operating the building -

Extra revenues for buildings Research of I.V. Ossokina 9 % x close to a railway station (CPB) €/m2 The rent is specified per 10 Rent - LFA/Y function type. Parking €/unit Dwellings The selling price are specified 11 Selling prices Retail - €/m2 LFA per function type Offices Services Website statistics Netherlands 12 Increase above inflation % (CBS)

26 Ossokina (2010),

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 39 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

40 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

4. Method & feasibility factors

This chapter discusses a variant study using the first end product of the research, the developed calculation tool which was developed in the previous chapter. This variant study is performed in order to develop the second and third end product: the method to create a feasible transformation variant and an overview of factors influencing the feasibility of the variants.

The actual method to create a feasible variant is included in appendix VII. More detailed calculations of the balances of the land development are included in the financial appendixes.

4.1. Variant study Zutphen

This variant study creates a Main variant for Zutphen using sub variants. Zutphen is a municipality located in the province of Gelderland with a surface of 42.82 km2 and 46, 878 inhabitants (1,145 inhabitants/km2). Figure 4.1 shows the railway area of Zutphen and table 4.1 shows the characteristics of the railway area of Zutphen. This information is used to create the environmental zones.

Figure 4.1. Railway area Zutphen

Developable railway area

Indispensable rail infrastructure

Inner city area

Table 4.1. Railway area Zutphen Area of the plan 220,953 m2 Sound pollution 75.5 dB Safety zone 0 m Pool fire attention area Yes, 30 m Day 12,500 users Maximum density Night 11,000 users

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 41 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

4.1.1. Sub variants Zutphen

As part of the variant study, three sub variants are created. These sub variants are used to determine the characteristics for the Main variant. These sub variants have the level of detail of functional areas in RICARDO. This means that in all the sub variants the functions are defined as a percentage of the total amount of real estate, the tool translates this percentage into the GFA per real estate function. The sub variants have to cover a functional range from a social variant till a profit variant. Therefore it was chosen to base the sub variants on market research, precedents and policy of the local government. The three sub variants are:

• Market variant: This variant is a translation of the existing plan for the area, assuming that the existing plan is based on a market research; • Social variant: This variant has 40 percent of social housing and the non-housing part of the real estate is also 30 percent; • Policy variant: This variant is the current real estate configuration of the municipality corrected with the structural vision of the municipality on real estate.

Next, the three sub variants are presented separately. First, the characteristics of the different real estate functions are presented in a table (percentage, amount, Gross Floor Area and residual land value). Second, the financial feasibility and the quality parameters are presented and using the Spacemate website reference pictures are generated. Last, a conclusion on the feasibility of the sub variant is presented.

42 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 4.2. Costs and revenues market variant Residual land value Amount Land value Real estate m2 GFA % Units (€) Residential 93.00 1,068 145,278 105,974,222 Social 6.60 75 8,250 -1,538,971 Apartment High 2.50 29 3,828 3,452,560 Rental Ground Social 6.60 76 9,029 4,334,162 bound High 0.00 0 0 -

Medium 10.60 123 13,530 12,658,615 Apartment Owner High 40.40 463 61,116 63,210,587 occupied Ground Medium 6.90 79 9,385 4,323,989 bound High 19.40 223 40,140 19,534,280 Retail 2.60 30 5,625 2,814,711 Offices 2.50 29 15,042 591,557 Services 1.90 22 13,086 1,396,507 Total real estate 100.00 1,149 190,938 110,776,997 Parking Level 0 15.00 219 1,462,729 Level 0 covered 45.00 658 2,477,029 Level -0,5 40.00 585 558,277 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,462 4,498,036 NPV residual land value 115,275,033 Cost land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 31,043,406 Soil clean up costs 1,802,082 Railway yard outplacement costs 1,630,041 Demolition costs 2,716,734 Site preparation costs 29,837,776 NPV costs land development 67,030,038 Balance land development 48,244,995

Table 4.2 shows that this design has a positive balance for the land development. The positive balance is mainly caused by the high percentage of high priced residential real estate. A high percentage of high priced real estate generates a high risk for this development. This is caused by the fact that high priced real estate has a lower potential take-up by the market. This is shown by the higher GIY of the high priced real estate27. The positive balance for the land development consists of the profit of the land owner and the real estate developer. Table 4.2 also shows that the mix of functions is low; more than half of the area consists of high end residential real estate. This positive balance gives an opportunity to create a social variant with a more equal division of functions in the variant.

27 Tazelaar, T.A.C. (2002)

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 43 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 4.3. Qualities market variant Area of the plan 224,366 m2 FSI 0.77 Operating area 220,953 m2 GSI 0.22 Parking places 1,462 Units OSR 1.00 GFA 170,925 m2 GSR 0.16 Footprint 49,366 m2 SPR 117 Green area 26,855 m2 Day 2,218 Users Building height 1-5 Floors Night 2,395

Figure 4.2. References market variant

Amsteldorp, Amsterdam/Watersgraafmeer Holendrecht. Amsterdam/Zuidoost

Kolenkit, Amsterdam/Bos en Lommer Dreischor

SPACEMATE, PERMETA Architects (2010)

As can be seen from table 4.3 and the reference pictures in figure 4.2, the area has a suburban character with a relative high percentage of green area. The ratio between the Gross Floor Area and the amount of parking places (SPR) is high in comparison with the precedent, which indicates a lower amount of parking places.

44 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 4.4. Costs and revenues social variant Residual land value Amount Land value Real estate m2 GFA % Units (€) Residential 70.00 574 72,488 34,666,095 Social 20.00 164 18,040 -3,367,403 Apartment High 5.00 41 5,412 4,881,205 Rental Ground Social 20.00 164 19,483 9,352,666 bound High 5.00 41 7,380 4,863,334

Medium 5.00 41 4,510 4,219,538 Apartment Owner High 5.00 41 5,412 5,597,482 occupied Ground Medium 5.00 41 4,871 2,244,095 bound High 5.00 41 7,380 3,591,504 Retail 10.00 82 16,096 8,058,764 Offices 10.00 82 41,389 1,627,702 Services 10.00 82 49,273 5,258,289 Total real estate 100.00 820 179,246 46,323,176 Parking Level 0 40.00 723 4,818,937 Level 0 covered 30.00 542 2,040,133 Level -0,5 30.00 542 517,285 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,807 7,376,355 NPV residual land value 53,669,531 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 31,043,406 Soil clean up costs 1,802,082 Railway yard outplacement costs 1,630,041 Demolition costs 2,716,734 Site preparation costs 29,693,944 NPV costs land development 66,886,206 Balance land development -13,186,675

Table 4.4 shows that the design of this variant has a negative balance on the land development. The negative balance is caused by the high percentage of social housing. This design shows that a high percentage of social housing has a negative influence on the balance of the land development. But the high percentage of social housing creates a low risk profile. This is caused by the fact that social real estate has a much higher potential take-up by the market. This is shown by the lower GIY of social real estate28. Table 4.4 also shows that this variant has a good mix of functions, but the division in the residential real estate is not equal.

28 Tazelaar, T.A.C. (2002)

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 45 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 4.5. Qualities social variant Area of the plan 224,366 m2 FSI 0.81 Operating area 220,953 m2 GSI 0.28 Parking places 1,807 Units OSR 0.88 GFA 179,246 m2 GSR 0.07 Footprint 61,930 m2 SPR 99 Green area 12,359 m2 Day 3,732 Users Building height 1-6 Floors Night 1,278

Figure 4.3. References social variant

Feyenoord, Rotterdam Betondorp, Amsterdam/Watersgraafmeer

Ypenburg, Den Haag Venserpolder, Amsterdam/Zuidoost

SPACEMATE, PERMETA Architects (2010)

As can be seen from table 4.5 and the reference pictures in figure 4.3, the area has a suburban character with a relative low percentage of green area. The ratio between the Gross Floor Area and the amount of parking places (SPR) is near the ratio of the precedents. In this variant the density during day time is too high.

46 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 4.6. Costs and revenues policy variant Residual land value Amount Land value Real estate m2 GFA % Units (€) Residential 89.00 832 110,182 56,310,210 Social 8.00 75 8,250 -1,539,971 Apartment High 2.00 19 2,508 2,262,022 Rental Ground Social 23.00 215 25,542 12,261,117 bound High 6.00 56 9,996 6,487,853

Medium 7.00 65 7,150 6,689,512 Apartment Owner High 5.00 47 6,204 6,416,625 occupied Ground Medium 23.00 215 25,542 11,767,818 bound High 15.00 140 24,990 11,965,224 Retail 3.00 28 5,492 2,748,308 Offices 3.00 28 14,123 555,414 Services 5.00 47 28,022 2,990,436 Total real estate 100.00 935 157,819 62,604,359 Parking Level 0 15.00 205 1,363,888 Level 0 covered 45.00 614 2,309,648 Level -0,5 45.00 545 520,552 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,364 4,194,089 NPV residual land value 66,798,447 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 31,043,406 Soil clean up costs 1,802,082 Railway yard outplacement costs 1,630,041 Demolition costs 2,716,734 Site preparation costs 27,901,176 NPV costs land development 65,093,438 Balance land development 1,705,009

Table 4.6 shows that the design of this variant has a slightly positive balance on the land development. The positive balance of this variant does not leave much profit for the real estate developer and the land owner. The policy variant represents the current configuration of the real estate in Zutphen corrected for the policy of the municipality. If the policy is based on the right market conditions, this sub variant has a low risk profile.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 47 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 4.7. Qualities Policy variant Area of the plan 224,336 m2 FSI 0.71 Operating area 220,953 m2 GSI 0.27 Parking places 1,364 Units OSR 1.02 GFA 157,819 m2 GSR 0.08 Footprint 59,713 m2 SPR 116 Green area 12,620 m2 Day 2,295 Users Building height 1-6 Floors Night 1,844

Figure 4.4. References policy variant

Betondorp, Amsterdam/Watersgraafmeer Amsteldorp, Amsterdam/Watersgraafmeer

Ypenburg, Den Haag Dreischor

SPACEMATE, PERMETA Architects (2010)

As can be seen from table 4.7 and the reference pictures in figure 4.4, the area has a suburban character with a relative low percentage of green area. The ratio between the Gross Floor Area and the amount of parking places (SPR) is high is comparison with the precedents, which indicates a low amount of parking places.

48 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

4.1.2. Main variant Zutphen

For making the Main variant the relevant strengths of the three sub variants are combined. Table 4.8 gives an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the three sub variants. The strengths used are: the amount of green and the real estate with a high profit from the market variant, the function mix from the social variant, and the division of the residential real estate from the policy variant. This is done while trying to avoid a high risk profile.

Table 4.8. Strengths and weaknesses sub variants Strengths Weaknesses

+ High balance on the land - Function mix Market variant development - Low amount of parking places + High percentage of green - High risk profile

- Negative balance on the land + Function mix development Social variant + Low risk profile - Low percentage of green + High amount parking places - Density too high

+ Slightly positive balance on the land development - Low percentage of green Policy variant + Low risk profile - Low amount of parking places + Division of the residential real estate

In the Main variant first functional areas are used to create the basis of the variant. To fine tune the Main variant, this variant is entered in the tool on a stamp level. This means the variant is created placing predefined stamps of building types on the map. The tool translates the stamps into Gross Floor Area (GFA) per real estate function.

The stamp method is more detailed than the functional area input method. The real estate program entered using the stamps method is directly copied from the real estate program of the Main variant in functional areas. If the ground use of Main variant in stamps exceeds the operating area of the development area, the amount of building stamps need to be adjusted in a way that the operating area and the ground use match and the percentile division of functions is similar with the Main variant in functional areas. In this way the level of detail is increases and the design is fined tuned. The urban type of the Main variant in stamps is presented with a 3D-picture generated with the developed calculation tool.

Table 4.9 presents the characteristics of the different real estate functions of the Main variant in functional areas (percentage, amount, Gross Floor Area and residual land value); also the total financial feasibility of Main variant in functional areas is shown. Table 4.11 presents the quality parameters.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 49 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 4.9. Costs and revenues Main variant in functional areas Residual land value Amount Land value Real estate m2 GFA % Units (€) Residential 85.00 745 94,723 66,733,452 Social 5.00 44 4,840 -902,306 Apartment High 10.00 88 11,616 10,479,506 Rental Ground Social 20.00 175 20,790 9,984,401 bound High 5.00 44 7,854 5,099,294

Medium 20.00 175 19,250 18,013,680 Apartment Owner High 15.00 131 17,292 17,887,896 occupied Ground Medium 5.00 44 5,227 2,409,142 bound High 5.00 44 7,854 3,761,838 Retail 7.50 66 12,866 6,441,299 Offices 2.50 22 11,028 436,436 Services 5.00 44 26,257 2,808,364 Total real estate 100.00 877 144,874 76,419,550 Parking Level 0 30.00 414 2,757,542 Level 0 covered 40.00 551 2,075,424 Level -0,5 30.00 414 394,675 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,378 5,227,641 NPV residual land value 81,647,191 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 31,043,406 Soil clean up costs 1,802,082 Railway yard outplacement costs 1,630,041 Demolition costs 2,716,734 Site preparation costs 30,428,174 NPV costs land development 67,620,436 Balance land development 14,026,755

Table 4.9 shows that this variant has a positive balance for the land development and a low risk profile because there is a high percentage of social housing. The low revenues of the social housing are compensated with high profits from the apartments. This also leads to a good function mix.

Table 4.10. Qualities Main variant in functional areas Area of the plan 224,366 m2 FSI 0.66 Operating area 220,953 m2 GSI 0.25 Parking places 1,378 Units OSR 1.14 GFA 144,874 m2 GSR 0.12 Footprint 55,200 m2 SPR 105 Green area 17,635 m2 Day 2,182 Users Building height 1-6 Floors Night 1,662

50 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

As can be seen from table 4.10 the area has a suburban character with a relative high percentage of green area. The ratio between the Gross Floor Area and the amount of parking places (SPR) is high in comparison with the precedents. The next step is fine tuning the bases of the Main variant. When the Main variant is created in stamps the green character needs to be maintained while increasing the amount of parking places. The Main variant in stamps is presented in table 4.11 and 4.12 and figures 4.5 and 4.6.

Table 4.11. Costs and revenues Main variant in stamps Residual land value Amount Land value Real estate m2 GFA % Units (€) Residential 85.78 733 93,261 24,109,151 Social 4.66 40 4,400 -752,964 Apartment High 9.32 80 10,560 9,208,335 Rental Ground Social 21.20 182 21,622 10,681,479 bound High 4.90 42 7,497 4,972,301

Medium 20.98 180 19,800 18,758,447 Apartment Owner High 14.92 128 16,896 17,684,410 occupied Ground Medium 4.90 42 4,990 2,351,820 bound High 4.90 42 7,497 3,673,610 Retail 6.99 60 12,442 6,409,884 Offices 2.45 21 10,886 -575,230 Services 4.78 41 24,600 1,365,689 Total real estate 100.00 855 141,189 73,777,781 Parking Level 0 30.00 451 3,007,035 Level 0 covered 40.00 601 2,263,201 Level -0,5 30.00 451 430,383 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,503 5,700,619 NPV residual land value 79,872,098 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 31,043,406 Soil clean up costs 1,802,082 Railway yard outplacement costs 1,630,041 Demolition costs 2,716,734 Site preparation costs 28,208,510 NPV costs land development 65,400,772 Balance land development 14,471,326

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 51 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 4.12. Qualities Main variant in functional areas Area of the plan 224,366 m2 FSI 0.64 Operating area 220,953 m2 GSI 0.31 Parking places 1,503 Units OSR 1.08 GFA 141,189 m2 GSR 0.17 Footprint 67,862 m2 SPR 94 Green area 24,536 m2 Day 2,112 Users Building height 1-6 Floors Night 1,642

Figure 4.5. Main variant in stamps

Social Retail Apartments High Offices Rental Ground Social Services Bound High Housing Medium Water Apartments Owner High Occupied Ground Medium Bound High

52 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Figure 4.6. Main variant Zutphen in stamps (3D)

Table 4.11 shows that the Main variant still has a positive balance on the land development. The balance is decreased because the amount of real estate is decreased in the fine tune process. The functional mix is almost kept the same, as can be seen from table 4.12 and figure 4.5 and 4.6. The area has a suburban character with a high percentage of green area. The ratio between the Gross Floor Area and the amount of parking places (SPR) is increased during the fine tune process.

4.1.3. Scenario analysis of the Main variant

To test the durability of the Main variant a scenario analysis is conducted. Scenarios can be seen as descriptions of different possible future situations. These alternative futures can be used to project what might happen in the future and see if the developed variant remains feasible. Three scenarios were used in this analysis. The scenarios are summarised in table 4.13. In all scenarios is assumed that the land is acquired in the year t0.

The first scenario is the ideal situation. In the year t1 the land development starts, which will take 1 year. The land development is directly followed by the real estate development, which will start in year t2. This real estate development will take 2 years. The real estate exploitative starts directly after the completion of the development in year t4.

The second scenario represents the end of the financial crisis. The land development starts a year later than in the ideal situation in year t2. The real estate development also starts 1 year later in t4. In this scenario the assumption is made that after the realisation of the real estate the crisis is over, things have changed for the best, and the real estate can be sold immediately after realisation in year t6.

The last scenario assumes that it will take longer to recover from the crisis. For this reason the exploitation of the real estate starts 2 years after the realisation of the real estate in t8.

Table 4.13. Scenarios

Start land Start real estate Start real estate Scenario development development operation

Ideal t0 + 1 t1 + 1 t2 + 2 t4

End of crisis t0 + 2 t2 + 2 t4 + 2 t6

Crisis t0 + 2 t2 + 2 t4 + 4 t8

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 53 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The different scenarios were entered in the tool. Table 4.14 shows the financial results of the scenarios. The cash flows of the three scenarios are shown in fig 4.7. The results show that the Main variant is durable, only in the situation that the crisis will hold on for more than 6 years the Main variant has a negative balance. Based on the scenario analysis the conclusion is drawn that the Main variant is durable, under different conditions.

Table 4.14. Outcome scenarios

Total costs land Total costs land Balance land Scenarios development (€) development (€) development (€) Ideal 79,872,098 65,400,772 14,471,326 End of crisis 78,045,022 64,260,954 13,784,068 Crisis 60,049,547 64,260,954 -4,211,407

Figure 4.7. Cash flow land value

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s -10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 n o li il -20 M -30

-40

-50

Ideal End of crisis Crisis

4.1.4. Conclusion variant study Zutphen

To create a feasible variant, the Main variant has to have be financial as well as qualitative feasible. The variant study shows that a Main variant can be created which delivers a financial as well as a qualitative feasible result and is durable.

4.2. Method to create a feasible transformation variant

The goal of the research was, next to creating a new calculation tool, to develop a method to create a feasible transformation variant. The variant study was used to create this method. The method is based on the transformation of Zutphen. The method uses text and pictures to describe the development of a Main variant for the transformation of a railway yard into a multifunctional living area. The method consists of two parts, the preparation of the tool and the creation of a main variant. The method to create a feasible transformation variant for Zutphen is included in appendix VII.

54 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

The preparation of the tool explains how the tool needs to be prepared for use. The railway area is analysed in order to prepare the tool. First the environmental restrictions are determined and the environmental data is entered, like the amount of air pollution. Second the location specific operational data, like rent prices, and specific areas, like the amount of polluted soil, are entered. The last step is the creation of zones, based on the environmental regulations.

The creation of the main variant follows the same steps as the variant study performed in this chapter. First three sub variants are created to determine the characteristics of the Main variant. Second, these sub variants are presented and judged. Third, a Main variant in functional areas in created based on the strengths of these three sub variants. Fourth, the Main variant in stamps is created. Last this main variant is presented.

4.3. Feasibility factors

The variant study also shows which real estate parameters have an influence on the feasibility. All conclusions on the type of real estate are summarized in table 4.15.

Table 4.15. Facts per function Residual land value Green area Parking 2 (€/unit) (€/m2) (m /unit) (units/unit) Real estate Residential - - Social -20,533 -187 34 1 Apartment High 119,054 902 34 1 Rental Ground Social 57,028 480 9 1 bound High 115,855 649 9 1

Medium 102,916 936 34 1 Apartment Owner High 136,524 1,034 9 1 occupied Ground Medium 54,734 461 9 1 bound High 85,466 479 34 1 Retail - 500 0 4 Office - 39 0 6 Services - 107 0 5 Parking Level 0 6,668 - - - Level 0 covered 3,764 - - - Level -0,5 954 - - -

The financial feasibility was mostly influenced by the type of real estate. Apartments, excluding social rent apartments, and retail give the best result on the financial feasibility. Social apartments and offices gave the lowest results on financial feasibility, with social apartments even having a negative result.

The qualitative feasibility was determined by the urban type, green area, parking places and function mix. The urban type is in this research was determined by the factors FSI, GSI and OSR. The building height and real estate type had the largest influence on these factors and therefore on the urban type. This is caused by the fact that the tool uses predefined configurations of real estate types and only the building height can be changed.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 55 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The amount of green areas is influenced by the type of real estate. The variant study shows that in Zutphen the residential real estate generates green areas, caused by demands for green area linked with residential real estate. Apartments generate the highest amount of green areas. Also the amount of parking places is influenced by the type of real estate. The variant study shows that the non residential real estate generates more parking places, caused by demands for parking linked with the real estate type.

More profitable real estate was used to compensate for the lower profitable real estate. The balance between residential real estate and non residential real estate creates the balance between green area and parking places. And the type, which can be increased in building height, apartments, offices and service, determines the urban type.

These former conclusions show that the real estate types create contradicting results on the financial and qualitative feasibility. A feasible Main variant is determined by financial as well a qualitative feasibility. Based on this it was concluded that in order to create a feasible Main variant the function mix is the most important real estate variable.

56 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

5. Testing applicability calculation tool & method

In this chapter the general applicability of the calculation tool and method, developed in the previous chapters for the railway area of Zutphen, is tested on two other locations. The test locations, Amersfoort and Nijmegen, were chosen in consultation with the Ministry of VROM.

For these two locations a Main variant is created using the method and the developed calculation tool created for Zutphen. If feasible Main variants can be developed with a positive result on the financial feasibility as well as the qualitative feasibility, the end products can be seen as general applicable. The following sections present the variant studies for both locations separately. The testing of the tool and the method can lead to adjustments to the tool and the method; as well as new feasibility factors can become apparent.

In order to create the Main variant for Zwolle and Nijmegen the location specific data of course has to be adjusted (see table 5.1).

Table 5.1. Location specific data Operational data land development IRR land development % Acquisition costs €/m2 land Operational real estate development IRR real estate development % Operational real estate operation IRR real estate operation % GIY % Friction Vacancy rate % rent Start Efficiency m2/inhabitant Rent €/m2 LFA/Y Selling prices €/unit or €/m2 LFA

The developed calculation tool is supplied on CD and the general method is included in appendix VIII. A more detailed presentation of the calculations of the balances of the land development is included in the financial appendixes.

5.1. Variant study Amersfoort

This section presents the variant study for the location Amersfoort. Amersfoort is a municipality located in the province of Utrecht with a surface of 63.78 km2 and 143,212 inhabitants (2,281 inhabitants/km2). Figure 5.1 shows the railway area of Amersfoort and table 5.2 presents the characteristics of the railway area of Amersfoort. This information is used to create the environmental zones.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 57 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 5.1. Railway area Amersfoort

Developable railway area

Indispensable rail infrastructure

Inner city area

Table 5.2. Railway area Amersfoort Area of the plan 205,646 m2 Sound pollution 86.0 dB Safety zone 0 m Pool fire attention area Yes, 30 m Day NA Maximum density Night NA

58 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Next, the sub variants used to create the main variant are presented. Table 5.3 presents the characteristics of the different real estate functions (the percentage and Gross Floor Area (GFA)) and the financial and the quality feasibility of the sub variants.

Table 5.3. Facts sub variants Amersfoort Costs and revenues sub variants Profit Social Policy

% m2 % m2 % m2 Residential 93.00 128,693 70.00 58,474 90.00 103,556 Social 4.00 4,730 20.00 14,630 10.00 9,680 Apartment High 25.00 35,904 5.00 4,356 3.00 3,432 Rental Ground Social 4.00 5,227 20.00 15,800 21.00 21,859 bound High 3.00 5,891 5.00 5,891 8.00 12,495

Medium 25.00 29,920 5.00 3,630 10.00 9,680 Apartment Owner High 25.00 35,904 5.00 4,356 5.00 5,808 occupied Ground Medium 4.00 5,227 5.00 3,920 21.00 21,859 bound High 3.00 5,891 5.00 5,891 12.00 18,743 Retail 3.00 6,395 10.00 12,988 3.00 5,154 Office 2.00 10,963 10.00 33,397 3.00 13,254 Services 2.00 13,051 10.00 39,759 4.00 21,038 Total real estate 100.00 159,102 100.00 144,618 100.00 143,002 Parking 1,381 units 1,458 units 1,236 units NPV residual land value (€) 140,438,312 65,452,287 82,381,356 NPV land development cost (€) 73,222,675 72,115,548 70,293,104 Balance land development (€) 67,215,637 -6,663,261 12,142,252 Qualities sub variants Operating area 205,646 m2 205,646 m2 205,646 m2 Footprint 50,983 m2 56,465 m2 53,048 m2 Green area 30,584 m2 9,972 m2 12,237 m2 FSI 0.77 0.70 0.70 GSI 0.25 0.27 0.26 OSR 0.97 1.03 1.07 GSR 0.19 0.07 0.09 SPR 115 99 116 Day 1,995 3,012 2,015 Users Night 2,274 1,032 1,750

After this the Main variant for Amersfoort is presented. This Main variant is based on the strengths and weaknesses of the sub variants. Table 5.4 presents the strengths and weaknesses of the sub variants. These strengths are used to create the Main variant in functional areas (table 5.5). Last, the Main variant in stamps is presented (table 5.6 and 5.7 and figure 5.2 and 5.3).

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 59 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 5.4. Strengths and weaknesses sub variants Amersfoort Strengths Weaknesses

+ High balance on the land - Function mix Profit variant development - Low amount of parking places + High percentage of green - High risk profile

+ Function mix - Negative balance on the land Social variant + Low risk profile development + High amount parking places - Low percentage of green

+ Low risk profile - Function mix Demographic variant + Positive balance on the land - Low amount of parking places development

Table 5.5. Costs and revenues Main variant Amersfoort / Functional areas Residual land value Amount Residual land Real estate GFA (m2) % Units value (€) Residential 90.00 841 106,493 75,686,081 Social 12.50 117 12,870 -2,496,686 Apartment High 12.50 117 15,444 17,493,219 Rental Ground Social 15.00 140 16,632 11,096,252 bound High 4.00 37 6,605 5,632,536

Medium 12.50 117 12,870 12,950,772 Apartment Owner High 12.50 117 15,444 17,186,867 occupied Ground Medium 10.00 140 16,632 8,508,128 bound High 6.00 56 9,996 5,314,995 Retail 2.50 23 4,576 3,132,939 Office 2.50 23 11,767 2,629,390 Services 5.00 47 28,017 8,403,150 Total real estate 100.00 934 150,853 89,851,560 Amount Residual land Parking % Units value (€) Level 0 30.00 399 2,901,027 Level 0 covered 40.00 532 2,114,182 Level -0,5 30.00 399 345,944 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,331 5,361,153 NPV residual land value 95,212,713 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 30,847,050 Soil clean up costs 4,394,919 Railway yard outplacement costs 3,765,118 Demolition costs 2,852,362 Site preparation costs 29,478,378 NPV cost land development 71,336,926 Balance land development 23,875,787

60 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 5.6. Costs and revenues Main variant Amersfoort / Stamps Residual land value Amount Residual land Real estate GFA (m2) % Units value (€) Residential 90.00 837 106,009 75,300,319 Social 12.47 116 12,760 -2,475,347 Apartment High 12.47 116 15,312 17,343,704 Rental Ground Social 15.06 140 16,632 11,096,252 bound High 3.98 37 6,605 5,632,536

Medium 12.47 116 12,760 12,840,081 Apartment Owner High 12.47 116 15,312 17,039,970 occupied Ground Medium 15.06 140 16,632 8,508,128 bound High 6.02 56 9,996 5,314,995 Retail 2.37 22 4,562 3,123,300 Office 2.47 23 11,923 2,664,293 Services 5.16 48 28,800 8,637,995 Total real estate 100.00 930 151,294 89,725,907 Amount Residual land Parking % Units value (€) Level 0 30.00 470 3,418,862 Level 0 covered 40.00 627 2,491,565 Level -0,5 30.00 470 407,695 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,568 6,318,122 NPV residual land value 96,044,029 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 31,276,500 Soil clean up costs 4,394,919 Railway yard outplacement costs 3,765,118 Demolition costs 2,852,362 Site preparation costs 29,017,584 NPV cost land development 71,306,483 Balance land development 24,737,546

Table 5.7. Qualities Main variant Amersfoort Area of the plan 227,670 m2 FSI 0.73 Operating area 208,510 m2 GSI 0.26 Parking places 1,568 Units OSR 1.02 GFA 151,294 m2 GSR 0.13 Footprint 54,545 m2 SPR 96 Green area 19,409 m2 Day 2,237 Users Building height 1-5 Floors Night 1,866

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 61 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 5.2. Main variant Amersfoort

Social Retail Apartments High Offices Rental Ground Social Services Bound High Housing Medium Apartments Owner High Occupied Ground Medium Bound High

Figure 5.3. Main variant Amersfoort in stamps (3D)

The variant study shows that it is possible to create a financial and qualitative feasible variant for Amersfoort using the developed calculation tool and the method. Table 5.6 shows that the Main variant has a positive balance on the land development and a low risk profile because there is a high percentage of social housing. The low revenues of the social housing are compensated with high profits from the apartments. This leads to a good function mix. As can be seen from table 5.7 and figure 5.2 and 5.3 the area has a suburban character with a relative high percentage of green area. The ratio between the Gross Floor Area and the amount of parking places (SPR) is according to the precedents.

The variant study also shows that in Amersfoort there is only an overlap with zone 2, in which no residential functions are allowed and only non residential functions with a lost of design flexibility. In Zutphen this zone was very small and did not have an influence. In Amersfoort an extra check

62 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard needs to be added to see if the ground use of the non residential real estate is large enough to cover the overlap with zone 2.

Another conclusion is the indication of the railway yard to create the zones. Not the railway yard but the connecting railway track needs to be entered. In Zutphen the upper border of the railway yard, the border which creates the zones for the development area, and the upper border of the connecting railway track area are the same. In Amersfoort these borders differ and therefore the zones are not correctly generated if the railway yard is entered, because the environmental data provides information on the connecting railway track and not on the railway yard.

5.2. Variant study Nijmegen

This section presents the variant study for the location Nijmegen. Nijmegen is a municipality located in province of Gelderland with a surface of 57.53 km2 and 161,820 inhabitants (3,021 inhabitants/km2). Figure 5.3 shows the railway area of Nijmegen and table 5.10 shows the characteristics of the railway area of Nijmegen. This information is used to create the environmental zones.

Table 5.8. Railway area Nijmegen Area of the plan 128,841 m2 Sound pollution 83.5 dB Safety zone 0 m Pool fire attention area Yes, 30 m Day NA Maximum density Night NA

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 63 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 5.4. Railway area Nijmegen

Developable railway area

Study area

Indispensable rail infrastructure

Inner city area

64 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Next, the sub variants used to create the main variant are presented. Table 5.9 presents the characteristics of the different real estate functions (the percentage and Gross Floor Area (GFA)) and the financial and the quality feasibility of the sub variants.

Table 5.9. Facts sub variants Nijmegen Costs and revenues sub variants Profit Social Policy

% m2 % m2 % m2 Residential 93.00 80,105 70.00 38,836 89.00 64,823 Social 4.00 2,970 20.00 9,130 15.00 9,240 Apartment High 25.00 22,440 5.00 2,772 5.00 3,696 Rental Ground Social 4.00 3,208 20.00 9,860 23.00 15,206 bound High 3.00 3,570 5.00 3,749 8.00 8,033

Medium 25.00 18,700 5.00 2,310 8.00 4,950 Apartment Owner High 25.00 21,440 5.00 2,772 7.00 5,148 occupied Ground Medium 4.00 3,208 5.00 2,495 13.00 8,554 bound High 3.00 3,570 5.00 3,749 10.00 9,996 Retail 3.00 3,991 10.00 8,136 3.00 3,276 Office 2.00 6,842 10.00 20,922 4.00 11,232 Services 2.00 8,145 10.00 24,907 4.00 13,371 Total real estate 100.00 99,083 100.00 90,801 100.00 92,702 Parking 862 units 913 Units 808 units NPV residual land value (€) 85,057,565 36,209,789 49,323,697 NPV land development cost (€) 56,802,926 56,143,631 55,215,672 Balance land development (€) 28,254,773 -19,933,842 -5,891,956 Qualities sub variants Operating area 128,844 m2 128,844 m2 128,844 m2 Footprint 27,742 m2 35,373 m2 32,836 m2 Green area 19,085 m2 6,247 m2 9,338 m2 FSI 0.77 0.70 0.72 GSI 0.22 0.27 0.25 OSR 1.02 1.03 1.04 GSR 0.19 0.07 0.10 SPR 115 99 115 Day 1,244 1,888 1,372 Users Night 1,417 650 1,104

After this the Main variant for Nijmegen is presented. This Main variant is based on the strengths and weaknesses of the sub variants. Table 5.10 presents the strengths and weaknesses of the sub variants. These strengths are used to create the Main variant in functional areas (table 5.11). Last, the Main variant in stamps is presented (table 5.12 and 5.13 and figure 5.5 and 5.6).

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 65 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 5.10. Strengths and weaknesses sub variants Nijmegen Strengths Weaknesses

+ High balance on the land - Function mix Profit variant development - Low amount of parking places + High percentage of green - High risk profile

+ Function mix - Negative balance on the land Social variant + Low risk profile development + High amount parking places - Low percentage of green

+ Low risk profile - Low amount of parking places Demographic variant - Negative balance on the land development

Table 5.11. Costs and revenues Main variant Nijmegen / Functional areas Residual land value Amount Residual land Real estate GFA (m2) % Units value (€) Residential 85.00 459 59,297 49,675,868 Social 5.00 27 2,970 -660,148 Apartment High 15.00 81 10,692 11,805,297 Rental Ground Social 15.00 81 9,623 6,175,061 bound High 5.00 27 4,820 3,985,681

Medium 15.00 81 8,910 8,777,115 Apartment Owner High 20.00 108 14,256 15,547,610 occupied Ground Medium 5.00 27 3,208 1,579,681 bound High 5.00 27 4,820 2,465,568 Retail 5.00 27 5,308 3,491,280 Office 5.00 27 13,650 2,642,466 Services 5.00 27 16,250 4,406,044 Total real estate 100.00 540 94,505 60,707,675 Amount Residual land Parking % Units value (€) Level 0 30.00 260 1,889,601 Level 0 covered 40.00 347 1,377,085 Level -0,5 30.00 260 225,332 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 868 3,492,018 NPV residual land value 63,707,675 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 19,326,600 Soil clean up costs 9,629,573 Railway yard outplacement costs 3,689,131 Demolition costs 1,140,945 Site preparation costs 22,376,556 NPV cost land development 56,162,805 Balance land development 7,544,870

66 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 5.12. Costs and revenues Main variant Nijmegen / Stamps Residual land value Amount Residual land Real estate GFA (m2) % Units value (€) Residential 84.87 461 59,641 51,125,263 Social 5.17 28 3,080 -597,498 Apartment High 14.74 80 10,560 11,961,175 Rental Ground Social 14.92 81 9,623 6,419,974 bound High 5.17 28 4,998 4,262,459

Medium 14.74 80 8,800 8,855,228 Apartment Owner High 19.89 108 14,256 15,864,800 occupied Ground Medium 5.17 28 3,326 1,701,626 bound High 5.17 28 4,998 2,657,498 Retail 4.98 27 5,599 3,833,140 Office 4.98 27 13,997 1,465,218 Services 5.17 28 16,800 2,813,241 Total real estate 100.00 543 96,305 59,287,783 Amount Residual land Parking % Units value (€) Level 0 30.00 302 2,192,035 Level 0 covered 40.00 402 1,597,489 Level -0,5 30.00 302 261,397 Level -1 0.00 0 - Total parking 100.00 1,006 4,050,921 NPV residual land value 63,287,783 Costs land development Costs (€) Acquisition costs 19,326,600 Soil clean up costs 9,629,573 Railway yard outplacement costs 3,689,131 Demolition costs 1,140,945 Site preparation costs 21,283,383 NPV cost land development 55,069,631 Balance land development 8,218,152

Table 5.13. Qualities Main variant Nijmegen Area of the plan 128,844 m2 FSI 0.75 Operating area 128,844 m2 GSI 0.26 Parking places 1,009 Units OSR 0.99 GFA 96,305 m2 GSR 0.12 Footprint 33,404 m2 SPR 96 Green area 11,890 m2 Day 1,568 Users Building height 1-6 Floors Night 1,031

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 67 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 5.5. Main variant Nijmegen

Social Retail Apartments High Offices Rental Ground Social Services Bound High Housing Medium Apartments Owner High Occupied Ground Medium Bound High

Figure 5.6. Main variant Nijmegen in stamps (3D)

The variant study shows that it is also possible to create a financial and qualitative feasible variant for Nijmegen using the developed calculation tool and the method to create a feasible transformation variant. Table 5.12 and 5.13 and figure 5.5 and 5.6 show that the railway area of Nijmegen has similar results on the feasibility as the railway area of Amersfoort.

The variant study also shows that the Main variant has a very large part of apartments in the design. A check needs to be made if this matches the market research of the location. This check needs to be entered in the method. As concluded before, apartments, excluding social apartments, give the best result on financial feasibility. The Main variant in Nijmegen has the largest ratio between the railway yard and the development area. The research shows that the Main variant in Nijmegen has the high amount of apartment to compensate for the larges amount of land development costs.

68 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Based on this result the conclusion is drawn that by decreasing the ratio between the railway yard and development area, the feasibility of the design increases. The ratio between the railway yard and the development area can be decreased by increasing the development areas by including surrounding industrial area to the development area. The relation between the ratio of the railway yard and the development area is researched in the next section.

5.3. Adjustments to the calculation tool and method

The testing of the general applicability of the end products indicates that both the developed tool and the method need to be adjusted.

The tool needs to be adjusted to implement the overlap with zone 2 and 3, in order for the tool to indicate an undevelopable area for residential functions. The adjustment implicates that an overview of the overlap with zone 2 and 3 needs to be entered in the land development sheet of the tool. Next to this the tool needs to give an overview of the residential and the non residential use. A manual check needs to be made between the overlap with zone 2 and 3, and the non residential ground use.

The method also needs to be adjusted to implement this overlap with zone 2 and 3. Further, the method needs to be adjusted on the part of entering the railway yard. The environmental data applies to the connecting railway track and not to the railway yard. The method must indicate that in the tool the connecting railway track must be indicated in stead of the railway yard. Next, a check needs to be entered if the real estate program of the Main variant matches the market research for the location.

The final developed calculation tool is supplied on CD and the general method is included in appendix VIII.

5.4. A new feasibility factor

From the conclusions drawn by testing the developed calculation tool and method on the railway yards of Nijmegen and Amersfoort, a new feasibility factor is indicated in this section.

In section 5.2 is concluded that there is a relation between the size of the railway yard and the development area which has a significant influence on the feasibility. The relation between the railway yard and the development area is tested in this section. To do so the Main variant of Zutphen is used. To test if there is an influence the development area of Zutphen is halved (see fig. 5.7). Table 5.14 shows the dimensions of the two different development areas and the percentile proportion of the railway yard.

Table 5.14. Outcome scenarios

Development area Railway yard %

Normal development area 220,953 25,000 11.31 Half development area 111,578 25,000 22.41

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 69 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 5.7. Zutphen

Normal development area Half development area

Table 5.15 shows the financial result of the halving of the development area. It shows that by halving the development area the financial feasibility disappears. To compensate for this loss in feasibility, the function mix has to be adjusted. As indicated in the before function mix has a large influence on the feasibility of the plan.

Table 5.15. Outcome scenarios

Total residual land Total costs land Balance land

value (€) development (€) development (€) Normal development area 81,647,191 67,620,436 14,026,755 Half development area 22,581,084 24,682,196 -2,101,111

70 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

6. Conclusions and recommendations

This chapter presents the conclusions and recommendations of this graduation research. It discusses whether the main question is answered: “Which transformation possibilities give a feasible result for the transformation of inner city railway yards into multifunctional inner city living areas?” To answer the main research question, three end products were created:

The conclusions of the research are:

The developed calculation tool has RICARDO as a base. RICARDO is adjusted in three ways for the specific characteristics of railway areas in three ways. First, the design part of RICARDO is adjusted in a way that environmental data creates zones indicating the developable area, the areas with extra costs and the area with a lost of design flexibility, as well as a maximum density. In order to implement the influence of these zones in the tool the overlap of a zone with the design is determined. The output of the design part, the amount of GFA per function and the effects of the different zones on this GFA, is the input for the calculation part.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 71 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Second, the calculation part of the tool is replaced. The biggest difference is the calculation of the real estate value. In the new calculation part the real estate value is calculated with a NPV-method. The biggest advantage of this method is the implementation of time. This is very important in a time consuming transformation process.

Third, the output of the tool is adjusted. Feasibility is defined in this research a combination of financial and qualitative feasibility. The financial feasibility is defined as the balance between the residual land value and a value based land value. The qualitative feasibility is defined based on demands on urban type, green, parking places and function mix. The output of the tool is adjusted in a way that the feasibility can be judged in a fair and easy way.

The research concludes that the three adjustments to RICARDO have a significant added value. The adjustments of the design part to the regulations have a significant impact on the design of the variant, by influencing the financial as well as the qualitative feasibility. Including the new calculation part makes it possible to give a more precise outcome of the financial feasibility. The adjustments on the output of the tool offer the opportunity to analyse the qualitative feasibility.

The method to create a feasible transformation variant is created by performing a variant study on the location Zutphen. The developed calculation tool and the method were tested to check their general applicability. This was checked by performing variant studies in Nijmegen and Amersfoort. The research concludes that with some minor changes these two end products are general applicable.

The variant study on Zutphen using the method and developed calculation tool is also used to create the third end product: an overview of feasibility factors. The variant studies used for testing the general applicability also led to an additional feasibility factor. The three variant studies combined lead to two main feasibility factors. First the feasibility is influenced by the real estate variables, especially the function mix. To create a feasible variant the variant has to comply with five demands, one financial and four qualitative demands. In general the feasibility is influenced by the real estate function. The urban type is also influenced by the building height. But, different real estate types create contradicting results on the demands on financial and qualitative feasibility. To achieve an optimal and feasible Main variant, it was concluded that the function mix is the most important variable.

Second, the feasibility is influenced by the ratio between the railway yard area and the development area. The research shows that the ratio between the railway yard and the development area has an influence on the financial feasibility. If the ratio between the railway yard and the development area is increased, a lower percentage of railway yard area, the financial feasibility decreases. To compensate for this loss, the function mix has to be adjusted. As indicated in the first conclusion this influences the feasibility of the plan.

72 \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Based on these conclusions some recommendation can be made:

Research needs to be done to determine the best ratio of the factors with an effect on the feasibility. A research to this ratio increases the knowledge on the feasibility of the transformation of railway yards into multi-functional living areas. The research also shows that the location of the development area close to a railway track generates extra costs. This influences the feasibility. The feasibility of these kinds of transformations can be improved by increasing the revenues. The development of a living area close to the railway station could increase the amount of railway passenger. Research can be done to find a method to show the link between these two. If this link is present the NS can be convinced to contribute in the transformation of the railway yard.

Another important issue is the interface of the tool. The developed tool works in a research setting. When the tool is exploited professionally the interface need to be simplified. The calculation of de overlap with the different zones and the translation of this overlap in the tool have to be implemented. The last recommendations discuss the qualitative feasibility. To increase the insight on the qualitative feasibility more reference projects can be research. Spacemate generates the reference pictures for urban type of the variant; but the database of this program is relatively small. To increase the description of the urban type, the database of Spacemate needs to be increased.

Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / 73

Appendixes

Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Machiel Broeren / 29 October 2010

Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Content

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 /

Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix I. Literature list

1. Theses

• Bronk, Y. (2007) Uitplaatsing Spoorwegemplacement Roosendaal, het realiseren van een besluitvormingsprogramma voor NS. Breda • Dijk, H.J. van (2009) Integrale projecten in “cost en baet”. Delft • Korenberg, J.E.B. (2007) Vastgoedontwikkeling op milieubelaste binnenstedelijke stationslocaties. Groningen • Ponse, M.L.H. (2008) De waarde van groen. De factoren die bepalen of de voordelen van groen gebruikt worden in stedelijke projecten. Wageningen • Reusen, M. (2005) Financiële tuning gedurende het gebiedsontwikkelingsproces. Delft • Tazelaar, T.A.C. (2002) Risico als maat voor rendement, een onderzoek naar de rendementseisen van vastgoed. Delft

2. Dissertations

• Wilde, Th.S. de (2006) Rail Estate, Multiple use of space and railway infrastructure. Delft

3. Publications

• Bijleveld, S.W. & G. Wigmans (2006), IGOMOD: a calculation model for Integrated Urban Area Development. Delft: Architectural Annual • Bruil, I., Hobma, F.A.M., Peek, G.J., Wigmans, G. (2004) Integrale gebiedsontwikkeling. Het stationsgebied ’s-Hertogenbosch. Amsterdam: SUN • ECORYS (2006) De prijs van kwaliteit Handreiking voor gemeentelijk grondprijsbeleid bij woningbouw. The Hague • Gerritse, K. (2008) Controlling cost and quality in the early phases of the accommodation process. Delft: VSSD • Interprovinciaal Overleg, IPO (2010) Bouwkundige maatregelen externe veiligheid, een eerste aanzet voor een catalogus. • Kerman, M.C., Brown, R.L. (2000) Computer programming fundamentals with applications in visual basic 6.0. Addison Wesley • Soeter, J.P. et al., (2008) AR1R050 – Real Estate Economics, finance and planning. Delft • Verlaat, J van ’t (2005) Outlines of urban area development • VROM-raad (2009) Acupunctuur in de infrastructuur. Naar een betere verknoping van verstedelijking en mobiliteit. The Hague

4. Policy documents

• European Council (1991) Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community's railways. Brussels • Ministry of General Affairs (2007), Beleidsprogramma 2007-2011. Brief minister-president ter aanbieding van het beleidsprogramma ‘Samen werken, samen leven’ voor de periode 2007-2011, Bijlage bij kamerstuk 31070 nr. 1, June 15th 2007. The Hague • Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, VROM (2006a) Interim-wet Stad en milieubenadering. The Hague

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / A Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

• Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, VROM (2006b) Reiswijzer Marktpartijen & Gebiedsontwikkeling, ‘een praktische routebeschrijving’. The Hague • Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, VROM (2006c) Reken- en meetvoorschrift geluidshinders 2006. The Hague • Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, VROM (2007) Wet Geluidshinder. The Hague • Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, VROM (2008) concept Besluit transportroutes externe veiligheid. The Hague • Ministry of Public Health and Environmental Hygiene (1979) Wet milieuhinder. The Hague • Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, VenW (2006) Nota vervoer gevaarlijke stoffen. The Hague

5. Articles

• Cramer, J.M. (2009). “Spoorzoneontwikkeling grote kans voor Nederlandse binnensteden”, Spoorzone magazine maart 2009 pp. 4-5 • Ossokina, I.V. (2010). Geographical range of amenity benefits: hedonic price analysis for railway stations. The Hague • Rust, W. N. J. (2005). “Valkuilen van de residuele methode”, PropertyNL magazine nr 3 – 17 februari 2005 • Zerzan, J.M. (1989). Overlap: A FORTRAN program for rapidly evaluating the area of overlap between two polygons, Computers & Geosciences Vol. 15 No. 7 pp. 1109-1114. Great Britain • Coeveringen, P., Hoom, A. van, Hilbers, A. (2009) Programmaverandering op stationslocaties, bijdrage aan het colloquium Vervoersplanologisch Speurwerk 2009, 19 en 20 november

6. Websites

• http://www.vrom.nl • http://www.ruimteforum.vrom.nl • http://www.cbs.nl • http://www.ns.nl • http://www.prorail.nl • http://www.deltarail.nl • http://rijkswaterstaat.nl • http://www.DTZ.nl • http://www.twynstragudde.nl • http://www.vitruvius-consultancy.nl • http://www.spacemate.nl

B \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix II. Experts

Environmental regulations Regulations on sound

Dolf de Gruijter Piet Luijk Wet geluidshinder Building Decree Sound Ministry of VROM Ministry of VROM Spatial Development Portfolio Housing, Communities and Integration Portfolio Living Environment Directorate Cities and Construction Directorate Regulations on external safety Geert-Jan Verbakel Basic network Ministry of VROM Environment Portfolio Risk Policy Directorate Regulations on air pollution Marij Philippens Particle matter Ministry of VROM Environment Portfolio Climate and Air Quality Directorate

Economics and finance Financial general Henk Schuur Henk Meeldijk Economist Economist Ministry of VROM Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Spatial Development Portfolio Management Integrated Area Development Directorate Mobility portfolio Railway directorate Financial ground exploitation Michel van Rhee Gerard Menkhorst Land exploitation Land exploitation Brink Groep Ministry of Finance Government Real Estate Development Company (RVOB) Financial real estate development Donne Bax Robert Cijs Real Estate Development Real Estate Development Ministry of Finance NS Poort Government Real Estate Development Company (RVOB) Wout Buijs Economist Ministry of VROM Government Buildings Agency(RGD)

Financial real estate exploitation Arend Bongers Economist Ministry of VROM Government Buildings Agency(RGD)

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / C Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

D \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix III. Zones based on regulation

This appendix describes the creation of zones. To create cost zones based on regulation in the design part of RICARDO an extra feature has to be implemented in the design part. The design part has to create zones based on the railway track and the distances based on the environmental regulations. To describe this process an example region is used (see figure 1.1).

Figure 1. Geometry

1. Figure 2. Lines

The coordinate system in excel starts in the upper left corner. The coordinate system gives the inverse value for the y-coordinate as in a normal coordinate system. No conversion is needed, because this is implemented consequently.

First, all vertexes of the railway track are collected in a table (see table 1). The vertexes are the starting point of the calculation. These vertexes have to be moved. This method determines the coordinates for the new vertexes. The vertexes are collected in counter clockwise direction.

Table 1. Data from excel

X-coordinate Y-coordinate Vertex 1 1 5 Vertex 2 3 5 Vertex 3 5 7 Vertex 4 7 7 Vertex 5 5 2 Vertex 6 1 3

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / E Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Second, the formula for the lines trough the vertexes are determined (see figure 1.2). The lines are calculated based on theses vertexes. Line 1 is the line through vertexes 1 and 2. The last line, line N, is the line through the last vertex, vertex N, and the first vertex, vertex 1 (see table 2).

Table 2. Data from excel

Vertex vertex Line 1 1 2 Line 2 2 3 Line 3 3 4 ... Line N-1 N-1 N Line N N 1

If XA = XB the formula is X = XA and if YA = yB the formula is y = yA. In all other situations the formula of the line has to be calculated by determining the gradient of the line and thereafter entering one vertex in the formula of the line (see figure 2). This section discussed the moving of vertex 5. The other vertexes are moved in the same way.

Figure 2. Calculating lines

Gradient line 5 = (YF-YE)/(XF-XE) = (5-1)/(2-3) = -¼ Æ y = -¼ x + b Enter vertex 5 (5,2) Æ 2 = -1¼ + b Æ b = 3¼

Third, the lines 4 and 5 have to be moved. To determine which side the line has to he offset to the x-coordinate of the first point on the line is compared with the x-coordinate of the second point on the line. If the first x-coordinate is larger the line has to be moved down, otherwise the line has to be moved up. If the line is vertical (X1=X2), the line has to be moved to the left if Y1 >Y2, otherwise the line has to be moved to the right (see figure 3.3)

Figure 3. Geometry

3. shift the line 4. vertical shift

F \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

After this the vertical shift of the lines is calculated (see figure 3.4). The angle of the line with the Y-axis is calculated, using formula 1 in figure 4. This angle is used to translate the orthogonal shift of the line to a vertical shift using formula 2 in figure 5.5 the same steps are repeated for all lines. This leads to six new lines.

Figure 4. Calculating shift of lines

1. Lα1 = tan-1 (1/RC line 1) 2. S1= (sin Lα1) * O1

Fifth, the intersections of these lines are calculated (see figure 5.5).

Figure 5. Geometry

5. New intersections 6. zones

Sixth, the intersection points of the moved lines are connected and the first zone disappears. This step is repeated for the other zones.

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / G Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

H \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix IV.Overlap regulation zone and building areas

This appendix describes the calculation of the overlap of a zone and a building area. A zone consists of two regions, an inner border and an outer border. To check the overlap between a zone and a building area the overlap of the building area with both borders needs to be calculated (see figure 1.1). In this example the calculation of the intersection with the outer border is shown (see figure 1.2).

Figure 1. Overlap

1. overlap area 2. Outer border

First, determine the intersection points of the outer border region and the building area region (see figure 2.3). Second, determine the points of the outer border region inside the building area region and the other way around (see figure 2.4). Third, enter the y-coordinate of these points into a table in ascending order, starting with the lowest value (see table 1).

Figure 2. Overlap area

3. Intersection points regions 4. Overlapping vertexes

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / I Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 1. Y-coordinates intersection points and overlapping vertexes

Point 1 (I2) 3.00

Point 2 (O2) 3.00

Point 3 (I1) 5.00

Point 4 (O1) 5.00

Fourth, create lines vertical to the x-axis through the midpoint of all these y-coordinates, x-lines (see figure 3.5). Fifth, determine the intersection points of these lines with both regions (see figure 3.5).

Sixth, enter the x-coordinates of these intersection points into a table in ascending order, starting with the lowest value (see table 2). Seventh, create lines vertical to the y-axis through the midpoints of all the x-coordinates of these intersection points, y-lines (see figure 3.6).

Table 2. X-coordinates intersection lines with regions Point 1 3.75 Point 2 3.75 Point 3 3.75 Point 4 6.48 Point 5 6.88 Point 6 7.28

Figure 3. Overlap area

5. Intersection Y-lines with figures 6. X-Lines

J \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Eighth, check if the intersection points of the Y-lines with the X-lines are inside both regions (see figure 4.7). The overlap area is the sum of the areas between the four lines which determine a matching intersection point (see figure 4.8). Ninth, if an intersection point is inside both regions calculate the overlap area. Tenth, add up all the overlap areas.

Figure 4. Overlap area

7. Matching intersection points 8. Area of overlap outer border

These 10 steps are repeated for the overlap with the inner border (see figure 5.9). The area of overlap is the overlap area of the outer region of the zone minus the overlap area of the inner border of the area (see figure 5.10). If this area is zero there is also no overlap.

Figure 5. Overlap

9. Area of overlap inner border 10. Total overlap area

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / K Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

L \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix V. Calculation tool

Regulation-sheet / Design part

Zones-sheet / Design part

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / M Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Area Covered by the plan-sheet / Design part

Input-sheet / Calculation part

N \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Land Development (LD)-sheet / Calculation part

Real Estate Development (RED)-sheet / Calculation part

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / O Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Real estate Operation (REO)-sheet / Calculation part

SolverModel-sheet / Calculation part

P \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Scene-sheet / Design part

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / Q Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

R \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix VI. Input

General Inflation 2,50% Price level 2010

Land development phase IRR land development 5,50% Increase land development costs above inflation 0,00% Acquisition costs € 125 €/m² Soil clean up costs Lightly Polluted€ 31 €/m² Polluted€ 62 €/m² Outplacement costs € 250 €/m² Demolition costs € 50 €/m² Site preparation costs For building€ 25 €/m² Callosity€ 135 €/m² Green€ 35 €/m² Additional land costs 20,00%

Real estate development phase IRR real estate development 7,50% Increase real estate development costs above inflation 0,00% Construction costs Parking 0€ 2.200 €/m2 GFA 0 covered€ 13.000 €/m2 GFA -0,5€ 16.000 €/m2 GFA -1€ 23.000 €/m2 GFA Dwellings / Social€ 1.000 €/m2 GFA Apartments Medium€ 1.000 €/m2 GFA High€ 1.050 €/m2 GFA Dwellings / Social€ 900 €/m2 GFA Ground bound Medium€ 900 €/m2 GFA High€ 925 €/m2 GFA Retail€ 1.100 €/m2 GFA Offices€ 1.200 €/m2 GFA Services€ 1.150 €/m2 GFA Surface Dwellings / Social 110 m2 GFA Apartments Medium 110 m2 GFA High 130 m2 GFA Dwellings / Social 120 m2 GFA Ground bound Medium 120 m2 GFA High 180 m2 GFA Additional real estate Parking 18,00% development costs Dwellings Rent 23,50% Ownership 23,50% Retail 23,50% Offices 26,50% Services 26,50% Extra cost Sound 0,00% External Safety 2,80% Factor GFA/LFA Dwellings 75,00% Retail 90,00% Offices 85,00% Services 85,00%

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / S Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Real estate operation phase IRR real estate developer Public space 5,50% Parking 7,00% Dwellings Social 5,50% Non-social 6,00% Retail 7,00% Offices 6,50% Services 7,00% BAR Dwellings Social 6,00% Non-social 6,50% Retail 7,50% Offices 7,00% Services 7,50% Increase real estate operation costs above inflation 0,00% Rental period 40 Vacancy rate Dwellings 5,00% (friction) Retail 5,00% % rent Offices 10,00% Services 10,00% Vacancy rate Year 1 2 2 (start) Dwellings 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% % rent Retail 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% Offices 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% Services 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% Maintenance Dwellings 0,50% (yearly) Retail 0,50% % All-in CC Offices 0,50% Services 0,50% Maintenance Year 10 20 30 (structural) Dwellings 5,00% 5,00% 5,00% % All-inn CC Retail 5,00% 5,00% 5,00% Offices 5,00% 5,00% 5,00% Services 5,00% 5,00% 5,00% Maintenance cost of the public space Pavement€ 5 €/m²/Y Green€ 3 €/m²/Y Efficiency Dwellings / Social 37 m2 LFA/user Apartments medium 37 m2 LFA/user High 44 m2 LFA/user Dwellings / Social 40 m2 LFA/user Ground bound Medium 40 m2 LFA/user High 61 m2 LFA/user Retail 50 m2 LFA/user Offices 25 m2 LFA/user Services 30 m2 LFA/user Operation costs 5,00% Extra for living in a railway area 5,00% Rent Dwellings / Social€ 70 €/m2 LFA/Y Apartments High€ 120 €/m2 LFA/Y Dwellings / Social€ 70 €/m2 LFA/Y Ground bound High€ 120 €/m2 LFA/Y Retail€ 125 €/m2 LFA/Y Offices€ 135 €/m2 LFA/Y Services€ 125 €/m2 LFA/Y Selling prices Parking 0 covered€ 11.500 €/Unit -1€ 21.000 €/Unit Dwellings / Medium€ 2.600 €/m2 LFA Apartments High€ 2.800 €/m2 LFA Dwellings / Medium€ 2.000 €/m2 LFA €/m2 LFA Ground bound High€ 2.100

T \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix VII. Draft method to create a transformation variant

Method to create a feasible Transformation of inner city railway yards

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / U Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

V \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

This document gives a detailed description of the method to create a feasible Main variant for the transformation of a railway yard into a multifunctional living area. The method uses the calculation tool developed in the graduation research of Machiel Broeren with the title: “Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards”.

1. Preparation of the tool

1.1. Determine environmental restrictions

Information on the environmental restrictions in the railway area needs to be gathered. There are two types of regulation which are of significant importance in railway areas; Regulations on sound and regulations on environmental safety.

1. Regulations on sound: The information needed is the air pollution emitted by the railway tracks. This information can be gathered using the ASWIN-tool. ASWIN is a calculation tool developed by DeltaRail by order of ProRail. The program can be order at DeltaRail (payment required). 2. Regulations on the external safety: • Safety zone: This information has to be looked up in an appendix of the “basisnet”- regulation document which lists the safety zone for railway tracks in the Netherlands; • Pool fire attention area: The presence of a pool fire attention area has to be looked up in an appendix of the “basisnet”-regulation document, which lists the presence of a safety zone for railway tracks in the Netherlands; • The maximum density: The maximum density is calculated using the group risk. The group risk can be calculated using the RBMII-tool. More information on the RBMII-tool can be found on: http://www.rws.nl/kenniscentrum/veiligheid/rbmii/.

1.2. Location specific input

Some input for the tool is location specific, this data needs to be entered in the tool. Open the tool. First, there is location specific data (see figure 6.1). Go to the input-sheet of the tool and enter the input presented in table 1 in the tool. In the tool all white cells can be adjusted.

Table 1. Location specific data Operational data land development IRR land development % Acquisition costs €/m2 land Operational real estate development IRR real estate development % Operational real estate operation IRR real estate operation % GIY % Friction Vacancy rate % rent Start Efficiency m2/inhabitant Rent €/m2 LFA/Y Selling prices €/unit or €/m2 LFA

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / W Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Second, there are some areas which have an influence on the land development and are location specific (see table 2). These areas needs to be entered in LD (Land Development)-sheet. Extra costs are cost like costs for civil engineering or extra costs for site preparation.

Table 2. Location specific areas Polluted area m2 land Moved emplacement area m2 land Demolition cost GFA old buildings Extra cost €

1.3. Create cost and attention zones

In this step the information gathered in the first step is entered into the tool. Go to the “area covered by the plan”-sheet of the tool (see figure 1).

Figure 1. Opening screen tool

Second enter the connecting railway track. The connecting railway track needs to be entered in counter clockwise direction using the freeform-option (see figure 2).

Figure 2. Entering railway area

X \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Click on the railway yard area which you have drawn and rename this area to SWE (spoorwegemplacement) (see figure 3).

Figure 3. Spoorwegemplacement

Now enter the environmental information, gathered is section 2.1, in the regulation sheet of the calculation tool (see figure 4).

Figure 4. Environmental information

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / Y Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The next step is generating environmental zones. An overlap of a building with an environmental zone can create extra cost, decrease the design flexibility or building on the area can be prohibited. The different zones are created by clicking on the “Maak zones”-button in the zones sheet (see figure 5).

Figure 5. “Maak zones”-button

Figure 6 shows the different zones in the “area covered by the plan”-sheet. Table 3 shows the different zones. The next step is creating the Main variant.

Figure 6. Zones

Z \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 3. Zones

2. Creation of Main variant

This part describes the creation of the Main variant. To determine the characteristics of the Main variant, three sub variants are created. These sub variants have to cover a functional range from a social variant till a profit variant. The sub variants below can be used:

1. Market variant: This variant is a translation of a market research or a existing plan for the area, assuming that the existing plan is based on a market research; 2. Social variant: This variant has 40 percent of social housing and the non-housing part of the real estate is 30 percent; 3. Policy variant: This variant is the current real estate configuration of the municipality corrected with the structural vision of the municipality on real estate.

If the market variant is not comparable with a profit variant, a profit variant needs to be included. These sub variants are judged on their feasibility. To create a feasible variant, the Main variant has to comply with demands on financial feasibility as well a qualitative feasibility:

The strengths of these sub variants are combined into the Main variant. Next, the Main variant is fine tuned. These steps are explained in the next subsections.

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / AA Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

2.1. Creation of three sub variants

To enter the sub variants the developable area has to be drawn in the “area covered by the plan”- sheet using the freeform option. The following steps need to be repeated for all variant separately. Save each variant after the creation of the variant is finished.

Zone 1 indicates an area in which real estate development is prohibited; this area has to be excluded from the developable area. The sub variants are entered using the functional areas method. First, the developable area has to be entered using the freeform-option (see figure 7).

Figure 7. Developable area

After this click with the right mouse button on the on this area and go to the attribute option. Then choose for a functional area in the choice menu. An input screen will appear. In this screen the variant has to be entered (see figure 8).

Figure 8. Input screen variants

BB \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 3 indicates how the real estate functions used in this method are called in the calculation tool. These are the functions which can be used to develop a feasible Main variant.

If other real estate functions are needed for specific locations contact M. Broeren ([email protected]) to implement these functions in the calculation tool.

Table 3. Real estate functions Real estate function Input in calculation tool Dwellings Social tower apartment subsidized, rent Apartment High tower apartment, rent Rental Ground Social terraced houses subsidized, rent bound High mansions, rent

Medium tower apartment subsidized, sale Apartment Owner High tower apartment, sale occupied Ground Medium terraced houses, sale bound High mansions, sale Retail retail Office office building Services leisure

After the variant is entered the overlap with the zones needs to be implemented. To calculate the extra cost for developing a railway area, the overlap with a pool fire attention zone needs to be entered. The overlap with this area is measured using the freeform-tool (1). When the overlap area is drawn, click on this area with the right mouse button and go to the attribute option. Choose Building shape in the choice menu (2). The built on area needs to be copied (see figure 9).

Figure 9. Overlap area

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / CC Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The built on area needs to be entered in the Overlap area-cell in the input-sheet (see 10).

Figure 10. Input sheet

Next to the zones the environmental regulations determine the maximum density. Go to the “regulation”-sheet and check if the density (1, see figure 11) of the variant does not exceed the maximum density defined by the group risk (2, see figure 11).

Figure 11. Density

DD \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

An important factor in the feasibility is the phasing. The phasing needs to be entered in the LD- sheet and in the REO sheet (see figure 12).

Figure 12. Phasing

2.2. Presenting the three sub variants

The results of the sub variants are judged on their feasibility. First, information on the financial feasibility is gathered on the LD-sheet, the RED-sheet and the REO-sheet. Second, information on the quality is gathered on the LD-sheet. This sheet presents the FSI, GSI, OSR (urban type), GSR (green), SPR (parking) and the function mix. This information needs to be entered in tables.

The Spacemate program of PERMETA Architects makes it possible to describe an urban environment with reference pictures by using indexes and ratios. For more information see http://www.spacemate.nl. On this website the operational area, footprint and GFA needs to be entered in the input screen (See figure 13).

Figure 13. Input-screen SPACEMATE

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / EE Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Based on this information the site generates plans with a matching quality (see figure 14).

Figure 14. Output-screen SPACEMATE

The last step in presenting the strengths and weaknesses of the sub variants on the financial and the qualitative feasibility they deliver. In this analysis the strengths and weaknesses of the three variants need to be entered in a table.

2.3. Create Main variant in functional area

The first step in creating a Main variant is combining the strengths of the three sub variants into one variant. This variant is still on the detail level of functional areas in the calculation tool. This variant is entered the same way as the three variant (see figure 7 and 8). This variant is also presented the same way as the three sub variants (see section 2.2). To fine tune the Main variant the detail level is increased.

FF \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

2.4. Create Main variant in stamps

To increase the level of detail the stamp method is used. To create the Main variant in stamps the building program of the Main variant in functional areas is translated in building stamps. Start this process by entering the building program of the Main variant in functional areas using building stamps (see figure 15). A stamp is a predefined configuration of real estate. A stamp can be defined as one object, like a detached house, or as a group of objects, like an apartment complex.

Figure 15. Entering stamps

When the whole real estate program is entered it leads to figure 16.

Figure 16. Stamps

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / GG Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The stamp method is more detailed than the functional area input method. When real estate program of the Main variant in stamps is directly copied from the real estate program of the Main variant in functional areas, the ground use of Main variant in stamps can exceed the operating area of the development area. Check if the ground use is in order with the operating area in the LD- sheet (see figure 17). Adjust the amount of building stamps in a way that the operating area and the ground use match and the percentile division of functions is similar with the Main variant in functional areas. Also check in the “regulation”-sheet and check if the density of the variant does not exceed the maximum density (see figure 11).

Figure 17. Check ground use

After this the Main variant is created. For easy reference change all stamps with the same function to the same colour. Double click on the stamp and chose a colour (see figure 18).

Figure 18. Change colours stamps

HH \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Figure 19 shows the end result of this action.

Figure 19. Coloured stamps

Next create the Main variant with these stamps (see figure 20).

Figure 20. Main variant

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / II Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The design of the Main variant is now finished. The next steps are needed to implement the extra cost generated by environmental restrictions. Go to the area covered by the plan”-sheet and click with the right mouse-button on the stamps located in the extra cost zone. Chose attributes and go to financial tab and change the 1 in the investment (excl. cost of land) into 1.14, because the extra cost for building in this zone in 14 percent (see figure 21).

Figure 21. Extra costs

2.5. Present Main variant

The Main variant is presented by showing the real estate program and quality variant in different tables. The tool offers the opportunity to present a 3D-picture of the design. In order to use this option Cortona SDK has to be installed on your computer. The program can be order at Parallel Graphics (payment required).

Go to the “scene”-sheet and click on the “Open 3D view”-button (see figure 22).

Figure 22. 3D-picture of variant

JJ \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

The calculation tool now generates a 3D-picture of the Main variant (see figure 23).

Figure 23. 3D-picture of variant

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / KK Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

LL \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Appendix VIII. Final method to create a transformation variant

Method to create a feasible Transformation of inner city railway yards

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / MM Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

NN \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

1. Preparation of the tool

1.1. Determine environmental restrictions

1. Regulations on sound: The information needed is the air pollution emitted by the railway tracks. This information can be gathered using the ASWIN-tool. ASWIN is a calculation tool developed by DeltaRail by order of ProRail. The program can be order at DeltaRail (payment required). 2. Regulations on the external safety: • Safety zone: This information has to be looked up in an appendix of the “basisnet”- regulation document, which lists the safety zone for railway tracks in the Netherlands; • Pool fire attention area: The presence of a pool fire attention area has to be looked up in an appendix of the “basisnet”-regulation document, which lists the presence of a safety zone for railway tracks in the Netherlands; • The maximum density: The maximum density is calculated using the group risk. The group risk can be calculated using the RBMII-tool. More information on the RBMII-tool can be found on: http://www.rws.nl/kenniscentrum/veiligheid/rbmii/.

1.2. Location specific input

Some input for the tool is location specific; this data needs to be entered in the tool. Open the tool. First, there is location specific data (see table.1). Go to the input-sheet of the tool and enter the input presented in table 1 in the tool. In the tool all white cells can be adjusted.

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / OO Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Table 2. Location specific areas Polluted area m2 land Moved emplacement area m2 land Demolition cost GFA old buildings Extra cost €

1.3. Create cost and attention zones

In this step the information gathered in the first step is entered into the tool. Go to the “area covered by the plan”-sheet of the tool (see figure 1).

Figure 1. Opening screen tool

Second enter the connecting railway track. The connecting railway track needs to be entered in counter clockwise direction using the freeform-option (see figure 2).

Figure 2. Entering railway area

PP \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Click on the connecting railway track which you have drawn and rename this area to SWE (spoorwegemplacement) (see figure 3).

Figure 3. Spoorwegemplacement

Now enter the environmental information, gathered is section 2.1, in the regulation sheet of the calculation tool (see figure 4).

Figure 4. Environmental information

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / QQ Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The next step is generating environmental zones. These environmental zones generate different actions. An overlap of a building with an environmental zone can create extra cost, decrease the design flexibility or building on the area can be prohibited. The different zones are created by clicking on the “Maak zones”-button in the zones sheet (see figure 5).

Figure 5. “Maak zones”-button

Figure 6 shows the different zones in the “area covered by the plan”-sheet. Table 3 shows the different zones. The next step is creating the Main variant.

Figure 6. Zones

RR \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 3. Zones

2. Creation of Main variant

The strengths of these sub variants are combined into the Main variant. Next, the Main variant is fine tuned. These steps are explained in the next subsections.

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / SS Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

2.1. Creation of three sub variants

Figure 7. Developable area

Figure 8. Input screen variants

TT \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Table 4 indicates how the real estate functions used in this method are called in the calculation tool. These are the functions which can be used to develop a feasible Main variant.

If other real estate functions are needed for specific locations contact M. Broeren ([email protected]) to implement these functions in the calculation tool.

Table 4. Real estate functions Real estate function Input in calculation tool Dwellings Social tower apartment subsidized, rent Apartment High tower apartment, rent Rental Ground Social terraced houses subsidized, rent bound High mansions, rent

After the variant is entered the overlap with the different zones needs to be implemented. First, the area in which only non residential real estate can be located, overlap with zone 2 and 3 (see table 3), has to be check with the ground use of the non residential real estate. The overlap with this area is measured using the freeform-tool (1, see figure 9).When the overlap area is drawn, click on this area with the right mouse button and go to the attribute option. Choose Building shape in the choice menu. The built on area needs to be copied (2, see figure 9).

Figure 9. Overlap area

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / UU Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The built on area needs to be pasted in the Minimum non residential-cell in the land development (LD) –sheet. A check needs to be made if this area is smaller that the ground use non residential area (see figure 10). If this area is larger than the ground use non residential area the percentage of the non residential real estate needs to be increased in the variant.

Figure 10. Land development sheet

Next, the extra cost for developing in a railway area need to be implemented. To calculate the extra cost the overlap with a pool fire attention zone needs to be entered, overlap with zone 2, 4 and 6 (see table 3). The overlap with this zone is calculated in the same way as the overlap with the zone in which only non residential real estate can be located. The built on area needs to be entered in the Overlap area-cell in the input-sheet (see figure 11).

Figure 11. Input sheet

VV \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Next to the zones the environmental regulations determine the maximum density. Go to the “regulation”-sheet and check if the density (1, see figure 12) of the variant does not exceed the maximum density defined by the group risk (2, see figure 12).

Figure 12. Density

An important factor in the feasibility is the phasing. The phasing needs to be entered in the LD- sheet and in the REO sheet. The LD-sheet is shown in figure 13.

Figure 13. Phasing

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / WW Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

2.2. Presenting the three sub variants

Figure 14. Input-screen SPACEMATE

Based on this information the site generates plans with a matching quality (see figure 15).

Figure 15. Output-screen SPACEMATE

XX \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

2.3. Create Main variant in functional area

The first step in creating a Main variant is combining the strengths of the three sub variants into one variant. This variant is still on the detail level of functional areas in the calculation tool. This variant is entered the same way as the three variant (see figure 7 and 8). This variant is also presented the same way as the three sub variants (see section 2.2). While trying to avoid a high risk profile, the real estate program of the Main variant needs to be checked with the market research of the location. To fine tune the Main variant the detail level is increased.

2.4. Create Main variant in stamps

To increase the level of detail the stamp method is used. To create the Main variant in stamps the building program of the Main variant in functional areas is translated in building stamps. Start this process by entering the building program of the Main variant in functional areas using building stamps (see figure 16). A stamp is a predefined configuration of real estate. A stamp can be defined as one object, like a detached house, or as a group of objects, like an apartment complex.

Figure 16. Entering stamps

When the whole real estate program is entered it leads to figure 17.

Figure 17. Stamps

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / YY Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

The stamp method is more detailed than the functional area input method. When real estate program of the Main variant in stamps is directly copied from the real estate program of the Main variant in functional areas, the ground use of Main variant in stamps can exceed the operating area of the development area. Check if the ground use (1, see figure 18), is in order with the operating area in the LD-sheet (2, see figure 18). Adjust the amount of building stamps in a way that the operating area and the ground use match and the percentile division of functions is similar with the Main variant in functional areas. Also check in the “regulation”-sheet and check if the density of the variant does not exceed the maximum density (see figure 12).

Figure 18. Check ground use

After this the Main variant is created. For easy reference change all stamps with the same function to the same colour. Double click on the stamp and chose a colour (see figure 19).

Figure 19. Change colours stamps

ZZ \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Figure 20 shows the end result of this action.

Figure 20. Coloured stamps

Next create the Main variant with these stamps (see figure 21). Locate only non residential real estate in the areas in which only non residential real estate is allowed, zone 2 and 3.

Figure 21. Main variant

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / AAA Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Figure 22. Extra costs

2.5. Present Main variant

Go to the “scene”-sheet and click on the “Open 3D view”-button (see figure 23).

Figure 23. 3D-picture of variant

BBB \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

The calculation tool now generates a 3D-picture of the Main variant (see figure 24).

Figure 24. 3D-picture of variant

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / CCC Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

DDD \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix I. Three sub variants Zutphen

Market variant Zutphen / Land development

Land development phase Zutphen market varaint

Total ground use 220.953

Area of plan 224.366 m² Building height 1-5 floors Operating area 220.953 m² FSI 0,77 Parking places 1.462 Units GSI 0,22 Footprint 49.366 m² OSR 1,00 GFA 170.924 m² GSR 0,16 Green area 26.855 m² SPR 117

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 total area 220.953 m²€ 125 € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 Soil clean up costs € 1.658.316 € 331.663 € 1.802.082 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 673.750 Polluted 515 m²€ 62 € 38.316 € 7.663 € 41.638 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.086.694 Outplacement costs emplacement € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Railway yard 25.000 m²€ 50 € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 Site preparation costs € 27.457.393 € 5.491.479 € 29.837.776 For building 220.953 m²€ 25 € 5.523.825 € 1.104.765 € 6.002.706 Pavement 96.249 m²€ 135 € 12.993.641 € 2.598.728 € 14.120.108 Green 26.855 m²€ 35 € 939.927 € 187.985 € 1.021.412 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 8.693.550 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 60.734.834 € 12.146.967 € 67.030.038

revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.462 Units€ 4.498.036 0 219 Units - - 15,00%€ 1.462.729 0 Covered 658 Units - - 45,00%€ 2.477.029 -0,5 585 Units - - 40,00%€ 558.277 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 1.068 Units - 145.278 m² GFA€ 105.974.222 Rent 180 Units - 21.107 m² GFA€ 6.246.751 Appartment 104 Units - 12.078 m² GFA€ 1.912.589 Affordable 75 Units 110 8.250 m² GFA € 1.539.971- High priced 29 Units 132 3.828 m² GFA€ 3.452.560 Ground Bound 76 Units - 9.029 m² GFA€ 4.334.162 Affordable 76 Units 118,8 9.029 m² GFA€ 4.334.162 High priced 0 Units 180 0 m² GFA€ - Ownership 888 Units - 124.171 m² GFA€ 99.727.471 Appartment 586 Units - 74.646 m² GFA€ 75.869.202 Medium priced 123 Units 110 13.530 m² GFA€ 12.658.615 High priced 463 Units 132 61.116 m² GFA€ 63.210.587 Ground bound 302 Units - 49.525 m² GFA€ 23.858.269 Medium priced 79 Units 118,8 9.385 m² GFA€ 4.323.989 High priced 223 Units 180 40.140 m² GFA€ 19.534.280 Retail 5.625 m² GFA€ 2.814.711 Retail 5.625 m² GFA - -€ 2.814.711 Offices 15.042 m² GFA€ 591.557 Offices 15.042 m² GFA - -€ 591.557 Services 13.086 m² GFA€ 1.396.507 Services 13.086 m² GFA - -€ 1.396.507

Total Reveneus 179.031 m² GFA€ 115.275.033

Total result land development 93.985 m²€ 48.244.995

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / EEE Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Market variant Zutphen / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Zutphen market varaint

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1462 m² GFA€ 17.914.653 € 3.224.638 € 17.229.639 0 219 units€ 2.200 € 482.599 € 86.868 € 451.970 0 Covered 658 units€ 13.000 € 8.555.161 € 1.539.929 € 8.012.193 -0,5 585 units€ 16.000 € 9.359.492 € 1.684.709 € 8.765.476 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 145278 m² GFA€ 146.096.929 € 34.332.778 € 143.202.060 Rental 21107 m² GFA€ 20.640.854 € 4.850.601 € 20.231.862 Appartment 12078 m² GFA€ 12.417.108 € 2.918.020 € 12.171.067 Affordable 8250 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 8.349.320 € 1.962.090 € 8.183.880 High priced 3828 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 4.067.789 € 955.930 € 3.987.187 Ground bound 9029 m² GFA€ 8.223.746 € 1.932.580 € 8.060.795 Affordable 9029 m² GFA€ 900 € 8.223.746 € 1.932.580 € 8.060.795 High priced 0 m² GFA€ 950 € - € - € - Ownership 124171 m² GFA€ 125.456.074 € 29.482.177 € 122.970.198 Appartment 74646 m² GFA€ 78.637.233 € 18.479.750 € 77.079.059 Medium priced 13530 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 13.692.884 € 3.217.828 € 13.421.564 High priced 61116 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 64.944.349 € 15.261.922 € 63.657.495 Ground bound 49525 m² GFA€ 46.818.841 € 11.002.428 € 45.891.139 Medium priced 9385 m² GFA€ 900 € 8.548.368 € 2.008.866 € 8.378.984 High priced 40140 m² GFA€ 950 € 38.270.473 € 8.993.561 € 37.512.155 Retail 5625 m² GFA€ 5.692.409 € 1.337.716 € 5.579.616 Retail 5625 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 5.692.409 € 1.337.716 € 5.579.616 Offices 15042 m² GFA€ 16.745.442 € 4.437.542 € 16.812.347 Offices 15042 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 16.745.442 € 4.437.542 € 16.812.347 Services 13086 m² GFA€ 13.905.743 € 3.685.022 € 13.961.302 Services 13086 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 13.905.743 € 3.685.022 € 13.961.302

Total Costs € 200.355.175 € 47.017.696 € 196.784.964

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 658 units€ 21.727.675 0 219 units€ 1.914.699 0 Covered 658 units€ 10.489.222 -0,5 585 units€ 9.323.753 -1 0 units€ - Housing 116.222 m² LFA€ 249.176.282 Rental 16.885 m² LFA€ 26.478.613 Appartment 9.662 m² LFA€ 14.083.656 Affordable 6.600 m² LFA€ 6.643.909 High priced 3.062 m² LFA€ 7.439.746 Ground bound 7.223 m² LFA€ 12.394.957 Affordable 7.223 m² LFA€ 12.394.957 High priced 0 m² LFA€ - Ownership 99.337 m² LFA€ 222.697.669 Appartment 59.717 m² LFA€ 152.948.261 Medium priced 10.824 m² LFA€ 26.080.179 High priced 48.893 m² LFA€ 126.868.082 Ground bound 39.620 m² LFA€ 69.749.408 Medium priced 7.508 m² LFA€ 12.702.973 High priced 32.112 m² LFA€ 57.046.435 Retail 5.062 m² LFA€ 8.394.327 Retail 5.062 m² LFA€ 8.394.327 Offices 12.786 m² LFA€ 17.403.904 Offices 12.786 m² LFA€ 17.403.904 Services 11.123 m² LFA€ 15.357.809 Services 11.123 m² LFA€ 15.357.809

Total Costs € 312.059.997

FFF \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Market variant Zutphen / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Zutphen market varaint

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 16.885 m² LFA € 10.047.517 Rental 16.885 m² LFA € 10.047.517 Appartments 9.662 m² LFA € 5.328.232 Affordable 6.600 m² LFA € 3.580.686 vacancy Rent Start€ 62.370 € 41.580 € 20.790 € 108.697 € 415.800 Friction€ 20.790 € 440.922 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 40.919 € 867.834 € 8.183.880 Structural€ 409.194 € 409.194 € 409.194 € 1.722.311 Operation Rent€ 20.790 € 440.922 High priced 3.062 m² LFA € 1.747.545 vacancy Rent Start€ 57.879 € 38.586 € 19.293 € 91.226 € 385.862 Friction€ 19.293 € 297.556 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 19.936 € 307.471 € 3.987.187 Structural€ 199.359 € 199.359 € 199.359 € 753.736 Operation Rent€ 19.293 € 297.556 Ground bound 7.223 m² LFA € 4.719.286 Affordable 7.223 m² LFA € 4.719.286 vacancy Rent Start€ 136.515 € 91.010 € 45.505 € 237.915 € 910.103 Friction€ 45.505 € 965.090 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 40.304 € 854.782 € 8.060.795 Structural€ 403.040 € 403.040 € 403.040 € 1.696.408 Operation Rent€ 45.505 € 965.090 High priced 0 m² LFA € - vacancy Rent Start€ - € - € - € - € - Friction€ - € - Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ - € - € - Structural€ - € - € - € - Operation Rent€ - € - Retail 5.062 m² LFA € 2.487.443 Retail 5.062 m² LFA € 2.487.443 vacancy Rent Start€ 99.663 € 66.442 € 33.221 € 151.985 € 664.417 Friction€ 33.221 € 463.841 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 27.898 € 389.523 € 5.579.616 Structural€ 278.981 € 278.981 € 278.981 € 1.018.253 Operation Rent€ 33.221 € 463.841 Offices 12.786 m² LFA € 7.361.195 Offices 12.786 m² LFA € 7.361.195 vacancy Rent Start€ 271.857 € 181.238 € 90.619 € 388.399 € 1.812.378 Friction€ 181.238 € 2.093.441 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 84.062 € 970.980 € 16.812.347 Structural€ 840.617 € 840.617 € 840.617 € 2.861.654 Operation Rent€ 90.619 € 1.046.721 Services 11.123 m² LFA € 6.445.437 Services 11.123 m² LFA € 6.445.437 vacancy Rent Start€ 218.986 € 145.991 € 72.995 € 323.197 € 1.459.910 Friction€ 145.991 € 1.851.183 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 69.807 € 885.155 € 13.961.302 Structural€ 698.065 € 698.065 € 698.065 € 2.460.310 Operation Rent€ 72.995 € 925.592

Total Costs € 26.341.592

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.462 units€ 12.284.334 - -€ 21.727.675 0 219 units€ 11.500 - -€ 2.522.676 - -€ 1.914.699 0 Covered 658 units€ 21.000 - -€ 13.819.875 - -€ 10.489.222 -0,5 585 units€ 21.000 - -€ 12.284.334 - -€ 9.323.753 -1 0 units€ 21.000 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 116.222 m² LFA€ 2.395 € 259.868.448 € 1.711.765 € 5.487.714 € 259.223.799 Rental 16.885 m² LFA€ 401 -€ 1.711.765 € 5.487.714 € 36.526.130 Appartments 9.662 m² LFA€ 233 -€ 801.662 € 2.409.928 € 19.411.887 Affordable 6.600 m² LFA -€ 63 € 167 -€ 415.800 € 1.406.152 € 10.224.596 High priced 3.062 m² LFA -€ 126 € 66 -€ 385.862 € 1.003.776 € 9.187.292 Ground bound 7.223 m² LFA€ 168 -€ 910.103 € 3.077.786 € 17.114.243 Affordable 7.223 m² LFA -€ 126 € 168 -€ 910.103 € 3.077.786 € 17.114.243 High priced 0 m² LFA -€ 142 € - -€ - € - € - Ownership 99.337 m² LFA€ 1.994 € 259.868.448 - -€ 222.697.669 Appartments 59.717 m² LFA€ 1.323 € 173.294.352 - -€ 152.948.261 Medium priced 10.824 m² LFA€ 2.730 -€ 274 € 29.549.520 - -€ 26.080.179 High priced 48.893 m² LFA€ 2.940 -€ 1.048 € 143.744.832 - -€ 126.868.082 Ground bound 39.620 m² LFA€ 672 € 86.574.096 -€ 69.749.408 Medium priced 7.508 m² LFA€ 2.100 -€ 174 € 15.767.136 - -€ 12.702.973 High priced 32.112 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 497 € 70.806.960 - -€ 57.046.435 Retail 5.062 m² LFA€ 101 -€ 664.417 € 1.604.947 € 10.881.770 Retail 5.062 m² LFA -€ 131 € 101 -€ 664.417 € 1.604.947 € 10.881.770 Offices 12.786 m² LFA€ 511 -€ 1.812.378 € 3.830.686 € 24.765.099 Offices 12.786 m² LFA -€ 142 € 511 -€ 1.812.378 € 3.830.686 € 24.765.099 Services 11.123 m² LFA€ 371 -€ 1.459.910 € 3.291.414 € 21.803.246 Services 11.123 m² LFA -€ 131 € 371 -€ 1.459.910 € 3.291.414 € 21.803.246

Total reveneus € 3.379 € 338.401.589

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / GGG Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Social variant Zutphen / Land development

Land development phase Zutphen social variant

Total ground uses 220.546 m²

Area of plan 224.366 m² Building height 1-5 floors Operating area 220.953 m² FSI 0,81 Parking places 1.807 Units GSI 0,28 Footprint 61.930 m² OSR 0,89 GFA 179.246 m² GSR 0,07 Green area 12.359 m² SPR 99

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 total area 220.953 m²€ 125 € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 Soil clean up costs € 1.658.316 € 331.663 € 1.802.082 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 673.750 Polluted 515 m²€ 62 € 38.316 € 7.663 € 41.638 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.086.694 Outplacement costs emplacement € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Railway yard 25.000 m²€ 50 € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 Site preparation costs € 27.325.035 € 5.465.007 € 29.693.944 For building 220.953 m²€ 25 € 5.523.825 € 1.104.765 € 6.002.706 Pavement 99.027 m²€ 135 € 13.368.645 € 2.673.729 € 14.527.623 Green 12.359 m²€ 35 € 432.565 € 86.513 € 470.066 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 8.693.550 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 60.602.476 € 12.120.495 € 66.886.206

revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.807 Units€ 7.376.355 0 723 Units - - 40,00%€ 4.818.937 0 Covered 542 Units - - 30,00%€ 2.040.133 -0,5 542 Units - - 30,00%€ 517.285 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 574 Units - 72.488 m² GFA€ 31.382.422 Rent 410 Units - 50.315 m² GFA€ 15.729.802 Appartment 205 Units - 23.452 m² GFA€ 1.513.802 Affordable 164 Units 110 18.040 m² GFA € 3.367.403- High priced 41 Units 132 5.412 m² GFA€ 4.881.205 Ground Bound 205 Units - 26.863 m² GFA€ 14.216.000 Affordable 164 Units 118,8 19.483 m² GFA€ 9.352.666 High priced 41 Units 180 7.380 m² GFA€ 4.863.334 Ownership 164 Units - 22.173 m² GFA€ 15.652.620 Appartment 82 Units - 9.922 m² GFA€ 9.817.020 Medium priced 41 Units 110 4.510 m² GFA€ 4.219.538 High priced 41 Units 132 5.412 m² GFA€ 5.597.482 Ground bound 82 Units - 12.251 m² GFA€ 5.835.600 Medium priced 41 Units 118,8 4.871 m² GFA€ 2.244.095 High priced 41 Units 180 7.380 m² GFA€ 3.591.504 Retail 16.096 m² GFA€ 8.054.764 Retail 16.096 m² GFA - -€ 8.054.764 Offices 41.389 m² GFA€ 1.627.702 Offices 41.389 m² GFA - -€ 1.627.702 Services 49.273 m² GFA€ 5.258.289 Services 49.273 m² GFA - -€ 5.258.289

Total Reveneus 179.246 m² GFA€ 53.699.531

Total result land development 220.953 m² € 13.186.675-

HHH \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Social variant Zutphen / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Zutphen social variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1807 m² GFA€ 15.718.464 € 2.829.324 € 16.209.872 0 723 units€ 2.200 € 1.589.914 € 286.184 € 1.489.007 0 Covered 542 units€ 13.000 € 7.046.208 € 1.268.317 € 6.599.008 -0,5 542 units€ 16.000 € 8.672.256 € 1.561.006 € 8.121.857 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 72488 m² GFA€ 70.578.520 € 16.585.952 € 69.180.027 Rental 50315 m² GFA€ 48.790.444 € 11.465.754 € 47.823.675 Appartment 23452 m² GFA€ 24.008.191 € 5.641.925 € 23.532.475 Affordable 18040 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 18.257.179 € 4.290.437 € 17.895.418 High priced 5412 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 5.751.011 € 1.351.488 € 5.637.057 Ground bound 26863 m² GFA€ 24.782.254 € 5.823.830 € 24.291.200 Affordable 19483 m² GFA€ 900 € 17.745.978 € 4.170.305 € 17.394.347 High priced 7380 m² GFA€ 950 € 7.036.275 € 1.653.525 € 6.896.854 Ownership 22173 m² GFA€ 21.788.076 € 5.120.198 € 21.356.352 Appartment 9922 m² GFA€ 10.315.306 € 2.424.097 € 10.110.911 Medium priced 4510 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 4.564.295 € 1.072.609 € 4.473.855 High priced 5412 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 5.751.011 € 1.351.488 € 5.637.057 Ground bound 12251 m² GFA€ 11.472.770 € 2.696.101 € 11.245.440 Medium priced 4871 m² GFA€ 900 € 4.436.495 € 1.042.576 € 4.348.587 High priced 7380 m² GFA€ 950 € 7.036.275 € 1.653.525 € 6.896.854 Retail 16096 m² GFA€ 16.289.776 € 3.828.097 € 15.966.999 Retail 16096 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 16.289.776 € 3.828.097 € 15.966.999 Offices 41389 m² GFA€ 46.075.999 € 12.210.140 € 46.260.094 Offices 41389 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 46.075.999 € 12.210.140 € 46.260.094 Services 49273 m² GFA€ 52.359.495 € 13.875.266 € 52.568.695 Services 49273 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 52.359.495 € 13.875.266 € 52.568.695

Total Costs € 201.022.255 € 49.328.779 € 200.185.687

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 542 units€ 23.586.227 0 723 units€ 6.307.944 0 Covered 542 units€ 8.639.141 -0,5 542 units€ 8.639.141 -1 0 units€ - Housing 57.990 m² LFA€ 100.562.449 Rental 40.252 m² LFA€ 63.553.477 Appartment 18.762 m² LFA€ 25.046.277 Affordable 14.432 m² LFA€ 14.528.015 High priced 4.330 m² LFA€ 10.518.262 Ground bound 21.491 m² LFA€ 38.507.200 Affordable 15.587 m² LFA€ 26.747.013 High priced 5.904 m² LFA€ 11.760.187 Ownership 17.738 m² LFA€ 37.008.972 Appartment 7.938 m² LFA€ 19.927.932 Medium priced 3.608 m² LFA€ 8.693.393 High priced 4.330 m² LFA€ 11.234.539 Ground bound 9.801 m² LFA€ 17.081.040 Medium priced 3.897 m² LFA€ 6.592.682 High priced 5.904 m² LFA€ 10.488.358 Retail 14.486 m² LFA€ 24.021.762 Retail 14.486 m² LFA€ 24.021.762 Offices 35.181 m² LFA€ 47.887.796 Offices 35.181 m² LFA€ 47.887.796 Services 41.882 m² LFA€ 57.826.984 Services 41.882 m² LFA€ 57.826.984

Total Costs € 253.885.218

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / III Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Social variant Zutphen / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Zutphen social variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 40.252 m² LFA € 23.808.375 Rental 40.252 m² LFA € 23.808.375 Appartments 18.762 m² LFA € 10.300.435 Affordable 14.432 m² LFA € 7.829.767 vacancy Rent Start€ 136.382 € 90.922 € 45.461 € 237.683 € 909.216 Friction€ 45.461 € 964.150 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 89.477 € 1.897.664 € 17.895.418 Structural€ 894.771 € 894.771 € 894.771 € 3.766.121 Operation Rent€ 45.461 € 964.150 High priced 4.330 m² LFA € 2.470.668 vacancy Rent Start€ 81.829 € 54.553 € 27.276 € 128.975 € 545.530 Friction€ 27.276 € 420.683 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 28.185 € 434.700 € 5.637.057 Structural€ 281.853 € 281.853 € 281.853 € 1.065.626 Operation Rent€ 27.276 € 420.683 Ground bound 21.491 m² LFA € 13.507.940 Affordable 15.587 m² LFA € 10.183.721 vacancy Rent Start€ 294.586 € 196.391 € 98.195 € 513.396 € 1.963.907 Friction€ 98.195 € 2.082.564 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 86.972 € 1.844.529 € 17.394.347 Structural€ 869.717 € 869.717 € 869.717 € 3.660.669 Operation Rent€ 98.195 € 2.082.564 High priced 5904 m² LFA € 3.324.218 vacancy Rent Start€ 125.534 € 83.689 € 41.845 € 197.860 € 836.892 Friction€ 41.845 € 645.366 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 34.484 € 531.849 € 6.896.854 Structural€ 344.843 € 344.843 € 344.843 € 1.303.777 Operation Rent€ 41.845 € 645.366 Retail 14.486 m² LFA € 7.118.232 Retail 14.486 m² LFA € 7.118.232 vacancy Rent Start€ 285.201 € 190.134 € 95.067 € 434.931 € 1.901.340 Friction€ 95.067 € 1.327.359 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 79.835 € 1.114.684 € 15.966.999 Structural€ 798.350 € 798.350 € 798.350 € 2.913.900 Operation Rent€ 95.067 € 1.327.359 Offices 35.181 m² LFA € 20.254.731 Offices 35.181 m² LFA € 20.254.731 vacancy Rent Start€ 748.029 € 498.686 € 249.343 € 1.068.701 € 4.986.857 Friction€ 498.686 € 5.760.218 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 231.300 € 2.671.705 € 46.260.094 Structural€ 2.313.005 € 2.313.005 € 2.313.005 € 7.873.997 Operation Rent€ 249.343 € 2.880.109 Services 41.882 m² LFA € 24.269.097 Services 41.882 m² LFA € 24.269.097 vacancy Rent Start€ 824.553 € 549.702 € 274.851 € 1.216.939 € 5.497.019 Friction€ 549.702 € 6.970.287 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 262.843 € 3.332.887 € 52.568.695 Structural€ 2.628.435 € 2.628.435 € 2.628.435 € 9.263.840 Operation Rent€ 274.851 € 3.485.144

Total Costs € 75.450.435

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.807 units€ 11.382.336 - -€ 23.586.227 0 723 units€ 11.500 - -€ 8.310.912 - -€ 6.307.944 0 Covered 542 units€ 21.000 - -€ 11.382.336 - -€ 8.639.141 -0,5 542 units€ 21.000 - -€ 11.382.336 - -€ 8.639.141 -1 0 units€ 21.000 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 57.990 m² LFA€ 1.278 € 43.780.128 € 4.255.544 € 13.312.533 € 124.370.824 Rental 40.252 m² LFA€ 912 -€ 4.255.544 € 13.312.533 € 87.361.852 Appartments 18.762 m² LFA€ 459 -€ 1.454.746 € 4.493.918 € 35.346.712 Affordable 14.432 m² LFA -€ 63 € 366 -€ 909.216 € 3.074.786 € 22.357.782 High priced 4.330 m² LFA -€ 126 € 93 -€ 545.530 € 1.419.132 € 12.988.930 Ground bound 21.491 m² LFA€ 453 -€ 2.800.799 € 8.818.615 € 52.015.140 Affordable 15.587 m² LFA -€ 126 € 362 -€ 1.963.907 € 6.641.538 € 36.930.734 High priced 5.904 m² LFA -€ 142 € 91 -€ 836.892 € 2.177.077 € 15.084.406 Ownership 17.738 m² LFA€ 366 € 43.780.128 - -€ 37.008.972 Appartments 7.938 m² LFA€ 184 € 22.578.864 - -€ 19.927.932 Medium priced 3.608 m² LFA€ 2.730 -€ 91 € 9.849.840 - -€ 8.693.393 High priced 4.330 m² LFA€ 2.940 -€ 93 € 12.729.024 - -€ 11.234.539 Ground bound 9.801 m² LFA€ 182 € 21.201.264 -€ 17.081.040 Medium priced 3.897 m² LFA€ 2.100 -€ 91 € 8.182.944 - -€ 6.592.682 High priced 5.904 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 91 € 13.018.320 - -€ 10.488.358 Retail 14.486 m² LFA€ 290 -€ 1.901.340 € 4.592.822 € 31.139.994 Retail 14.486 m² LFA -€ 131 € 290 -€ 1.901.340 € 4.592.822 € 31.139.994 Offices 35.181 m² LFA€ 1.407 -€ 4.986.857 € 10.540.343 € 68.142.527 Offices 35.181 m² LFA -€ 142 € 1.407 -€ 4.986.857 € 10.540.343 € 68.142.527 Services 41.882 m² LFA€ 1.396 -€ 5.497.019 € 12.393.210 € 82.096.081 Services 41.882 m² LFA -€ 131 € 1.396 -€ 5.497.019 € 12.393.210 € 82.096.081

Total reveneus € 4.371 € 329.335.652

JJJ \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Policy variant Zutphen / Land development

Land development phase Zutphen policy variant

Total ground use 220.951 m²

Area of plan 224.366 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 220.953 m² FSI 0,71 Parking places 1.364 Units GSI 0,27 Footprint 59.713 m² OSR 1,02 GFA 157.819 m² GSR 0,08 Green area 12.620 m² SPR 116

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 total area 220.953 m²€ 125 € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 Soil clean up costs € 1.658.316 € 331.663 € 1.802.082 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 673.750 Polluted 515 m²€ 62 € 38.316 € 7.663 € 41.638 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.086.694 Outplacement costs emplacement € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Railway yard 25.000 m²€ 50 € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 Site preparation costs € 25.675.290 € 5.135.058 € 27.901.176 For building 220.953 m²€ 25 € 5.523.825 € 1.104.765 € 6.002.706 Pavement 86.739 m²€ 135 € 11.709.765 € 2.341.953 € 12.724.928 Green 12.620 m²€ 35 € 441.700 € 88.340 € 479.993 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 8.693.550 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 58.952.731 € 11.790.546 € 65.093.438

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.364 Units€ 4.194.089 0 205 Units - - 15,00%€ 1.363.888 0 Covered 614 Units - - 45,00%€ 2.309.648 -0,5 545 Units - - 40,00%€ 520.552 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 832 Units - 110.182 m² GFA€ 56.310.201 Rent 365 Units - 46.296 m² GFA€ 19.471.021 Appartment 94 Units - 10.758 m² GFA€ 722.051 Affordable 75 Units 110 8.250 m² GFA € 1.539.971- High priced 19 Units 132 2.508 m² GFA€ 2.262.022 Ground Bound 271 Units - 35.538 m² GFA€ 18.748.970 Affordable 215 Units 118,8 25.542 m² GFA€ 12.261.117 High priced 56 Units 178,5 9.996 m² GFA€ 6.487.853 Ownership 467 Units - 63.886 m² GFA€ 36.839.180 Appartment 112 Units - 13.354 m² GFA€ 13.106.137 Medium priced 65 Units 110 7.150 m² GFA€ 6.689.512 High priced 47 Units 132 6.204 m² GFA€ 6.416.625 Ground bound 355 Units - 50.532 m² GFA€ 23.733.042 Medium priced 215 Units 118,8 25.542 m² GFA€ 11.767.818 High priced 140 Units 178,5 24.990 m² GFA€ 11.965.224 Retail 5.492 m² GFA€ 2.748.308 Retail 5.492 m² GFA - -€ 2.748.308 Offices 14.123 m² GFA€ 555.414 Offices 14.123 m² GFA - -€ 555.414 Services 28.022 m² GFA€ 2.990.436 Services 28.022 m² GFA - -€ 2.990.436

Total Reveneus 157.819 m² GFA€ 66.798.447

Total result land development 220.953 m²€ 1.705.009

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / KKK Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Policy variant Zutphen / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Zutphen policy variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1364 m² GFA€ 16.704.100 € 3.006.738 € 16.065.375 0 205 units€ 2.200 € 449.988 € 80.998 € 421.429 0 Covered 614 units€ 13.000 € 7.977.060 € 1.435.871 € 7.470.782 -0,5 545 units€ 16.000 € 8.727.040 € 1.570.867 € 8.173.164 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 110182 m² GFA€ 105.009.040 € 24.677.125 € 102.928.316 Rental 46296 m² GFA€ 43.889.490 € 10.314.030 € 43.019.832 Appartment 10758 m² GFA€ 11.014.423 € 2.588.389 € 10.796.175 Affordable 8250 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 8.349.320 € 1.962.090 € 8.183.880 High priced 2508 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 2.665.103 € 626.299 € 2.612.295 Ground bound 35538 m² GFA€ 32.875.067 € 7.725.641 € 32.223.657 Affordable 25542 m² GFA€ 900 € 23.264.545 € 5.467.168 € 22.803.564 High priced 9996 m² GFA€ 950 € 9.610.522 € 2.258.473 € 9.420.093 Ownership 63886 m² GFA€ 61.119.551 € 14.363.094 € 59.908.484 Appartment 13354 m² GFA€ 13.828.700 € 3.249.745 € 13.554.688 Medium priced 7150 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 7.236.077 € 1.700.478 € 7.092.696 High priced 6204 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 6.592.623 € 1.549.266 € 6.461.992 Ground bound 50532 m² GFA€ 47.290.851 € 11.113.350 € 46.353.796 Medium priced 25542 m² GFA€ 900 € 23.264.545 € 5.467.168 € 22.803.564 High priced 24990 m² GFA€ 950 € 24.026.306 € 5.646.182 € 23.550.232 Retail 5492 m² GFA€ 5.558.117 € 1.306.157 € 5.447.984 Retail 5492 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 5.558.117 € 1.306.157 € 5.447.984 Offices 14123 m² GFA€ 15.722.326 € 4.166.416 € 15.785.144 Offices 14123 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 15.722.326 € 4.166.416 € 15.785.144 Services 28022 m² GFA€ 29.777.318 € 7.890.989 € 29.896.292 Services 28022 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 29.777.318 € 7.890.989 € 29.896.292

Total Costs € 172.770.901 € 41.047.425 € 170.123.110

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 614 units€ 20.259.463 0 205 units€ 1.785.317 0 Covered 614 units€ 9.780.431 -0,5 545 units€ 8.693.716 -1 0 units€ - Housing 88.146 m² LFA€ 159.238.517 Rental 37.037 m² LFA€ 62.490.853 Appartment 8.606 m² LFA€ 11.518.226 Affordable 6.600 m² LFA€ 6.643.909 High priced 2.006 m² LFA€ 4.874.317 Ground bound 28.430 m² LFA€ 50.972.627 Affordable 20.434 m² LFA€ 35.064.682 High priced 7.997 m² LFA€ 15.907.946 Ownership 51.109 m² LFA€ 96.747.664 Appartment 10.683 m² LFA€ 26.660.826 Medium priced 5.720 m² LFA€ 13.782.208 High priced 4.963 m² LFA€ 12.878.617 Ground bound 40.426 m² LFA€ 70.086.838 Medium priced 20.434 m² LFA€ 34.571.382 High priced 19.992 m² LFA€ 35.515.456 Retail 4.943 m² LFA€ 8.196.292 Retail 4.943 m² LFA€ 8.196.292 Offices 12.005 m² LFA€ 16.340.558 Offices 12.005 m² LFA€ 16.340.558 Services 23.819 m² LFA€ 32.886.728 Services 23.819 m² LFA€ 32.886.728

Total Costs € 236.921.558

LLL \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Policy variant Zutphen / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Zutphen policy variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 37.037 m² LFA € 22.599.693 Rental 37.037 m² LFA € 22.599.693 Appartments 8.606 m² LFA € 4.725.630 Affordable 6.600 m² LFA € 3.580.686 vacancy Rent Start€ 62.370 € 41.580 € 20.790 € 108.697 € 415.800 Friction€ 20.790 € 440.922 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 40.919 € 867.834 € 8.183.880 Structural€ 409.194 € 409.194 € 409.194 € 1.722.311 Operation Rent€ 20.790 € 440.922 High priced 2.006 m² LFA € 1.144.944 vacancy Rent Start€ 37.921 € 25.281 € 12.640 € 59.769 € 252.806 Friction€ 12.640 € 194.951 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 13.061 € 201.446 € 2.612.295 Structural€ 130.615 € 130.615 € 130.615 € 493.827 Operation Rent€ 12.640 € 194.951 Ground bound 28.430 m² LFA € 17.874.063 Affordable 20.434 m² LFA € 13.350.610 vacancy Rent Start€ 386.195 € 257.463 € 128.732 € 673.049 € 2.574.634 Friction€ 128.732 € 2.730.190 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 114.018 € 2.418.133 € 22.803.564 Structural€ 1.140.178 € 1.140.178 € 1.140.178 € 4.799.048 Operation Rent€ 128.732 € 2.730.190 High priced 7996,8 m² LFA € 4.523.453 vacancy Rent Start€ 170.032 € 113.355 € 56.677 € 267.995 € 1.133.546 Friction€ 56.677 € 874.130 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 47.100 € 726.427 € 9.420.093 Structural€ 471.005 € 471.005 € 471.005 € 1.780.769 Operation Rent€ 56.677 € 874.130 Retail 4.943 m² LFA € 2.428.761 Retail 4.943 m² LFA € 2.428.761 vacancy Rent Start€ 97.311 € 64.874 € 32.437 € 148.400 € 648.743 Friction€ 32.437 € 452.898 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 27.240 € 380.333 € 5.447.984 Structural€ 272.399 € 272.399 € 272.399 € 994.231 Operation Rent€ 32.437 € 452.898 Offices 12.005 m² LFA € 6.911.439 Offices 12.005 m² LFA € 6.911.439 vacancy Rent Start€ 255.247 € 170.164 € 85.082 € 364.669 € 1.701.645 Friction€ 170.164 € 1.965.536 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 78.926 € 911.655 € 15.785.144 Structural€ 789.257 € 789.257 € 789.257 € 2.686.812 Operation Rent€ 85.082 € 982.768 Services 23.819 m² LFA € 13.802.055 Services 23.819 m² LFA € 13.802.055 vacancy Rent Start€ 468.931 € 312.620 € 156.310 € 692.084 € 3.126.204 Friction€ 312.620 € 3.964.065 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 149.481 € 1.895.443 € 29.896.292 Structural€ 1.494.815 € 1.494.815 € 1.494.815 € 5.268.429 Operation Rent€ 156.310 € 1.982.033

Total Costs € 45.741.947

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.364 units€ 11.454.240 - -€ 20.259.463 0 205 units€ 11.500 - -€ 2.352.210 - -€ 1.785.317 0 Covered 614 units€ 21.000 - -€ 12.886.020 - -€ 9.780.431 -0,5 545 units€ 21.000 - -€ 11.454.240 - -€ 8.693.716 -1 0 units€ 21.000 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 88.146 m² LFA€ 1.844 € 117.200.328 € 4.376.786 € 13.719.482 € 181.838.210 Rental 37.037 m² LFA€ 809 -€ 4.376.786 € 13.719.482 € 85.090.546 Appartments 8.606 m² LFA€ 210 -€ 668.606 € 2.063.799 € 16.243.856 Affordable 6.600 m² LFA -€ 63 € 167 -€ 415.800 € 1.406.152 € 10.224.596 High priced 2.006 m² LFA -€ 126 € 43 -€ 252.806 € 657.647 € 6.019.260 Ground bound 28.430 m² LFA€ 598 -€ 3.708.180 € 11.655.683 € 68.846.690 Affordable 20.434 m² LFA -€ 126 € 475 -€ 2.574.634 € 8.706.894 € 48.415.292 High priced 7.997 m² LFA -€ 142 € 124 -€ 1.133.546 € 2.948.789 € 20.431.398 Ownership 51.109 m² LFA€ 1.036 € 117.200.328 - -€ 96.747.664 Appartments 10.683 m² LFA€ 251 € 30.207.408 - -€ 26.660.826 Medium priced 5.720 m² LFA€ 2.730 -€ 145 € 15.615.600 - -€ 13.782.208 High priced 4.963 m² LFA€ 2.940 -€ 106 € 14.591.808 - -€ 12.878.617 Ground bound 40.426 m² LFA€ 784 € 86.992.920 -€ 70.086.838 Medium priced 20.434 m² LFA€ 2.100 -€ 475 € 42.910.560 - -€ 34.571.382 High priced 19.992 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 310 € 44.082.360 - -€ 35.515.456 Retail 4.943 m² LFA€ 99 -€ 648.743 € 1.567.083 € 10.625.053 Retail 4.943 m² LFA -€ 131 € 99 -€ 648.743 € 1.567.083 € 10.625.053 Offices 12.005 m² LFA€ 480 -€ 1.701.645 € 3.596.638 € 23.251.997 Offices 12.005 m² LFA -€ 142 € 480 -€ 1.701.645 € 3.596.638 € 23.251.997 Services 23.819 m² LFA€ 794 -€ 3.126.204 € 7.048.130 € 46.688.782 Services 23.819 m² LFA -€ 131 € 794 -€ 3.126.204 € 7.048.130 € 46.688.782

Total reveneus € 3.217 € 282.663.505

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / MMM Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

NNN \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix II. Main variant Zutphen/Functional area

Main variant Zutphen - Functional areas / Land development

Land development phase Zutphen Main variant / Functional areas

Total ground use 220.951 m² Minimum non residental 3.500 m² Ground use residental 125.840 m² Ground use non residential 95.111 m²

Area of plan 224.366 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 220.953 m² FSI 0,66 Parking places 1.378 Units GSI 0,25 Footprint 55.200 m² OSR 1,14 GFA 144.874 m² GSR 0,12 Green area 17.635 m² SPR 105

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 total area 220.953 m²€ 125 € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 Soil clean up costs € 1.658.316 € 331.663 € 1.802.082 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 673.750 Polluted 515 m²€ 62 € 38.316 € 7.663 € 41.638 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.086.694 Outplacement costs emplacement € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Railway yard 25.000 m²€ 50 € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 Site preparation costs € 28.000.690 € 5.600.138 € 30.428.174 For building 220.953 m²€ 25 € 5.523.825 € 1.104.765 € 6.002.706 Pavement 102.664 m²€ 135 € 13.859.640 € 2.771.928 € 15.061.184 Green 17.635 m²€ 35 € 617.225 € 123.445 € 670.735 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 8.693.550 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 61.278.131 € 12.255.626 € 67.620.436

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.378 Units€ 5.227.641 0 414 Units - - 30,00%€ 2.757.542 0 Covered 551 Units - - 40,00%€ 2.075.424 -0,5 414 Units - - 30,00%€ 394.675 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 745 Units - 94.723 m² GFA€ 66.733.452 Rent 351 Units - 45.100 m² GFA€ 24.660.895 Appartment 132 Units - 16.456 m² GFA€ 9.577.200 Affordable 6070,794521 44 Units 110 4.840 m² GFA € 902.306- High priced 12780,09132 88 Units 132 11.616 m² GFA€ 10.479.506 Ground Bound 219 Units - 28.644 m² GFA€ 15.083.695 Affordable 34166 175 Units 118,8 20.790 m² GFA€ 9.984.401 High priced 10555,5 44 Units 178,5 7.854 m² GFA€ 5.099.294 Ownership 394 Units - 49.623 m² GFA€ 42.072.557 Appartment 306 Units - 36.542 m² GFA€ 35.901.576 Medium priced 24145,20548 175 Units 110 19.250 m² GFA€ 18.013.680 High priced 19024,90868 131 Units 132 17.292 m² GFA€ 17.887.896 Ground bound 88 Units - 13.081 m² GFA€ 6.170.980 Medium priced 8542 44 Units 118,8 5.227 m² GFA€ 2.409.142 High priced 10555,5 44 Units 178,5 7.854 m² GFA€ 3.761.838 Retail 12.866 m² GFA€ 6.441.299 Retail 54939 12.866 m² GFA - -€ 6.441.299 Offices 11.028 m² GFA€ 436.436 Offices 7059 11.028 m² GFA - -€ 436.436 Services 26.257 m² GFA€ 2.808.364 Services 33113 26.257 m² GFA - -€ 2.808.364

Total Reveneus 144.874 m² GFA€ 81.647.191

Total result land development 220.953 m²€ 14.026.755

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / OOO Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Main variant Zutphen - Functional areas / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Zutphen Main variant / Functional areas

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1378 m² GFA€ 13.784.800 € 2.481.264 € 13.761.979 0 414 units€ 2.200 € 909.797 € 163.763 € 852.055 0 Covered 551 units€ 13.000 € 7.168.096 € 1.290.257 € 6.713.161 -0,5 414 units€ 16.000 € 6.616.704 € 1.191.007 € 6.196.764 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 94723 m² GFA€ 93.881.463 € 22.062.144 € 92.021.228 Rental 45100 m² GFA€ 43.721.371 € 10.274.522 € 42.855.045 Appartment 16456 m² GFA€ 17.238.782 € 4.051.114 € 16.897.200 Affordable 4840 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 4.897.381 € 1.150.885 € 4.800.341 High priced 11616 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 12.341.401 € 2.900.229 € 12.096.859 Ground bound 28644 m² GFA€ 26.482.589 € 6.223.408 € 25.957.844 Affordable 20790 m² GFA€ 900 € 18.932.831 € 4.449.215 € 18.557.682 High priced 7854 m² GFA€ 950 € 7.549.758 € 1.774.193 € 7.400.162 Ownership 49623 m² GFA€ 50.160.092 € 11.787.622 € 49.166.184 Appartment 36542 m² GFA€ 37.850.079 € 8.894.769 € 37.100.090 Medium priced 19250 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 19.478.221 € 4.577.382 € 19.092.265 High priced 17292 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 18.371.858 € 4.317.387 € 18.007.825 Ground bound 13081 m² GFA€ 12.310.013 € 2.892.853 € 12.066.094 Medium priced 5227 m² GFA€ 900 € 4.760.255 € 1.118.660 € 4.665.931 High priced 7854 m² GFA€ 950 € 7.549.758 € 1.774.193 € 7.400.162 Retail 12866 m² GFA€ 13.018.535 € 3.059.356 € 12.760.576 Retail 12866 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 13.018.535 € 3.059.356 € 12.760.576 Offices 11028 m² GFA€ 12.274.618 € 3.252.774 € 12.323.661 Offices 11028 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 12.274.618 € 3.252.774 € 12.323.661 Services 26257 m² GFA€ 27.896.708 € 7.392.628 € 28.008.168 Services 26257 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 27.896.708 € 7.392.628 € 28.008.168

Total Costs € 160.856.123 € 38.248.165 € 158.875.612

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 551 units€ 18.989.620 0 414 units€ 3.609.597 0 Covered 551 units€ 8.788.584 -0,5 414 units€ 6.591.438 -1 0 units€ - Housing 75.779 m² LFA€ 158.754.680 Rental 36.080 m² LFA€ 67.515.940 Appartment 13.165 m² LFA€ 26.474.400 Affordable 3.872 m² LFA€ 3.898.035 High priced 9.293 m² LFA€ 22.576.365 Ground bound 22.915 m² LFA€ 41.041.539 Affordable 16.632 m² LFA€ 28.542.083 High priced 6.283 m² LFA€ 12.499.457 Ownership 39.699 m² LFA€ 91.238.740 Appartment 29.234 m² LFA€ 73.001.666 Medium priced 15.400 m² LFA€ 37.105.946 High priced 13.834 m² LFA€ 35.895.721 Ground bound 10.465 m² LFA€ 18.237.074 Medium priced 4.182 m² LFA€ 7.075.074 High priced 6.283 m² LFA€ 11.162.000 Retail 11.579 m² LFA€ 19.201.875 Retail 11.579 m² LFA€ 19.201.875 Offices 9.374 m² LFA€ 12.760.097 Offices 9.374 m² LFA€ 12.760.097 Services 22.318 m² LFA€ 30.816.532 Services 22.318 m² LFA€ 30.816.532

Total Costs € 240.522.803

PPP \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Main variant Zutphen - Functional areas / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Zutphen Main variant / Functional areas

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 36.080 m² LFA € 21.822.206 Rental 36.080 m² LFA € 21.822.206 Appartments 13.165 m² LFA € 7.402.708 Affordable 3.872 m² LFA € 2.100.394 vacancy Rent Start€ 36.590 € 24.394 € 12.197 € 63.769 € 243.936 Friction€ 12.197 € 258.674 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 24.002 € 509.037 € 4.800.341 Structural€ 240.017 € 240.017 € 240.017 € 1.010.240 Operation Rent€ 12.197 € 258.674 High priced 9.293 m² LFA € 5.302.314 vacancy Rent Start€ 175.634 € 117.089 € 58.545 € 276.825 € 1.170.893 Friction€ 58.545 € 902.930 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 60.484 € 932.845 € 12.096.859 Structural€ 604.843 € 604.843 € 604.843 € 2.286.784 Operation Rent€ 58.545 € 902.930 Ground bound 22.915 m² LFA € 14.419.498 Affordable 16.632 m² LFA € 10.865.713 vacancy Rent Start€ 314.345 € 209.563 € 104.782 € 547.831 € 2.095.632 Friction€ 104.782 € 2.222.248 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 92.788 € 1.967.892 € 18.557.682 Structural€ 927.884 € 927.884 € 927.884 € 3.905.495 Operation Rent€ 104.782 € 2.222.248 High priced 6283,2 m² LFA € 3.553.785 vacancy Rent Start€ 133.597 € 89.064 € 44.532 € 210.568 € 890.644 Friction€ 44.532 € 686.817 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 37.001 € 570.661 € 7.400.162 Structural€ 370.008 € 370.008 € 370.008 € 1.398.923 Operation Rent€ 44.532 € 686.817 Retail 11.579 m² LFA € 5.689.227 Retail 11.579 m² LFA € 5.689.227 vacancy Rent Start€ 227.969 € 151.980 € 75.990 € 347.653 € 1.519.796 Friction€ 75.990 € 1.060.996 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 63.803 € 890.838 € 12.760.576 Structural€ 638.029 € 638.029 € 638.029 € 2.328.743 Operation Rent€ 75.990 € 1.060.996 Offices 9.374 m² LFA € 5.396.316 Offices 9.374 m² LFA € 5.396.316 vacancy Rent Start€ 199.310 € 132.874 € 66.437 € 284.753 € 1.328.736 Friction€ 132.874 € 1.534.796 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 61.618 € 711.741 € 12.323.661 Structural€ 616.183 € 616.183 € 616.183 € 2.097.628 Operation Rent€ 66.437 € 767.398 Services 22.318 m² LFA € 12.931.501 Services 22.318 m² LFA € 12.931.501 vacancy Rent Start€ 439.394 € 292.930 € 146.465 € 648.493 € 2.929.297 Friction€ 292.930 € 3.714.384 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 140.041 € 1.775.735 € 28.008.168 Structural€ 1.400.408 € 1.400.408 € 1.400.408 € 4.935.698 Operation Rent€ 146.465 € 1.857.192

Total Costs € 45.839.249

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.378 units€ 8.684.424 - -€ 18.989.620 0 414 units€ 11.500 - -€ 4.755.756 - -€ 3.609.597 0 Covered 551 units€ 21.000 - -€ 11.579.232 - -€ 8.788.584 -0,5 414 units€ 21.000 - -€ 8.684.424 - -€ 6.591.438 -1 0 units€ 21.000 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 75.779 m² LFA€ 1.662 € 105.348.936 € 4.401.104 € 13.274.797 € 180.576.886 Rental 36.080 m² LFA€ 781 -€ 4.401.104 € 13.274.797 € 89.338.145 Appartments 13.165 m² LFA€ 297 -€ 1.414.829 € 3.870.884 € 33.877.108 Affordable 3.872 m² LFA -€ 63 € 98 -€ 243.936 € 824.943 € 5.998.429 High priced 9.293 m² LFA -€ 126 € 199 -€ 1.170.893 € 3.045.942 € 27.878.679 Ground bound 22.915 m² LFA€ 484 -€ 2.986.276 € 9.403.913 € 55.461.037 Affordable 16.632 m² LFA -€ 126 € 386 -€ 2.095.632 € 7.087.007 € 39.407.796 High priced 6.283 m² LFA -€ 142 € 97 -€ 890.644 € 2.316.906 € 16.053.241 Ownership 39.699 m² LFA€ 881 € 105.348.936 - -€ 91.238.740 Appartments 29.234 m² LFA€ 687 € 82.712.784 - -€ 73.001.666 Medium priced 15.400 m² LFA€ 2.730 -€ 390 € 42.042.000 - -€ 37.105.946 High priced 13.834 m² LFA€ 2.940 -€ 297 € 40.670.784 - -€ 35.895.721 Ground bound 10.465 m² LFA€ 194 € 22.636.152 -€ 18.237.074 Medium priced 4.182 m² LFA€ 2.100 -€ 97 € 8.781.696 - -€ 7.075.074 High priced 6.283 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 97 € 13.854.456 - -€ 11.162.000 Retail 11.579 m² LFA€ 232 -€ 1.519.796 € 3.671.176 € 24.891.101 Retail 11.579 m² LFA -€ 131 € 232 -€ 1.519.796 € 3.671.176 € 24.891.101 Offices 9.374 m² LFA€ 375 -€ 1.328.736 € 2.808.449 € 18.156.413 Offices 9.374 m² LFA -€ 142 € 375 -€ 1.328.736 € 2.808.449 € 18.156.413 Services 22.318 m² LFA€ 744 -€ 2.929.297 € 6.604.195 € 43.748.032 Services 22.318 m² LFA -€ 131 € 744 -€ 2.929.297 € 6.604.195 € 43.748.032

Total reveneus € 3.013 € 286.362.052

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / QQQ Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

RRR \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix III. Main variant Zutphen/Stamps

Main variant Zutphen - Stamps / Land development

Land development phase Zutphen Main variant / Stamps

Total ground use 220.821

Area of plan 224.366 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 220.953 m² FSI 0,64 Parking places 1.503 Units GSI 0,31 Footprint 67.862 m² OSR 1,08 GFA 141.189 m² GSR 0,17 Green area 24.536 m² SPR 94

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 total area 220.953 m²€ 125 € 27.619.125 € 5.523.825 € 31.043.406 Soil clean up costs € 1.658.316 € 331.663 € 1.802.082 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 673.750 Polluted 515 m²€ 62 € 38.316 € 7.663 € 41.638 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.086.694 Outplacement costs emplacement € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Railway yard 25.000 m²€ 50 € 1.500.000 € 300.000 € 1.630.041 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.716.734 Site preparation costs € 25.958.105 € 5.191.621 € 28.208.510 For building 220.953 m²€ 25 € 5.523.825 € 1.104.765 € 6.002.706 Pavement 87.548 m²€ 135 € 11.818.980 € 2.363.796 € 12.843.611 Green 17.580 m²€ 35 € 615.300 € 123.060 € 668.643 Port 6.956 m²€ 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 8.693.550 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 59.235.546 € 11.847.109 € 65.400.772

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.503 Units€ 5.700.619 0 451 Units - - 30,00%€ 3.007.035 0 Covered 601 Units - - 40,00%€ 2.263.201 -0,5 451 Units - - 30,00%€ 430.383 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 736 Units - 93.261 m² GFA€ 66.577.438 Rent 344 Units - 44.079 m² GFA€ 24.109.151 Appartment 120 Units - 14.960 m² GFA€ 8.455.371 Affordable 40 Units 110 4.400 m² GFA € 752.964- High priced 80 Units 132 10.560 m² GFA€ 9.208.335 Ground Bound 224 Units - 29.119 m² GFA€ 15.653.780 Affordable 182 Units 118,8 21.622 m² GFA€ 10.681.479 High priced 42 Units 178,5 7.497 m² GFA€ 4.972.301 Ownership 392 Units - 49.183 m² GFA€ 42.468.287 Appartment 308 Units - 36.696 m² GFA€ 36.442.857 Medium priced 180 Units 110 19.800 m² GFA€ 18.758.447 High priced 128 Units 132 16.896 m² GFA€ 17.684.410 Ground bound 84 Units - 12.487 m² GFA€ 6.025.430 Medium priced 42 Units 118,8 4.990 m² GFA€ 2.351.820 High priced 42 Units 178,5 7.497 m² GFA€ 3.673.610 Retail 12.442 m² GFA€ 6.409.884 Retail 12.442 m² GFA 60 -€ 6.409.884 Offices 10.886 m² GFA € 181.532- Offices 10.886 m² GFA 21 - € 181.532- Services 24.600 m² GFA€ 1.365.689 Services 24.600 m² GFA 41 -€ 1.365.689

Total Reveneus 141.189 m² GFA€ 79.872.098

Total result land development 141.189 m²€ 14.471.326

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / SSS Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Main variant Zutphen - Stamps / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Zutphen Main variant / Stamps

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1.503 m² GFA€ 15.032.000 € 2.705.760 € 15.007.115 0 451 units€ 2.200 € 992.112 € 178.580 € 929.146 0 Covered 601 units€ 13.000 € 7.816.640 € 1.406.995 € 7.320.544 -0,5 451 units€ 16.000 € 7.215.360 € 1.298.765 € 6.757.425 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 93.261 m² GFA€ 91.611.260 € 21.528.646 € 89.796.009 Rental 44.079 m² GFA€ 42.457.670 € 9.977.552 € 41.616.383 Appartment 14.960 m² GFA€ 15.876.080 € 3.730.879 € 15.561.500 Affordable 4.400 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 4.400.000 € 1.034.000 € 4.312.815 High priced 10.560 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 11.476.080 € 2.696.879 € 11.248.685 Ground bound 29.119 m² GFA€ 26.581.590 € 6.246.674 € 26.054.883 Affordable 21.622 m² GFA€ 900 € 19.459.440 € 4.572.968 € 19.073.857 High priced 7.497 m² GFA€ 950 € 7.122.150 € 1.673.705 € 6.981.027 Ownership 49.183 m² GFA€ 49.153.590 € 11.551.094 € 48.179.626 Appartment 36.696 m² GFA€ 37.540.800 € 8.822.088 € 36.796.940 Medium priced 19.800 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 19.800.000 € 4.653.000 € 19.407.669 High priced 16.896 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 17.740.800 € 4.169.088 € 17.389.271 Ground bound 12.487 m² GFA€ 11.612.790 € 2.729.006 € 11.382.686 Medium priced 4.990 m² GFA€ 900 € 4.490.640 € 1.055.300 € 4.401.659 High priced 7.497 m² GFA€ 950 € 7.122.150 € 1.673.705 € 6.981.027 Retail 12.442 m² GFA€ 12.441.600 € 2.923.776 € 12.195.073 Retail 12.442 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 12.441.600 € 2.923.776 € 12.195.073 Offices 10.886 m² GFA€ 12.613.709 € 3.342.633 € 12.664.106 Offices 10.886 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 12.613.709 € 3.342.633 € 12.664.106 Services 24.600 m² GFA€ 27.153.000 € 7.195.545 € 27.261.489 Services 24.600 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 27.153.000 € 7.195.545 € 27.261.489

Total Costs € 158.851.569 € 37.696.360 € 156.923.792

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 601 units€ 20.707.734 0 451 units€ 3.936.181 0 Covered 601 units€ 9.583.744 -0,5 451 units€ 7.187.808 -1 0 units€ - Housing 74.609 m² LFA€ 156.373.447 Rental 35.263 m² LFA€ 65.725.534 Appartment 11.968 m² LFA€ 24.016.871 Affordable 3.520 m² LFA€ 3.559.851 High priced 8.448 m² LFA€ 20.457.020 Ground bound 23.295 m² LFA€ 41.708.663 Affordable 17.297 m² LFA€ 29.755.336 High priced 5.998 m² LFA€ 11.953.328 Ownership 39.346 m² LFA€ 90.647.913 Appartment 29.357 m² LFA€ 73.239.797 Medium priced 15.840 m² LFA€ 38.166.115 High priced 13.517 m² LFA€ 35.073.681 Ground bound 9.989 m² LFA€ 17.408.116 Medium priced 3.992 m² LFA€ 6.753.479 High priced 5.998 m² LFA€ 10.654.637 Retail 11.197 m² LFA€ 18.604.957 Retail 11.197 m² LFA€ 18.604.957 Offices 9.253 m² LFA€ 12.482.575 Offices 9.253 m² LFA€ 12.482.575 Services 20.910 m² LFA€ 28.627.177 Services 20.910 m² LFA€ 28.627.177

Total Costs € 236.795.890

TTT \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Main variant Zutphen - Stamps / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Zutphen Main variant / Stamps

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 35.263 m² LFA € 21.379.493 Rental 35.263 m² LFA € 21.379.493 Appartments 11.968 m² LFA € 6.780.500 Affordable 3.520 m² LFA € 1.893.267 vacancy Rent Start€ 33.264 € 22.176 € 11.088 € 57.972 € 221.760 Friction€ 11.088 € 235.158 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 21.564 € 457.339 € 4.312.815 Structural€ 215.641 € 215.641 € 215.641 € 907.639 Operation Rent€ 11.088 € 235.158 High priced 8.448 m² LFA € 4.887.233 vacancy Rent Start€ 159.667 € 106.445 € 53.222 € 251.659 € 1.064.448 Friction€ 53.222 € 820.845 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 56.243 € 867.438 € 11.248.685 Structural€ 562.434 € 562.434 € 562.434 € 2.126.445 Operation Rent€ 53.222 € 820.845 Ground bound 23.295 m² LFA € 14.598.993 Affordable 17.297 m² LFA € 11.228.772 vacancy Rent Start€ 326.919 € 217.946 € 108.973 € 569.744 € 2.179.457 Friction€ 108.973 € 2.311.138 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 95.369 € 2.022.628 € 19.073.857 Structural€ 953.693 € 953.693 € 953.693 € 4.014.125 Operation Rent€ 108.973 € 2.311.138 High priced 5997,6 m² LFA € 3.370.221 vacancy Rent Start€ 127.524 € 85.016 € 42.508 € 200.996 € 850.160 Friction€ 42.508 € 655.598 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 34.905 € 538.339 € 6.981.027 Structural€ 349.051 € 349.051 € 349.051 € 1.319.689 Operation Rent€ 42.508 € 655.598 Retail 11.197 m² LFA € 5.465.082 Retail 11.197 m² LFA € 5.465.082 vacancy Rent Start€ 220.450 € 146.966 € 73.483 € 336.185 € 1.469.664 Friction€ 73.483 € 1.025.998 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 60.975 € 851.359 € 12.195.073 Structural€ 609.754 € 609.754 € 609.754 € 2.225.542 Operation Rent€ 73.483 € 1.025.998 Offices 9.253 m² LFA € 5.440.709 Offices 9.253 m² LFA € 5.440.709 vacancy Rent Start€ 196.751 € 131.168 € 65.584 € 281.097 € 1.311.675 Friction€ 131.168 € 1.515.090 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 63.321 € 731.403 € 12.664.106 Structural€ 633.205 € 633.205 € 633.205 € 2.155.576 Operation Rent€ 65.584 € 757.545 Services 20.910 m² LFA € 12.360.049 Services 20.910 m² LFA € 12.360.049 vacancy Rent Start€ 411.666 € 274.444 € 137.222 € 607.568 € 2.744.438 Friction€ 274.444 € 3.479.980 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 136.307 € 1.728.395 € 27.261.489 Structural€ 1.363.074 € 1.363.074 € 1.363.074 € 4.804.115 Operation Rent€ 137.222 € 1.739.990

Total Costs € 44.645.333

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.503 units€ 9.470.160 - -€ 20.707.734 0 451 units€ 11.500 - -€ 5.186.040 - -€ 3.936.181 0 Covered 601 units€ 21.000 - -€ 12.626.880 - -€ 9.583.744 -0,5 451 units€ 21.000 - -€ 9.470.160 - -€ 7.187.808 -1 0 units€ 21.000 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 74.609 m² LFA€ 1.642 € 104.589.828 € 4.315.825 € 13.101.065 € 177.752.940 Rental 35.263 m² LFA€ 765 -€ 4.315.825 € 13.101.065 € 87.105.027 Appartments 11.968 m² LFA€ 270 -€ 1.286.208 € 3.518.986 € 30.797.371 Affordable 3.520 m² LFA -€ 63 € 89 -€ 221.760 € 749.948 € 5.453.118 High priced 8.448 m² LFA -€ 126 € 181 -€ 1.064.448 € 2.769.038 € 25.344.253 Ground bound 23.295 m² LFA€ 495 -€ 3.029.617 € 9.582.079 € 56.307.656 Affordable 17.297 m² LFA -€ 126 € 402 -€ 2.179.457 € 7.370.487 € 40.984.108 High priced 5.998 m² LFA -€ 142 € 93 -€ 850.160 € 2.211.592 € 15.323.549 Ownership 39.346 m² LFA€ 877 € 104.589.828 - -€ 90.647.913 Appartments 29.357 m² LFA€ 691 € 82.982.592 - -€ 73.239.797 Medium priced 15.840 m² LFA€ 2.730 -€ 401 € 43.243.200 - -€ 38.166.115 High priced 13.517 m² LFA€ 2.940 -€ 290 € 39.739.392 - -€ 35.073.681 Ground bound 9.989 m² LFA€ 186 € 21.607.236 -€ 17.408.116 Medium priced 3.992 m² LFA€ 2.100 -€ 93 € 8.382.528 - -€ 6.753.479 High priced 5.998 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 93 € 13.224.708 - -€ 10.654.637 Retail 11.197 m² LFA€ 224 -€ 1.469.664 € 3.550.078 € 24.070.039 Retail 11.197 m² LFA -€ 131 € 224 -€ 1.469.664 € 3.550.078 € 24.070.039 Offices 9.253 m² LFA€ 370 -€ 1.311.675 € 2.772.389 € 17.923.284 Offices 9.253 m² LFA -€ 142 € 370 -€ 1.311.675 € 2.772.389 € 17.923.284 Services 20.910 m² LFA€ 697 -€ 2.744.438 € 6.187.424 € 40.987.226 Services 20.910 m² LFA -€ 131 € 697 -€ 2.744.438 € 6.187.424 € 40.987.226

Total reveneus € 2.933 € 281.441.223

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / UUU Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

VVV \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix IV. Three sub variants Amersfoort

Profit variant Amersfoort / Land development

Land development phase Amersfoort Profit variant

Total ground use 205.645 m² Minimum non residental 6.150 m² Ground use residental 154.768 m² Ground use non residential 50.877 m²

Area of plan 224.805 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 205.645 m² FSI 0,77 Parking places 1.381 Units GSI 0,25 Footprint 50.983 m² OSR 0,97 GFA 159.102 m² GSR 0,19 Green area 30.584 m² SPR 115

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 25.705.625 € 5.141.125 € 30.846.750 total area 205.645 m²€ 125 € 25.705.625 € 5.141.125 € 30.846.750 Soil clean up costs € 3.852.000 € 770.400 € 4.394.919 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 707.386 Polluted 30.000 m²€ 62 € 2.232.000 € 446.400 € 2.546.589 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Railway yard 55.000 m²€ 50 € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 Site preparation costs € 27.489.085 € 5.497.817 € 31.363.526 For building 205.645 m²€ 25 € 5.141.125 € 1.028.225 € 5.865.739 Pavement 98.352 m²€ 135 € 13.277.520 € 2.655.504 € 15.148.916 Green 30.584 m²€ 35 € 1.070.440 € 214.088 € 1.221.313 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 62.846.710 € 12.569.342 € 73.222.675

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.381 Units€ 5.564.859 0 414 Units - - 30,00%€ 3.011.257 0 Covered 552 Units - - 40,00%€ 2.194.514 -0,5 414 Units - - 30,00%€ 359.088 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 1.013 Units - 128.693 m² GFA€ 124.131.019 Rent 392 Units - 51.752 m² GFA€ 48.261.416 Appartment 315 Units - 40.634 m² GFA€ 39.750.410 Affordable 43 Units 110 4.730 m² GFA € 917.586- High priced 272 Units 132 35.904 m² GFA€ 40.667.995 Ground Bound 77 Units - 11.118 m² GFA€ 8.511.006 Affordable 44 Units 118,8 5.227 m² GFA€ 3.487.393 High priced 33 Units 178,5 5.891 m² GFA€ 5.023.613 Ownership 621 Units - 76.942 m² GFA€ 75.869.603 Appartment 544 Units - 65.824 m² GFA€ 70.063.569 Medium priced 272 Units 110 29.920 m² GFA€ 30.107.777 High priced 272 Units 132 35.904 m² GFA€ 39.955.793 Ground bound 77 Units - 11.118 m² GFA€ 5.806.034 Medium priced 44 Units 118,8 5.227 m² GFA€ 2.673.983 High priced 33 Units 178,5 5.891 m² GFA€ 3.132.051 Retail 6.395 m² GFA€ 4.378.310 Retail 6.395 m² GFA - -€ 4.378.310 Offices 10.963 m² GFA€ 2.449.732 Offices 10.963 m² GFA - -€ 2.449.732 Services 13.051 m² GFA€ 3.914.392 Services 13.051 m² GFA - -€ 3.914.392

Total Reveneus 159.102 m² GFA€ 140.438.312

Total result land development 205.645 m²€ 67.215.637

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / WWW Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Profit variant Amersfoort / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Amersfoort Profit variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1381 m² GFA€ 13.812.000 € 2.486.160 € 15.241.397 0 414 units€ 2.200 € 911.592 € 164.087 € 943.651 0 Covered 552 units€ 13.000 € 7.182.240 € 1.292.803 € 7.434.828 -0,5 414 units€ 16.000 € 6.629.760 € 1.193.357 € 6.862.918 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 128693 m² GFA€ 130.649.310 € 30.702.588 € 141.547.779 Rental 51752 m² GFA€ 52.729.655 € 12.391.469 € 57.128.243 Appartment 40634 m² GFA€ 42.429.200 € 9.970.862 € 45.968.548 Affordable 4730 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 4.730.000 € 1.111.550 € 5.124.566 High priced 35904 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 37.699.200 € 8.859.312 € 40.843.982 Ground bound 11118 m² GFA€ 10.300.455 € 2.420.607 € 11.159.696 Affordable 5227 m² GFA€ 900 € 4.704.480 € 1.105.553 € 5.096.917 High priced 5891 m² GFA€ 950 € 5.595.975 € 1.315.054 € 6.062.779 Ownership 76942 m² GFA€ 77.919.655 € 18.311.119 € 84.419.536 Appartment 65824 m² GFA€ 67.619.200 € 15.890.512 € 73.259.840 Medium priced 29920 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 29.920.000 € 7.031.200 € 32.415.859 High priced 35904 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 37.699.200 € 8.859.312 € 40.843.982 Ground bound 11118 m² GFA€ 10.300.455 € 2.420.607 € 11.159.696 Medium priced 5227 m² GFA€ 900 € 4.704.480 € 1.105.553 € 5.096.917 High priced 5891 m² GFA€ 950 € 5.595.975 € 1.315.054 € 6.062.779 Retail 6395 m² GFA€ 6.395.000 € 1.502.825 € 6.928.456 Retail 6395 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 6.395.000 € 1.502.825 € 6.928.456 Offices 10963 m² GFA€ 12.059.300 € 3.195.715 € 13.382.634 Offices 10963 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 12.059.300 € 3.195.715 € 13.382.634 Services 13051 m² GFA€ 13.703.550 € 3.631.441 € 15.207.317 Services 13051 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 13.703.550 € 3.631.441 € 15.207.317

Total Costs € 176.619.160 € 41.518.728 € 192.307.583

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 552 units€ 20.806.256 0 414 units€ 3.954.908 0 Covered 552 units€ 9.629.342 -0,5 414 units€ 7.222.006 -1 0 units€ - Housing 102.955 m² LFA€ 265.678.798 Rental 41.401 m² LFA€ 105.389.659 Appartment 32.507 m² LFA€ 85.718.957 Affordable 3.784 m² LFA€ 4.206.980 High priced 28.723 m² LFA€ 81.511.977 Ground bound 8.894 m² LFA€ 19.670.702 Affordable 4.182 m² LFA€ 8.584.310 High priced 4.712 m² LFA€ 11.086.391 Ownership 61.553 m² LFA€ 160.289.139 Appartment 52.659 m² LFA€ 143.323.410 Medium priced 23.936 m² LFA€ 62.523.635 High priced 28.723 m² LFA€ 80.799.775 Ground bound 8.894 m² LFA€ 16.965.730 Medium priced 4.182 m² LFA€ 7.770.900 High priced 4.712 m² LFA€ 9.194.829 Retail 5.756 m² LFA€ 11.306.767 Retail 5.756 m² LFA€ 11.306.767 Offices 9.319 m² LFA€ 15.832.366 Offices 9.319 m² LFA€ 15.832.366 Services 11.093 m² LFA€ 19.121.708 Services 11.093 m² LFA€ 19.121.708

Total Costs € 332.745.896

XXX \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Profit variant Amersfoort / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Amersfoort Profit variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 41.401 m² LFA € 27.600.167 Rental 41.401 m² LFA € 27.600.167 Appartments 32.507 m² LFA € 21.361.483 Affordable 3.784 m² LFA € 2.335.165 vacancy Rent Start€ 35.759 € 23.839 € 11.920 € 64.445 € 238.392 Friction€ 11.920 € 278.142 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 25.623 € 597.905 € 5.124.566 Structural€ 256.228 € 256.228 € 256.228 € 1.116.531 Operation Rent€ 11.920 € 278.142 High priced 28.723 m² LFA € 19.026.319 vacancy Rent Start€ 570.012 € 380.008 € 190.004 € 941.232 € 3.800.079 Friction€ 190.004 € 3.247.973 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 204.220 € 3.490.984 € 40.843.982 Structural€ 2.042.199 € 2.042.199 € 2.042.199 € 8.098.155 Operation Rent€ 190.004 € 3.247.973 Ground bound 8.894 m² LFA € 6.238.684 Affordable 4.182 m² LFA € 3.145.738 vacancy Rent Start€ 82.987 € 55.325 € 27.662 € 149.559 € 553.247 Friction€ 27.662 € 645.496 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 25.485 € 594.679 € 5.096.917 Structural€ 254.846 € 254.846 € 254.846 € 1.110.507 Operation Rent€ 27.662 € 645.496 High priced 4712,4 m² LFA € 3.092.945 vacancy Rent Start€ 105.207 € 70.138 € 35.069 € 173.724 € 701.382 Friction€ 35.069 € 599.479 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 30.314 € 518.193 € 6.062.779 Structural€ 303.139 € 303.139 € 303.139 € 1.202.070 Operation Rent€ 35.069 € 599.479 Retail 5.756 m² LFA € 3.290.407 Retail 5.756 m² LFA € 3.290.407 vacancy Rent Start€ 118.977 € 79.318 € 39.659 € 190.883 € 793.180 Friction€ 39.659 € 615.213 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 34.642 € 537.391 € 6.928.456 Structural€ 346.423 € 346.423 € 346.423 € 1.331.707 Operation Rent€ 39.659 € 615.213 Offices 9.319 m² LFA € 6.484.713 Offices 9.319 m² LFA € 6.484.713 vacancy Rent Start€ 208.042 € 138.695 € 69.347 € 319.768 € 1.386.950 Friction€ 138.695 € 1.870.864 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 66.913 € 902.596 € 13.382.634 Structural€ 669.132 € 669.132 € 669.132 € 2.456.053 Operation Rent€ 69.347 € 935.432 Services 11.093 m² LFA € 7.758.591 Services 11.093 m² LFA € 7.758.591 vacancy Rent Start€ 229.320 € 152.880 € 76.440 € 362.678 € 1.528.802 Friction€ 152.880 € 2.261.870 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 76.037 € 1.124.965 € 15.207.317 Structural€ 760.366 € 760.366 € 760.366 € 2.878.144 Operation Rent€ 76.440 € 1.130.935

Total Costs € 45.133.877

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.381 units€ 9.136.638 - -€ 20.806.256 0 414 units€ 12.075 - -€ 5.003.397 - -€ 3.954.908 0 Covered 552 units€ 22.050 - -€ 12.182.184 - -€ 9.629.342 -0,5 414 units€ 22.050 - -€ 9.136.638 - -€ 7.222.006 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 102.955 m² LFA€ 2.274 € 177.412.227 € 5.293.100 € 17.305.795 € 293.278.965 Rental 41.401 m² LFA€ 882 -€ 5.293.100 € 17.305.795 € 132.989.826 Appartments 32.507 m² LFA€ 712 -€ 4.038.471 € 12.843.333 € 107.080.440 Affordable 3.784 m² LFA -€ 63 € 96 -€ 238.392 € 979.304 € 6.542.145 High priced 28.723 m² LFA -€ 132 € 616 -€ 3.800.079 € 11.864.029 € 100.538.296 Ground bound 8.894 m² LFA€ 170 -€ 1.254.629 € 4.462.462 € 25.909.385 Affordable 4.182 m² LFA -€ 132 € 97 -€ 553.247 € 2.272.715 € 11.730.049 High priced 4.712 m² LFA -€ 149 € 73 -€ 701.382 € 2.189.748 € 14.179.337 Ownership 61.553 m² LFA€ 1.393 € 177.412.227 - -€ 160.289.139 Appartments 52.659 m² LFA€ 1.222 € 157.281.062 - -€ 143.323.410 Medium priced 23.936 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 607 € 68.612.544 - -€ 62.523.635 High priced 28.723 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 616 € 88.668.518 - -€ 80.799.775 Ground bound 8.894 m² LFA€ 170 € 20.131.165 -€ 16.965.730 Medium priced 4.182 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 97 € 9.220.781 - -€ 7.770.900 High priced 4.712 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 73 € 10.910.384 - -€ 9.194.829 Retail 5.756 m² LFA€ 115 -€ 793.180 € 2.292.912 € 14.597.174 Retail 5.756 m² LFA -€ 138 € 115 -€ 793.180 € 2.292.912 € 14.597.174 Offices 9.319 m² LFA€ 373 -€ 1.386.950 € 3.608.436 € 22.317.079 Offices 9.319 m² LFA -€ 149 € 373 -€ 1.386.950 € 3.608.436 € 22.317.079 Services 11.093 m² LFA€ 370 -€ 1.528.802 € 4.261.602 € 26.880.299 Services 11.093 m² LFA -€ 138 € 370 -€ 1.528.802 € 4.261.602 € 26.880.299

Total reveneus € 3.132 € 377.879.773

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / YYY Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Social variant Amersfoort / Land development

Land development phase Amersfoort social variant

Total ground use 205.645 m² Minimum non residental 18.860 m² Ground use residental 78.466 m² Ground use non residential 127.179 m²

Area of plan 224.805 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 205.645 m² FSI 0,70 Parking places 1.458 Units GSI 0,27 Footprint 56.465 m² OSR 1,03 GFA 144.618 m² GSR 0,07 Green area 9.972 m² SPR 99

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 25.705.625 € 5.141.125 € 30.846.750 total area 205.645 m²€ 125 € 25.705.625 € 5.141.125 € 30.846.750 Soil clean up costs € 3.852.000 € 770.400 € 4.394.919 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 707.386 Polluted 30.000 m²€ 62 € 2.232.000 € 446.400 € 2.546.589 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Railway yard 55.000 m²€ 50 € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 Site preparation costs € 26.518.725 € 5.303.745 € 30.256.399 For building 205.645 m²€ 25 € 5.141.125 € 1.028.225 € 5.865.739 Pavement 96.508 m²€ 135 € 13.028.580 € 2.605.716 € 14.864.890 Green 9.972 m²€ 35 € 349.020 € 69.804 € 398.213 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 61.876.350 € 12.375.270 € 72.115.548

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.458 Units€ 5.873.642 0 437 Units - - 30,00%€ 3.178.346 0 Covered 583 Units - - 40,00%€ 2.316.283 -0,5 437 Units - - 30,00%€ 379.014 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 464 Units - 58.474 m² GFA€ 31.298.821 Rent 332 Units - 40.677 m² GFA€ 17.660.923 Appartment 166 Units - 18.986 m² GFA€ 2.095.871 Affordable 133 Units 110 14.630 m² GFA € 2.838.114- High priced 33 Units 132 4.356 m² GFA€ 4.933.985 Ground Bound 166 Units - 21.691 m² GFA€ 15.565.052 Affordable 133 Units 118,8 15.800 m² GFA€ 10.541.439 High priced 33 Units 178,5 5.891 m² GFA€ 5.023.613 Ownership 132 Units - 17.797 m² GFA€ 13.637.898 Appartment 66 Units - 7.986 m² GFA€ 8.500.360 Medium priced 33 Units 110 3.630 m² GFA€ 3.652.782 High priced 33 Units 132 4.356 m² GFA€ 4.847.578 Ground bound 66 Units - 9.811 m² GFA€ 5.137.538 Medium priced 33 Units 118,8 3.920 m² GFA€ 2.005.487 High priced 33 Units 178,5 5.891 m² GFA€ 3.132.051 Retail 12.988 m² GFA€ 8.892.180 Retail 12.988 m² GFA - -€ 8.892.180 Offices 33.397 m² GFA€ 7.462.711 Offices 33.397 m² GFA - -€ 7.462.711 Services 39.759 m² GFA€ 11.924.932 Services 39.759 m² GFA - -€ 11.924.932

Total Reveneus 144.618 m² GFA€ 65.452.287

Total result land development 205.645 m² € 6.663.261-

ZZZ \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Social variant Amersfoort / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Amersfoort social variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1458 m² GFA€ 14.578.400 € 2.624.112 € 16.087.111 0 437 units€ 2.200 € 962.174 € 173.191 € 996.012 0 Covered 583 units€ 13.000 € 7.580.768 € 1.364.538 € 7.847.371 -0,5 437 units€ 16.000 € 6.997.632 € 1.259.574 € 7.243.727 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 58474 m² GFA€ 56.348.270 € 13.241.843 € 61.048.715 Rental 40677 m² GFA€ 39.020.135 € 9.169.732 € 42.275.106 Appartment 18986 m² GFA€ 19.203.800 € 4.512.893 € 20.805.737 Affordable 14630 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 14.630.000 € 3.438.050 € 15.850.401 High priced 4356 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 4.573.800 € 1.074.843 € 4.955.336 Ground bound 21691 m² GFA€ 19.816.335 € 4.656.839 € 21.469.369 Affordable 15800 m² GFA€ 900 € 14.220.360 € 3.341.785 € 15.406.590 High priced 5891 m² GFA€ 950 € 5.595.975 € 1.315.054 € 6.062.779 Ownership 17797 m² GFA€ 17.328.135 € 4.072.112 € 18.773.609 Appartment 7986 m² GFA€ 8.203.800 € 1.927.893 € 8.888.142 Medium priced 3630 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 3.630.000 € 853.050 € 3.932.806 High priced 4356 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 4.573.800 € 1.074.843 € 4.955.336 Ground bound 9811 m² GFA€ 9.124.335 € 2.144.219 € 9.885.466 Medium priced 3920 m² GFA€ 900 € 3.528.360 € 829.165 € 3.822.688 High priced 5891 m² GFA€ 950 € 5.595.975 € 1.315.054 € 6.062.779 Retail 12988 m² GFA€ 12.988.000 € 3.052.180 € 14.071.430 Retail 12988 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 12.988.000 € 3.052.180 € 14.071.430 Offices 33397 m² GFA€ 36.736.700 € 9.735.226 € 40.768.023 Offices 33397 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 36.736.700 € 9.735.226 € 40.768.023 Services 39759 m² GFA€ 41.746.950 € 11.062.942 € 46.328.075 Services 39759 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 41.746.950 € 11.062.942 € 46.328.075

Total Costs € 162.398.320 € 39.716.303 € 178.303.354

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 583 units€ 21.960.753 0 437 units€ 4.174.358 0 Covered 583 units€ 10.163.654 -0,5 437 units€ 7.622.741 -1 0 units€ - Housing 46.779 m² LFA€ 92.347.536 Rental 32.542 m² LFA€ 59.936.029 Appartment 15.189 m² LFA€ 22.901.609 Affordable 11.704 m² LFA€ 13.012.288 High priced 3.485 m² LFA€ 9.889.321 Ground bound 17.353 m² LFA€ 37.034.421 Affordable 12.640 m² LFA€ 25.948.029 High priced 4.712 m² LFA€ 11.086.391 Ownership 14.238 m² LFA€ 32.411.506 Appartment 6.389 m² LFA€ 17.388.502 Medium priced 2.904 m² LFA€ 7.585.588 High priced 3.485 m² LFA€ 9.802.914 Ground bound 7.849 m² LFA€ 15.023.005 Medium priced 3.136 m² LFA€ 5.828.175 High priced 4.712 m² LFA€ 9.194.829 Retail 11.689 m² LFA€ 22.963.610 Retail 11.689 m² LFA€ 22.963.610 Offices 28.387 m² LFA€ 48.230.734 Offices 28.387 m² LFA€ 48.230.734 Services 33.795 m² LFA€ 58.253.008 Services 33.795 m² LFA€ 58.253.008

Total Costs € 243.755.641

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / AAAA Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Social variant Amersfoort / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Amersfoort social variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 32.542 m² LFA € 22.132.713 Rental 32.542 m² LFA € 22.132.713 Appartments 15.189 m² LFA € 9.531.058 Affordable 11.704 m² LFA € 7.222.718 vacancy Rent Start€ 110.603 € 73.735 € 36.868 € 199.329 € 737.352 Friction€ 36.868 € 860.300 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 79.252 € 1.849.333 € 15.850.401 Structural€ 792.520 € 792.520 € 792.520 € 3.453.456 Operation Rent€ 36.868 € 860.300 High priced 3.485 m² LFA € 2.308.340 vacancy Rent Start€ 69.156 € 46.104 € 23.052 € 114.194 € 461.039 Friction€ 23.052 € 394.056 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 24.777 € 423.539 € 4.955.336 Structural€ 247.767 € 247.767 € 247.767 € 982.497 Operation Rent€ 23.052 € 394.056 Ground bound 17.353 m² LFA € 12.601.654 Affordable 12.640 m² LFA € 9.508.709 vacancy Rent Start€ 250.847 € 167.231 € 83.616 € 452.077 € 1.672.314 Friction€ 83.616 € 1.951.160 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 77.033 € 1.797.552 € 15.406.590 Structural€ 770.330 € 770.330 € 770.330 € 3.356.760 Operation Rent€ 83.616 € 1.951.160 High priced 4712,4 m² LFA € 3.092.945 vacancy Rent Start€ 105.207 € 70.138 € 35.069 € 173.724 € 701.382 Friction€ 35.069 € 599.479 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 30.314 € 518.193 € 6.062.779 Structural€ 303.139 € 303.139 € 303.139 € 1.202.070 Operation Rent€ 35.069 € 599.479 Retail 11.689 m² LFA € 6.682.690 Retail 11.689 m² LFA € 6.682.690 vacancy Rent Start€ 241.638 € 161.092 € 80.546 € 387.676 € 1.610.918 Friction€ 80.546 € 1.249.474 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 70.357 € 1.091.420 € 14.071.430 Structural€ 703.571 € 703.571 € 703.571 € 2.704.646 Operation Rent€ 80.546 € 1.249.474 Offices 28.387 m² LFA € 19.754.625 Offices 28.387 m² LFA € 19.754.625 vacancy Rent Start€ 633.768 € 422.512 € 211.256 € 974.121 € 4.225.117 Friction€ 422.512 € 5.699.284 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 203.840 € 2.749.611 € 40.768.023 Structural€ 2.038.401 € 2.038.401 € 2.038.401 € 7.481.967 Operation Rent€ 211.256 € 2.849.642 Services 33.795 m² LFA € 23.636.028 Services 33.795 m² LFA € 23.636.028 vacancy Rent Start€ 698.609 € 465.739 € 232.870 € 1.104.873 € 4.657.394 Friction€ 465.739 € 6.890.635 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 231.640 € 3.427.130 € 46.328.075 Structural€ 2.316.404 € 2.316.404 € 2.316.404 € 8.768.073 Operation Rent€ 232.870 € 3.445.318

Total Costs € 72.206.056

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.458 units€ 9.643.612 - -€ 21.960.753 0 437 units€ 12.075 - -€ 5.281.025 - -€ 4.174.358 0 Covered 583 units€ 22.050 - -€ 12.858.149 - -€ 10.163.654 -0,5 437 units€ 22.050 - -€ 9.643.612 - -€ 7.622.741 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 46.779 m² LFA€ 1.032 € 36.907.863 € 3.572.087 € 13.527.940 € 114.480.248 Rental 32.542 m² LFA€ 738 -€ 3.572.087 € 13.527.940 € 82.068.742 Appartments 15.189 m² LFA€ 371 -€ 1.198.391 € 4.468.397 € 32.432.667 Affordable 11.704 m² LFA -€ 63 € 297 -€ 737.352 € 3.029.011 € 20.235.006 High priced 3.485 m² LFA -€ 132 € 75 -€ 461.039 € 1.439.386 € 12.197.661 Ground bound 17.353 m² LFA€ 367 -€ 2.373.696 € 9.059.544 € 49.636.075 Affordable 12.640 m² LFA -€ 132 € 294 -€ 1.672.314 € 6.869.796 € 35.456.738 High priced 4.712 m² LFA -€ 149 € 73 -€ 701.382 € 2.189.748 € 14.179.337 Ownership 14.238 m² LFA€ 294 € 36.907.863 - -€ 32.411.506 Appartments 6.389 m² LFA€ 148 € 19.081.894 - -€ 17.388.502 Medium priced 2.904 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 74 € 8.324.316 - -€ 7.585.588 High priced 3.485 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 75 € 10.757.578 - -€ 9.802.914 Ground bound 7.849 m² LFA€ 146 € 17.825.970 -€ 15.023.005 Medium priced 3.136 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 73 € 6.915.586 - -€ 5.828.175 High priced 4.712 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 73 € 10.910.384 - -€ 9.194.829 Retail 11.689 m² LFA€ 234 -€ 1.610.918 € 4.656.817 € 29.646.300 Retail 11.689 m² LFA -€ 138 € 234 -€ 1.610.918 € 4.656.817 € 29.646.300 Offices 28.387 m² LFA€ 1.135 -€ 4.225.117 € 10.992.514 € 67.985.359 Offices 28.387 m² LFA -€ 149 € 1.135 -€ 4.225.117 € 10.992.514 € 67.985.359 Services 33.795 m² LFA€ 1.127 -€ 4.657.394 € 12.982.684 € 81.889.036 Services 33.795 m² LFA -€ 138 € 1.127 -€ 4.657.394 € 12.982.684 € 81.889.036

Total reveneus € 3.528 € 315.961.697

BBBB \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Policy variant Amersfoort / Land development

Land development phase Amersfoort policy variant

Total ground use 205.645 m² Minimum non residental 6.150 m² Ground use residental 148.544 m² Ground use non residential 57.101 m²

Area of plan 224.805 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 205.645 m² FSI 0,70 Parking places 1.236 Units GSI 0,26 Footprint 53.048 m² OSR 1,07 GFA 143.002 m² GSR 0,09 Green area 13.237 m² SPR 116

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 25.705.625 € 5.141.125 € 30.846.750 total area 205.645 m²€ 125 € 25.705.625 € 5.141.125 € 30.846.750 Soil clean up costs € 3.852.000 € 770.400 € 4.394.919 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 707.386 Polluted 30.000 m²€ 62 € 2.232.000 € 446.400 € 2.546.589 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Railway yard 55.000 m²€ 50 € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 Site preparation costs € 24.874.085 € 4.974.817 € 28.379.956 For building 205.645 m²€ 25 € 5.141.125 € 1.028.225 € 5.865.739 Pavement 83.479 m²€ 135 € 11.269.665 € 2.253.933 € 12.858.065 Green 13.237 m²€ 35 € 463.295 € 92.659 € 528.594 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 60.231.710 € 12.046.342 € 70.239.104

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.236 Units€ 4.979.848 0 371 Units - - 30,00%€ 2.694.696 0 Covered 494 Units - - 40,00%€ 1.963.814 -0,5 371 Units - - 30,00%€ 321.339 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 789 Units - 103.556 m² GFA€ 64.601.242 Rent 368 Units - 47.466 m² GFA€ 27.249.326 Appartment 114 Units - 13.112 m² GFA€ 2.009.532 Affordable 88 Units 110 9.680 m² GFA € 1.877.850- High priced 26 Units 132 3.432 m² GFA€ 3.887.382 Ground Bound 254 Units - 34.354 m² GFA€ 25.239.793 Affordable 184 Units 118,8 21.859 m² GFA€ 14.583.645 High priced 70 Units 178,5 12.495 m² GFA€ 10.656.148 Ownership 421 Units - 56.090 m² GFA€ 37.351.916 Appartment 132 Units - 15.488 m² GFA€ 16.204.188 Medium priced 88 Units 110 9.680 m² GFA€ 9.740.751 High priced 44 Units 132 5.808 m² GFA€ 6.463.437 Ground bound 289 Units - 40.602 m² GFA€ 21.147.728 Medium priced 184 Units 118,8 21.859 m² GFA€ 11.182.111 High priced 105 Units 178,5 18.743 m² GFA€ 9.965.616 Retail 5.154 m² GFA€ 3.528.665 Retail 5.154 m² GFA - -€ 3.528.665 Offices 13.254 m² GFA€ 2.961.666 Offices 13.254 m² GFA - -€ 2.961.666 Services 21.038 m² GFA€ 6.309.936 Services 21.038 m² GFA - -€ 6.309.936

Total Reveneus 143.002 m² GFA€ 82.381.356

Total result land development 205.645 m²€ 12.142.252

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / CCCC Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Policy variant Amersfoort / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Amersfoort policy variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1236 m² GFA€ 12.360.000 € 2.224.800 € 13.639.130 0 371 units€ 2.200 € 815.760 € 146.837 € 844.449 0 Covered 494 units€ 13.000 € 6.427.200 € 1.156.896 € 6.653.234 -0,5 371 units€ 16.000 € 5.932.800 € 1.067.904 € 6.141.447 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 103556 m² GFA€ 98.084.185 € 23.049.783 € 106.266.145 Rental 47466 m² GFA€ 44.827.130 € 10.534.376 € 48.566.508 Appartment 13112 m² GFA€ 13.283.600 € 3.121.646 € 14.391.688 Affordable 9680 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 9.680.000 € 2.274.800 € 10.487.484 High priced 3432 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 3.603.600 € 846.846 € 3.904.204 Ground bound 34354 m² GFA€ 31.543.530 € 7.412.730 € 34.174.820 Affordable 21859 m² GFA€ 900 € 19.673.280 € 4.623.221 € 21.314.380 High priced 12495 m² GFA€ 950 € 11.870.250 € 2.789.509 € 12.860.439 Ownership 56090 m² GFA€ 53.257.055 € 12.515.408 € 57.699.638 Appartment 15488 m² GFA€ 15.778.400 € 3.707.924 € 17.094.598 Medium priced 9680 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 9.680.000 € 2.274.800 € 10.487.484 High priced 5808 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 6.098.400 € 1.433.124 € 6.607.115 Ground bound 40602 m² GFA€ 37.478.655 € 8.807.484 € 40.605.039 Medium priced 21859 m² GFA€ 900 € 19.673.280 € 4.623.221 € 21.314.380 High priced 18743 m² GFA€ 950 € 17.805.375 € 4.184.263 € 19.290.659 Retail 5154 m² GFA€ 5.154.000 € 1.211.190 € 5.583.935 Retail 5154 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 5.154.000 € 1.211.190 € 5.583.935 Offices 13254 m² GFA€ 14.579.400 € 3.863.541 € 16.179.279 Offices 13254 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 14.579.400 € 3.863.541 € 16.179.279 Services 21038 m² GFA€ 22.089.900 € 5.853.824 € 24.513.948 Services 21038 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 22.089.900 € 5.853.824 € 24.513.948

Total Costs € 152.267.485 € 36.203.138 € 166.182.437

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 494 units€ 18.618.978 0 371 units€ 3.539.145 0 Covered 494 units€ 8.617.048 -0,5 371 units€ 6.462.786 -1 0 units€ - Housing 82.845 m² LFA€ 170.867.387 Rental 37.973 m² LFA€ 75.815.833 Appartment 10.490 m² LFA€ 16.401.220 Affordable 7.744 m² LFA€ 8.609.634 High priced 2.746 m² LFA€ 7.791.586 Ground bound 27.483 m² LFA€ 59.414.613 Affordable 17.487 m² LFA€ 35.898.025 High priced 9.996 m² LFA€ 23.516.588 Ownership 44.872 m² LFA€ 95.051.554 Appartment 12.390 m² LFA€ 33.298.787 Medium priced 7.744 m² LFA€ 20.228.235 High priced 4.646 m² LFA€ 13.070.552 Ground bound 32.481 m² LFA€ 61.752.767 Medium priced 17.487 m² LFA€ 32.496.492 High priced 14.994 m² LFA€ 29.256.275 Retail 4.639 m² LFA€ 9.112.600 Retail 4.639 m² LFA€ 9.112.600 Offices 11.266 m² LFA€ 19.140.945 Offices 11.266 m² LFA€ 19.140.945 Services 17.882 m² LFA€ 30.823.883 Services 17.882 m² LFA€ 30.823.883

Total Costs € 248.563.793

DDDD \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Policy variant Amersfoort / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Amersfoort policy variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 37.973 m² LFA € 26.313.332 Rental 37.973 m² LFA € 26.313.332 Appartments 10.490 m² LFA € 6.597.634 Affordable 7.744 m² LFA € 4.778.941 vacancy Rent Start€ 73.181 € 48.787 € 24.394 € 131.887 € 487.872 Friction€ 24.394 € 569.221 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 52.437 € 1.223.619 € 10.487.484 Structural€ 524.374 € 524.374 € 524.374 € 2.284.994 Operation Rent€ 24.394 € 569.221 High priced 2.746 m² LFA € 1.818.692 vacancy Rent Start€ 54.486 € 36.324 € 18.162 € 89.971 € 363.243 Friction€ 18.162 € 310.468 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 19.521 € 333.697 € 3.904.204 Structural€ 195.210 € 195.210 € 195.210 € 774.088 Operation Rent€ 18.162 € 310.468 Ground bound 27.483 m² LFA € 19.715.699 Affordable 17.487 m² LFA € 13.154.906 vacancy Rent Start€ 347.037 € 231.358 € 115.679 € 625.431 € 2.313.578 Friction€ 115.679 € 2.699.349 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 106.572 € 2.486.839 € 21.314.380 Structural€ 1.065.719 € 1.065.719 € 1.065.719 € 4.643.938 Operation Rent€ 115.679 € 2.699.349 High priced 9996 m² LFA € 6.560.793 vacancy Rent Start€ 223.167 € 148.778 € 74.389 € 368.505 € 1.487.780 Friction€ 74.389 € 1.271.623 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 64.302 € 1.099.197 € 12.860.439 Structural€ 643.022 € 643.022 € 643.022 € 2.549.845 Operation Rent€ 74.389 € 1.271.623 Retail 4.639 m² LFA € 2.651.878 Retail 4.639 m² LFA € 2.651.878 vacancy Rent Start€ 95.889 € 63.926 € 31.963 € 153.841 € 639.257 Friction€ 31.963 € 495.826 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 27.920 € 433.106 € 5.583.935 Structural€ 279.197 € 279.197 € 279.197 € 1.073.279 Operation Rent€ 31.963 € 495.826 Offices 11.266 m² LFA € 7.839.860 Offices 11.266 m² LFA € 7.839.860 vacancy Rent Start€ 251.518 € 167.679 € 83.839 € 386.591 € 1.676.788 Friction€ 167.679 € 2.261.829 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 80.896 € 1.091.216 € 16.179.279 Structural€ 808.964 € 808.964 € 808.964 € 2.969.308 Operation Rent€ 83.839 € 1.130.915 Services 17.882 m² LFA € 12.506.722 Services 17.882 m² LFA € 12.506.722 vacancy Rent Start€ 369.661 € 246.440 € 123.220 € 584.630 € 2.464.404 Friction€ 246.440 € 3.646.097 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 122.570 € 1.813.425 € 24.513.948 Structural€ 1.225.697 € 1.225.697 € 1.225.697 € 4.639.521 Operation Rent€ 123.220 € 1.823.049

Total Costs € 49.311.792

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.236 units€ 8.176.140 - -€ 18.618.978 0 371 units€ 12.075 - -€ 4.477.410 - -€ 3.539.145 0 Covered 494 units€ 22.050 - -€ 10.901.520 - -€ 8.617.048 -0,5 371 units€ 22.050 - -€ 8.176.140 - -€ 6.462.786 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 82.845 m² LFA€ 1.750 € 109.816.100 € 4.652.472 € 17.287.217 € 197.180.719 Rental 37.973 m² LFA€ 816 -€ 4.652.472 € 17.287.217 € 102.129.166 Appartments 10.490 m² LFA€ 255 -€ 851.115 € 3.138.219 € 22.998.854 Affordable 7.744 m² LFA -€ 63 € 196 -€ 487.872 € 2.004.157 € 13.388.575 High priced 2.746 m² LFA -€ 132 € 59 -€ 363.243 € 1.134.062 € 9.610.278 Ground bound 27.483 m² LFA€ 561 -€ 3.801.357 € 14.148.998 € 79.130.312 Affordable 17.487 m² LFA -€ 132 € 406 -€ 2.313.578 € 9.504.079 € 49.052.931 High priced 9.996 m² LFA -€ 149 € 155 -€ 1.487.780 € 4.644.919 € 30.077.381 Ownership 44.872 m² LFA€ 934 € 109.816.100 - -€ 95.051.554 Appartments 12.390 m² LFA€ 296 € 36.541.613 - -€ 33.298.787 Medium priced 7.744 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 196 € 22.198.176 - -€ 20.228.235 High priced 4.646 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 100 € 14.343.437 - -€ 13.070.552 Ground bound 32.481 m² LFA€ 638 € 73.274.487 -€ 61.752.767 Medium priced 17.487 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 406 € 38.559.629 - -€ 32.496.492 High priced 14.994 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 232 € 34.714.859 - -€ 29.256.275 Retail 4.639 m² LFA€ 93 -€ 639.257 € 1.847.955 € 11.764.477 Retail 4.639 m² LFA -€ 138 € 93 -€ 639.257 € 1.847.955 € 11.764.477 Offices 11.266 m² LFA€ 451 -€ 1.676.788 € 4.362.511 € 26.980.805 Offices 11.266 m² LFA -€ 149 € 451 -€ 1.676.788 € 4.362.511 € 26.980.805 Services 17.882 m² LFA€ 596 -€ 2.464.404 € 6.869.632 € 43.330.606 Services 17.882 m² LFA -€ 138 € 596 -€ 2.464.404 € 6.869.632 € 43.330.606

Total reveneus € 2.890 € 297.875.585

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / EEEE Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

FFFF \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix V. Main variant Amersfoort/Functional areas

Main variant Amersfoort - Functional areas / Land development

Land development phase Amersfoort Main variant / Functional areas

Total ground use 205.641 m² Minimum non residental 6.150 m² Ground use residental 143.180 m² Ground use non residential 62.461 m²

Area of plan 224.801 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 205.641 m² FSI 0,73 Parking places 1.331 Units GSI 0,25 Footprint 52.318 m² OSR 1,02 GFA 150.853 m² GSR 0,13 Green area 19.239 m² SPR 113

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 25.705.125 € 5.141.025 € 30.846.150 total area 205.641 m²€ 125 € 25.705.125 € 5.141.025 € 30.846.150 Soil clean up costs € 3.852.000 € 770.400 € 4.394.919 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 707.386 Polluted 30.000 m²€ 62 € 2.232.000 € 446.400 € 2.546.589 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Railway yard 55.000 m²€ 50 € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 Site preparation costs € 25.836.815 € 5.167.363 € 29.478.378 For building 205.641 m²€ 25 € 5.141.025 € 1.028.205 € 5.865.625 Pavement 89.055 m²€ 135 € 12.022.425 € 2.404.485 € 13.716.922 Green 19.239 m²€ 35 € 673.365 € 134.673 € 768.272 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 61.193.940 € 12.238.788 € 71.336.926

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.331 Units€ 5.361.153 0 399 Units - - 30,00%€ 2.901.027 0 Covered 532 Units - - 40,00%€ 2.114.182 -0,5 399 Units - - 30,00%€ 345.944 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 841 Units - 106.493 m² GFA€ 75.686.081 Rent 411 Units - 51.551 m² GFA€ 31.725.319 Appartment 234 Units - 28.314 m² GFA€ 14.996.532 Affordable 117 Units 110 12.870 m² GFA € 2.496.686- High priced 117 Units 132 15.444 m² GFA€ 17.493.219 Ground Bound 177 Units - 23.237 m² GFA€ 16.728.787 Affordable 140 Units 118,8 16.632 m² GFA€ 11.096.252 High priced 37 Units 178,5 6.605 m² GFA€ 5.632.536 Ownership 430 Units - 54.942 m² GFA€ 43.960.762 Appartment 234 Units - 28.314 m² GFA€ 30.137.638 Medium priced 117 Units 110 12.870 m² GFA€ 12.950.772 High priced 117 Units 132 15.444 m² GFA€ 17.186.867 Ground bound 196 Units - 26.628 m² GFA€ 13.823.124 Medium priced 140 Units 118,8 16.632 m² GFA€ 8.508.128 High priced 56 Units 178,5 9.996 m² GFA€ 5.314.995 Retail 4.576 m² GFA€ 3.132.939 Retail 4.576 m² GFA - -€ 3.132.939 Offices 11.767 m² GFA€ 2.629.390 Offices 11.767 m² GFA - -€ 2.629.390 Services 28.017 m² GFA€ 8.403.150 Services 28.017 m² GFA - -€ 8.403.150

Total Reveneus 150.853 m² GFA€ 95.212.713

Total result land development 205.641 m²€ 23.875.787

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / GGGG Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Main variant Amersfoort - Functional areas / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Amersfoort Main variant / Functional areas

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1.331 m² GFA€ 13.306.400 € 2.395.152 € 14.683.472 0 399 units€ 2.200 € 878.222 € 158.080 € 909.108 0 Covered 532 units€ 13.000 € 6.919.328 € 1.245.479 € 7.162.669 -0,5 399 units€ 16.000 € 6.387.072 € 1.149.673 € 6.611.695 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 106.493 m² GFA€ 103.880.475 € 24.411.912 € 112.545.949 Rental 51.551 m² GFA€ 50.329.275 € 11.827.380 € 54.527.629 Appartment 28.314 m² GFA€ 29.086.200 € 6.835.257 € 31.512.505 Affordable 12.870 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 12.870.000 € 3.024.450 € 13.943.586 High priced 15.444 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 16.216.200 € 3.810.807 € 17.568.919 Ground bound 23.237 m² GFA€ 21.243.075 € 4.992.123 € 23.015.124 Affordable 16.632 m² GFA€ 900 € 14.968.800 € 3.517.668 € 16.217.463 High priced 6.605 m² GFA€ 950 € 6.274.275 € 1.474.455 € 6.797.661 Ownership 54.942 m² GFA€ 53.551.200 € 12.584.532 € 58.018.320 Appartment 28.314 m² GFA€ 29.086.200 € 6.835.257 € 31.512.505 Medium priced 12.870 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 12.870.000 € 3.024.450 € 13.943.586 High priced 15.444 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 16.216.200 € 3.810.807 € 17.568.919 Ground bound 26.628 m² GFA€ 24.465.000 € 5.749.275 € 26.505.815 Medium priced 16.632 m² GFA€ 900 € 14.968.800 € 3.517.668 € 16.217.463 High priced 9.996 m² GFA€ 950 € 9.496.200 € 2.231.607 € 10.288.351 Retail 4.576 m² GFA€ 4.576.000 € 1.075.360 € 4.957.720 Retail 4.576 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 4.576.000 € 1.075.360 € 4.957.720 Offices 11.767 m² GFA€ 12.943.700 € 3.430.081 € 14.364.084 Offices 11.767 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 12.943.700 € 3.430.081 € 14.364.084 Services 28.017 m² GFA€ 29.417.850 € 7.795.730 € 32.646.035 Services 28.017 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 29.417.850 € 7.795.730 € 32.646.035

Total Costs € 164.124.425 € 39.108.234 € 179.197.260

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 532 units€ 20.044.625 0 399 units€ 3.810.135 0 Covered 532 units€ 9.276.851 -0,5 399 units€ 6.957.639 -1 0 units€ - Housing 85.194 m² LFA€ 188.232.030 Rental 41.240 m² LFA€ 86.252.948 Appartment 22.651 m² LFA€ 46.509.037 Affordable 10.296 m² LFA€ 11.446.900 High priced 12.355 m² LFA€ 35.062.137 Ground bound 18.589 m² LFA€ 39.743.911 Affordable 13.306 m² LFA€ 27.313.715 High priced 5.284 m² LFA€ 12.430.196 Ownership 43.954 m² LFA€ 101.979.082 Appartment 22.651 m² LFA€ 61.650.143 Medium priced 10.296 m² LFA€ 26.894.358 High priced 12.355 m² LFA€ 34.755.785 Ground bound 21.302 m² LFA€ 40.328.938 Medium priced 13.306 m² LFA€ 24.725.592 High priced 7.997 m² LFA€ 15.603.347 Retail 4.118 m² LFA€ 8.090.659 Retail 4.118 m² LFA€ 8.090.659 Offices 10.002 m² LFA€ 16.993.474 Offices 10.002 m² LFA€ 16.993.474 Services 23.814 m² LFA€ 41.049.184 Services 23.814 m² LFA€ 41.049.184

Total Costs € 274.409.973

HHHH \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Main variant Amersfoort - Functional areas / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Amersfoort Main variant / Functional areas

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 41.240 m² LFA € 28.014.950 Rental 41.240 m² LFA € 28.014.950 Appartments 22.651 m² LFA € 14.537.935 Affordable 10.296 m² LFA € 6.353.820 vacancy Rent Start€ 97.297 € 64.865 € 32.432 € 175.349 € 648.648 Friction€ 32.432 € 756.805 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 69.718 € 1.626.857 € 13.943.586 Structural€ 697.179 € 697.179 € 697.179 € 3.038.003 Operation Rent€ 32.432 € 756.805 High priced 12.355 m² LFA € 8.184.115 vacancy Rent Start€ 245.189 € 163.459 € 81.730 € 404.868 € 1.634.593 Friction€ 81.730 € 1.397.106 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 87.845 € 1.501.637 € 17.568.919 Structural€ 878.446 € 878.446 € 878.446 € 3.483.398 Operation Rent€ 81.730 € 1.397.106 Ground bound 18.589 m² LFA € 13.477.015 Affordable 13.306 m² LFA € 10.009.167 vacancy Rent Start€ 264.050 € 176.033 € 88.017 € 475.871 € 1.760.331 Friction€ 88.017 € 2.053.852 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 81.087 € 1.892.160 € 16.217.463 Structural€ 810.873 € 810.873 € 810.873 € 3.533.431 Operation Rent€ 88.017 € 2.053.852 High priced 5283,6 m² LFA € 3.467.848 vacancy Rent Start€ 117.960 € 78.640 € 39.320 € 194.781 € 786.398 Friction€ 39.320 € 672.144 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 33.988 € 581.004 € 6.797.661 Structural€ 339.883 € 339.883 € 339.883 € 1.347.775 Operation Rent€ 39.320 € 672.144 Retail 4.118 m² LFA € 2.354.480 Retail 4.118 m² LFA € 2.354.480 vacancy Rent Start€ 85.135 € 56.757 € 28.378 € 136.588 € 567.567 Friction€ 28.378 € 440.221 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 24.789 € 384.535 € 4.957.720 Structural€ 247.886 € 247.886 € 247.886 € 952.915 Operation Rent€ 28.378 € 440.221 Offices 10.002 m² LFA € 6.960.286 Offices 10.002 m² LFA € 6.960.286 vacancy Rent Start€ 223.300 € 148.867 € 74.433 € 343.219 € 1.488.665 Friction€ 148.867 € 2.008.069 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 71.820 € 968.790 € 14.364.084 Structural€ 718.204 € 718.204 € 718.204 € 2.636.174 Operation Rent€ 74.433 € 1.004.034 Services 23.814 m² LFA € 16.655.615 Services 23.814 m² LFA € 16.655.615 vacancy Rent Start€ 492.289 € 328.193 € 164.096 € 778.571 € 3.281.929 Friction€ 328.193 € 4.855.628 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 163.230 € 2.414.998 € 32.646.035 Structural€ 1.632.302 € 1.632.302 € 1.632.302 € 6.178.604 Operation Rent€ 164.096 € 2.427.814

Total Costs € 53.985.331

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.331 units€ 8.802.184 - -€ 20.044.625 0 399 units€ 12.075 - -€ 4.820.243 - -€ 3.810.135 0 Covered 532 units€ 22.050 - -€ 11.736.245 - -€ 9.276.851 -0,5 399 units€ 22.050 - -€ 8.802.184 - -€ 6.957.639 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 85.194 m² LFA€ 1.875 € 115.507.426 € 4.829.970 € 17.454.431 € 216.246.980 Rental 41.240 m² LFA€ 917 -€ 4.829.970 € 17.454.431 € 114.267.898 Appartments 22.651 m² LFA€ 526 -€ 2.283.241 € 7.767.896 € 61.046.972 Affordable 10.296 m² LFA -€ 63 € 261 -€ 648.648 € 2.664.618 € 17.800.720 High priced 12.355 m² LFA -€ 132 € 265 -€ 1.634.593 € 5.103.277 € 43.246.252 Ground bound 18.589 m² LFA€ 391 -€ 2.546.729 € 9.686.536 € 53.220.927 Affordable 13.306 m² LFA -€ 132 € 309 -€ 1.760.331 € 7.231.364 € 37.322.882 High priced 5.284 m² LFA -€ 149 € 82 -€ 786.398 € 2.455.171 € 15.898.044 Ownership 43.954 m² LFA€ 959 € 115.507.426 - -€ 101.979.082 Appartments 22.651 m² LFA€ 526 € 67.653.986 - -€ 61.650.143 Medium priced 10.296 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 261 € 29.513.484 - -€ 26.894.358 High priced 12.355 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 265 € 38.140.502 - -€ 34.755.785 Ground bound 21.302 m² LFA€ 433 € 47.853.439 -€ 40.328.938 Medium priced 13.306 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 309 € 29.338.848 - -€ 24.725.592 High priced 7.997 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 124 € 18.514.591 - -€ 15.603.347 Retail 4.118 m² LFA€ 82 -€ 567.567 € 1.640.714 € 10.445.139 Retail 4.118 m² LFA -€ 138 € 82 -€ 567.567 € 1.640.714 € 10.445.139 Offices 10.002 m² LFA€ 400 -€ 1.488.665 € 3.873.070 € 23.953.760 Offices 10.002 m² LFA -€ 149 € 400 -€ 1.488.665 € 3.873.070 € 23.953.760 Services 23.814 m² LFA€ 794 -€ 3.281.929 € 9.148.517 € 57.704.800 Services 23.814 m² LFA -€ 138 € 794 -€ 3.281.929 € 9.148.517 € 57.704.800

Total reveneus € 3.152 € 328.395.304

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / IIII Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

JJJJ \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix VI. Main variant Amersfoort/Functional areas

Main variant Amersfoort - Stamps / Land development

Land development phase Amersfoort Main variant / Stamps

Total ground use 204.776 m² Minimum non residental 6.150 m² Ground use residental 157.209 m² Ground use non residential 47.567 m²

Area of plan 227.670 m² Building height 1-5 floors Operating area 208.510 m² FSI 0,73 Parking places 1.568 Units GSI 0,26 Footprint 54.545 m² OSR 1,02 GFA 151.294 m² GSR 0,13 Green area 19.409 m² SPR 96

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 26.063.750 € 5.212.750 € 31.276.500 total area 208.510 m²€ 125 € 26.063.750 € 5.212.750 € 31.276.500 Soil clean up costs € 3.852.000 € 770.400 € 4.394.919 Lighthly polluted 20.000 m²€ 31 € 620.000 € 124.000 € 707.386 Polluted 30.000 m²€ 62 € 2.232.000 € 446.400 € 2.546.589 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Railway yard 55.000 m²€ 50 € 3.300.000 € 660.000 € 3.765.118 Demolition cost € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 GFA old buildings 50.000 m²€ 50 € 2.500.000 € 500.000 € 2.852.362 Site preparation costs € 25.432.945 € 5.086.589 € 29.017.584 For building 208.510 m²€ 25 € 5.212.750 € 1.042.550 € 5.947.460 Pavement 85.488 m²€ 135 € 11.540.880 € 2.308.176 € 13.167.506 Green 19.409 m²€ 35 € 679.315 € 135.863 € 775.061 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 61.148.695 € 12.229.739 € 71.306.483

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.568 Units€ 6.318.122 0 470 Units - - 30,00%€ 3.418.862 0 Covered 627 Units - - 40,00%€ 2.491.565 -0,5 470 Units - - 30,00%€ 407.695 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 837 Units - 106.009 m² GFA€ 75.300.319 Rent 409 Units - 51.309 m² GFA€ 31.597.144 Appartment 232 Units - 28.072 m² GFA€ 14.868.357 Affordable 116 Units 110 12.760 m² GFA € 2.475.347- High priced 116 Units 132 15.312 m² GFA€ 17.343.704 Ground Bound 177 Units - 23.237 m² GFA€ 16.728.787 Affordable 140 Units 118,8 16.632 m² GFA€ 11.096.252 High priced 37 Units 178,5 6.605 m² GFA€ 5.632.536 Ownership 428 Units - 54.700 m² GFA€ 43.703.175 Appartment 232 Units - 28.072 m² GFA€ 29.880.052 Medium priced 116 Units 110 12.760 m² GFA€ 12.840.081 High priced 116 Units 132 15.312 m² GFA€ 17.039.970 Ground bound 196 Units - 26.628 m² GFA€ 13.823.124 Medium priced 140 Units 118,8 16.632 m² GFA€ 8.508.128 High priced 56 Units 178,5 9.996 m² GFA€ 5.314.995 Retail 4.562 m² GFA€ 3.123.300 Retail 4.562 m² GFA - -€ 3.123.300 Offices 11.923 m² GFA€ 2.664.293 Offices 11.923 m² GFA - -€ 2.664.293 Services 28.800 m² GFA€ 8.637.995 Services 28.800 m² GFA - -€ 8.637.995

Total Reveneus 151.294 m² GFA€ 96.044.029

Total result land development 208.510 m²€ 24.737.546

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / KKKK Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Main variant Amersfoort - Stamps / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Amersfoort Main variant / Stamps

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1.568 m² GFA€ 15.681.600 € 2.822.688 € 17.304.481 0 470 units€ 2.200 € 1.034.986 € 186.297 € 1.071.384 0 Covered 627 units€ 13.000 € 8.154.432 € 1.467.798 € 8.441.210 -0,5 470 units€ 16.000 € 7.527.168 € 1.354.890 € 7.791.886 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 106.009 m² GFA€ 103.383.275 € 24.295.070 € 112.007.274 Rental 51.309 m² GFA€ 50.080.675 € 11.768.959 € 54.258.291 Appartment 28.072 m² GFA€ 28.837.600 € 6.776.836 € 31.243.167 Affordable 12.760 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 12.760.000 € 2.998.600 € 13.824.410 High priced 15.312 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 16.077.600 € 3.778.236 € 17.418.757 Ground bound 23.237 m² GFA€ 21.243.075 € 4.992.123 € 23.015.124 Affordable 16.632 m² GFA€ 900 € 14.968.800 € 3.517.668 € 16.217.463 High priced 6.605 m² GFA€ 950 € 6.274.275 € 1.474.455 € 6.797.661 Ownership 54.700 m² GFA€ 53.302.600 € 12.526.111 € 57.748.982 Appartment 28.072 m² GFA€ 28.837.600 € 6.776.836 € 31.243.167 Medium priced 12.760 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 12.760.000 € 2.998.600 € 13.824.410 High priced 15.312 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 16.077.600 € 3.778.236 € 17.418.757 Ground bound 26.628 m² GFA€ 24.465.000 € 5.749.275 € 26.505.815 Medium priced 16.632 m² GFA€ 900 € 14.968.800 € 3.517.668 € 16.217.463 High priced 9.996 m² GFA€ 950 € 9.496.200 € 2.231.607 € 10.288.351 Retail 4.562 m² GFA€ 4.561.920 € 1.072.051 € 4.942.465 Retail 4.562 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 4.561.920 € 1.072.051 € 4.942.465 Offices 11.923 m² GFA€ 13.115.520 € 3.475.613 € 14.554.759 Offices 11.923 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 13.115.520 € 3.475.613 € 14.554.759 Services 28.800 m² GFA€ 30.240.000 € 8.013.600 € 33.558.404 Services 28.800 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 30.240.000 € 8.013.600 € 33.558.404

Total Costs € 166.982.315 € 39.679.022 € 182.367.382

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 627 units€ 23.622.602 0 470 units€ 4.490.247 0 Covered 627 units€ 10.932.775 -0,5 470 units€ 8.199.581 -1 0 units€ - Housing 84.807 m² LFA€ 187.307.592 Rental 41.047 m² LFA€ 85.855.435 Appartment 22.458 m² LFA€ 46.111.524 Affordable 10.208 m² LFA€ 11.349.063 High priced 12.250 m² LFA€ 34.762.461 Ground bound 18.589 m² LFA€ 39.743.911 Affordable 13.306 m² LFA€ 27.313.715 High priced 5.284 m² LFA€ 12.430.196 Ownership 43.760 m² LFA€ 101.452.157 Appartment 22.458 m² LFA€ 61.123.219 Medium priced 10.208 m² LFA€ 26.664.491 High priced 12.250 m² LFA€ 34.458.727 Ground bound 21.302 m² LFA€ 40.328.938 Medium priced 13.306 m² LFA€ 24.725.592 High priced 7.997 m² LFA€ 15.603.347 Retail 4.106 m² LFA€ 8.065.765 Retail 4.106 m² LFA€ 8.065.765 Offices 10.135 m² LFA€ 17.219.052 Offices 10.135 m² LFA€ 17.219.052 Services 24.480 m² LFA€ 42.196.399 Services 24.480 m² LFA€ 42.196.399

Total Costs € 278.411.411

LLLL \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Main variant Amersfoort - Stamps / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Amersfoort Main variant / Stamps

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 41.047 m² LFA € 27.890.694 Rental 41.047 m² LFA € 27.890.694 Appartments 22.458 m² LFA € 14.413.679 Affordable 10.208 m² LFA € 6.299.514 vacancy Rent Start€ 96.466 € 64.310 € 32.155 € 173.851 € 643.104 Friction€ 32.155 € 750.337 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 69.122 € 1.612.952 € 13.824.410 Structural€ 691.221 € 691.221 € 691.221 € 3.012.037 Operation Rent€ 32.155 € 750.337 High priced 12.250 m² LFA € 8.114.165 vacancy Rent Start€ 243.093 € 162.062 € 81.031 € 401.408 € 1.620.622 Friction€ 81.031 € 1.385.165 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 87.094 € 1.488.802 € 17.418.757 Structural€ 870.938 € 870.938 € 870.938 € 3.453.625 Operation Rent€ 81.031 € 1.385.165 Ground bound 18.589 m² LFA € 13.477.015 Affordable 13.306 m² LFA € 10.009.167 vacancy Rent Start€ 264.050 € 176.033 € 88.017 € 475.871 € 1.760.331 Friction€ 88.017 € 2.053.852 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 81.087 € 1.892.160 € 16.217.463 Structural€ 810.873 € 810.873 € 810.873 € 3.533.431 Operation Rent€ 88.017 € 2.053.852 High priced 5283,6 m² LFA € 3.467.848 vacancy Rent Start€ 117.960 € 78.640 € 39.320 € 194.781 € 786.398 Friction€ 39.320 € 672.144 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 33.988 € 581.004 € 6.797.661 Structural€ 339.883 € 339.883 € 339.883 € 1.347.775 Operation Rent€ 39.320 € 672.144 Retail 4.106 m² LFA € 2.347.236 Retail 4.106 m² LFA € 2.347.236 vacancy Rent Start€ 84.873 € 56.582 € 28.291 € 136.168 € 565.821 Friction€ 28.291 € 438.867 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 24.712 € 383.352 € 4.942.465 Structural€ 247.123 € 247.123 € 247.123 € 949.983 Operation Rent€ 28.291 € 438.867 Offices 10.135 m² LFA € 7.052.680 Offices 10.135 m² LFA € 7.052.680 vacancy Rent Start€ 226.264 € 150.843 € 75.421 € 347.775 € 1.508.426 Friction€ 150.843 € 2.034.725 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 72.774 € 981.650 € 14.554.759 Structural€ 727.738 € 727.738 € 727.738 € 2.671.168 Operation Rent€ 75.421 € 1.017.362 Services 24.480 m² LFA € 17.121.095 Services 24.480 m² LFA € 17.121.095 vacancy Rent Start€ 506.048 € 337.365 € 168.683 € 800.330 € 3.373.650 Friction€ 337.365 € 4.991.330 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 167.792 € 2.482.490 € 33.558.404 Structural€ 1.677.920 € 1.677.920 € 1.677.920 € 6.351.279 Operation Rent€ 168.683 € 2.495.665

Total Costs € 54.411.705

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.568 units€ 10.373.378 - -€ 23.622.602 0 470 units€ 12.075 - -€ 5.680.660 - -€ 4.490.247 0 Covered 627 units€ 22.050 - -€ 13.831.171 - -€ 10.932.775 -0,5 470 units€ 22.050 - -€ 10.373.378 - -€ 8.199.581 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 84.807 m² LFA€ 1.866 € 114.929.186 € 4.810.455 € 17.388.039 € 215.198.287 Rental 41.047 m² LFA€ 912 -€ 4.810.455 € 17.388.039 € 113.746.129 Appartments 22.458 m² LFA€ 521 -€ 2.263.726 € 7.701.503 € 60.525.203 Affordable 10.208 m² LFA -€ 63 € 259 -€ 643.104 € 2.641.844 € 17.648.577 High priced 12.250 m² LFA -€ 132 € 263 -€ 1.620.622 € 5.059.659 € 42.876.626 Ground bound 18.589 m² LFA€ 391 -€ 2.546.729 € 9.686.536 € 53.220.927 Affordable 13.306 m² LFA -€ 132 € 309 -€ 1.760.331 € 7.231.364 € 37.322.882 High priced 5.284 m² LFA -€ 149 € 82 -€ 786.398 € 2.455.171 € 15.898.044 Ownership 43.760 m² LFA€ 954 € 114.929.186 - -€ 101.452.157 Appartments 22.458 m² LFA€ 521 € 67.075.747 - -€ 61.123.219 Medium priced 10.208 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 259 € 29.261.232 - -€ 26.664.491 High priced 12.250 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 263 € 37.814.515 - -€ 34.458.727 Ground bound 21.302 m² LFA€ 433 € 47.853.439 -€ 40.328.938 Medium priced 13.306 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 309 € 29.338.848 - -€ 24.725.592 High priced 7.997 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 124 € 18.514.591 - -€ 15.603.347 Retail 4.106 m² LFA€ 82 -€ 565.821 € 1.635.666 € 10.413.000 Retail 4.106 m² LFA -€ 138 € 82 -€ 565.821 € 1.635.666 € 10.413.000 Offices 10.135 m² LFA€ 405 -€ 1.508.426 € 3.924.483 € 24.271.732 Offices 10.135 m² LFA -€ 149 € 405 -€ 1.508.426 € 3.924.483 € 24.271.732 Services 24.480 m² LFA€ 816 -€ 3.373.650 € 9.404.193 € 59.317.494 Services 24.480 m² LFA -€ 138 € 816 -€ 3.373.650 € 9.404.193 € 59.317.494

Total reveneus € 3.170 € 332.823.115

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / MMMM Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

NNNN \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix VII. Three sub variants Nijmegen

Profit variant Nijmegen / Land development

Land development phase Nijmegen profit variant

Total ground use 128.837 m² Minimum non residental 24.370 m² Ground use residental 97.088 m² Ground use non residential 31.749 m²

Area of plan 128.844 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 128.844 m² FSI 0,77 Parking places 862 Units GSI 0,34 Footprint 43.757 m² OSR 0,86 GFA 99.083 m² GSR 0,19 Green area 19.085 m² SPR 115

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 total area 128.844 m²€ 125 € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 Soil clean up costs € 8.440.000 € 1.688.000 € 9.629.573 Lighthly polluted 0 m²€ 31 € - € - € - Polluted 100.000 m²€ 62 € 7.440.000 € 1.488.000 € 8.488.629 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Railway yard 53.890 m²€ 50 € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Demolition cost € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 GFA old buildings 20.000 m²€ 50 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Site preparation costs € 20.173.350 € 4.034.670 € 23.016.677 For building 128.844 m²€ 25 € 3.221.100 € 644.220 € 3.675.097 Pavement 61.365 m²€ 135 € 8.284.275 € 1.656.855 € 9.451.900 Green 19.085 m²€ 35 € 667.975 € 133.595 € 762.123 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 48.952.250 € 9.790.450 € 56.802.926

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 862 Units€ 3.472.356 0 259 Units - - 30,00%€ 1.878.962 0 Covered 345 Units - - 40,00%€ 1.369.331 -0,5 259 Units - - 30,00%€ 224.064 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 631 Units - 80.105 m² GFA€ 75.427.336 Rent 244 Units - 32.188 m² GFA€ 29.127.112 Appartment 197 Units - 25.410 m² GFA€ 24.116.402 Affordable 27 Units 110 2.970 m² GFA € 660.148- High priced 170 Units 132 22.440 m² GFA€ 24.776.550 Ground Bound 47 Units - 6.778 m² GFA€ 5.010.710 Affordable 27 Units 118,8 3.208 m² GFA€ 2.058.354 High priced 20 Units 178,5 3.570 m² GFA€ 2.952.356 Ownership 387 Units - 47.918 m² GFA€ 46.300.224 Appartment 340 Units - 41.140 m² GFA€ 42.894.196 Medium priced 170 Units 110 18.700 m² GFA€ 18.421.106 High priced 170 Units 132 22.440 m² GFA€ 24.473.090 Ground bound 47 Units - 6.778 m² GFA€ 3.406.027 Medium priced 27 Units 118,8 3.208 m² GFA€ 1.579.681 High priced 20 Units 178,5 3.570 m² GFA€ 1.826.347 Retail 3.991 m² GFA€ 2.625.038 Retail 3.991 m² GFA - -€ 2.625.038 Offices 6.842 m² GFA€ 1.324.524 Offices 6.842 m² GFA - -€ 1.324.524 Services 8.145 m² GFA€ 2.208.445 Services 8.145 m² GFA - -€ 2.208.445

Total Reveneus 99.083 m² GFA€ 85.057.699

Total result land development 128.844 m²€ 28.254.773

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / OOOO Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Profit variant Nijmegen / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Nijmegen profit variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 862 m² GFA€ 8.618.400 € 1.551.312 € 9.510.314 0 259 units€ 2.200 € 568.814 € 102.387 € 588.819 0 Covered 345 units€ 13.000 € 4.481.568 € 806.682 € 4.639.177 -0,5 259 units€ 16.000 € 4.136.832 € 744.630 € 4.282.318 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 80105 m² GFA€ 82.941.867 € 19.491.339 € 89.860.689 Rental 32188 m² GFA€ 33.452.097 € 7.861.243 € 36.242.595 Appartment 25410 m² GFA€ 27.050.955 € 6.356.974 € 29.307.485 Affordable 2970 m² GFA€ 1.020 € 3.028.092 € 711.602 € 3.280.689 High priced 22440 m² GFA€ 1.071 € 24.022.863 € 5.645.373 € 26.026.796 Ground bound 6778 m² GFA€ 6.401.142 € 1.504.268 € 6.935.111 Affordable 3208 m² GFA€ 918 € 2.943.305 € 691.677 € 3.188.829 High priced 3570 m² GFA€ 969 € 3.457.836 € 812.592 € 3.746.281 Ownership 47918 m² GFA€ 49.489.770 € 11.630.096 € 53.618.094 Appartment 41140 m² GFA€ 43.088.628 € 10.125.828 € 46.682.983 Medium priced 18700 m² GFA€ 1.020 € 19.065.764 € 4.480.455 € 20.656.187 High priced 22440 m² GFA€ 1.071 € 24.022.863 € 5.645.373 € 26.026.796 Ground bound 6778 m² GFA€ 6.401.142 € 1.504.268 € 6.935.111 Medium priced 3208 m² GFA€ 918 € 2.943.305 € 691.677 € 3.188.829 High priced 3570 m² GFA€ 969 € 3.457.836 € 812.592 € 3.746.281 Retail 3991 m² GFA€ 4.069.062 € 956.230 € 4.408.494 Retail 3991 m² GFA€ 1.020 € 4.069.062 € 956.230 € 4.408.494 Offices 6842 m² GFA€ 7.673.409 € 2.033.454 € 8.515.455 Offices 6842 m² GFA€ 1.122 € 7.673.409 € 2.033.454 € 8.515.455 Services 8145 m² GFA€ 8.719.529 € 2.310.675 € 9.676.371 Services 8145 m² GFA€ 1.071 € 8.719.529 € 2.310.675 € 9.676.371

Total Costs € 112.022.267 € 26.343.009 € 121.971.324

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 345 units€ 12.982.670 0 259 units€ 2.467.780 0 Covered 345 units€ 6.008.508 -0,5 259 units€ 4.506.381 -1 0 units€ - Housing 64.084 m² LFA€ 165.287.921 Rental 25.750 m² LFA€ 65.369.659 Appartment 20.328 m² LFA€ 53.423.848 Affordable 2.376 m² LFA€ 2.620.536 High priced 17.952 m² LFA€ 50.803.311 Ground bound 5.422 m² LFA€ 11.945.811 Affordable 2.566 m² LFA€ 5.247.179 High priced 2.856 m² LFA€ 6.698.633 Ownership 38.334 m² LFA€ 99.918.262 Appartment 32.912 m² LFA€ 89.577.131 Medium priced 14.960 m² LFA€ 39.077.272 High priced 17.952 m² LFA€ 50.499.859 Ground bound 5.422 m² LFA€ 10.341.131 Medium priced 2.566 m² LFA€ 4.768.507 High priced 2.856 m² LFA€ 5.572.624 Retail 3.592 m² LFA€ 7.033.526 Retail 3.592 m² LFA€ 7.033.526 Offices 5.816 m² LFA€ 9.839.968 Offices 5.816 m² LFA€ 9.839.968 Services 6.923 m² LFA€ 11.884.803 Services 6.923 m² LFA€ 11.884.803

Total Costs € 207.028.888

PPPP \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Profit variant Nijmegen / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Nijmegen profit variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 25.750 m² LFA € 17.366.145 Rental 25.750 m² LFA € 17.366.145 Appartments 20.328 m² LFA € 13.520.437 Affordable 2.376 m² LFA € 1.487.321 vacancy Rent Start€ 22.453 € 14.969 € 7.484 € 40.465 € 149.688 Friction€ 7.484 € 174.647 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 16.403 € 382.771 € 3.280.685 Structural€ 164.034 € 164.034 € 164.034 € 714.790 Operation Rent€ 7.484 € 174.647 High priced 17.952 m² LFA € 12.033.116 vacancy Rent Start€ 356.257 € 237.505 € 118.752 € 588.270 € 2.375.050 Friction€ 118.752 € 2.029.983 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 130.134 € 2.224.539 € 26.026.769 Structural€ 1.301.338 € 1.301.338 € 1.301.338 € 5.160.340 Operation Rent€ 118.752 € 2.029.983 Ground bound 5.422 m² LFA € 3.845.709 Affordable 2.566 m² LFA € 1.950.805 vacancy Rent Start€ 50.924 € 33.949 € 16.975 € 91.775 € 339.492 Friction€ 16.975 € 396.100 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 15.944 € 372.054 € 3.188.826 Structural€ 159.441 € 159.441 € 159.441 € 694.776 Operation Rent€ 16.975 € 396.100 High priced 2856 m² LFA € 1.894.904 vacancy Rent Start€ 63.762 € 42.508 € 21.254 € 105.287 € 425.080 Friction€ 21.254 € 363.321 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 18.731 € 320.199 € 3.746.277 Structural€ 187.314 € 187.314 € 187.314 € 742.776 Operation Rent€ 21.254 € 363.321 Retail 3.592 m² LFA € 2.076.296 Retail 3.592 m² LFA € 2.076.296 vacancy Rent Start€ 74.251 € 49.501 € 24.750 € 119.126 € 495.009 Friction€ 24.750 € 383.943 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 22.042 € 341.935 € 4.408.490 Structural€ 220.424 € 220.424 € 220.424 € 847.348 Operation Rent€ 24.750 € 383.943 Offices 5.816 m² LFA € 4.088.102 Offices 5.816 m² LFA € 4.088.102 vacancy Rent Start€ 129.839 € 86.559 € 43.280 € 199.567 € 865.594 Friction€ 86.559 € 1.167.605 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 42.577 € 574.327 € 8.515.447 Structural€ 425.772 € 425.772 € 425.772 € 1.562.800 Operation Rent€ 43.280 € 583.803 Services 6.923 m² LFA € 4.890.923 Services 6.923 m² LFA € 4.890.923 vacancy Rent Start€ 143.117 € 95.411 € 47.706 € 226.343 € 954.110 Friction€ 95.411 € 1.411.611 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 48.382 € 715.811 € 9.676.361 Structural€ 483.818 € 483.818 € 483.818 € 1.831.353 Operation Rent€ 47.706 € 705.805

Total Costs € 28.421.465

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 862 units€ 5.701.072 - -€ 12.982.670 0 259 units€ 12.075 - -€ 3.122.015 - -€ 2.467.780 0 Covered 345 units€ 22.050 - -€ 7.601.429 - -€ 6.008.508 -0,5 259 units€ 22.050 - -€ 5.701.072 - -€ 4.506.381 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 64.084 m² LFA€ 1.417 € 110.571.224 € 3.289.310 € 10.751.670 € 182.654.077 Rental 25.750 m² LFA€ 549 -€ 3.289.310 € 10.751.670 € 82.735.815 Appartments 20.328 m² LFA€ 445 -€ 2.524.738 € 8.029.930 € 66.944.293 Affordable 2.376 m² LFA -€ 63 € 60 -€ 149.688 € 614.912 € 4.107.858 High priced 17.952 m² LFA -€ 132 € 385 -€ 2.375.050 € 7.415.018 € 62.836.435 Ground bound 5.422 m² LFA€ 104 -€ 764.572 € 2.721.740 € 15.791.522 Affordable 2.566 m² LFA -€ 132 € 60 -€ 339.492 € 1.394.620 € 7.197.984 High priced 2.856 m² LFA -€ 149 € 44 -€ 425.080 € 1.327.120 € 8.593.537 Ownership 38.334 m² LFA€ 868 € 110.571.224 - -€ 99.918.262 Appartments 32.912 m² LFA€ 764 € 98.300.664 - -€ 89.577.131 Medium priced 14.960 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 379 € 42.882.840 - -€ 39.077.272 High priced 17.952 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 385 € 55.417.824 - -€ 50.499.859 Ground bound 5.422 m² LFA€ 104 € 12.270.560 -€ 10.341.131 Medium priced 2.566 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 60 € 5.658.206 - -€ 4.768.507 High priced 2.856 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 44 € 6.612.354 - -€ 5.572.624 Retail 3.592 m² LFA€ 72 -€ 495.009 € 1.430.964 € 9.109.823 Retail 3.592 m² LFA -€ 138 € 72 -€ 495.009 € 1.430.964 € 9.109.823 Offices 5.816 m² LFA€ 233 -€ 865.594 € 2.252.022 € 13.928.072 Offices 5.816 m² LFA -€ 149 € 233 -€ 865.594 € 2.252.022 € 13.928.072 Services 6.923 m² LFA€ 231 -€ 954.110 € 2.659.623 € 16.775.729 Services 6.923 m² LFA -€ 138 € 231 -€ 954.110 € 2.659.623 € 16.775.729

Total reveneus € 1.952 € 235.450.371

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / QQQQ Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Social variant Nijmegen / Land development

Land development phase Nijmegen social variant

Total ground use 128.838 m² Minimum non residental 24.370 m² Ground use residental 49.109 m² Ground use non residential 79.729 m²

Area of plan 128.844 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 128.844 m² FSI 0,70 Parking places 913 Units GSI 0,27 Footprint 35.373 m² OSR 1,03 GFA 90.801 m² GSR 0,07 Green area 6.247 m² SPR 99

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 total area 128.844 m²€ 125 € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 Soil clean up costs € 8.440.000 € 1.688.000 € 9.629.573 Lighthly polluted 0 m²€ 31 € - € - € - Polluted 100.000 m²€ 62 € 7.440.000 € 1.488.000 € 8.488.629 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Railway yard 53.890 m²€ 50 € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Demolition cost € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 GFA old buildings 20.000 m²€ 50 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Site preparation costs € 19.595.500 € 3.919.100 € 22.357.382 For building 128.844 m²€ 25 € 3.221.100 € 644.220 € 3.675.097 Pavement 60.413 m²€ 135 € 8.155.755 € 1.631.151 € 9.305.266 Green 6.247 m²€ 35 € 218.645 € 43.729 € 249.462 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 48.374.400 € 9.674.880 € 56.143.631

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 913 Units€ 3.679.286 0 274 Units - - 30,00%€ 1.990.935 0 Covered 365 Units - - 40,00%€ 1.450.934 -0,5 274 Units - - 30,00%€ 237.416 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 292 Units - 36.836 m² GFA€ 17.966.965 Rent 208 Units - 25.511 m² GFA€ 9.760.198 Appartment 104 Units - 11.902 m² GFA€ 687.326 Affordable 83 Units 110 9.130 m² GFA € 2.292.582- High priced 21 Units 132 2.772 m² GFA€ 2.979.908 Ground Bound 104 Units - 13.609 m² GFA€ 9.072.872 Affordable 83 Units 118,8 9.860 m² GFA€ 6.071.663 High priced 21 Units 178,5 3.749 m² GFA€ 3.001.209 Ownership 84 Units - 11.325 m² GFA€ 8.206.767 Appartment 42 Units - 5.082 m² GFA€ 5.185.906 Medium priced 21 Units 110 2.310 m² GFA€ 2.225.642 High priced 21 Units 132 2.772 m² GFA€ 2.960.264 Ground bound 42 Units - 6.243 m² GFA€ 3.020.860 Medium priced 21 Units 118,8 2.495 m² GFA€ 1.180.132 High priced 21 Units 178,5 3.749 m² GFA€ 1.840.729 Retail 8.136 m² GFA€ 5.128.174 Retail 8.136 m² GFA - -€ 5.128.174 Offices 20.922 m² GFA€ 3.413.128 Offices 20.922 m² GFA - -€ 3.413.128 Services 24.907 m² GFA€ 6.022.237 Services 24.907 m² GFA - -€ 6.022.237

Total Reveneus 90.801 m² GFA€ 36.209.789

Total result land development 128.844 m² € 19.933.842-

RRRR \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Social variant Nijmegen / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Nijmegen social variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 913 m² GFA€ 9.132.000 € 1.643.760 € 10.077.066 0 274 units€ 2.200 € 602.712 € 108.488 € 623.908 0 Covered 365 units€ 13.000 € 4.748.640 € 854.755 € 4.915.642 -0,5 274 units€ 16.000 € 4.383.360 € 789.005 € 4.537.516 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 36836 m² GFA€ 36.905.386 € 8.672.766 € 39.983.949 Rental 25511 m² GFA€ 25.442.829 € 5.979.065 € 27.565.212 Appartment 11902 m² GFA€ 12.516.199 € 2.941.307 € 13.560.272 Affordable 9130 m² GFA€ 1.020 € 9.490.631 € 2.230.298 € 10.282.318 High priced 2772 m² GFA€ 1.071 € 3.025.568 € 711.008 € 3.277.954 Ground bound 13609 m² GFA€ 12.926.630 € 3.037.758 € 14.004.940 Affordable 9860 m² GFA€ 918 € 9.224.894 € 2.167.850 € 9.994.413 High priced 3749 m² GFA€ 969 € 3.701.736 € 869.908 € 4.010.527 Ownership 11325 m² GFA€ 11.462.557 € 2.693.701 € 12.418.738 Appartment 5082 m² GFA€ 5.426.812 € 1.275.301 € 5.879.504 Medium priced 2310 m² GFA€ 1.020 € 2.401.244 € 564.292 € 2.601.550 High priced 2772 m² GFA€ 1.071 € 3.025.568 € 711.008 € 3.277.954 Ground bound 6243 m² GFA€ 6.035.745 € 1.418.400 € 6.539.234 Medium priced 2495 m² GFA€ 918 € 2.334.009 € 548.492 € 2.528.707 High priced 3749 m² GFA€ 969 € 3.701.736 € 869.908 € 4.010.527 Retail 8136 m² GFA€ 8.457.369 € 1.987.482 € 9.162.863 Retail 8136 m² GFA€ 1.020 € 8.457.369 € 1.987.482 € 9.162.863 Offices 20922 m² GFA€ 23.923.252 € 6.339.662 € 26.548.484 Offices 20922 m² GFA€ 1.122 € 23.923.252 € 6.339.662 € 26.548.484 Services 24907 m² GFA€ 27.185.358 € 7.204.120 € 30.168.558 Services 24907 m² GFA€ 1.071 € 27.185.358 € 7.204.120 € 30.168.558

Total Costs € 105.603.364 € 25.847.789 € 115.940.921

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 365 units€ 13.756.352 0 274 units€ 2.614.844 0 Covered 365 units€ 6.366.576 -0,5 274 units€ 4.774.932 -1 0 units€ - Housing 29.469 m² LFA€ 57.950.914 Rental 20.409 m² LFA€ 37.325.410 Appartment 9.522 m² LFA€ 14.247.598 Affordable 7.304 m² LFA€ 7.989.736 High priced 2.218 m² LFA€ 6.257.862 Ground bound 10.887 m² LFA€ 23.077.812 Affordable 7.888 m² LFA€ 16.066.077 High priced 2.999 m² LFA€ 7.011.736 Ownership 9.060 m² LFA€ 20.625.504 Appartment 4.066 m² LFA€ 11.065.410 Medium priced 1.848 m² LFA€ 4.827.192 High priced 2.218 m² LFA€ 6.238.218 Ground bound 4.995 m² LFA€ 9.560.094 Medium priced 1.996 m² LFA€ 3.708.839 High priced 2.999 m² LFA€ 5.851.255 Retail 7.322 m² LFA€ 14.291.037 Retail 7.322 m² LFA€ 14.291.037 Offices 17.784 m² LFA€ 29.961.611 Offices 17.784 m² LFA€ 29.961.611 Services 21.171 m² LFA€ 36.190.795 Services 21.171 m² LFA€ 36.190.795

Total Costs € 152.150.710

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / SSSS Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Social variant Nijmegen / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Nijmegen social variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 20.409 m² LFA € 14.214.951 Rental 20.409 m² LFA € 14.214.951 Appartments 9.522 m² LFA € 6.142.411 Affordable 7.304 m² LFA € 4.638.125 vacancy Rent Start€ 69.023 € 46.015 € 23.008 € 124.393 € 460.152 Friction€ 23.008 € 536.879 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 51.412 € 1.199.682 € 10.282.318 Structural€ 514.116 € 514.116 € 514.116 € 2.240.293 Operation Rent€ 23.008 € 536.879 High priced 2.218 m² LFA € 1.504.286 vacancy Rent Start€ 44.008 € 29.339 € 14.669 € 72.669 € 293.388 Friction€ 14.669 € 250.763 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 16.390 € 280.171 € 3.277.954 Structural€ 163.898 € 163.898 € 163.898 € 649.921 Operation Rent€ 14.669 € 250.763 Ground bound 10.887 m² LFA € 8.072.540 Affordable 7.888 m² LFA € 6.061.061 vacancy Rent Start€ 156.544 € 104.362 € 52.181 € 282.124 € 1.043.625 Friction€ 52.181 € 1.217.641 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 49.972 € 1.166.090 € 9.994.413 Structural€ 499.721 € 499.721 € 499.721 € 2.177.565 Operation Rent€ 52.181 € 1.217.641 High priced 2998,8 m² LFA € 2.011.479 vacancy Rent Start€ 66.950 € 44.633 € 22.317 € 110.551 € 446.334 Friction€ 22.317 € 381.487 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 20.053 € 342.785 € 4.010.527 Structural€ 200.526 € 200.526 € 200.526 € 795.169 Operation Rent€ 22.317 € 381.487 Retail 7.322 m² LFA € 4.280.128 Retail 7.322 m² LFA € 4.280.128 vacancy Rent Start€ 151.368 € 100.912 € 50.456 € 242.850 € 1.009.118 Friction€ 50.456 € 782.701 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 45.814 € 710.698 € 9.162.863 Structural€ 458.143 € 458.143 € 458.143 € 1.761.179 Operation Rent€ 50.456 € 782.701 Offices 17.784 m² LFA € 12.628.731 Offices 17.784 m² LFA € 12.628.731 vacancy Rent Start€ 397.032 € 264.688 € 132.344 € 610.251 € 2.646.881 Friction€ 264.688 € 3.570.393 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 132.742 € 1.790.570 € 26.548.484 Structural€ 1.327.424 € 1.327.424 € 1.327.424 € 4.872.320 Operation Rent€ 132.344 € 1.785.197 Services 21.171 m² LFA € 15.108.539 Services 21.171 m² LFA € 15.108.539 vacancy Rent Start€ 437.643 € 291.762 € 145.881 € 692.147 € 2.917.622 Friction€ 291.762 € 4.316.634 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 150.843 € 2.231.726 € 30.168.558 Structural€ 1.508.428 € 1.508.428 € 1.508.428 € 5.709.715 Operation Rent€ 145.881 € 2.158.317

Total Costs € 46.232.349

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 913 units€ 6.040.818 - -€ 13.756.352 0 274 units€ 12.075 - -€ 3.308.067 - -€ 2.614.844 0 Covered 365 units€ 22.050 - -€ 8.054.424 - -€ 6.366.576 -0,5 274 units€ 22.050 - -€ 6.040.818 - -€ 4.774.932 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 29.469 m² LFA€ 650 € 23.486.822 € 2.243.499 € 8.486.899 € 72.165.864 Rental 20.409 m² LFA€ 462 -€ 2.243.499 € 8.486.899 € 51.540.360 Appartments 9.522 m² LFA€ 233 -€ 753.540 € 2.806.258 € 20.390.009 Affordable 7.304 m² LFA -€ 63 € 185 -€ 460.152 € 1.890.285 € 12.627.861 High priced 2.218 m² LFA -€ 132 € 48 -€ 293.388 € 915.973 € 7.762.148 Ground bound 10.887 m² LFA€ 230 -€ 1.489.959 € 5.680.642 € 31.150.352 Affordable 7.888 m² LFA -€ 132 € 183 -€ 1.043.625 € 4.287.166 € 22.127.137 High priced 2.999 m² LFA -€ 149 € 46 -€ 446.334 € 1.393.476 € 9.023.214 Ownership 9.060 m² LFA€ 187 € 23.486.822 - -€ 20.625.504 Appartments 4.066 m² LFA€ 94 € 12.143.023 - -€ 11.065.410 Medium priced 1.848 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 47 € 5.297.292 - -€ 4.827.192 High priced 2.218 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 48 € 6.845.731 - -€ 6.238.218 Ground bound 4.995 m² LFA€ 93 € 11.343.799 -€ 9.560.094 Medium priced 1.996 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 46 € 4.400.827 - -€ 3.708.839 High priced 2.999 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 46 € 6.942.972 - -€ 5.851.255 Retail 7.322 m² LFA€ 146 -€ 1.009.118 € 2.917.144 € 18.571.166 Retail 7.322 m² LFA -€ 138 € 146 -€ 1.009.118 € 2.917.144 € 18.571.166 Offices 17.784 m² LFA€ 711 -€ 2.646.881 € 6.886.408 € 42.590.343 Offices 17.784 m² LFA -€ 149 € 711 -€ 2.646.881 € 6.886.408 € 42.590.343 Services 21.171 m² LFA€ 706 -€ 2.917.622 € 8.132.994 € 51.299.334 Services 21.171 m² LFA -€ 138 € 706 -€ 2.917.622 € 8.132.994 € 51.299.334

Total reveneus € 2.213 € 198.383.059

TTTT \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Policy variant Nijmegen / Land development

Land development phase Nijmegen policy variant

Total ground use 128.843 m² Minimum non residental 35.241 m² Ground use residental 90.702 m² Ground use non residential 38.141 m²

Area of plan 128.844 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 128.844 m² FSI 0,72 Parking places 808 Units GSI 0,25 Footprint 32.836 m² OSR 1,04 GFA 92.702 m² GSR 0,10 Green area 9.338 m² SPR 115

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 total area 128.844 m²€ 125 € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 Soil clean up costs € 8.440.000 € 1.688.000 € 9.629.573 Lighthly polluted 0 m²€ 31 € - € - € - Polluted 100.000 m²€ 62 € 7.440.000 € 1.488.000 € 8.488.629 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Railway yard 53.890 m²€ 50 € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Demolition cost € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 GFA old buildings 20.000 m²€ 50 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Site preparation costs € 18.782.175 € 3.756.435 € 21.429.423 For building 128.844 m²€ 25 € 3.221.100 € 644.220 € 3.675.097 Pavement 53.587 m²€ 135 € 7.234.245 € 1.446.849 € 8.253.874 Green 9.338 m²€ 35 € 326.830 € 65.366 € 372.895 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 47.561.075 € 9.512.215 € 55.215.672

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 808 Units€ 3.255.112 0 242 Units - - 30,00%€ 1.761.407 0 Covered 323 Units - - 40,00%€ 1.283.660 -0,5 242 Units - - 30,00%€ 210.045 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 497 Units - 64.823 m² GFA€ 38.158.969 Rent 285 Units - 36.175 m² GFA€ 18.374.558 Appartment 112 Units - 12.936 m² GFA€ 2.006.669 Affordable 84 Units 110 9.240 m² GFA € 2.068.310- High priced 28 Units 132 3.696 m² GFA€ 4.074.979 Ground Bound 173 Units - 23.239 m² GFA€ 16.367.889 Affordable 128 Units 118,8 15.206 m² GFA€ 9.736.620 High priced 45 Units 178,5 8.033 m² GFA€ 6.631.269 Ownership 212 Units - 28.648 m² GFA€ 19.784.410 Appartment 84 Units - 10.098 m² GFA€ 10.478.399 Medium priced 45 Units 110 4.950 m² GFA€ 4.870.348 High priced 39 Units 132 5.148 m² GFA€ 5.608.051 Ground bound 128 Units - 18.550 m² GFA€ 9.306.011 Medium priced 72 Units 118,8 8.554 m² GFA€ 4.203.420 High priced 56 Units 178,5 9.996 m² GFA€ 5.102.591 Retail 3.276 m² GFA€ 2.149.857 Retail 3.276 m² GFA - -€ 2.149.857 Offices 11.232 m² GFA€ 2.155.735 Offices 11.232 m² GFA - -€ 2.155.735 Services 13.371 m² GFA€ 3.604.043 Services 13.371 m² GFA - -€ 3.604.043

Total Reveneus 92.702 m² GFA€ 49.323.717

Total result land development 128.844 m² € 5.891.956-

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / UUUU Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Policy variant Nijmegen / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Nijmegen policy variant

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 808 m² GFA€ 8.079.200 € 1.454.256 € 8.915.312 0 242 units€ 2.200 € 533.227 € 95.981 € 551.980 0 Covered 323 units€ 13.000 € 4.201.184 € 756.213 € 4.348.933 -0,5 242 units€ 16.000 € 3.878.016 € 698.043 € 4.014.399 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 64823 m² GFA€ 63.267.010 € 14.867.747 € 68.544.600 Rental 36175 m² GFA€ 35.148.400 € 8.259.874 € 38.080.400 Appartment 12936 m² GFA€ 13.391.681 € 3.147.045 € 14.508.784 Affordable 9240 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 9.430.761 € 2.216.229 € 10.217.454 High priced 3696 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 3.960.920 € 930.816 € 4.291.331 Ground bound 23239 m² GFA€ 21.756.720 € 5.112.829 € 23.571.616 Affordable 15206 m² GFA€ 900 € 13.968.304 € 3.282.551 € 15.133.508 High priced 8033 m² GFA€ 950 € 7.788.415 € 1.830.278 € 8.438.107 Ownership 28648 m² GFA€ 28.118.610 € 6.607.873 € 30.464.200 Appartment 10098 m² GFA€ 10.569.188 € 2.483.759 € 11.450.846 Medium priced 4950 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 5.052.193 € 1.187.265 € 5.473.636 High priced 5148 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 5.516.995 € 1.296.494 € 5.977.210 Ground bound 18550 m² GFA€ 17.549.421 € 4.124.114 € 19.013.354 Medium priced 8554 m² GFA€ 900 € 7.857.171 € 1.846.435 € 8.512.599 High priced 9996 m² GFA€ 950 € 9.692.250 € 2.277.679 € 10.500.756 Retail 3276 m² GFA€ 3.343.633 € 785.754 € 3.622.552 Retail 3276 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 3.343.633 € 785.754 € 3.622.552 Offices 11232 m² GFA€ 12.610.275 € 3.341.723 € 13.994.070 Offices 11232 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 12.610.275 € 3.341.723 € 13.994.070 Services 13371 m² GFA€ 14.329.398 € 3.797.291 € 15.901.843 Services 13371 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 14.329.398 € 3.797.291 € 15.901.843

Total Costs € 101.629.516 € 24.246.770 € 110.978.378

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 323 units€ 12.170.425 0 242 units€ 2.313.386 0 Covered 323 units€ 5.632.593 -0,5 242 units€ 4.224.445 -1 0 units€ - Housing 51.858 m² LFA€ 106.703.569 Rental 28.940 m² LFA€ 56.454.958 Appartment 10.349 m² LFA€ 16.515.453 Affordable 7.392 m² LFA€ 8.149.144 High priced 2.957 m² LFA€ 8.366.309 Ground bound 18.591 m² LFA€ 39.939.505 Affordable 12.165 m² LFA€ 24.870.128 High priced 6.426 m² LFA€ 15.069.377 Ownership 22.918 m² LFA€ 50.248.611 Appartment 8.078 m² LFA€ 21.929.246 Medium priced 3.960 m² LFA€ 10.343.984 High priced 4.118 m² LFA€ 11.585.262 Ground bound 14.840 m² LFA€ 28.319.365 Medium priced 6.843 m² LFA€ 12.716.019 High priced 7.997 m² LFA€ 15.603.347 Retail 2.948 m² LFA€ 5.772.409 Retail 2.948 m² LFA€ 5.772.409 Offices 9.547 m² LFA€ 16.149.805 Offices 9.547 m² LFA€ 16.149.805 Services 11.365 m² LFA€ 19.505.886 Services 11.365 m² LFA€ 19.505.886

Total Costs € 160.302.094

VVVV \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Policy variant Nijmegen / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Nijmegen policy variant

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 28.940 m² LFA € 20.133.813 Rental 28.940 m² LFA € 20.133.813 Appartments 10.349 m² LFA € 6.614.081 Affordable 7.392 m² LFA € 4.630.860 vacancy Rent Start€ 69.854 € 46.570 € 23.285 € 125.892 € 465.696 Friction€ 23.285 € 543.347 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 51.087 € 1.192.114 € 10.217.454 Structural€ 510.873 € 510.873 € 510.873 € 2.226.160 Operation Rent€ 23.285 € 543.347 High priced 2.957 m² LFA € 1.983.221 vacancy Rent Start€ 58.678 € 39.118 € 19.559 € 96.892 € 391.185 Friction€ 19.559 € 334.350 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 21.457 € 366.785 € 4.291.331 Structural€ 214.567 € 214.567 € 214.567 € 850.844 Operation Rent€ 19.559 € 334.350 Ground bound 18.591 m² LFA € 13.519.732 Affordable 12.165 m² LFA € 9.253.650 vacancy Rent Start€ 241.417 € 160.945 € 80.472 € 435.082 € 1.609.445 Friction€ 80.472 € 1.877.808 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 75.668 € 1.765.690 € 15.133.508 Structural€ 756.675 € 756.675 € 756.675 € 3.297.261 Operation Rent€ 80.472 € 1.877.808 High priced 6426 m² LFA € 4.266.082 vacancy Rent Start€ 143.464 € 95.643 € 47.821 € 236.896 € 956.430 Friction€ 47.821 € 817.472 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 42.191 € 721.215 € 8.438.107 Structural€ 421.905 € 421.905 € 421.905 € 1.673.027 Operation Rent€ 47.821 € 817.472 Retail 2.948 m² LFA € 1.705.361 Retail 2.948 m² LFA € 1.705.361 vacancy Rent Start€ 60.949 € 40.633 € 20.316 € 97.785 € 406.326 Friction€ 20.316 € 315.158 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 18.113 € 280.976 € 3.622.552 Structural€ 181.128 € 181.128 € 181.128 € 696.285 Operation Rent€ 20.316 € 315.158 Offices 9.547 m² LFA € 6.714.870 Offices 9.547 m² LFA € 6.714.870 vacancy Rent Start€ 213.147 € 142.098 € 71.049 € 327.614 € 1.420.981 Friction€ 142.098 € 1.916.770 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 69.970 € 943.834 € 13.994.070 Structural€ 699.704 € 699.704 € 699.704 € 2.568.267 Operation Rent€ 71.049 € 958.385 Services 11.365 m² LFA € 8.033.496 Services 11.365 m² LFA € 8.033.496 vacancy Rent Start€ 234.943 € 156.629 € 78.314 € 371.570 € 1.566.287 Friction€ 156.629 € 2.317.329 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 79.509 € 1.176.342 € 15.901.843 Structural€ 795.092 € 795.092 € 795.092 € 3.009.590 Operation Rent€ 78.314 € 1.158.664

Total Costs € 36.587.540

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 808 units€ 5.344.391 - -€ 12.170.425 0 242 units€ 12.075 - -€ 2.926.690 - -€ 2.313.386 0 Covered 323 units€ 22.050 - -€ 7.125.854 - -€ 5.632.593 -0,5 242 units€ 22.050 - -€ 5.344.391 - -€ 4.224.445 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 51.858 m² LFA€ 1.104 € 57.667.982 € 3.422.756 € 12.731.909 € 126.837.382 Rental 28.940 m² LFA€ 633 -€ 3.422.756 € 12.731.909 € 76.588.772 Appartments 10.349 m² LFA€ 251 -€ 856.881 € 3.134.356 € 23.129.534 Affordable 7.392 m² LFA -€ 63 € 187 -€ 465.696 € 1.913.059 € 12.780.004 High priced 2.957 m² LFA -€ 132 € 63 -€ 391.185 € 1.221.297 € 10.349.530 Ground bound 18.591 m² LFA€ 382 -€ 2.565.875 € 9.597.553 € 53.459.237 Affordable 12.165 m² LFA -€ 132 € 283 -€ 1.609.445 € 6.611.533 € 34.123.778 High priced 6.426 m² LFA -€ 149 € 100 -€ 956.430 € 2.986.019 € 19.335.459 Ownership 22.918 m² LFA€ 471 € 57.667.982 - -€ 50.248.611 Appartments 8.078 m² LFA€ 189 € 24.064.841 - -€ 21.929.246 Medium priced 3.960 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 100 € 11.351.340 - -€ 10.343.984 High priced 4.118 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 88 € 12.713.501 - -€ 11.585.262 Ground bound 14.840 m² LFA€ 283 € 33.603.142 -€ 28.319.365 Medium priced 6.843 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 159 € 15.088.550 - -€ 12.716.019 High priced 7.997 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 124 € 18.514.591 - -€ 15.603.347 Retail 2.948 m² LFA€ 59 -€ 406.326 € 1.174.602 € 7.477.770 Retail 2.948 m² LFA -€ 138 € 59 -€ 406.326 € 1.174.602 € 7.477.770 Offices 9.547 m² LFA€ 382 -€ 1.420.981 € 3.696.976 € 22.864.675 Offices 9.547 m² LFA -€ 149 € 382 -€ 1.420.981 € 3.696.976 € 22.864.675 Services 11.365 m² LFA€ 379 -€ 1.566.287 € 4.366.093 € 27.539.382 Services 11.365 m² LFA -€ 138 € 379 -€ 1.566.287 € 4.366.093 € 27.539.382

Total reveneus € 1.924 € 196.889.635

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / WWWW Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

XXXX \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix VIII. Main variant Nijmegen/Functional areas

Main variant Nijmegen - Functional areas / Land development

Land development phase Nijmegen Main variant / Functional areas

Total ground use 128.841 m² Minimum non residental 24.370 m² Ground use residental 76.824 m² Ground use non residential 52.017 m²

Area of plan 128.844 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 128.844 m² FSI 0,73 Parking places 867 Units GSI 0,25 Footprint 32.218 m² OSR 1,02 GFA 94.505 m² GSR 0,12 Green area 11.591 m² SPR 109

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 total area 128.844 m²€ 125 € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 Soil clean up costs € 8.440.000 € 1.688.000 € 9.629.573 Lighthly polluted 0 m²€ 31 € - € - € - Polluted 100.000 m²€ 62 € 7.440.000 € 1.488.000 € 8.488.629 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Railway yard 53.890 m²€ 50 € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Demolition cost € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 GFA old buildings 20.000 m²€ 50 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Site preparation costs € 19.612.305 € 3.922.461 € 22.376.556 For building 128.844 m²€ 25 € 3.221.100 € 644.220 € 3.675.097 Pavement 59.152 m²€ 135 € 7.985.520 € 1.597.104 € 9.111.037 Green 11.591 m²€ 35 € 405.685 € 81.137 € 462.864 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 48.391.205 € 9.678.241 € 56.162.805

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 867 Units€ 3.492.018 0 260 Units - - 30,00%€ 1.889.601 0 Covered 347 Units - - 40,00%€ 1.377.085 -0,5 260 Units - - 30,00%€ 225.332 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 459 Units - 59.297 m² GFA€ 49.675.866 Rent 216 Units - 28.104 m² GFA€ 21.305.892 Appartment 108 Units - 13.662 m² GFA€ 11.145.150 Affordable 27 Units 110 2.970 m² GFA € 660.148- High priced 81 Units 132 10.692 m² GFA€ 11.805.297 Ground Bound 108 Units - 14.442 m² GFA€ 10.160.742 Affordable 81 Units 118,8 9.623 m² GFA€ 6.175.061 High priced 27 Units 178,5 4.820 m² GFA€ 3.985.681 Ownership 243 Units - 31.193 m² GFA€ 28.369.974 Appartment 189 Units - 23.166 m² GFA€ 24.324.725 Medium priced 81 Units 110 8.910 m² GFA€ 8.777.115 High priced 108 Units 132 14.256 m² GFA€ 15.547.610 Ground bound 54 Units - 8.027 m² GFA€ 4.045.249 Medium priced 27 Units 118,8 3.208 m² GFA€ 1.579.681 High priced 27 Units 178,5 4.820 m² GFA€ 2.465.568 Retail 5.308 m² GFA€ 3.491.280 Retail 5.308 m² GFA - -€ 3.491.280 Offices 13.650 m² GFA€ 2.642.466 Offices 13.650 m² GFA - -€ 2.642.466 Services 16.250 m² GFA€ 4.406.044 Services 16.250 m² GFA - -€ 4.406.044

Total Reveneus 94.505 m² GFA€ 63.707.675

Total result land development 128.844 m²€ 7.544.870

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / YYYY Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Main variant Nijmegen - Functional areas / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Nijmegen Main variant / Functional areas

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 867 m² GFA€ 8.667.200 € 1.560.096 € 9.564.164 0 260 units€ 2.200 € 572.035 € 102.966 € 592.153 0 Covered 347 units€ 13.000 € 4.506.944 € 811.250 € 4.665.446 -0,5 260 units€ 16.000 € 4.160.256 € 748.846 € 4.306.565 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 59297 m² GFA€ 59.929.457 € 14.083.422 € 64.928.637 Rental 28104 m² GFA€ 27.972.246 € 6.573.478 € 30.305.627 Appartment 13662 m² GFA€ 14.474.265 € 3.401.452 € 15.681.675 Affordable 2970 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 3.028.089 € 711.601 € 3.280.685 High priced 10692 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 11.446.176 € 2.689.851 € 12.400.990 Ground bound 14442 m² GFA€ 13.497.981 € 3.172.026 € 14.623.952 Affordable 9623 m² GFA€ 900 € 8.829.907 € 2.075.028 € 9.566.478 High priced 4820 m² GFA€ 950 € 4.668.074 € 1.096.997 € 5.057.474 Ownership 31193 m² GFA€ 31.957.211 € 7.509.945 € 34.623.009 Appartment 23166 m² GFA€ 24.345.834 € 5.721.271 € 26.376.709 Medium priced 8910 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 9.084.267 € 2.134.803 € 9.842.055 High priced 14256 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 15.261.568 € 3.586.468 € 16.534.653 Ground bound 8027 m² GFA€ 7.611.377 € 1.788.674 € 8.246.300 Medium priced 3208 m² GFA€ 900 € 2.943.302 € 691.676 € 3.188.826 High priced 4820 m² GFA€ 950 € 4.668.074 € 1.096.997 € 5.057.474 Retail 5308 m² GFA€ 5.411.817 € 1.271.777 € 5.863.258 Retail 5308 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 5.411.817 € 1.271.777 € 5.863.258 Offices 13650 m² GFA€ 15.308.671 € 4.056.798 € 16.988.577 Offices 13650 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 15.308.671 € 4.056.798 € 16.988.577 Services 16250 m² GFA€ 17.396.218 € 4.609.998 € 19.305.201 Services 16250 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 17.396.218 € 4.609.998 € 19.305.201

Total Costs € 106.713.363 € 25.582.091 € 116.649.837

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 347 units€ 13.056.182 0 260 units€ 2.481.754 0 Covered 347 units€ 6.042.530 -0,5 260 units€ 4.531.898 -1 0 units€ - Housing 47.438 m² LFA€ 114.604.503 Rental 22.483 m² LFA€ 51.611.519 Appartment 10.930 m² LFA€ 26.826.825 Affordable 2.376 m² LFA€ 2.620.537 High priced 8.554 m² LFA€ 24.206.287 Ground bound 11.554 m² LFA€ 24.784.694 Affordable 7.698 m² LFA€ 15.741.539 High priced 3.856 m² LFA€ 9.043.155 Ownership 24.954 m² LFA€ 62.992.983 Appartment 18.533 m² LFA€ 50.701.434 Medium priced 7.128 m² LFA€ 18.619.171 High priced 11.405 m² LFA€ 32.082.263 Ground bound 6.422 m² LFA€ 12.291.549 Medium priced 2.566 m² LFA€ 4.768.507 High priced 3.856 m² LFA€ 7.523.042 Retail 4.777 m² LFA€ 9.354.539 Retail 4.777 m² LFA€ 9.354.539 Offices 11.603 m² LFA€ 19.631.043 Offices 11.603 m² LFA€ 19.631.043 Services 13.813 m² LFA€ 23.711.246 Services 13.813 m² LFA€ 23.711.246

Total Costs € 180.357.512

ZZZZ \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Main variant Nijmegen - Functional areas / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase Nijmegen Main variant / Functional areas

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 22.483 m² LFA € 15.631.281 Rental 22.483 m² LFA € 15.631.281 Appartments 10.930 m² LFA € 7.220.747 Affordable 2.376 m² LFA € 1.487.321 vacancy Rent Start€ 22.453 € 14.969 € 7.484 € 40.465 € 149.688 Friction€ 7.484 € 174.647 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 16.403 € 382.771 € 3.280.685 Structural€ 164.034 € 164.034 € 164.034 € 714.790 Operation Rent€ 7.484 € 174.647 High priced 8.554 m² LFA € 5.733.426 vacancy Rent Start€ 169.746 € 113.164 € 56.582 € 280.293 € 1.131.641 Friction€ 56.582 € 967.227 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 62.005 € 1.059.927 € 12.400.990 Structural€ 620.049 € 620.049 € 620.049 € 2.458.750 Operation Rent€ 56.582 € 967.227 Ground bound 11.554 m² LFA € 8.410.534 Affordable 7.698 m² LFA € 5.852.414 vacancy Rent Start€ 152.772 € 101.848 € 50.924 € 275.325 € 1.018.477 Friction€ 50.924 € 1.188.300 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 47.832 € 1.116.161 € 9.566.478 Structural€ 478.324 € 478.324 € 478.324 € 2.084.327 Operation Rent€ 50.924 € 1.188.300 High priced 3855,6 m² LFA € 2.558.120 vacancy Rent Start€ 86.079 € 57.386 € 28.693 € 142.137 € 573.858 Friction€ 28.693 € 490.483 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 25.287 € 432.268 € 5.057.474 Structural€ 252.874 € 252.874 € 252.874 € 1.002.748 Operation Rent€ 28.693 € 490.483 Retail 4.777 m² LFA € 2.761.458 Retail 4.777 m² LFA € 2.761.458 vacancy Rent Start€ 98.754 € 65.836 € 32.918 € 158.437 € 658.358 Friction€ 32.918 € 510.641 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 29.316 € 454.771 € 5.863.258 Structural€ 293.163 € 293.163 € 293.163 € 1.126.967 Operation Rent€ 32.918 € 510.641 Offices 11.603 m² LFA € 8.155.888 Offices 11.603 m² LFA € 8.155.888 vacancy Rent Start€ 259.033 € 172.689 € 86.344 € 398.142 € 1.726.887 Friction€ 172.689 € 2.329.408 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 84.943 € 1.145.799 € 16.988.577 Structural€ 849.429 € 849.429 € 849.429 € 3.117.835 Operation Rent€ 86.344 € 1.164.704 Services 13.813 m² LFA € 9.757.826 Services 13.813 m² LFA € 9.757.826 vacancy Rent Start€ 285.530 € 190.354 € 95.177 € 451.575 € 1.903.535 Friction€ 190.354 € 2.816.289 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 96.526 € 1.428.107 € 19.305.201 Structural€ 965.260 € 965.260 € 965.260 € 3.653.711 Operation Rent€ 95.177 € 1.408.144

Total Costs € 36.306.453

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 867 units€ 5.733.353 - -€ 13.056.182 0 260 units€ 12.075 - -€ 3.139.693 - -€ 2.481.754 0 Covered 347 units€ 22.050 - -€ 7.644.470 - -€ 6.042.530 -0,5 260 units€ 22.050 - -€ 5.733.353 - -€ 4.531.898 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 47.438 m² LFA€ 1.027 € 70.223.914 € 2.873.664 € 10.123.422 € 130.235.784 Rental 22.483 m² LFA€ 482 -€ 2.873.664 € 10.123.422 € 67.242.800 Appartments 10.930 m² LFA€ 244 -€ 1.281.329 € 4.147.950 € 34.047.571 Affordable 2.376 m² LFA -€ 63 € 60 -€ 149.688 € 614.912 € 4.107.858 High priced 8.554 m² LFA -€ 132 € 183 -€ 1.131.641 € 3.533.038 € 29.939.713 Ground bound 11.554 m² LFA€ 239 -€ 1.592.335 € 5.975.472 € 33.195.229 Affordable 7.698 m² LFA -€ 132 € 179 -€ 1.018.477 € 4.183.861 € 21.593.953 High priced 3.856 m² LFA -€ 149 € 60 -€ 573.858 € 1.791.612 € 11.601.275 Ownership 24.954 m² LFA€ 544 € 70.223.914 - -€ 62.992.983 Appartments 18.533 m² LFA€ 425 € 55.639.030 - -€ 50.701.434 Medium priced 7.128 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 181 € 20.432.412 - -€ 18.619.171 High priced 11.405 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 245 € 35.206.618 - -€ 32.082.263 Ground bound 6.422 m² LFA€ 119 € 14.584.884 -€ 12.291.549 Medium priced 2.566 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 60 € 5.658.206 - -€ 4.768.507 High priced 3.856 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 60 € 8.926.678 - -€ 7.523.042 Retail 4.777 m² LFA€ 96 -€ 658.358 € 1.903.171 € 12.115.996 Retail 4.777 m² LFA -€ 138 € 96 -€ 658.358 € 1.903.171 € 12.115.996 Offices 11.603 m² LFA€ 464 -€ 1.726.887 € 4.492.853 € 27.786.931 Offices 11.603 m² LFA -€ 149 € 464 -€ 1.726.887 € 4.492.853 € 27.786.931 Services 13.813 m² LFA€ 460 -€ 1.903.535 € 5.306.185 € 33.469.072 Services 13.813 m² LFA -€ 138 € 460 -€ 1.903.535 € 5.306.185 € 33.469.072

Total reveneus € 2.047 € 216.663.965

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / AAAAA Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

BBBBB \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Financial appendix IX. Main variant Nijmegen/Stamps

Main variant Nijmegen - Stamps / Land development

Land development phase Nijmegen Main variant / Stamps

Total ground use 122.080 m² Minimum non residental 24.370 m² Ground use residental 84.176 m² Ground use non residential 37.904 m²

Area of plan 128.844 m² Building height 1-6 floors Operating area 128.844 m² FSI 0,75 Parking places 1.005 Units GSI 0,26 Footprint 33.313 m² OSR 0,99 GFA 96.037 m² GSR 0,12 Green area 11.725 m² SPR 96

Costs Amount Unit Cost Costs Additional Costs /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Acquisition costs € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 total area 128.844 m²€ 125 € 16.105.500 € 3.221.100 € 19.326.600 Soil clean up costs € 8.440.000 € 1.688.000 € 9.629.573 Lighthly polluted 0 m²€ 31 € - € - € - Polluted 100.000 m²€ 62 € 7.440.000 € 1.488.000 € 8.488.629 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Outplacement costs emplacement € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Railway yard 53.890 m²€ 50 € 3.233.400 € 646.680 € 3.689.131 Demolition cost € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 GFA old buildings 20.000 m²€ 50 € 1.000.000 € 200.000 € 1.140.945 Site preparation costs € 18.654.175 € 3.730.835 € 21.283.383 For building 128.844 m²€ 25 € 3.221.100 € 644.220 € 3.675.097 Pavement 52.020 m²€ 135 € 7.022.700 € 1.404.540 € 8.012.513 Green 11.725 m²€ 35 € 410.375 € 82.075 € 468.215 Port € 8.000.000 € 1.600.000 € 9.127.558 Civil engeneering Extra

Total costs € 47.433.075 € 9.486.615 € 55.069.631

Revenues amount Unit m² GFA m² GFA Percentage Reveneus /unit real Parking 1.005 Units€ 4.050.921 0 302 Units - - 30,00%€ 2.192.035 0 Covered 402 Units - - 40,00%€ 1.597.489 -0,5 302 Units - - 30,00%€ 261.397 -1 0 Units - -€ - Housing 461 Units - 59.641 m² GFA€ 51.125.263 Rent 217 Units - 28.261 m² GFA€ 22.046.111 Appartment 108 Units - 13.640 m² GFA€ 11.363.677 Affordable 28 Units 110 3.080 m² GFA € 597.498- High priced 80 Units 132 10.560 m² GFA€ 11.961.175 Ground Bound 109 Units - 14.621 m² GFA€ 10.682.433 Affordable 81 Units 118,8 9.623 m² GFA€ 6.419.974 High priced 28 Units 178,5 4.998 m² GFA€ 4.262.459 Ownership 244 Units - 31.380 m² GFA€ 29.079.152 Appartment 188 Units - 23.056 m² GFA€ 24.720.028 Medium priced 80 Units 110 8.800 m² GFA€ 8.855.228 High priced 108 Units 132 14.256 m² GFA€ 15.864.800 Ground bound 56 Units - 8.324 m² GFA€ 4.359.123 Medium priced 28 Units 118,8 3.326 m² GFA€ 1.701.626 High priced 28 Units 178,5 4.998 m² GFA€ 2.657.498 Retail 5.599 m² GFA€ 3.833.140 Retail 5.599 m² GFA 27 -€ 3.833.140 Offices 13.997 m² GFA€ 1.465.218 Offices 13.997 m² GFA 27 -€ 1.465.218 Services 16.800 m² GFA€ 2.813.241 Services 16.800 m² GFA 28 -€ 2.813.241

Total Reveneus 96.037 m² GFA€ 63.287.783

Total result land development 128.844 m²€ 8.218.152

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / CCCCC Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yards

Main variant Nijmegen - Stamps / Real estate development

Real estate development phase Nijmegen Main variant / Stamps

Costs (ex land) amount Unit Cost Cost Additional Cost /unit 2010 cost 2010 real Parking 1005 m² GFA€ 10.054.400 € 1.809.792 € 11.094.925 0 302 units€ 2.200 € 663.590 € 119.446 € 686.928 0 Covered 402 units€ 13.000 € 5.228.288 € 941.092 € 5.412.158 -0,5 302 units€ 16.000 € 4.826.112 € 868.700 € 4.995.838 -1 0 units€ 23.000 € - € - € - Housing 59641 m² GFA€ 59.087.280 € 13.885.511 € 64.016.207 Rental 28261 m² GFA€ 27.576.620 € 6.480.506 € 29.876.999 Appartment 13640 m² GFA€ 14.168.000 € 3.329.480 € 15.349.862 Affordable 3080 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 3.080.000 € 723.800 € 3.336.927 High priced 10560 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 11.088.000 € 2.605.680 € 12.012.936 Ground bound 14621 m² GFA€ 13.408.620 € 3.151.026 € 14.527.137 Affordable 9623 m² GFA€ 900 € 8.660.520 € 2.035.222 € 9.382.961 High priced 4998 m² GFA€ 950 € 4.748.100 € 1.115.804 € 5.144.176 Ownership 31380 m² GFA€ 31.510.660 € 7.405.005 € 34.139.208 Appartment 23056 m² GFA€ 23.768.800 € 5.585.668 € 25.751.539 Medium priced 8800 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 8.800.000 € 2.068.000 € 9.534.076 High priced 14256 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 14.968.800 € 3.517.668 € 16.217.463 Ground bound 8324 m² GFA€ 7.741.860 € 1.819.337 € 8.387.668 Medium priced 3326 m² GFA€ 900 € 2.993.760 € 703.534 € 3.243.493 High priced 4998 m² GFA€ 950 € 4.748.100 € 1.115.804 € 5.144.176 Retail 5599 m² GFA€ 5.598.720 € 1.315.699 € 6.065.753 Retail 5599 m² GFA€ 1.000 € 5.598.720 € 1.315.699 € 6.065.753 Offices 13997 m² GFA€ 16.593.984 € 4.397.406 € 18.414.934 Offices 13997 m² GFA€ 1.100 € 16.593.984 € 4.397.406 € 18.414.934 Services 16800 m² GFA€ 19.227.600 € 5.095.314 € 21.337.552 Services 16800 m² GFA€ 1.050 € 19.227.600 € 5.095.314 € 21.337.552

Total Costs € 110.561.984 € 26.503.722 € 120.929.370

Revenues amount Unit Reveneus real Parking 402 units€ 15.145.846 0 302 units€ 2.878.962 0 Covered 402 units€ 7.009.648 -0,5 302 units€ 5.257.236 -1 0 units € - Housing 47.713 m² LFA€ 115.141.470 Rental 22.609 m² LFA€ 51.923.110 Appartment 10.912 m² LFA€ 26.713.540 Affordable 2.464 m² LFA€ 2.739.429 High priced 8.448 m² LFA€ 23.974.111 Ground bound 11.697 m² LFA€ 25.209.570 Affordable 7.698 m² LFA€ 15.802.935 High priced 3.998 m² LFA€ 9.406.635 Ownership 25.104 m² LFA€ 63.218.360 Appartment 18.445 m² LFA€ 50.471.568 Medium priced 7.040 m² LFA€ 18.389.304 High priced 11.405 m² LFA€ 32.082.263 Ground bound 6.660 m² LFA€ 12.746.792 Medium priced 2.661 m² LFA€ 4.945.118 High priced 3.998 m² LFA€ 7.801.673 Retail 5.039 m² LFA€ 9.898.893 Retail 5.039 m² LFA€ 9.898.893 Offices 11.897 m² LFA€ 19.880.152 Offices 11.897 m² LFA€ 19.880.152 Services 14.280 m² LFA€ 24.150.793 Services 14.280 m² LFA€ 24.150.793

Total Costs € 184.217.154

DDDDD \ Appendixes \ Machiel Broeren \ 1088548 Transformation possibilities of inner city railway yard

Main variant Nijmegen - Stamps / Real estate exploitation

Real estate operation phase

Costs Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost nominal nominal nominal nominal real /year 2010 2010 2010 Housing 22.609 m² LFA € 15.531.884 Rental 22.609 m² LFA € 15.531.884 Appartments 10.912 m² LFA € 7.116.548 Affordable 2.464 m² LFA € 1.520.572 vacancy Rent Start€ 23.285 € 15.523 € 7.762 € 41.964 € 155.232 Friction€ 7.762 € 181.116 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 16.685 € 389.333 € 3.336.927 Structural€ 166.846 € 166.846 € 166.846 € 727.043 Operation Rent€ 7.762 € 181.116 High priced 8.448 m² LFA € 5.595.976 vacancy Rent Start€ 167.651 € 111.767 € 55.884 € 276.833 € 1.117.670 Friction€ 55.884 € 955.286 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 60.065 € 1.026.760 € 12.012.936 Structural€ 600.647 € 600.647 € 600.647 € 2.381.810 Operation Rent€ 55.884 € 955.286 Ground bound 11.697 m² LFA € 8.415.336 Affordable 7.698 m² LFA € 5.791.018 vacancy Rent Start€ 152.772 € 101.848 € 50.924 € 275.325 € 1.018.477 Friction€ 50.924 € 1.188.300 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 46.915 € 1.094.750 € 9.382.961 Structural€ 469.148 € 469.148 € 469.148 € 2.044.342 Operation Rent€ 50.924 € 1.188.300 High priced 3998,4 m² LFA € 2.624.317 vacancy Rent Start€ 89.267 € 59.511 € 29.756 € 147.402 € 595.112 Friction€ 29.756 € 508.649 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 25.721 € 439.679 € 5.144.176 Structural€ 257.209 € 257.209 € 257.209 € 1.019.938 Operation Rent€ 29.756 € 508.649 Retail 5.039 m² LFA € 2.880.699 Retail 5.039 m² LFA € 2.880.699 vacancy Rent Start€ 104.162 € 69.442 € 34.721 € 167.115 € 694.416 Friction€ 34.721 € 538.609 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 30.329 € 470.477 € 6.065.753 Structural€ 303.288 € 303.288 € 303.288 € 1.165.888 Operation Rent€ 34.721 € 538.609 Offices 11.897 m² LFA € 8.612.751 Offices 11.897 m² LFA € 8.612.751 vacancy Rent Start€ 265.614 € 177.076 € 88.538 € 408.257 € 1.770.761 Friction€ 177.076 € 2.388.590 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 92.075 € 1.242.000 € 18.414.934 Structural€ 920.747 € 920.747 € 920.747 € 3.379.608 Operation Rent€ 88.538 € 1.194.295 Services 14.280 m² LFA € 10.451.078 Services 14.280 m² LFA € 10.451.078 vacancy Rent Start€ 295.194 € 196.796 € 98.398 € 466.859 € 1.967.963 Friction€ 196.796 € 2.911.609 Maintenance All-in CC Yearly€ 106.688 € 1.578.450 € 21.337.552 Structural€ 1.066.878 € 1.066.878 € 1.066.878 € 4.038.355 Operation Rent€ 98.398 € 1.455.805

Total Costs € 37.476.411

Revenues amount Unit Revenues Revenues Users Sell Rent Rest value Reveneus /unit /unit/year reveneus reveneus real 2010/year Parking 1.005 units€ 6.650.986 - -€ 15.145.846 0 302 units€ 12.075 - -€ 3.642.206 - -€ 2.878.962 0 Covered 402 units€ 22.050 - -€ 8.867.981 - -€ 7.009.648 -0,5 302 units€ 22.050 - -€ 6.650.986 - -€ 5.257.236 -1 0 units€ 22.050 - -€ - - -€ - Housing 47.713 m² LFA€ 1.031 € 70.511.843 € 2.886.491 € 10.168.935 € 130.673.354 Rental 22.609 m² LFA€ 484 -€ 2.886.491 € 10.168.935 € 67.454.994 Appartments 10.912 m² LFA€ 244 -€ 1.272.902 € 4.127.107 € 33.830.088 Affordable 2.464 m² LFA -€ 63 € 62 -€ 155.232 € 637.686 € 4.260.001 High priced 8.448 m² LFA -€ 132 € 181 -€ 1.117.670 € 3.489.420 € 29.570.087 Ground bound 11.697 m² LFA€ 241 -€ 1.613.589 € 6.041.828 € 33.624.906 Affordable 7.698 m² LFA -€ 132 € 179 -€ 1.018.477 € 4.183.861 € 21.593.953 High priced 3.998 m² LFA -€ 149 € 62 -€ 595.112 € 1.857.968 € 12.030.952 Ownership 25.104 m² LFA€ 547 € 70.511.843 - -€ 63.218.360 Appartments 18.445 m² LFA€ 423 € 55.386.778 - -€ 50.471.568 Medium priced 7.040 m² LFA€ 2.867 -€ 178 € 20.180.160 - -€ 18.389.304 High priced 11.405 m² LFA€ 3.087 -€ 245 € 35.206.618 - -€ 32.082.263 Ground bound 6.660 m² LFA€ 124 € 15.125.065 -€ 12.746.792 Medium priced 2.661 m² LFA€ 2.205 -€ 62 € 5.867.770 - -€ 4.945.118 High priced 3.998 m² LFA€ 2.315 -€ 62 € 9.257.296 - -€ 7.801.673 Retail 5.039 m² LFA€ 101 -€ 694.416 € 2.007.408 € 12.779.592 Retail 5.039 m² LFA -€ 138 € 101 -€ 694.416 € 2.007.408 € 12.779.592 Offices 11.897 m² LFA€ 476 -€ 1.770.761 € 4.607.001 € 28.492.903 Offices 11.897 m² LFA -€ 149 € 476 -€ 1.770.761 € 4.607.001 € 28.492.903 Services 14.280 m² LFA€ 476 -€ 1.967.963 € 5.485.779 € 34.601.872 Services 14.280 m² LFA -€ 138 € 476 -€ 1.967.963 € 5.485.779 € 34.601.872

Total reveneus € 2.084 € 221.693.565

Appendixes / Machiel Broeren / 1088548 / EEEEE