Wakker Emmen, SP and PvdA believe that the council should make an effort to see whether semi-detached houses can return to the Bomenbuurt in Veenoord. At the beginning of this week, there was a commotion in the neighborhood due to the demolition and new construction plans of housing association Woonservice.
The corporation wants to demolish 62 outdated homes in the Bomenbuurt. This will include 66 new social rental homes and 14 owner-occupied homes. But in the form of terraced houses with blocks of three and four homes. Many people find the new houses too small.
The majority of residents would prefer to see two hairdressers return, but according to Woonservice that is too expensive. They also point out that the plans have so far been drawn up without the active involvement of local residents.
The petitioners therefore request the mayor and aldermen to enter into discussions with Woonservice about the redevelopment of the Bomenbuurt. The housing needs of the current residents must first be identified and Woonservice must be asked to investigate whether those needs can be met.
With special attention, of course, to the return of semi-detached houses. The council must inform the council of the outcome before the end of this year.
Last autumn, ten new sustainable semi-detached houses were built on Gratamaplein in Veenoord. The municipality thus indicated that maintaining that type of housing remains a conscious choice. So why can’t it be done in this case, the factions believe. It should be noted that another housing association, Lefier, was responsible for this.
Monique Kuipers (Wakker Emmen) was also at the tumultuous residents’ meeting last Monday. “We have seen many residents there and they are concerned that they are not being heard.” There is great mutual solidarity in the neighborhood and no one wants to lose that, she reports.
Roy Pruisscher (CU) points out that Woonservice finds the two-hairdressers too expensive. So shouldn’t the municipality contribute? And why doesn’t Wakker Emmen first ask critical questions to its own councilor instead of immediately waving a motion? Kuipers thinks the latter is ahead of the music. First the municipality must discuss their housing wishes and only then does the financial situation come into play.
Councilor Albert Jan Jakobs says he attaches importance to careful consideration. “So we’ll continue to talk.” The idea is to arrive at a widely supported solution together with the residents. Does this mean that the return of two hairdressers is also being discussed in concrete terms, Kuiper wondered out loud? “We take specific wishes into account,” says Jakobs.
The Christian Union was still curious whether the municipality would also consider a financial contribution. “There are possibilities, but we have to look at them closely,” said the councilor. He expects to be able to report the next steps to the council in early 2026.