The following Dutch sites have been proposed to be included to be in the new Dutch Tentative List, which is scheduled for the end of October:

Afsluitdijk
Belfort Sluis
Binnenhofcomplex en omgeving Den Haag
Bloembollenstreek
12 bruggen van het Rijkswegenplan 1927
Eise Eisinga Planetarium
Friese Elf Steden
Historisch centrum Breda
Historische binnenstad Delft
Historische buitenplaats Slot Zeist en Evangelische broedergemeente
Havengebied Spakenburg
Industriewand langs de Zaan
Kampen in de IJsseldelta
Kloosterkerk Den Haag
Maatschappij van Weldadigheid
Marine Park Bonaire
Markiezenhof Bergen op Zoom
Museum het Schip Amsterdam
Nationaal Park Arikok en rotstekeningen Aruba
Panorama Mesdag Den Haag
Plantage Systeem van West Curaçao
Polder Rondehoep Amstelland
Raadhuis Hilversum
Romeinse Rijksgrens Limes
Saba
Staats-Spaanse linies Sluis
Teylers Museum
Vallei van Rincon, Bonaire
Vestingwerken 's Hertogenbosch
Waterstad Gouda [the place where I live!!]
Wervenstructuur Utrecht

In addition to the current Tentative List:
Alblasserwaard Oost
Fort Vechten/de Burg bij Bunnik
Forum Hadriani – Romeinse nederzetting in Voorburg
Gouw en de Groetpolder
Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie
Noordoostpolder
Rivierduinen Swifterbant Visvijverweg/Noordertocht
Sanatorium Zonnestraal
Scheepswrakken Waddenzee west
Van Nelle fabriek
Wierden Middag Humsterland

Good to see Hilversum Townhall, and Het Schip in Amsterdam on there, and delft is the equal of many already inscribed cities, but it won't exactly diversify the list.

Very surprising that there is another polder on there, surely the Dutch struggle against water has enough inscriptions on the list already.

Els, has Waterstad Gouda been peopossed purely becasue you live there? Maybe this a new criterion; xi: Home to a WHS enthusiast?

It's the only reason I can think of!

From the list above, interesting ones could be Panorama Mesdag (discussed earlier on the Forum), Teylers Museum (as an example of museum history, I don't know however how it is rated in an international context), Bloembollenstreek (flower bulbs, Keukenhof?).

The rest includes some modern architecture and many more watermanagement.

Els,
By what processes
a. Has the above NL "candidate list" been compiled
b. Are decisions to be made about which go forward.

Interesting to compare/contrast with the UK process for the same aspects!.
I am hoping to try to get published the minutes of the 3 "expert" meetings which have been scheduled between now and Jan to choose from the UK's 38 candidates. It will be interesting to see if "Freedom of Information" extends to these!! We managed to look at the minutes of (one of?) the US meetings to determine its T List

I see the process and people involved are described to some extent here
http://www.voorlopigelijst.nl/ (See "De Commissie" tab)
It isn't quite clear to me how "Applications" were sought - I can find no evidence of an open system with a form etc etc. The implication also is that the existing T List sites did not have to apply again - UK took the view that a complete new start should be made and a number of sites dropped out by not applying again. I note that the Committee members have been published "up front" - we still do not yet know who the UK "great and good" are going to be - though there was an "open" competition for these too with people who were interested being asked to apply!!!

One particular aspect of differences between the general approach of the UK and NL candidate lists which hits me is that the NL list contains quite a number of individual buildings whilst the UK list seems to have got very tied up in serial sites and large Cultural Landscapes.

This is a very interesting list, I'm very surprised to see Bloembollenstreek in the list, however I can not deny its significant that this place maybe one of the most famous in NL and maybe one of the most iconic landscape in the world.

My personal support are Binnenhof+Delft for Dutch royal and politic history, this site quite similar to UK's Westminster, and Het Schip for Amsterdam School.

For Panorama Mesdag, I don't think it can be fit in WHS criteria, since it can be considered as "Movable property".

Regarding Mesdag - one of my more esoteric "Travel lists" is "Cycloramas of the World".
Among my count so far are -
a. Battle for Atlanta
b. Battle of Stalingrad
c. The Volochaevskaia Battle (Khabarovsk)
d. Battle of Borodino (Moscow)
e. Battle on Height 1211 (Pyonggyang)

As you will gather they are at their "best" in communist countries! I was not aware of Mesdag and must try to see it next time I am in NL - its peaceful subject will make a change!

Of course those of us who are real aficionados differentiate between a "Diorama" and a "Cyclorama" as being different types of "Panorama" but anyone wanting to start this rewarding collecting hobby (!!) should look at
http://www.panoramapainting.com/
(A "full" list of all the world's Panorama installations is under "Search - Alle")

Whilst Durian is probably correct about the Mesdag Panorama being regarded as "moveable" an alternative argument could be made. Originally these panoramas were indeed often designed to be moved and shown in different places either in portable structures or alternatively in permanent purpose-designed structures which could show different panoramas at different times. If the NL proposal was for the purpose-built structure (from 1880) with its extant painting (plus of course the "articles" which are placed in front of the painting to help create the 3D effect) as a complete ensemble, is that really any different from a purpose-built museum building with its contents being inscribed?? The Mesdag ensemble could legitimately be regarded as an authentic example of a type of entertainment location/structure which belongs very much to a particular stage of human culture

Of course UNESCO was very pedantic when rejecting the UK proposal for the SS Great Britain (which will never ever be moved again!) on the basis that it was designed to be "moved" - but perhaps a fixed building could make a better case even if the contents are "moveable" - so are many tapestries etc which adorn other WHS!!!

Further to the above on Mesdag, I found this among the "Guestbook" comments" on the Panorama Painting web site dated 17 Jan 2010. It concerns a possible "serial nomination" for 3 historic European Panorama sites (Mesdag, Waterloo and Altoetting -Jerusalem).
"Panorama appeal to UNESCO World Heritage in Holland, Germany, Belgium
The Bavarian Heritage Department (Bayerische Landesamt fuer Denkmalpflege) has given support to the plea of Dr. Gebhard Streicher, president of the board of the Foundation Panorama Altoetting, aiming at a serial nomination of the three most representative panoramas of universal value for the World Heritage list of UNESCO. Prof. Dr. Egon Johannes Greipl, Generalkonservator of the Bayerische Landesamt fuer Denkmalpflege in Munich is working on the application, appreciating the fact that European heritage sites are overrepresented on the list. Both UNESCO and European countries being reticent about new applications.
Nevertheless the Panorama of the Battle of Waterloo was placed on the Belgian provisional list during the UNESCO Convention in Quebec in July 2008. This was on the initiative of the Wallonia Region. Inspector General Ghislain Geron of the Department of Heritage also supported the application of Panorama Mesdag for a place on the provisional list of The Netherlands. He has also acknowledged his willingness to support a 'proposition commune', a Serial Nomination of the world's three most authentic and eligible panoramas of The Hague (1881), Altoetting (1903) and Waterloo (1912).
The Mesdag application is being considered by the Dutch Minister of Education, Art and Science Dr. Ronald Plasterk. The IPC, giving support to the request for a Serial Nomination recognition of the three panoramas, informed Dr. Plasterk on 17 December 2009 about the Belgian and German applications and their support for the Mesdag application in Holland."

I have just perused the description of the Belgian T List entry for Waterloo and note that there are 2 "Waterloo Related" sites on Belgium's T LIst. The battlefield itself and its "memorials" AND, totally separately, the Panorama - both added in April 2008. The entry ( http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5364/ ) provides some nice background to the "Panorama phenomenon" and mentions the Mesdag and Atloetting examples but only hints at, rather than openly suggests, a serial trans-boundary approach.
It is an interesting question as to whether UNESCO acceptance of the Waterloo Panorama on its T List says anything about its legitimacy as regards "movability" or not. My impression is that registration on the T List implies absolutely nothing regarding the suitability or otherwise of sites accepted onto it. Does anyone know of ANY occasion where UNESCO has refused to allow a suggested site to be placed on a country's T List (Israel comes to mind as a possibility if it had ever suggested a site beyond its internationally accepted borders)? It really is quite a nice little "loophole" for countries to place large numbers of sites on their T Lists which they have absolutely NO intention of following up on but which thereby gain some credibility by their entry on the UNESCO site and their ability to state "Registered on the UNESCO World Heritage List" (not "inscribed" of course!!!).

Panorama Mesdag didn't make it. These are the 9 that will be put on the New Dutch Tentative List.

- Bonaire Marine Park,
- Koninklijk Eise Eisinga Planetarium (Franeker),
- Maatschappij van Weldadigheid (Veenhuizen),
- Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie,
- de Noordoostpolder
- het Plantagesysteem West Curaçao,
- Sanatorium Zonnestraal (Hilversum),
- het Teylers Museum (Haarlem)
- Van Nellefabriek (Rotterdam).

This has been announced today.

Els, What is Maatschappij van Weldadigheid in this particular case and what is its significant?

I just did a bit of a search and turned up this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veenhuizen_(Noordenveld) which should hopefully explain it a bit. It seems someone has been a bit over eager and already listed it as a World Heritage Site.
It only seems mildly remarkable, not sure if it would warrant OUV. However it is a little different from many of the other European sites, which I suppose is one of the positive things that can be said about the Dutch inscriptions on the list.

Sad to see the Raadhuis in Hilversum didn't make the final list, I thought that would be a good site. But at least there are a few more water management sites, 6 just isn't enough for the Netherlands it seems.

It was a penal colony. I've never been there, I've set myself a goal to visit all the new ones in 2011 (besides those in the Caribbean)

Agree with meltwaterfalls on Hilversum's Raadhuis. Too bad Het Schip is off too...

Also too bad Delft didn't make it - was my favourite Dutch town apart from Amsterdam when I was in the NL. (I know, I know, there's already hundreds of nice European towns on the list... but I'd support it anyway).

Binnenhof would have been nice in the sense that it would add another site to the list of WH places I've been to, but I must say it did not impress me much, and does not compare very favourably with other European centers of power or medieval sites.

I find it quite interesting that Curacao is there again - they already got Willemstad, and all the Caribbean tentative lists are full of plantation sites... Now that the Netherlands Antilles have been dissolved, I would have assumed that there would be some preferential treatment for an Aruban or St Maarten site (to match Curacao's existing one), but that is obviously not the case.

Today I read the report of the commission that has decided on the new Dutch Tentative List. You can find it here (all in Dutch), it is a well-written account of how they decided, what the OUV of the nominated sites is and why other sites have not been considered.

Some conclusions:
- They are a bit critical of the (limited) thematic approach that has been underlying Dutch nominations in the past.
- They now have looked very hard at the Global Approach, and the chances of getting a site in (also taking the management and support into account). Historic city centers or religious buildings are seen as overrepresented, and thus NL will not nominate them anymore.
- The Netherlands (the European part at least) does not have any "nature" (in the Unesco definition of it) anymore, so cannot/will not nominate natural sites except from those at the (former) Dutch Antilles.
- The "Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie" is proposed as an extension to the Defense Line of Amsterdam.
- However, the "Noordoostpolder" is proposed as a separate site from Schokland (which is in the Noordoostpolder)
- They had wanted to include transboundary nominations, but did not find any
- The first nominations will be Plantagesysteem Westelijk Curaçao, Teylers Museum & Van Nellefabriek, but no years or order are given
- Het Schip (discussed in the posts above) was rejected because they saw it as too limited, a more representative site would be the whole neighbourhood (Spaarndammerbuurt). Het Raadhuis Hilversum was rejected because it only has architectural value, and the socially more relevant Van Nellefabriek and Sanatorium Zonnestraal are given priority.

I also posted about it on my Dutch weblog.

This week the Dutch limes were on the news: next year an underground visitor center will open on the Domplein in Utrecht, showing the excavated limes.

More info about the Limes around Utrecht can be found here: http://www.utrecht.nl/smartsite.dws?id=329782

Not long ago I was at the parking garage Castellum in Woerden and I was surprised by the info signs and some roman artifacts on display, that were found when they built the garage.

It looks like a lot of research about the roman limes in Holland is going on and since there will be a visitor center coming next year, I assume changes of the Dutch limes being added to the WHS are increasing.

I'm still looking for an exact map of the limes in Holland, since my village is part of it and I assume my house is pretty much on it. How cool to possibly live on a WHS :-)