OPINION – Affordable housing is quietly falling by the wayside, unless the council intervenes.

By: Tjeerd Ritmeester

Just before the autumn break, the Eindhoven city council was completely caught off guard. The municipal executive presented a proposal to tinker with the affordability requirement for new housing projects. This proposal not only makes it harder to find an affordable home but also undermines the municipality’s credibility.

On Tuesday, November 11, the 2025–2030 housing program is on the agenda. It promises to be a tense evening, as the proposal to relax the 85% requirement is already sparking heated debate. This rule stipulates that 85% of all newly built homes must fall within the affordable housing category.

Supporters of this rule emphasize that it is the only way to ensure a sufficient supply of affordable housing. Opponents, however, claim it slows down housing development. But there is no evidence to support that. Municipalities with lower requirements do not build more or faster than Eindhoven. The argument that relaxing the rule would improve housing mobility also doesn’t hold up. Many wealthier homebuyers come from outside the city, often even from abroad, and therefore do not free up affordable homes within Eindhoven.

The proposal also puts the city council’s credibility at risk. The 85% rule is one of the most important agreements in the coalition accord. In the previous council term, it was hotly debated several times, but each time a majority stood firm on this standard. In fact, earlier this year, an amendment was adopted explicitly stating that lowering this requirement would be “off the table.”

Ironically, even the municipal executive agreed with that position at the time. As recently as May, the alderman said that a lower affordability requirement, such as D66 and VVD proposed, would not result in more or faster housing construction. On the contrary, she warned, it would only be a matter of time before a terraced house in Eindhoven would cost a million euros, just like in Amsterdam.

It is therefore all the more puzzling that this same executive now proposes to allow exceptions to the 85% rule. These exceptions are written so broadly that they effectively amount to a reduction. The way it was handled also leaves much to be desired. Without explanation or clarification, these proposals were suddenly presented to the council. Both supporters and opponents of the relaxation felt they were not being taken seriously.

Now, all eyes are on the left-wing coalition parties, PvdA and GroenLinks. They have fought for years to preserve the 85% rule. I know this from personal experience—when I was still a member of the PvdA council group, I often had the opportunity to express this position.

It’s not certain whether these parties have actually changed their stance, but there is cause for concern. During the interpellation debate two weeks ago, both parties downplayed the significance of the relaxation. Moreover, they had received the documents earlier than the rest of the council. Did they already influence the content at that stage? Have they perhaps already agreed to the proposal? Let’s hope not, but appearances are against them.

Nevertheless, the hope remains with these parties. As recently as May, I co-wrote an opinion piece in this newspaper with PvdA and GroenLinks on the importance of the 85% rule. Both parties also reaffirmed in their election programs for the upcoming municipal elections that they want to maintain this standard. Hopefully, they won’t abandon their political promises before the elections have even taken place.

The pressure is high, but the 85% rule is too important for everyone counting on an affordable home. On November 11, the council must demonstrate that its oversight role and political commitments still mean something. If not, it’s not just the credibility of certain parties that will be at stake, but that of the entire council.