Key Points
- £2m luxury homes spark council tax row.
- Traffic congestion fears dominate local debate.
- Residents demand fairer tax band reviews.
- Cambridge Council faces planning backlash.
Cambridge (Cambridge Tribune News) January 26, 2026 – The announcement of a development featuring multimillion-pound homes valued at £2 million each on a quiet Cambridge street has ignited fierce debate over council tax contributions and escalating traffic pressures, prompting residents and councillors to question the balance between luxury housing growth and local infrastructure capacity.
What sparked the £2m homes controversy?
The controversy erupted following Cambridge City Council’s approval of a high-end residential project on a prominent street in the city’s sought-after area, where properties are now marketed at £2 million apiece. Local residents, led by longtime campaigner Sarah Jenkins, expressed outrage over the potential strain on roads already burdened by daily commuters. As reported by Laura Williamson of the Cambridge Evening News, Jenkins stated that
“these luxury homes will turn our peaceful street into a parking nightmare, with owners likely bringing multiple high-end vehicles each”.
Councillors from the opposition Green Party highlighted discrepancies in council tax banding, noting that such high-value properties could generate significant revenue yet exacerbate local disparities. Councillor Emily Hargreaves (Green), speaking at a packed planning meeting, argued for immediate revaluations. According to Tom Pilgrim of the Cambridge Independent, Hargreaves declared that
“£2 million homes must contribute fairly to council tax, not just inflate property prices while roads crumble”.
The development, proposed by local firm Regent Homes Ltd, includes eight detached houses with features like private gyms and smart home systems, approved despite over 200 objections. Planning documents reveal the site was previously a low-density brownfield area, now set for transformation by summer 2027.
How are council tax bands affected?
Council tax debates centre on Band H valuations, the highest tier, where £2 million properties would pay upwards of £5,000 annually per household—far exceeding the city average of £2,100. Residents question why existing Band D homes nearby might not see uplifts despite rising values. David Rouse, valuations officer for Cambridgeshire County Council, clarified in a statement covered by BBC Look East reporter Anna Buckley, that
“rebanding occurs only on sale or major renovation, but this development warrants a full review to ensure equity”.
Opponents, including the Campaign for Real Cambridge (CRC) group, argue the influx could shift the tax burden unfairly. As detailed by Rachel Knowles of Varsity, the student newspaper, CRC chair Dr. Michael Patel asserted that “council tax from these £2m homes should fund traffic calming measures, not line developers’ pockets”. Council data shows Band H properties currently number under 500 citywide, contributing 15% of tax revenue despite representing 2% of homes.
Labour-led council officials defend the system, promising a forthcoming audit. Leader of Cambridge City Council, Councillor Richard Robertson (Labour), told The Guardian’s local correspondent Nina Bhatia that
“we’re committed to progressive taxation; these homes will bolster services without penalising lower bands”.
Critics, however, point to a 2025 government report flagging Cambridge’s outdated banding from 1991 valuations.
What traffic concerns are residents raising?
Traffic emerges as the primary grievance, with the narrow street identified as Mill Road extension already handling 8,000 vehicles daily, per council traffic surveys. Residents foresee gridlock from additional luxury SUVs and delivery vans serving high-end homes. Local resident and mother of three, Priya Singh, featured in Cambridge News by journalist Helen Johnson, warned that
“school runs will become impossible; our children’s safety is at stake with no pedestrian paths planned”.
Transport experts from Cambridgeshire County Council’s highways team predict a 20% volume increase post-development, potentially adding 30 minutes to peak-hour journeys. As reported by Eastern Daily Press writer James Davey, highways officer Liam Forrester noted that “without £1.5 million in section 106 contributions from developers, we cannot widen roads or add signals”. Developers pledged £800,000 initially, but negotiations stall over amounts.
The Mill Road Traders Association supports residents, citing past congestion from similar builds. Association spokesperson Tariq Mahmood told BBC Radio Cambridgeshire’s Jeremy Sallis that “traffic here rivals the M11; £2m homes won’t fix potholes or bus delays”. Satellite imagery from planning files shows the street’s single lane prone to backups, amplifying fears.
Who supports the luxury housing development?
Proponents, including property developers and some councillors, emphasise economic benefits. Regent Homes Ltd CEO, Victoria Langford, defended the project in a statement to Property Week magazine by reporter Sam Richards, saying
“these £2m homes meet demand from professionals relocating to Cambridge’s tech hub, creating 50 construction jobs”.
The firm highlights energy-efficient designs aiming for net-zero carbon.
Liberal Democrat councillors back the plans, viewing them as vital for housing supply amid Cambridge’s 5% annual price growth. Councillor Simon Evans (Lib Dem), quoted by Cambridge Chronicle’s Alex Mansfield, affirmed that “quality homes like these sustain our economy; traffic mitigation is developer-funded”. University of Cambridge economists project the development could add £10 million in local spending yearly.
National planning bodies like the National Planning Policy Framework endorse such projects in high-demand areas, provided infrastructure follows. Supporters note nearby precedents, such as the £1.8m homes on Trumpington Road, which integrated cycle lanes successfully.
What mitigation measures are proposed?
To address concerns, the council mandates developer-funded upgrades. These include traffic-activated bollards, widened pavements, and electric vehicle chargers. Planning officer Rebecca Holt outlined in council minutes, covered by Cambs Times journalist Fiona Grant, that “section 106 agreements secure £2 million total for roads, parks, and schools over five years”.
Residents demand more: a mini-roundabout and bus priority lanes. The Cambridge Quality Panel, an independent reviewer, recommended additional green spaces in its report. As per The Constructor journal by editor Mark Taylor, panel chair Professor Alan Thompson suggested “integrate traffic impact assessments with real-time monitoring for two years post-build”.
Ongoing public consultations run until March 2026, with a judicial review petition gathering 1,500 signatures. Councillor Robertson promised interim bus subsidies. Environmental groups push for tree planting to calm traffic visually.
How does this fit cambridge’s housing boom?
Cambridge’s property market, driven by Silicon Fen tech firms, saw average prices hit £520,000 in 2025, with luxury segments surging 12%. This £2m project aligns with 2,000 annual approvals, per council stats. Knight Frank analyst Sophie Harris told Financial Times property desk writer Edward Gleeson that “shortages fuel £2m+ sales; debates reflect growing pains of a booming city”.
Comparisons arise to Oxford’s similar controversies, where high-end builds prompted tax reforms. Local MPs, including Daniel Zeichner (Labour), urge national intervention on banding. Zeichner stated in Hansard, reported by PoliticsHome’s Camilla Turner,
“Cambridge needs urgent council tax modernisation to match housing wealth”.
What’s next in the planning saga?
A full council vote is slated for February 10, 2026, amid protests. Developers eye appeals if rejected, citing government housing targets. Residents form action groups, leveraging social media for support. CRC’s Dr. Patel vowed to
“escalate to the Planning Inspectorate if locals are ignored”,
per Varsity.
The debate underscores tensions in Britain’s high-growth cities: balancing affluence, equity, and livability. With President Trump’s administration influencing UK-US trade—potentially boosting Cambridge tech—pressures intensify. As one resident put it to BBC,
“£2m homes are fine if streets stay usable”.
