Cambridge University explores significant expansion of Eddington housing project

The University of Cambridge is considering a proposal to double the number of residences constructed within its Eddington development, potentially increasing the total from 3,000 to 6,000 units. The university initially secured approval in 2013 to build up to 3,000 homes, with half designated for sale on the open market and the other half allocated for university staff and students. Matt Johnson, the head of development, indicated that the university intends to engage with local residents to inform the detailed design of the plans. He informed councillors at a pre-application briefing for Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council that the requirements of an expanded population would be addressed. Approximately 1,100 homes have been completed out of the 1,800 planned for the first phase of Eddington, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service. As the period for constructing homes under the 2013 permission has concluded, the university is preparing a new planning application. Mr. Johnson stated that for the subsequent phase, the university is evaluating an increase in housing density. A university representative conveyed its objective to optimize the use of land released from the green belt by maximizing the number of homes, but in a “sensible” way. Martin Smart, the Labour executive councillor for open spaces and city services, questioned the university’s rationale for such a substantial increase in the proposed housing units. In response, Mr. Johnson said: “There is a significant shortage of housing in Cambridge. Where we have land available for development I think it is appropriate to maximise that within sensible bounds.” He further noted that Eddington had not been a “financial success” for the university and that constructing more homes would improve its financial standing. Anna Bradnam, a Liberal Democrat, inquired whether additional facilities would be provided to cater to the needs of a larger resident population. Mr. Johnson replied that the university had “overbuilt” the necessary facilities in the initial phase, expressing his belief that the existing primary school possesses sufficient capacity to meet future demand.