Christ’s Lane Campaign 2026 (RGL2026)

Christ’s Lane Campaign

Christ's Lane Campaign

2026: Tuesday 20th october – High court hearing at Royal courts of justic

2026: 14th October – Campaign bulletin from Christ’s Lane Action Group

The Christ’s College library permission is frozen.

Last Wednesday Cambridge City Council approved, again, a scheme the Council and the College have already agreed was unlawfully permitted. The High Court rules on it next Tuesday. Six days before that hearing, the Secretary of State has stepped in.

It took eleven hours and fifteen minutes. Here is how Tuesday went.

What just happened

Tuesday, 9.22 am
We write to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government asking for a holding direction: an order stopping the Council from issuing permission for a scheme identical to the one before the High Court, six days before the Court hears it.
Tuesday, 1.00 pm
Daniel Zeichner, Member of Parliament for Cambridge, writes to the Secretary of State forwarding our submission, so that residents’ concerns “may be brought to the attention of the MHCLG Planning Casework Unit” and are “noted and considered alongside the formal Article 31 submission”.
Tuesday, 8.37 pm
Her Planning Casework Unit replies. A holding direction under Article 31 of the planning rules has been issued that day. It “prevents the Council from granting planning permission without special authorisation”.

What it means

The permission councillors approved last Wednesday, for the identical scheme already before the High Court, is frozen. Officers cannot sign it. The Committee cannot sign it. Nobody at the Guildhall can, unless she says so.

Last Wednesday, the Chair of the Committee, Cllr Katie Porrer, warned members three times that if they waited for the High Court they would “lose the right to determine” the application. On that basis they did not wait. Six days later, the Secretary of State has taken the pen out of the Council’s hand.

The Council cannot issue the permission on 16 October, or on any other day, without her authorisation. Members were told they could not wait a week for the Court. The Secretary of State has made them wait. When it takes the Secretary of State to hold a city council to the simple course of waiting for the Court, something is amiss in Cambridge.

Holding directions are rare. They are reserved for cases the Secretary of State wants to look at herself before a council is allowed to act. Our own interval is a matter of record: request 9.22 am, direction issued the same day, reply 8.37 pm. Eleven hours and fifteen minutes from a residents’ email to a Secretary of State’s direction. Whitehall moves like this only when it means to. When it called in the Beehive Centre in February 2025, its letter reached the Guildhall twenty minutes before the Committee began. This time the letter came before the Council could sign. Christ’s College’s scheme in the heart of heritage Cambridge now sits on the Secretary of State’s desk.

What happens next

Tuesday 20 October: the High Court hears our case on the first permission for the identical scheme, as planned. Now with no second permission in the way.

And let nobody mistake this

We do not oppose a new library. We never have. We oppose a building, identical to the one before the Court, that Historic England called “too big for its location”, set hard against Grade I courts, and waved through on a report that itself found it in conflict with the Local Plan. Christ’s needs a new library. It does not need this one.

One week ago

Think back a week. Papers landing on the morning of the meeting. Members given ten minutes by the Chair to read a case, about the identical scheme, that has been before the High Court for most of a year. Our emails to councillors captured and forwarded on; “Were those emails read?” and no answer from the Council. The ward councillor, Cllr Hugh Clough, and his copy of our letter that “did not reach my inbox”. Our speaker given three minutes against a juggernaut that had been rolling since July. Members told three times that waiting for the Court would mean losing the right to decide. The vote taken.

A neighbourhood was told, in effect, that its voice did not count.

Six days later the Secretary of State has said otherwise. Our submission is on her desk. Our Member of Parliament, who by long standing practice takes no side on planning applications, wrote to us on Tuesday that he recognises “the strength of feeling that exists among local residents regarding the proposed development and the planning process”, and sent our submission on to the Secretary of State to be “noted and considered”. The permission is frozen. The Court sits on Tuesday.

So, this week, no ask. No letters to write, no forms to fill. Tell your neighbours. Raise a glass. You did this: more than 150 letters and documents on the Council’s register, a full public gallery on 7 October, and a High Court claim brought by residents without a solicitor.

After last week’s committee the Master issued a caution to “watch this space.” This week the Secretary of State and the rest of Whitehall are watching too.

---

Christ’s Lane campaign update June 2026

Christ’s College has proposed to demolish its 1970s library and replace it with a new four-storey building, together with works to Bath Court and the re-provision of the bridge to the Bodley Library. The site lies in the historic core of Cambridge. It includes Grade I listed College buildings, sits within the Central Conservation Area, and forms part of a Grade II Registered Park and Garden.

Historic England, the Government’s statutory adviser on heritage, assessed the scheme and concluded that it would cause heritage harm. It described the new building as “too big” and “overdominant” in Bath Court, particularly in relation to the South Range of First Court and the Bodley Library, and noted that the increased height towards Christ’s Lane appeared large alongside the more modest elevations of the College. The City Council’s own Conservation Officer identified a degree of harm, and the Victorian Society suggested the new building take its lead from the floor heights of the Bodley Library, reducing each floor by approximately half, to be sympathetic to the human scale of the Bodley.

In 2025 the City Council granted planning permission (reference 25/02161/FUL). Christ’s Lane Action Group, a group of local residents and stakeholders, challenged that decision by judicial review (case no. AC-2025-LON-004656). The High Court granted permission to proceed on all four grounds, which related to the unlawful treatment of heritage harm. Rather than defend the decision, the Council and the College agreed to a consent order quashing the permission on all four grounds. The Action Group has asked the Court to give a reasoned judgment, and a hearing is listed for 20 October 2026.

While those proceedings remain live, the College has submitted a fresh application for the same building (reference 26/02109/FUL). The College’s June 2026 covering statement states that the drawings and supporting reports are unchanged. While the earlier scheme was assessed as causing heritage harm; the current application describes the same building as producing heritage benefit. The application is open for public comment until 9 July 2026.

Further material, including the court documents, the consent order and the heritage evidence, has been published by Christ’s Lane Action Group.

Sources and further reading

Christ’s Lane Action Group — evidence pack, court documents and heritage reports: https://www.christslaneactiongroup.org

Current planning application (reference 26/02109/FUL), Greater Cambridge Planning portal — view documents and submit comments by 9 July 2026: https://applications.greatercambridgeplanning.org/online-applications (search reference: 26/02109/FUL)

---

The 2025 Christ’s Lane Campaign in Cambridge concerns a proposed major redevelopment by Christ’s College along Christ’s Lane, a central pedestrian route between St Andrew’s Street and Christ’s Pieces. The campaign emerged in response to the College’s planning application (June 2025) to demolish its 1970s library building and replace it with a larger, modern library and social complex. While Christ’s College presents the plan as essential for accessibility, sustainability, and study improvement, local residents, heritage groups, and traders have mobilised under the Christ’s Lane Action Group (CLAG) to oppose aspects of the project, citing concerns about heritage impact, scale, and disruption.

The College’s plans, detailed on its Library Plus webpage and in documents submitted to Cambridge City Council, include constructing a new multi-storey library building with expanded study areas, group and quiet spaces, new kitchens and dining facilities, and step-free access throughout. The scheme also proposes a redesigned frontage onto Christ’s Lane, with a masonry wall, timber structure, and new “chimneys” forming part of a sustainable ventilation system. Christ’s argues that the existing 1970s building is inefficient and fails modern accessibility and environmental standards. The new design aims to achieve net-zero standards through air-source heat pumps, rainwater reuse, and low-energy lighting, while offering students a more flexible and comfortable academic environment.

Supporters within the College community stress the educational and environmental benefits of the redevelopment. They note that the project would provide significantly more study space for undergraduates, postgraduates, and fellows, while offering improved social and welfare facilities. The College also claims the new design will enhance the appearance of Christ’s Lane with better lighting, seating, and views into the library, transforming what is currently a plain, underused frontage into an active public space.

Opponents, led by CLAG and several heritage advocates, focus on the negative effects of the project. They argue that the new structure’s size and bulk will dominate Christ’s Lane, overshadowing the narrow pedestrian passage and detracting from the surrounding conservation area and nearby Grade I-listed college buildings. Concerns include a “canyon effect,” loss of light, and a less welcoming public realm. Critics also contend that the proposal would primarily benefit the College rather than the wider community, and that its frontage design risks appearing closed and uninviting.

A major point of contention is the construction phase, expected to last nearly two years. During this period, part of Christ’s Lane would be narrowed, limiting pedestrian flow and potentially affecting footfall to nearby shops and cafés. Local press, including the Cambridge Independent and Varsity, have reported widespread unease about disruption, noise, and the potential impact on local businesses and tourism.

Public consultation so far has drawn both support and formal objections. A Development Control Forum was held in September 2025, where campaigners and college representatives presented their arguments before city councillors. Heritage organisations such as Historic England have raised reservations about the scheme’s visual and historical impact. As of late 2025, the planning application remains under review by Cambridge City Council.

In essence, the Christ’s Lane Campaign represents a familiar Cambridge tension between preserving historic character and accommodating institutional growth. The outcome will shape not only Christ’s College’s facilities but also the look and experience of one of Cambridge’s busiest pedestrian thoroughfares. (AI 2025)