The Planning Committee of 7 October 2026: approved again

The record of the meeting

The decision

The Council’s decision list for the meeting records item 6, application 26/02109/FUL, as “Approved as per Officer recommendation with amendments”. The amendments are those in the Amendment Sheet, the officer presentation and the discussion at committee.

The College’s own announcement of 8 October says that “councillors voted by six votes to one to approve”. The Cambridge Independent reported that “The committee approved the resubmitted scheme with six votes for and one against.”

No decision notice has been issued. On Friday 16 October 2026 the planning register still showed the application as “Awaiting decision”. The Council had not published the minutes of the meeting when this page was written.

What members were told

The group had asked the Council in writing, on 29 September, 5 October and 7 October, that the application not be determined before the High Court had given judgment, or that no decision notice issue before judgment.

Members were told that the applicant had agreed an extension of time to 16 October. Officers told them that if the applicant appealed after that date the Council “would lose the right to determine this application”. The Cambridge Independent reported that councillors “discussed deferring the application but their legal advisor told them a decision was needed before October 16 or this would open them up to an appeal”.

A motion to defer the item until after the High Court hearing was proposed and seconded. It was never put to the vote.

Since August every email the group sent to the Council, whoever it was addressed to, had been blocked and went instead to a Council mailbox, the Single Point of Contact. Officers told members that all correspondence sent by the group to members before the meeting “has been forwarded to members by the SPOC” and that “Members have a complete record of those representations.” The group’s letter of 30 September to the fourteen members of the committee never reached them from the group. It reached them at 4.44 pm on Friday 2 October as a different email from the mailbox, under the mailbox’s own subject line, with the group’s text pasted below a note.

A member asked whether deciding the application that day would affect the judicial review. The Council’s legal adviser answered: “The decision you make today does not impact the judicial review proceedings.”

What councillors said

Councillor Hugh Clough told the committee: “It is inexcusable that members’ emails should be interfered with”. Two days earlier he had told the group in writing that he had not received its emails.

After the meeting the Master of Christ’s College told the Cambridge Independent: “All our opponents’ arguments have been confounded but they still have legal options. Watch this space.”

What the group put before the committee

On the morning of the meeting the group placed on the register its response to the officers’ report and the Amendment Sheet, 44 pages, register document 9547246. It also placed a two page note for members, “Ten errors in the officer’s report”, register document 9547850.

The group’s speaker had three minutes. As the Council’s webcast records, the speaker told members that the errors the Council conceded in the first decision “have not been corrected. They have recurred.” The speaker told members: “The bulk has not been justified.”

Also before the committee were the objections of Roger Hepher of hgh Consulting, dated 4 October, Alec Forshaw, dated 5 October, eb7, dated 5 October, and Create Streets, dated 6 October. The first three are published on this site.

Watch the meeting

The Council’s webcast of the whole meeting is on YouTube under the title “Planning Committee, 07/10/26, 10:00”. The library was item 6.

What happened next

On Tuesday 13 October 2026 the Secretary of State directed the Council not to grant permission on the application without her specific authorisation, while she considers whether to call it in. The direction is on the Council’s register. Read the direction and the Planning Casework Unit’s letters.

On Thursday 15 October 2026 the Council’s Single Point of Contact told the group that direct emails to City Councillors would no longer pass through the mailbox.

The documents

• The Council’s decision list for 7 October 2026 (PDF)
• The Council’s page for the meeting: agenda, officers’ report, Amendment Sheet and speaker statements
• The Council’s webcast of the meeting (YouTube)
• The group’s response to the officers’ report and the Amendment Sheet, 7 October 2026 (PDF, 44 pages)
• Ten errors in the officers’ report: the note for members, 7 October 2026 (PDF, 2 pages)
• Roger Hepher, hgh Consulting: objection of 4 October 2026 (PDF)
• Alec Forshaw: additional heritage comments, 5 October 2026 (PDF)
• eb7: updated daylight and sunlight objection, 5 October 2026 (PDF)
• Cambridge Independent, 8 October 2026: “Controversial Christ’s College library plan approved by Cambridge City Council ahead of High Court hearing”
• Building, 13 October 2026: “Controversial Cambridge college approved for second time”

The words spoken at the meeting are taken from the Council’s webcast as transcribed by machine. Anyone may check them against the recording at the link above.

Watch the Council’s webcast