A Cambridge City Council website
A Cambridge City Council website
Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Matter for
Decision
AECOM’s ‘Mapping and Masterplanning Study’ (Work Package 1) suggested that the
Cambridge City-Centre Heat Network was likely to be feasible. The subsequent ‘Feasibility
Study’ (Work Package 2) was scheduled to report in summer 2023, enabling the
Cambridge City-Centre Heat Network to move to Detailed Project Development
stage.
The decision required
related to Council approval and match-funding needed to move to the next stage
of Detailed Project Development.
The Detailed Project
Development would provide a more thorough assessment of the physical and
financial aspects of the project. It could include options analysis and advice
on governance, financing and commercial models.
Once the Detailed Project
Development stage had been completed, a further decision on whether and how to
proceed with build-out and delivery of a network, and if, or what investment,
would be required.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Climate Action and Environment
ii.
Approved delegated authority to
the Assistant Chief Executive (as heat network Project Sponsor) to make the
final decision in consultation with the Executive Councillor, chair of
Environment and Communities Scrutiny Committee and opposition spokes, once the Feasibility Study was completed in summer
2023.
iii.
Noted the potential requirement
for a further additional council and partner investment in technical
assessment, at a later date, subject to exploration of alternative sources of
funding (see section on risks and mitigations on pages 9-11 of the Officer’s
report).
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny
Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Assistant Chief Executive.
The Assistant Chief Executive said the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
The project had not happened earlier as officers had
been exploring options for some years. It took time to find the finance and
appropriate technology to make the project practicable to meet targets in the
City Council’s strategies.
ii.
No-one else had done a heat network in a historic
city centre (they had in other settings such as rural areas) so the City
Council would be a trail blazer.
iii.
There would be some disruption to the city centre
if the network was installed. The intention to minimise this and further
details on ‘how’ were set out in the Officer’s report. The intention was to
work with partner organisations to mitigate disruption and risks; plus keep
residents informed.
iv.
Central Government funding would be sought to
minimise the cost to the Council.
v.
There were a lot of finance options for the project
at present, and the pros and cons of each would be explored further during the
next stage. There was a risk/reward review to decide which to use.
vi.
The impact of the project on open spaces (and any
archaeology therein) would be reviewed (later) in the bore hole part of the
project.
The Sustainability Co representative said the following in response to
Members’ questions:
i.
The City Council was showing an enabling role by
bringing the project forward.
ii.
The next stage of the project would look at project
finance and governance options.
iii.
The heat network tried to balance aims (e.g.
addressing fuel poverty) with what was practicable. The ambition would be to
explore the potential to connect the network to social housing in due course in
the hope this would lead to decarbonisation of housing stock in future.
iv.
There would be disruption from boreholes. There was
a chance to improve open spaces and increase biodiversity after the heat
network was installed.
v.
It was necessary to do a physical dig on site to
check how many bore holes were needed, and if it was suitable to dig them in
the first place.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any
Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
***See below for record of delegated Officer’s Decision –
additional information published on 14/02/24***
Decision taken: To use up to £180,000 of the Council’s
Climate Change Fund for match-funding of the next phase of Detailed Project
Development, subject to a satisfactory outcome from the feasibility study; a
successful second government Heat Network Delivery Unit grant application;
confirmation of a match-funding contribution from the University of Cambridge,
clarification of additional expected resourcing requirements and sources and
approval from the Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources.
Decision of: Andrew Limb Assistant Chief Executive
Reference: 23/6/EnC.
Date of decision: 14th February 2024
Matter for Decision: The Executive Councillor for Climate
Action and Environment approved delegated authority to the Assistant Chief
Executive (as heat network Project Sponsor) to make the final decision in
consultation with the Executive Councillor, chair of Environment and
Communities Scrutiny Committee and opposition spokes, once
the Feasibility Study is completed in summer 2023.
Any alternative options considered and rejected: None.
Reason for the decision including any background papers
considered: As set out in the officer report.
Conflict of interest and dispensation granted by Chief
Executive: None.
Comments: Chair, Executive Councillor and Opposition
Spokesperson consulted before decision was taken. Executive Councillor for
Finance & Resources approval confirmed.
Feasibility Study completed with positive conclusion. Application for Government grant
successful. Confirmation of match
funding from University of Cambridge confirmed.
Additional funding contributions confirmed by other stakeholders and
expected budget confirmed by programme manager, including consideration of contingency.
Contact for further information: Andrew Limb
