As cost spirals to £87m, are Cambridge civic quarter proposals too ambitious?

The cost of an ambitious plan to revamp the market square, Guildhall and Corn Exchange in Cambridge has shot up to £87million.

The latest civic quarter proposals have been unveiled by Cambridge City Council following a public consultation about how the area could be improved.

Highlights of the scheme include removing two thirds of the permanent stalls on the market to create a flexible entertainment area and putting the remaining 27 stalls beneath a canopy. Meanwhile, the cobbles would be reset to make them level and more accessible for people with disabilities.

The Guildhall would benefit from a £41m upgrade that would update the council offices and civic spaces in the building, create a rooftop pavilion space and make room for an interior cultural attraction. The Museum of Cambridge is in talks about relocating to the Guildhall, it has emerged.

The Corn Exchange would get a much-needed new roof as it is suffering from leaks that have forced events to be cancelled.

It would also have an increased capacity from around 1,400 seats to 2,000 seats, solar panels and a new mezzanine bar area.

But Green city councillor Naomi Bennett has warned that the projected cost is far too high at a time when the council is surveying residents on how it should close an £11m budget gap, with ideas including closing some public toilets or removing the out-of-hours pinder service that enables the grazing of cattle on the city’s commons.

Cllr Bennett said: “I have more questions than answers about the civic quarter report at this stage. I expect to spend a large chunk of this weekend studying the report.

“My key questions are: What will the final cost figure be if the project goes ahead? When the project started, the figure mentioned was £20m. Then it was £36m. Then it’s £55m, but only for the first phase of the project. The current full cost figure appears to be £87m. Where will this end? Where will the money come from?

“So far £3m has been promised by other public bodies. The council has earmarked £20m of its own reserves. Where is the rest to come from?

“Borrowing may be challenging because of technical rules on local government. The national government has announced that it intends to tighten up these rules but not all the details have been released yet. External grants may also be challenging given we have a new government that is talking up the ‘black hole’ in public finances. The council has said that it has an £11m budget shortfall, so own funds are unlikely to be an option. What happens if funding cannot be secured?

“The council wants to take the project up to the planning permission stage because they believe that it would enhance their chances of getting funding if they have an oven-ready project. I agree that getting planning permission may help with funding. The flip side is that if the council cannot get the project funded, then all the money spent on professional fees and all the officer time will be wasted.”

Recalling former Prime Minister Boris Johnson discussing Brexit, she added: “I can still remember the last time I heard a politician talk about an oven-ready project – and it’s not a good memory.

“Some work is undoubtedly necessary. The Corn Exchange roof leaks and should be repaired. Both Mandela House and the Guildhall are expensive to run, both in money and carbon emissions. But should we not be looking for a less ambitious plan that fits our finances as a council?”

The council report states that the first £36m of capital investment will be financed from reserves with £16m from capital receipts when the council office block Mandela House is sold.

It adds: “The remaining investment will be funded through external borrowing.”

Concerns have also been raised by some market traders over the removal of permanent stalls to make way for an entertainment space, which will have 64 demountable stalls.

One trader, who did not wish to be named for fear it would impact their business, said: “We are worried there are not enough permanent stalls for the traders who work five days a week. The 27 fixed stalls will be nowhere near enough, especially at weekends and the overflow section that will be made up of gazebos will be completely inadequate for people’s needs.

“Whenever we asked the council a question there were no answers that were definite. How can we run our businesses with such uncertainty? We all agree the market needs refurbishment but with the amount of money spent on consultations they could have already transformed the market. We don’t know how they will allocate the stalls. It seems like they are hearing, but not listening.”

Glenys Self, who runs a jewellery business on the market, said: “I feel like we’ve been talking to the hedge in Great St Mary’s churchyard. We have been telling the council until we are blue in the face that there isn’t a chance that gazebos can survive the strong wind that blows through the market square, but they are still in the plans years later. If the wind comes underneath those gazebos and they don’t have any sides on, they will fly up into the air like kites. They’re so dangerous, they’ll be blowing around and hitting people.

“I also think they need to invest in some proper security for the market square. There is lots of anti-social behaviour at night on Fridays and Saturdays and some of the young people involved are very vulnerable.”

A proposal to turn the Guildhall into a hotel has now been dropped in favour of instead moving council office space into the building and potentially relocating the Museum of Cambridge into the building. The council owns the Museum of Cambridge’s current premises in Castle Street.

The Guildhall’s ground floor would remain a public space with council staff located at ground, first and second floors, with the civic spaces, including the council chamber, being retained on the first floor, and commercial offices, accessed separately from Peas Hill, on the upper floors.

The budget to refurbish the Guildhall is estimated at £41m. This current net running cost of the Guildhall and Mandela House is around £2.4m. According to the report, this investment is estimated to generate a net saving for the council of £1m per year after the cost of capital expenditure.

The cost of refurbishing the Corn Exchange is estimated at £22m. This would include:

- increasing capacity to 2,000 with better movement flows around the building and additional fire escapes as well as extra lifts to make the building fully accessible.
- upgrading the audio visual systems and introducing new mechanical ventilation and cooling systems;
- remodelling the bar area, including a new mezzanine bar.

Parsons Court, to the side of the Guildhall, would be changed from a bin storage area to a food and drink space.

The building would also be upgraded with air source heat pumps and solar panels. A connection to a district heating network is also feasible.

Proposals for the market are expected to cost around £12m. These would include a lightweight canopy to cover approximately half the market square. The report says this would leave “the remaining space in the market available for additional trading during weekends and busier months, while also providing opportunity for occasional event space”.

The money would also be used to reset the cobbles and create a “shared surface” that was more accessible.

While the cobbles are being relaid, the works would be phased, enabling some traders to remain on the square, with Peas Hill and Guildhall Street accommodating other stalls.

A further £12m will be needed for the whole civic quarter project if the work is done in stages.

Foreseeable hazards that may occur during the works include the collapse of existing underground Great St Mary’s crypts under Market Hill, an archaeological discovery during groundworks and contact with asbestos, according to the report.

A city council spokesperson said: “The recommendation to allocate £55m could be funded from a) the initial £20m transfer of funds to a special reserve (this was never a potential cost, it was simply to enable design consultation work to progress); b) £16m from potential sales of commercial property; c) £3m from other secured funding sources; and d) £16m from borrowing, which could be financed from savings arising from the consolidation of the council’s offices.

“As development schemes progress, it is possible to establish more accurate estimates of the costs, so it is inevitable that there will be changes in budget estimates. This explains the increase from an initial assumption of £36m to a more informed estimate of £41m relating to the works on the Guildhall.

“The allocation of the remaining £14m (to make up the £55m) arises from capital and planning costs for the Corn Exchange, market square and public realm works, which hadn’t previously been included. The council is bringing forward two priority areas of work –the replacement of the Corn Exchange roof, and making the market surface safe. The budget estimates for these works are £4.5m and £3m respectively, with the remaining £6.5m to be set aside for planning costs (£3.6m) and other project costs (£2.9m) associated with large projects like this.

“These costs exceed the amount of funding currently available, however, the council believes it is much more likely to be able to obtain further funding by having fully designed and consented shovel-ready projects. For both the Corn Exchange and the market square, the proposal is for a new business plan to be developed to consider additional funding for further phases of work and funding opportunities.”