APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 LETTER FROM THE GREATER MANCHESTER LOCAL ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP

Transcription

1 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 LETTER FROM THE GREATER MANCHESTER LOCAL ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP

2 GREATER MANCHESTER LOCAL ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP Greater Manchester Integrated Support Team Room 307, Level 3, Town Hall Manchester M60 2LA Tel: Fax: Rt. Hon Patrick McLoughlin MP 20 February 2013 Secretary of State for Transport Department for Transport Great Minster House 76 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DR Dear Secretary of State Greater Manchester Submission to the Local Pinch Point Fund I am pleased to write to you in support of the Greater Manchester package submission to the Local Pinch Point Fund, which has been compiled on behalf of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) and Local Enterprise Partnership. As you will be aware from the recent Greater Manchester City Deal, GMCA and the LEP place a very strong focus on infrastructure and connectivity at the heart of our strategy for economic growth in Greater Manchester. This has been backed up over recent years by an unprecedented level of local commitment to transport investment through the Greater Manchester Transport Fund. The prioritisation process behind this package of measures reflects the strength of our governance arrangements in Greater Manchester, which drive clear decision making on those investment priorities that hold the greatest potential to support growth. If supported by the Department, this package will unlock immediate economic potential in a number of the key growth points that we have identified through our work to progress the core economic development plan contained in the Greater Manchester Strategy. Yours sincerely Mike Blackburn Chair, Greater Manchester Local Enterprise Partnership

3 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 2 COVENT GARDEN VILLAGE ACCESS ROAD AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES

4 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 3 WATERLOO ROAD/ SPRING GARDENS JUNCTION

5 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 4 Location map

6 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 5 Development Partner commitment

7 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 6 CAPEX FINANCIAL DETAIL Item Sub-item 2013/ /15 Total Area 5: Church Gate Access Highway/Civils - 14,179 14,179 Signs & Road Markings Street Lighting (incl Spring Gardens) ,295 26,199 11,295 Area 6: Lavenders Brow Highway/Civils - 73,466 73,466 Signs & Road Markings - - 4,953 78,419 4,953 Areas 7 & 9: New Road/Orchard Street Site Clearance, Highways & Drainage 53, , ,596 (Including Drainage) Retaining Wall, Structures 611, ,408 Signs & Road Markings - 7,490 7,490 Street Lighting (incl Lavenders Brow) - 664,926 16, ,883 16,315 Area 4: Churchgate/Spring Gardens/Waterloo Rd Highway/Civils - 27,194 27,194 Signs & Road Markings - 6,040 6,040 Traffic Signal Upgrade Equipment Cost - 52,551 52,551 Traffic Signal Upgrade Civils Costs ,081 97,866 12,081 Statutory undertaker diversions Electricity North West 80,772-80,772 British Telecom 40,386-40,386 Virgin Media 32, , ,730 Land purchase 41/43 Waterloo Road 315, ,059

8 Item Sub-item 2013/ /15 Total Orchard Street Works 318, , ,441 Design Design at 5% 46,987-46,987 Structure design 36,684 83, ,684 Strategic risk allowance - - SMBC Land at Waterloo Road Asset contribution (independent valuation) 22,500 22,500 22,500 Base estimate total 1,558, ,367 2,281,852 P50 Risk 109,542 50, ,386 P50 Total 1,668, ,211 2,442,238 Detail DfT contribution 1,167, ,948 1,709,566 Local contribution 500, , ,671 Total 1,668, ,211 2,442,238 Local contribution detail S106 contribution 72,016-72,016 SMBC Land contribution 22,500-22,500 SMBC contribution 405, , ,155 Total local contribution 500, , ,671 7

9 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 7 S106 AGREEMENT WITH ID4 LIVING (PART OF SEDDON GROUP)

10 9

11 10

12 11

13 12

14 13

15 14

16 15

17 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 8 INDEPENDENT VALUATION OF LAND AT WATERLOO ROAD

18 17

19 18

20 19

21 20

22 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 9 RISK REGISTER Ref Element Description Consequence of risk Strategic risks Inflation Staff Specification Technical risks 4 Area 5: Church Gate Access:Highway/Civils Inflation will differ from average since start of current alliance contract. Inadequate Project Team resources The development partner makes significant changes to the layout of phase 2 and 3 Contractor bankruptcy Increased Costs (see index) - fluctuation of additional 2% Delays to Programme Increase in design costs and changes to programme such as for drainage works Delay to delivery of programme and potential increased costs Minimum Most likely Maximum Mitigation Probability Cost Probability Cost Probability Cost Time allowance (days) , ,000 Plan in advance and draft staff into project from Framework Partnership as required ,000 Engagement with development partner through Covent Garden Village Project Board ,000 Alliance partnership Contractor appraisal process has included detailed investigation of partners' financial strength. 0 14, , ,179 5 Area 5: Church Gate Access:Signs & Road Markings 6 Area 5: Church Gate Access:Street Lighting (incl Spring Gardens) 7 Area 6: Lavenders Brow: Highway Civils 8 Area 6: Lavenders Brow: Signs and road markings 9 Areas 7 & 9: New Road/Orchard Street: Site Clearance, Highways & Drainage None None 0 11, , ,295 None 0 73, , ,466 None 0 4, , ,953 Unforeseen ground conditions Poor stability/ earth works failure 0 550, , , A high density sample of cores has already been taken from the alignment. 9 Areas 7 & 9: New Road/Orchard Street: Site Clearance, Highways & Drainage Additional requirements to drain surface water into river Additional cost item , Early engagement with Environment Agency to ensure support for feasibility design and ultimate approval of detailed design. 10 Areas 7 & 9: New Road/Orchard Street: Retaining wall Unforeseen engineering difficulties with retaining wall (in particular sub-surface footing) Increase cost of foundation works for retaining wall 0 611, , , Additional site and ground investigations

23 11 Areas 7 & 9: New Road/Orchard Street: Signs and road markings 12 Areas 7 & 9: New Road/Orchard Street: Street lighting 13 Area 4: Churchgate/Spring Gardens/Waterloo Rd: Highway/Civils 14 Area 4: Churchgate/Spring Gardens/Waterloo Rd: Signs and Road markings 15 Area 4: Churchgate/Spring Gardens/Waterloo Rd: Traffic Signal Upgrade Equipment Cost 16 Area 4: Churchgate/Spring Gardens/Waterloo Rd: Traffic Signal Upgrade Civils Costs None 0 7, , ,490 None 0 16, , ,315 None 0 27, , ,194 None 0 6, , ,040 None 0 52, , ,551 None 0 12, , , Statutory undertaker diversions: Electricity North West Substantial changes to diversion design from C3 to C , , , Statutory undertaker diversions: British Telecom Substantial changes to diversion design from C3 to C4 0 40, , , Statutory undertaker diversions: Virgin Media Substantial changes to diversion design from C3 to C , , , Land purchase: 41/43 Waterloo Road 21 Land purchase: Orchard Street Works None 0 305, , ,059 None 0 308, , , Design None 0 36, , , None 0 26, , ,684 2,259,352 22

24 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 10 Cumulative distribution of projected Capex outturn costs (from Monte Carlo simulation)

25 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 11 UPTAKE SCENARIOS AND REQUIRED ECONOMIC IMPACTS TO ACHIEVE BCR OF 2 High growth Average working age occupancy 1.43 Average GVA per head (South Manchester, NUTS 3, 2011) 22,080 Average increment in GVA per working age occupant required to attain BCR of 2 against 99th percentile cost / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /30 Phase Phase Total non construction jobs created ,976 78,912 95,009 ######### 253,057 Total GVA Total construction jobs (not included in GVA) BCR P BCR P BCR P BCR P BCR P Low growth Average working age occupancy 1.43 Average GVA per head (South Manchester, NUTS 3, 2011) 22,080 Average increment in GVA per working age occupant required to attain BCR of 2 against 99th percentile cost / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /30 Phase Phase Total non construction jobs created ,532 55,552 74,121 88, ,762 Total GVA Total construction jobs (not included in GVA) , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,397 BCR P BCR P BCR P BCR P BCR P

26 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 12 TRAFFIC BASE AND ASSESSMENT FORECAST OUTPUTS Data item Data source Number of highway trips (vehicles) affected Transport Assessment, Table 4 (Trip Generation), p61, Table 5 Trip Distribution p62 (on scroll). This is only provided for assessment scenario. Total vehicle travelled time (veh-hrs) Transport Assessment, Appendix P, p252. TRANSYT printouts. Also summarised in Scheme Impacts Proforma. Assessment year is Total vehicle travelled distance (veh-km) Transport Assessment, Appendix P, p252. TRANSYT printouts. Also summarised in Scheme Impacts Proforma. Assessment year is 2015 Total network delays (veh-hrs) Transport Assessment, Appendix P, p252. TRANSYT printouts. Also summarised in Scheme Current use and details of the site, vehicle trip generation and attraction Impacts Proforma. Assessment year is Transport Assessment, Appendix Only current assigned flows provided Development details (type, size, phases, year) to be unlocked by the improvements Person trip generation and attraction to the development Transport Assessment, p36 provides details of the proposals that form the basis of the Traffic appraisal. However, a more detailed projection of occupancy rates in phases 2 and 3 is provided in the appended occupancy.xlsx spreadsheet. Transport Assessment, Appendix N, p211 Projected modal split Transport Assessment, Appendix N, p211 Vehicle trip generation and attraction to the development Transport Assessment, Table 3 (Trip rates), p60 and Table 4 (Trip generation), p61 for whole Master Plan development. Assessment year for the scheme 2015 Traffic data, modelling assumptions, model validation of key area, cordon location map, traffic impact analysis showing the effect of proposed scheme within affected area Observed and modelled traffic flow, queue and delay on key links/junctions Transport Assessment, Appendix N, p211 Transport Assessment, Table 6, p63, Queue and delay on links. Average observed and modelled journey time and speed for vehicles passing through each key link/junction Vehicle trip purpose proportion Vehicle proportion (Car, LGV, OGV1&2, PSV) Average speed for car, LGV, HGV & PSV Transport Assessment, Figure 4 (2007 AM flows) p69 and Figure 5 (2007 year PM flows), Figure 18 (2015 AM base flows), p81, Figure 19 (2015 PM base flows), p82, Figure 20 (2015 AM assessment flows), p83, Figure 21 (2015 PM assessment flows), p84 N/A N/A N/A

27 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 13 PROJECT PLAN Area 5: Church Gate Access 153 days 30/12/ /07/2014 Design 109 days 30/12/ /05/ SS+150 days Highway/Civils 30 days 30/05/ /07/ Signs & Road Markings 5 days 11/07/ /07/ Street Lighting (incl Spring Gardens) 14 days 11/07/ /07/ Area 6: Lavenders Brow 210 days 30/12/ /10/2014 Design 175 days 30/12/ /08/ SS+150 days Highway/Civils 30 days 01/09/ /10/ Signs & Road Markings 5 days 13/10/ /10/ Areas 7 & 9: New Road/Orchard Street 435 days 03/06/ /01/2015 Design 175 days 03/06/ /01/2014 Highway retaining wall design 109 days 03/06/ /10/2013 Approval in Principle 23 days 02/09/ /10/2013 Highways & Drainage design 175 days 03/06/ /01/2014 Environment Agency approvals 1 day 30/09/ /09/2013 Statutory undertaker diversions 30 days 03/02/ /03/2014 Electricity North West 30 days 03/02/ /03/ British Telecom 30 days 03/02/ /03/ Virgin Media 30 days 03/02/ /03/ Construction 326 days 01/11/ /01/2015 Site Clearance 30 days 01/11/ /12/ ,12 Highway retaining Wall construction 90 days 13/12/ /04/ ,21 Road construction 180 days 18/04/ /12/ ,22,17,18, 19 23FS+20 Signs & Road Markings 6 days 23/01/ /01/2015 Street Lighting (incl Lavenders Brow) 30 days 14/11/ /12/2014 Area 4: Churchgate/Spring Gardens/Waterloo Rd 60 days 30/12/ /03/2014 Design 10 days 30/12/ /01/2014 days 23SS+150 days 14SS+150 days Highway/Civils 30 days 13/01/ /02/ Signs & Road Markings 5 days 24/02/ /02/ Traffic Signal Upgrade Civils 20 days 24/02/ /03/ Land purchase 21 days 31/05/ /06/2013 Agreement with Seddon Group 1 day 31/05/ /05/2013 Purchase 1 day 28/06/ /06/2013

28 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 14 LETTER FROM ID4 LIVING (SEDDON GROUP) CONFIRMING ARRANGEMENTS FOR LAND ACQUISITION FOR ACCESS ROAD

29 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 15 INFORMAL ENVIRONMENT AGENCY CONSULTATION

30 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 16 COVENT GARDEN VILLAGE MASTERPLAN PROJECT GOVERNANCE

31 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 17 PROCUREMENT STRATEGY: JOINT LETTER FROM HEAD OF PROCUREMENT AND S151 OFFICER

32 Greater Manchester Scheme Reference: 02 APPENDIX 18 LETTER FROM S151 OFFICER

33 Local Pinch Point Fund Application Form Checklist Scheme: Covent Garden Village Lead authority: Stockport MBC SECTION A Section / page A3. Have you appended a map? Appendix A6. Have you included supporting evidence of partnership bodies willingness to participate in delivering the bid proposals? 2 Appendix 5 Guidance Ref N/A Para A7. Have you appended a letter from the relevant LTB(s) / LEP(s) confirming the priority of the proposed scheme? [Optional] Appendix 1 Para SECTION B B4. Have you enclosed a letter from an independent valuer to verify the market value land if land is being included as part of the non-dft contribution towards scheme costs? B4. Have you enclosed a letter confirming the commitment of external sources to contribute to the cost of the scheme will be required? Section / Guidance page Ref Appendix 8 Para Appendix Para B6. Have you provided a completed Appraisal Summary Table in a Yes Para 35- format readable by Excel 2003? 39 B6. Have you provided a completed Scheme Impacts Pro Forma in a Yes Para 35- format readable by Excel 2003? [Small projects only] 39 B6. Have you provided relevant supporting material and for large N/A schemes a WebTAG compliant bid? B7. Have you attached a joint letter from the local authority s Section Appendix Para Officer and Head of Procurement confirming that a procurement strategy is in place that is legally compliant and is likely to achieve the best value for money outcome? B8. Has a letter been appended to demonstrate that arrangements Appendix N/A are in place to secure the land to meet the construction milestones? 14 B8. Has a Project Plan been appended to your bid? Appendix Para B11. Has a QRA been appended to your bid? Appendices Para 40-7 and 8 42 B11. Has a Risk Management Strategy been appended to your bid? Appendices Para 40-7 and 8 42 B12. Have you appended evidence of Stakeholder Analysis? [Large Para 40- projects only] 42 B12. Have you appended a Communications Plan? [Large projects N/A only]

34 B13. Have you provided evidence of an integrated assurance and approval plan? [Large projects only] SECTION D Para Section / Guidance page Ref D1. Has the SRO declaration been signed? Yes N/A D2. Has the Section 151 Officer declaration been signed? Yes N/A ECONOMIC CASE CHECKLIST (Large Projects Only) Schemes seeking more than 5 million in support from the Department are required to submit a full appraisal of the scheme in line with WebTAG guidance. These bids should include sufficient supporting information and material for the Department to undertake a full review of the modeling and appraisal. Large project bidders are required to submit the checklist indicating where key modeling and appraisal information is presented with the bid and supporting annexes. Complete the standard templates / outputs (in addition to the Appraisal Summary Table): Template / output Transport Economic Efficiency table* Provided Yes / No Public Accounts table* Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits table* WITA/COBA output files (if used) *Note: these tables should be provided in the templates provided un-amended and in a format readable by Excel 2003 Cost Benefit Analysis Item A clear explanation of the underlying assumptions used in the Cost Benefit Analysis Information on local factors used. For example the derivation of growth factors, M factors in COBA and annualisation factors in TUBA (to include full details of any calculations) A diagram of the network (if COBA used) Information on the number of junctions modelled (if COBA used), for both the do-minimum and the do-something Details of assumptions about operating costs and commercial viability (e.g. public transport, park and ride, etc.) Full appraisal inputs/outputs (when used, COBA and/or TUBA input and output files should be supplied) Section/Page 2

35 Evidence that TUBA/COBA warning messages have been checked and found to be acceptable Spatial (sectoral) analysis of TEE benefits Details of the maintenance delay costs/savings Details of the delays during construction Economic Case Assessment Item Assessment of Environmental impacts, to include an environmental constraints map Assessment of Safety impacts and the assumed accident rates presented (COBA output should be provided if an accident only COBA has been run) Assessment of Economic impacts Assessment of Accessibility impacts Assessment of Integration impacts Assessment of the Social and Distributional Impacts A comprehensive Appraisal Summary Table AST worksheets Modelling Item An Existing Data and Traffic Surveys Report to include: Details of the sources, locations (illustrated on a map), methods of collection, dates, days of week, durations, sample factors, estimation of accuracy, etc. Details of any specialist surveys (e.g. stated preference). Traffic and passenger flows; including daily, hourly and seasonal profiles, including details by vehicle class where appropriate Journey times by mode, including variability if appropriate Details of the pattern and scale of traffic delays and queues Desire line diagrams for important parts of the network Diagrams of existing traffic flows, both in the immediate corridor and other relevant corridors An Assignment Model Validation Report to include: Description of the road traffic and public transport passenger assignment model development, including model network and zone plans, details of treatment of congestion on the road system and crowding on the public transport system Description of the data used in model building and validation with a clear distinction made for any independent validation data Evidence of the validity of the networks employed, including range checks, link length checks, and route choice evidence Details of the segmentation used, including the rationale for that chosen Validation of the trip matrices, including estimation of measurement and sample errors 3 Section/Page Section/Page

36 Details of any 'matrix estimation' techniques used and evidence of the effect of the estimation process on the scale and pattern of the base travel matrices Validation of the trip assignment, including comparisons of flows (on links and across screenlines/cordons) and, for road traffic models, turning movements at key junctions Journey time validation, including, for road traffic models, checks on queue pattern and magnitudes of delays/queues Detail of the assignment convergence Present year validation if the model is more than 5 years old A diagram of modelled traffic flows, both in the immediate corridor and other relevant corridors A Demand Model Report to include: Where no Variable Demand Model has been developed evidence should be provided to support this decision (e.g. follow guidance in WebTAG Unit Variable Demand Modelling - Preliminary Assessment Procedures) Description of the demand model Description of the data used in the model building and validation Details of the segmentation used, including the rationale for that chosen. This should include justification for any segments remaining fixed Evidence of model calibration and validation and details of any sensitivity tests Details of any imported model components and rationale for their use Validation of the supply model sensitivity in cases where the detailed assignment models do not iterate directly with the demand model Details of the realism testing, including outturn elasticities of demand with respect to fuel cost and public transport fares Details of the demand/supply convergence A Forecasting Report to include: Description of the methods used in forecasting future traffic demand. Description of the future year demand assumptions (e.g. land use and economic growth - for the do minimum, core and variant scenarios) An uncertainty log providing a clear description of the planning status of local developments Description of the future year transport supply assumptions (i.e. networks examined for the do minimum, core scenario and variant scenarios) Description of the travel cost assumptions (e.g. fuel costs, PT fares, parking) Comparison of the local forecast results to national forecasts, at an overall and sectoral level 4

37 Presentation of the forecast travel demand and conditions for the core scenario and variant scenarios including a diagram of forecast flows for the do-minimum and the scheme options for affected corridors If the model includes very slow speeds or high junction delays evidence of their plausibility An explanation of any forecasts of flows above capacity, especially for the do-minimum, and an explanation of how these are accounted for in the modelling/appraisal Presentation of the sensitivity tests carried out (to include high and low demand tests). 5