Local Pinch Point Fund Application Form

Transcription

1 Local Pinch Point Fund Application Form Guidance on the Application Process is available at: Please include the Checklist with your completed application form. The level of information provided should be proportionate to the size and complexity of the scheme proposed. As a guide, for a small scheme we would suggest around pages including annexes would be appropriate. One application form should be completed per project. Applicant Information Local authority name(s)*: WIGAN COUNCIL Bid Manager Name and position: EMMA BARTON, TRANSPORT STRATEGY MANAGER Contact telephone number: address: Postal address: e.barton@wigan.gov.uk WIGAN COUNCIL, PO BOX 100, WIGAN. WN1 3DS When authorities submit a bid for funding to the Department, as part of the Government s commitment to greater openness in the public sector under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, they must also publish a version excluding any commercially sensitive information on their own website within two working days of submitting the final bid to the Department. The Department reserves the right to deem the business case as non-compliant if this is not adhered to. Please specify the weblink where this bid will be published: Also referenced on TfGM LTP3 site :

2 SECTION A - Project description and funding profile A1. Project name: A49 CONGESTION IMPROVEMENTS A2. Headline description: This proposal will improve congestion, capacity and connectivity between M6 J25 and Wigan Town Centre on the A49 corridor. With corporate, political and community support, the proposed scheme will improve two junctions along the A49 which will provide localised congestion relief and support economic growth and development opportunities at Pemberton Park (housing and employment) and Wigan Arc (housing site). The proposals also support one of the Council s future transport infrastructure priorities to introduce a new dual carriageway link road from the A49 through Westwood Park (housing and employment) to the heart of the town centre, significantly supporting further economic growth. A3. Geographical area: The A49 passes through the borough supporting our strategic route network and providing a vital arterial connection between the M6 J25 and the heart of Wigan town centre. Two junctions on this route generate congestion concerns: * Junction (1) A49 Warrington Road / Little Lane; and * Junction (2) A49 Warrington Road / Poolstock / Highfield Grange Avenue. Partially dualled, the A49 corridor is surrounded by significantly sized residential communities, which use the corridor to access employment, education, health, leisure and shopping in very close proximity, generating a mixture of commuter and local access problems through the day. OS Grid Reference: * Junction * Junction Postcode: Area - WN3 * Junction 1 - WN3 6PZ * Junction 2 - WN3 5RB Map appended to this application form showing the location (and route) of the proposed scheme, existing transport infrastructure, links to development sites, and areas of existing employment. Refer to Appendix A. A4. Type of bid (please tick relevant box): Small project bids (requiring DfT funding of between 1m and 5m) Scheme Bid Structure Maintenance Bid Large project bids (requiring DfT funding of between 5m and 20m) Scheme Bid Structure Maintenance Bid Note: Scheme and Structure Maintenance bids will be assessed using the same criteria. 2

3 A5. Equality Analysis Has any Equality Analysis been undertaken in line with the Equality Duty? Yes No Please refer to Customer Impact Assessment Record in Appendix A A6. Partnership bodies The Redwater Intrinsic Partnership Ltd are a development company who have an interest in the Wigan Arc development site located to the east of the A49 near Little Lane. This group have received outline planning approval to build 86 residential units, with access to the site being provided through the delivery of a new junction on the A49. The Council and Redwater have recently confirmed the Land Agreement in which it states the funding requirement and triggers for delivery of the new junction. Redwater have commissioned the Council s Highway Design team to design and deliver the A49 / Little Lane junction improvements and therefore if this bid is successful we will be able to ensure value for money through joint tendering / procurement so that efficiencies of scale can be realised for the construction of both junctions. Appendix B contains: - Letter of confirmed commitment from Redwater - Outline Planning Approval report A7. Local Enterprise Partnership / Local Transport Body Involvement Have you appended a letter from the LEP / LTB to support this case? Yes No While this bid is being submitted by Wigan Council, Transport for Greater Manchester has conducted a prioritisation process on behalf of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, acting as the shadow LTB. This prioritisation process has subsequently been endorsed by the Greater Manchester LEP. Letters of support from LEP / GMCA are attached to this application in Appendix B. The prioritisation process classed classified the ten GM schemes as either Priority 1 or Priority 2. This application has been classified as Priority 1. Prioritisation Table approved by AGMA WLT can also be seen in Appendix B. 3

4 SECTION B The Business Case You may find the following DfT tools useful in preparing your business case: Transport Business Cases Behavioural Insights Toolkit Logic Mapping Hints and Tips B1. The Scheme Summary Please select what the scheme is trying to achieve (this will need to be supported by evidence in the Business Case). Please select all categories that apply. Improve access to a development site that has the potential to create housing Improve access to a development site that has the potential to create jobs Improve access to urban employment centres Improve access to Enterprise Zones Maintain accessibility by addressing the condition of structures Ease congestion / bottlenecks Other(s), Please specify - B2. The Strategic Case a) What is the problem that is being addressed, making specific reference to barriers to growth and why this has not been addressed previously? Despite its strategic location at the heart of the North West, Wigan Borough is poorly regarded as a business location primarily due to a negative impact relating to poor accessibility from the strategic road network (motorways). This contributes significantly to a local economy which under performs at the national, regional and sub-regional level. Poor highway access was deemed to be one of the key factors hindering business investment in the borough in the 2002, 2007 and 2010 B2B reports, and through consultation with key economic stakeholders. A GVA study 'Testing the Case for an Employment Site of Exceptional Quality' (2010) terms the current employment land position in Wigan as supply constrained demand, particularly in the west of the borough in close proximity to the M6 corridor. Evidence suggests that there is a relatively footloose occupier market focused on the M6 motorway corridor that, due to a combination of strategic, site access and infrastructure constraints, Wigan is unable to attract. GVA consider the M6 motorway to be the borough s most valuable asset in terms of attracting inward investment. Located midway between Manchester and Liverpool and with strategic access to the M6, M58, M61 and A580 the borough has excellent transport links to major commercial markets including much of the north of England, the Midlands, London and the South East, and international airports and seaports. Wigan town centre is also on the West Coast Mainline providing direct rail links to London, Birmingham and Glasgow. Wigan town centre is by far the largest centre in the borough with over 120,000 square metres of retail floor space and over 300,000 visitors per week. It has a role to play within the wider area including as one of the sub-regional town centres within Greater Manchester. It needs to reinforce its core functions of shopping and employment to remain competitive with similar centres in neighbouring areas. In addition, it needs to diversify and broaden its appeal to become a more attractive destination for the wider community. Areas such as the 'Northern Crescent', the 'Eastern Gateway' and parts of the Pier Quarter have potential for development

5 and improvement that will strengthen the role of the town centre. Work has started on our Wigan Central Area Action Plan that will set out where, how and when beneficial development can be accommodated within an expanded centre. In order to boost the economic performance and profile of the borough, there is a need to bring forward a range of new employment sites of the right quality in terms of location, accommodation provision and supporting infrastructure, to attract, maintain and grow businesses, particularly within the M6 Corridor and other key employment locations at Westwood Park and Pemberton Park. The A49 junction improvements will provide a more direct and accessible route from the M6 motorway (J25) through to Wigan Town Centre. The proposals will help to relieve local congestion at two key junctions along the route and facilitate opportunities to open up two development sites. The Corporate Strategy identifies the need to improve our transport networks and the connectivity / accessibility of the Borough. Wigan Borough on the Move, the Council's new Transport Strategy identifies the importance of the boroughs strategic connectivity. Improving transport links to the motorway network are paramount to ensure we grasp opportunities to get better connected with opportunities for employment, education, health, leisure and with our neighbouring districts. The A49 junction improvements will improve accessibility, reduce congestion (in Poolstock particularly, but also in the Marus Bridge / Hawkley Hall area) and journey times will be improved, to support the viability and vitality of Wigan town centre and significantly improve access to the development sites to accelerate and motivate delivery. Drivers have used Poolstock (B5238) instead of the A49 route into Wigan town centre for some time, due to the history of access restrictions, road safety concerns and levels of congestion associated with the Saddle Junction. As a result, Poolstock is one of the borough s worst congestion corridors. Trafficmaster vehicle speed data from the Wigan Congestion Study 2010 revealed that during the AM peak period average speeds on the A49 northbound approaching Marus Bridge roundabout were between 10 and 15mph, during the PM peak average speeds were between 0 and 10 mph. The data also revealed that during the AM peak average speeds reduce to less than 10 mph on the B5238 Poolstock Lane from Snowden Avenue to the Marus Bridge Roundabout in both directions. These local congestion problems are exacerbated as this area lies within an Air Quality Management zone and Poolstock comprises a narrow single carriageway route with terraced residential frontages, and serves a number of local amenities including a number of primary schools, a large health centre and several local shops. During the Local Transport Plan 2 period, the Council undertook to widen the A49 between the Marus Bridge roundabout and a point north of Little Lane, to help accommodate transport movements into the centre of Wigan. More recently, the Council has invested in 7.3million worth of highway improvements at the notorious Saddle Junction, whereby the gyratory layout was revised and approaches to this area were improved. Most significant was the construction of a new dual link road between Wallgate and the Saddle junction relieving the pinch-point under the railway bridge on Wallgate. While these works are nearing completion, there are capacity issues at junctions on the A49 which are preventing drivers from choosing the primary route along the A49 to access Wigan Town centre and are habitually continuing to use Poolstock. In addition, the Council has recently submitted a planning application to develop the Westwood Park site, including a new dual carriageway link road from the A49 Warrington Road / Little Lane junction through to Chapel Lane / Riverway (funded through significant contributions from the developer and land sales). The new link road and with the completion of the A49 strategic corridor will fundamentally invite and welcome investors to take a fresh look at the opportunities for developments on the Westwood site. 5

6 On completion of all the infrastructure improvements, it will significantly improve the connectivity of the town centre for potential investors and long-distance strategic traffic, improving opportunities for economic growth and carbon reduction, although the full benefits of the link road won t be fully realised until the two junction improvements on the A49 are completed. On completion of this new highway infrastructure, it will also help to release road space elsewhere for additional environmental and community improvements. This will substantially increase the quality of the environment in adjacent local areas by removing the impacts of busy traffic and allowing communities to reclaim their streets with more sustainable activities. b) What options have been considered and why have alternatives have been rejected? A number of options have been considered as part of the A49 Link Road assessment work and in conjunction with concerns raised by the local community: Signalising the roundabout - This would enable the A49 primary route to have weighted priority. In turn, this would discourage inappropriate traffic on side roads, facilitating environmental improvements on local streets. However, the existing geometric design of the roundabout limits the capacity of the circulatory area for vehicle reservoirs. Various levels of restricted movements at the Clapgate Lane Junction - This would reduce the impact of turning traffic on the A49 primary route and reduce or eliminate rat-running in a sensitive location (20mph zone in front of a school in a residential area). Depending on how restrictive the selected option is, this may have little (if any) support from residents. Signalising Intrinsic junction This would help weight the priority route in a similar manner to the other junctions along the corridor. Funding for A49 Link Road through to Westwood Park is not yet confirmed as it is associated with land sales and negotiations on the masterplan document. Therefore, it was deemed more suitable to introduce a roundabout at this junction to provide better value for money in the longer term by reducing the requirement for further signals works and more civils works in conjunction with the new link road carrying significantly more traffic. The roundabout option will work for the existing flows, provide access to the development and facilitate the new link road in the longer term. Environmental improvements on Poolstock Lane - On their own, they are unlikely to have a significant impact on through traffic to/from Wigan town centre c) What are the expected benefits / outcomes? For example, job creation, housing numbers and GVA and the basis on which these have been estimated. We expect journey times to improve on the A49 and on Poolstock in particular, following a significant reduction in the lengths of queuing traffic and local congestion levels. We also expect to see fewer accidents, better air quality, less noise, and an altogether more convivial atmosphere that builds stronger communities and supports economic prosperity. Other specific benefits will be generated through the motivation of development sites: Pemberton Park residential dwellings and 250 jobs Westwood Park residential dwellings and 750 jobs Wigan Arc 86 residential dwellings Employment figures calculated using Employment Densities Guide (Homes & communities Agency, 2010) Refer to Appraisal Summary for other benefits and GVA Appendix C. 6

7 d) What is the project s scope and is there potential to reduce costs and still achieve the desired outcomes? For example, using value engineering. The A49 Congestion Improvement scheme identifies two junctions requiring interventions to improve capacity and connections between M6 J25 and Wigan Town Centre. Scheme proposal drawings for the two junctions can be seen in Appendix A. Junction 1 A49 Warrington Road / Little Lane (Drawing Ref: SCP/12084/F01) This junction improvement involves: - the removal of an existing signal controlled junction, - closure of Little Lane and associated redirection of traffic through Pemberton Park, - introduction of new roundabout junction on A49, - introduction of new access point onto the Wigan Arc development site, - introduction of junction access for the new dual link road through to Westwood Park; and - introduction of additional sustainable travel measures including the relocated bus stops facilities, new walking / cycling links and a new Toucan Crossing. The detail, funding and timescales for this junction are confirmed in the Land Agreement associated with the Wigan Arc Development site. Junction 2 - A49 Warrington Road / Highfield Grange Avenue / Poolstock (Drawing Ref: H/8866/P1) This junction improvement involves: - the removal of an existing roundabout, - introduction of new signal controlled junction; - signal timing adjustments to weight through movements on the A49 and restrict / limit turning movements onto / from the minor arms on Poolstock and Highfield Grange Avenue to encourage more through traffic from the motorway network to use the primary route network following significant capacity improvements at the Saddle junction; - relocated public art, landscaping and environmental improvements; and - introduction of additional sustainable travel measures including the relocated bus stops facilities, new walking / cycling links, Advanced Cycle Stop Lines, and pedestrian crossing points across the three arms with desire lines. The detailed costs for this junction could be refined as part of a value engineering exercise and as risks are reduced as the scheme progresses through detailed design. e) Are there are any related activities, that if not successfully concluded would mean the full economic benefits of the scheme may not be realised. For example, this could relate to land acquisition, other transport interventions being required or a need for additional consents? None applicable f) What will happen if funding for this scheme is not secured - would an alternative (lower cost) solution be implemented (if yes, please describe this alternative and how it differs from the proposed scheme)? None applicable no alternative solutions are suitable (refer to comments in B2 (b)) 7

8 g) What is the impact of the scheme and any associated mitigation works on any statutory environmental constraints? For example, Local Air Quality Management Zones. Junction improvements are within the existing highway boundaries and do not pose any new or additional impacts on the environment. Refer to comments in B2 (a) with regards to the area being within an Air Quality Management Zone. B3. The Financial Case Project Costs Please complete the following tables. Figures should be entered in 000s (i.e. 10,000 = 10). Table A: Funding profile (Nominal terms) 000s Total DfT funding sought 75 1,365 1,440 Local Authority contribution Third Party contribution TOTAL 1,015 1, ,410 Table B: Cost estimates (Nominal terms) Cost heading Cost ( 000s) Date estimated Status (e.g. target price) Project Management 50 18/01/2013 Estimate Planning Fees (A49 Link Road) 120 Nov / 2012 Actual Design Fees - Junction 1 50 Sept / 2012 Estimate Design Fees - Junction /01/2013 Estimate Construction - Junction Sept / 2012 Estimate Construction - Junction /01/2013 Estimate Site Supervision Jcts 1 & /01/2013 Estimate QRA / Contingency /01/2013 Estimate TOTAL 2,410 18/01/2013 Estimate Notes: 1) Department for Transport funding must not go beyond financial year. 2) A minimum local contribution of 30% (local authority and/or third party) of the project costs is required. 3) Costs in Table B should be presented in outturn prices and must match the total amount of funding indicated in Table A. 8

9 B4. The Financial Case - Local Contribution / Third Party Funding Please provide information on the following points (where applicable): a) The non-dft contribution may include funding from organisations other than the scheme promoter. If the scheme improves transport links to a new development, we would expect to see a significant contribution from the developer. Please provide details of all non-dft funding contributions to the scheme costs. This should include evidence to show how any third party contributions are being secured, the level of commitment and when they will become available. The Council are providing 50k (revenue) funding contribution over the three year delivery period for the project management of the scheme. This will be through the Transport Strategy Team and will include staff time associated with project and programme management, stakeholder liaison and engagement, meetings and approvals. The Council are also providing 120k (revenue) funding 2013/14 for the work associated with the development and submission of planning approval for the A49 Link Road, including submission fees. This work involved transport modelling, development of TIA, EIA, Risk Assessment and other inter-related scheme documents which have been useful for the development of the A49 junction improvements as well as the new link road. Redwater Intrinsic Partnership Ltd are contributing 800k for the design and delivery of the A49 Warrington Road / Little Lane junction improvements in conjunction with the development of the Wigan Arc site. (Refer to comments in A6 and letter of confirmation in Appendix B) b) Where the contribution is from external sources, please provide a letter confirming the body s commitment to contribute to the cost of the scheme. The Department is unlikely to fund any scheme where significant financial contributions from other sources have not been secured or appear to be at risk. Have you appended a letter(s) to support this case? Yes No N/A In Appendix B, we have attached the outline planning approval for the Wigan Arc site. Clause 17 states that the approved access arrangements, including the bus stops, footpaths and toucan crossing on Warrington Road, shown on plan reference SCP/12084/F01 revision A, shall be implemented in full and available for use before first occupation of any residential property approved by any subsequent reserved matters application. Appendix B also contains a letter from Redwater Intrinsic Partnership outlining their commitment to fund the A49 Warrington Road / Little Lane junction improvements. c) The Department may accept the provision of land in the local contribution towards scheme costs. Please provide evidence in the form of a letter from an independent valuer to verify the true market value of the land. Have you appended a letter to support this case? Yes No N/A 9

10 d) Please list any other funding applications you have made for this scheme or variants thereof and the outcome of these applications, including any reasons for rejection. None applicable B5. The Financial Case Affordability and Financial Risk Refer to the Risk Management Plan in Section B11 and in Appendix A. Please ensure that in the risk / QRA cost that you have not included any risks associated with ongoing operational costs and have used the P50 value. Please provide evidence on the following points (where applicable): a) What risk allowance has been applied to the project cost? 40% contingency allowance has been allocated to the cost estimate at this stage. If the application is successful, the Risk Management Plan will be converted into QRA. b) How will cost overruns be dealt with? This risk has been identified in the Risk Management Plan, and while it is envisaged that this will be avoided, any cost overruns will need to be met by the Council c) What are the main risks to project delivery timescales and what impact this will have on cost? Main risks associated with delay are linked with the stakeholder engagement process, which will be managed through the communication strategy. Other delays are likely to occur during construction, including Utility Services however it is standard practice for the Council to manage the contract in accordance with the programme. Some risks associated with the funding associated with the Wigan Arc site, however this agreement is imminent and therefore minimal delay anticipated and should fall in line with the decision for the Pinch Point applications. d) How will cost overruns be shared between non-dft funding partners (DfT funding will be capped and will not be able to fund any overruns)? Funding is also capped from the developer, and therefore any overruns will need to be met by the Council. This will be managed and monitored through the Major Projects Board (includes legal and finance). B6. The Economic Case Value for Money This section should set out the full range of impacts both beneficial and adverse of the scheme. The scope of information requested (and in the supporting annexes) will vary according to whether the application is for a small or large project. Small project bids (i.e. DfT contribution of less than 5m) a) Please provide a description of your assessment of the impact of the scheme to include: - Significant positive and negative impacts (quantified where possible); - A description of the key risks and uncertainties; 10

11 - A short description of the modelling approach used to forecast the impact of the scheme and the checks that have been undertaken to determine that it is fit-forpurpose. Impacts The A49 junction improvement scheme will produce significant congestion reduction benefits to car and bus traffic into Wigan town centre, accessing from the M6. The following impacts have been assessed: - Marus Bridge Signalisation The removal of an existing roundabout at the A49 Warrington Road/B5238 Poolstock Lane and replacement with a traffic signal control junction; and - A49 Warrington Road/U Little Lane Junction Improvement Removal of an existing traffic signal control junction and replacement with a roundabout. Initial traffic signal data and staging for the new Marus Bridge junction was provided by GMUTC. The new roundabout will also facilitate access to the major development at Westwood, to the east of the A49, via a new link road which will also improve access to Wigan town centre. (This scheme and the development are not included in the modelling or the scheme costs.) Modelling Approach An economic assessment of the scheme has been undertaken using a SATURN model to assess the impact of the reduction in delays to general traffic only ie no benefits have been included for buses or cyclists. A local area model was cordoned from a county-wide model with its boundary drawn to encompass the area of influence of the scheme. The county model has been used to support numerous transport schemes through business cases funding bids and has been scrutinised by the Department on many occasions. The modelling uses a future year of 2016 built using central TEMPRO 6.2 forecasts applied to base year model calibrated and validated to A fixed trip matrix appraisal has been undertaken using the inputs to the pro-forma spreadsheet. Estimates of GVA and jobs have been undertaken in the following manner. The increase in GVA is assumed to be the sum of benefits to business users in the appraisal and the wider impacts of the scheme. The wider impacts were estimated at 25% of the PVB as this is the average value found in the modelling undertaken for the Eddington Study for studies where the impacts are all in the positive direction as is the case here. The GVA value derived in this way is a discounted 60 year stream of benefits. To undiscount it to a single year value a factor of 0.04 has been applied (1/25 a typical ratio we have found empirically and in fact the inverse of the number that was used to estimate the discounted stream of benefits in the first place). The number of jobs has been estimated using an average GVA per worker figure of 40,000 this is derived from the GVA of the North West of England divided by the number of jobs in the North West. Appraisal Results The simple economic appraisal of the road traffic journey time and operating costs savings gives a PV of Benefits of 12.5m over 60 years. The PV of Capital Costs are 3.6m, giving a Net Present Value of 8.9m and a BCR of Using the method outlined above, a Wider Impacts GVA assessment has been undertaken, which uses the employers benefits included in the BCR calculation to derive a PV for GVA benefits, which covers to a GVA per annum of 372k.. Using the 40,000 figure above, this then converts to an indirect employment impact of 9 equivalent FTEs. 11

12 These benefit calculations are documented in a supporting spreadsheet called Appraisal A49 Wigan in Appendix C. b) Small project bidders should provide the following as annexes as supporting material: Has a Scheme Impacts Pro Forma been appended? Yes No N/A Refer to Appendix C Has a description of data sources / forecasts been appended? Yes No N/A Refer to Appendix C Has an Appraisal Summary Table been appended? Yes No N/A Refer to Appendix C - Other material supporting the assessment of the scheme described in this section should be appended to your bid. * This list is not necessarily exhaustive and it is the responsibility of bidders to provide sufficient information to demonstrate the analysis supporting the economic case is fit-for-purpose. *It is the responsibility of bidders to provide sufficient information for DfT to undertake a full review of the analysis. B7. The Commercial Case This section should set out the procurement strategy that will be used to select a contractor and, importantly for this fund, set out the timescales involved in the procurement process to show that delivery can proceed quickly. a) Please provide evidence to show the risk allocation and transfer between the promoter and contractor, contract timescales and implementation timescales (this can be cross-referenced to your Risk Management Strategy). Strategic, Finance, Legal, Environmental, Implementation risks are set out and identified the Risk Management Plan (Appendix A). This will be converted to QRA should the bid be successful. Any risks that are deemed transferable to the contractor are dealt with as part of the NEC3 conditions of contract. b) What is the preferred procurement route for the scheme and how and why was this identified as the preferred procurement route? For example, if it is proposed to use existing framework agreements or contracts, the contract must be appropriate in terms of scale and scope. Refer to letter in Appendix B, which sets out the Council s commitment to adhere to the legally compliant procurement procedures and framework standards utilised for all highway improvement schemes. 12

13 c) A procurement strategy will not need to form part of the bid documentation submitted to DfT. Instead, the Department will require the bid to include a joint letter from the local authority s Section 151 Officer and Head of Procurement confirming that a strategy is in place that is legally compliant and is likely to achieve the best value for money outcome. Has a joint letter been appended to your bid? Yes No Refer to Appendix B *It is the promoting authority s responsibility to decide whether or not their scheme proposal is lawful; and the extent of any new legal powers that need to be sought. Scheme promoters should ensure that any project complies with the Public Contracts Regulations as well as European Union State Aid rules, and should be prepared to provide the Department with confirmation of this, if required. B8. Management Case - Delivery Deliverability is one of the essential criteria for this Fund and as such any bid should set out any necessary statutory procedures that are needed before it can be constructed. a) A detailed project plan (typically in Gantt chart form) with milestones should be included, covering the period from submission of the bid to scheme completion. The definition of the key milestones should be clear and explained. The critical path should be identifiable and any key dependencies (internal or external) should be explained. Resource requirements, task durations, contingency and float should be detailed and easily identifiable. Dependencies and interfaces should be clearly outlined and plans for management detailed. Has a project plan been appended to your bid? Yes No Refer to Appendix A Programme and Project Initiation Document b) If delivery of the project is dependent on land acquisition, please include a letter from the respective land owner(s) to demonstrate that arrangements are in place in order to secure the land to enable the authority to meet its construction milestones. Has a letter relating to land acquisition been appended? Yes No N/A c) Please provide summary details of your construction milestones (at least one but no more than 5 or 6) between start and completion of works: Table C: Construction milestones 13 Estimated Date Stats diversions (3 months in advance) March May 2014 Start of works May week lead in for signals works (GMUTC) June 2014 Completion of works (20 weeks construction) Nov 2014 Construction embargo (lead up to Christmas) DECEMBER 2014 Testing and validation of new signals Nov - Jan 2014

14 d) Please list any major transport schemes costing over 5m in the last 5 years which the authority has delivered, including details of whether these were completed to time and budget (and if not, whether there were any mitigating circumstances) Saddle Junction Improvements - 7.6million The first stage of the project was to improve vehicle capacity on Ormskirk Road, Victoria Street and Warrington Road, with major amendments aimed at cutting congestion and improving traffic flow. More recently the Council has constructed a new link road out of the town centre Southgate to provide a new dual-carriageway section from Wallgate through to the Saddle Junction, to ease the pinch point of the narrow railway bridge. While some works are still to be completed on site, the phased delivery of this project has run on time and within budget over the last three years. More news on this scheme is available in a recent news article: the Borough Life at 31D3-48A7-A9EC-05EDB /0/BoroughLifeIssue40.pdf B9. Management Case Statutory Powers and Consents a) Please list separately each power / consents etc obtained, details of date acquired, challenge period (if applicable) and date of expiry of powers and conditions attached to them. Any key dates should be referenced in your project plan. - Outline planning approval for Wigan Arc site, including A49 Warrington Road / Little Lane junction improvements. - Land Agreement between Council and Redwater Intrinsic Partnership Ltd setting out funding commitment and timescales for junction delivery b) Please list separately any outstanding statutory powers / consents etc, including the timetable for obtaining them. - Delegated approval from Director Economy & Skills to proceed with highway improvements. Overview Programme including approvals included in Appendix A. - Planning Approval for Westwood Park including A49 Link Road likely to be presented to Planning Committee for decision in March Cabinet Approval for selection of procurement partner / framework for delivery of A49 Link Road scheme May 2013 B10. Management Case Governance Steve Normington, Director Economy & Skills - Scheme promoter, Decisions and Approvals Mike Worden, Head of Planning and Transport Planning approval Mark Tilley, Head of Infrastructure Design approval Emma Barton, Transport Strategy Manager Project Manager / Stakeholder Liaison Mark Jackson, Highway Design Manager CDMC / Design Manager The project would come under the remit of the Council s Major Projects Board, which meets on a monthly basis and is Chaired by Steve Normington, Director Economy & Skills. The Board reports to the Confident Places Scrutiny Committee and to Deputy Leader / Portfolio holder for Regeneration, however decisions on highway improvements (less than 5m) are delegated to the Chair of the Board. 14

15 The Major Projects Board manage and monitor progress, issues and risk management of corporate projects and due to the collaborative attendance of key officers, they are able to identify and mitigate risks / issues for delivery at an early stage. Refer to Appendix A Organogram: Transport Governance (TS00a & TS00b) B11. Management Case - Risk Management All schemes will be expected to undertake a thorough Quantified Risk Assessment (QRA) and a detailed risk register should be included in the bid. The QRA should be proportionate to the nature and complexity of the scheme. A Risk Management Strategy should be developed and should outline on how risks will be managed. Please ensure that in the risk / QRA cost that you have not included any risks associated with ongoing operational costs and have used the P50 value. Has a QRA been appended to your bid? Yes No Refer to Appendix A Risk Management Plan this will be developed into QRA should the bid be successful. 40% contingency has been applied to the cost estimate at this stage. Has a Risk Management Strategy been appended to your bid? Yes No Refer to Appendix A Risk Management Plan B12. Management Case - Stakeholder Management The bid should demonstrate that the key stakeholders and their interests have been identified and considered as appropriate. These could include other local authorities, the Highways Agency, statutory consultees, landowners, transport operators, local residents, utilities companies etc. This is particularly important in respect of any bids related to structures that may require support of Network Rail and, possibly, train operating company(ies). a) Please provide a summary of your strategy for managing stakeholders, with details of the key stakeholders together with a brief analysis of their influences and interests. Stakeholder list can be seen in Appendix A. Full stakeholder engagement plan to be developed if the bid is successful. b) Can the scheme be considered as controversial in any way? Yes No If yes, please provide a brief summary (in no more than 100 words) The scheme itself is not controversial junction improvement works. However, it is recognised that the community may have some concerns relating to the removal of the roundabout which currently houses community art and landscaping. On completion of the scheme, landscaped gardens on the four corners of the signal controlled junction will house the artwork creating new settings for these features. These proposals may not be acceptable to everyone in the community. c) Have there been any external campaigns either supporting or opposing the scheme? Yes No If yes, please provide a brief summary (in no more than 100 words) None applicable 15

16 d) For large schemes please also provide a Stakeholder Analysis and append this to your application. Has a Stakeholder Analysis been appended? Yes No N/A e) For large schemes please provide a Communications Plan with details of the level of engagement required (depending on their interests and influence), and a description of how and by what means they will be engaged with. Has a Communications Plan been appended? Yes No N/A B13. Management Case - Assurance Section 151 Officer confirmation (Section D) that adequate assurance systems are in place. SECTION C Monitoring, Evaluation and Benefits Realisation C1. Benefits Realisation Please provide details on the profile and baseline benefits and their ownership. This should be proportionate to the size of the proposed scheme. Congestion reduction on the A49 corridor and along Poolstock (B5238) in particular. Baseline evidence includes journey times on key corridors and junction capacity assessments. This will be reviewed on completion of the scheme. Better air quality less standing traffic, improved traffic flow on A49 corridor and on Poolstock Baseline evidence as the junctions are within an Air Quality Management Zone. This will be reviewed on completion of the scheme. Improved use of sustainable transport choices pedestrian and cycle improvements included in the proposals Baseline evidence includes pedestrian counts and cycling levels at the junctions and on the corridors within the scheme. This will be reviewed on completion of the scheme. Reduction in accidents Baseline evidence of collision records at the junctions and on the corridors within the scheme. Some potential collisions anticipated following the change in layout of the junctions, however this will be minimised through appropriate signage and driver awareness. This will be reviewed on completion of the scheme. C2. Monitoring and Evaluation Evaluation is an essential part of scheme development and should be considered and built into the planning of a scheme from the earliest stages. Evaluating the outcomes and impacts of schemes is important to show if a scheme has been successful. 16

17 Please set out how you plan to measure and report on the benefits identified in Section C1, alongside any other outcomes and impacts of the scheme While the GM bids are all Small Projects and hence DfT do not require Fuller Evaluations, TfGM will set up a monitoring and evaluation programme to cover the GM Pinch Point schemes that are awarded funding. This programme will be run alongside the other evaluation programmes TfGM is undertaking with DfT, in particular the LSTF Case Study and the evaluations for the Development Pool schemes. The precise objectives of the programme will be determined in liaison with DfT once funding decisions have been made, but in general will cover the link between the new transport infrastructure and economic growth. TfGM and the GM authorities will agree the research questions with DfT officials and then undertake appropriate baseline data gathering. This will link with the benefits articulated in C1 above to ensure that both the Benefits Realisation work and the Post-Implementation Evaluation research have a common understanding of the links between the inputs, outputs and the expected (and unexpected) outcomes. While individual authorities will report separate on the delivery of their project (eg any financial returns required), from April 2014 onwards, TfGM will compile a single impacts monitoring and evaluation report for the programme. It is expected that this will continue through to April 2017 to enable an assessment of impacts at least one year after opening. Provision has been made in scheme costs for monitoring activities for 2013/14 and 2014/15. However, given the local and national importance of understanding transport's links to economy, TfGM would be keen to discuss the possibilities for joint funding this evaluation research with DfT beyond March A fuller evaluation for large schemes may also be required depending on their size and type. SECTION D: Declarations D1. Senior Responsible Owner Declaration As Senior Responsible Owner for [scheme name] I hereby submit this request for approval to DfT on behalf of [name of authority] and confirm that I have the necessary authority to do so. I confirm that Wigan Council will have all the necessary statutory powers in place to ensure the planned timescales in the application can be realised. Name: Steve Normington Signed: Position: Director Economy and Skills 17

18 D2. Section 151 Officer Declaration As Section 151 Officer for Wigan Council I declare that the scheme cost estimates quoted in this bid are accurate to the best of my knowledge and that Wigan Council - has allocated sufficient budget to deliver this scheme on the basis of its proposed funding contribution - accepts responsibility for meeting any costs over and above the DfT contribution requested, including potential cost overruns and the underwriting of any funding contributions expected from third parties - accepts responsibility for meeting any ongoing revenue requirements in relation to the scheme - accepts that no further increase in DfT funding will be considered beyond the maximum contribution requested and that no DfT funding will be provided after 2014/15 - confirms that the authority has the necessary governance / assurance arrangements in place and, for smaller scheme bids, the authority can provide, if required, evidence of a stakeholder analysis and communications plan in place Name: Signed: Paul McKevitt Deputy Chief Executive Director - Corporate Services Section 151 Officer Submission of bids: For both small bids and large bids the deadline is 5pm, 21 February 2013 One hard copy and a CD version of each bid and supporting material should be submitted to: Steve Berry Local Transport Funding, Growth & Delivery Division Department for Transport Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London. SW1P 4DR An electronic copy should also be submitted to steve.berry@dft.gsi.gov.uk 18

19 Appendix A Project Information 1) Reference Map (A3) 2) Equality Assessment (A5) - Customer Impact Assessment Record 3) Scheme Drawings (B2 d) - Junction (1) A49 Warrington Road / Little Lane - Junction (2) A49 Warrington Road / Poolstock 4) Risk Management Plan (B5, B7a, B11) 5) Programme (B8) 6) Project Initiation Document (B8) 7) Transport Governance: Organogram (B10) 8) Stakeholder List (B12)

20 Blank page

21 Appendix B Letters of Support 1) Partnership Bodies (A6 and B4b) - Outline Planning Approval for site - Letter of support from Developer 2) LTB / LEP Support (A7) - Letter of support from LEP - Letter of support from GMCA - GM Prioritisation Table of Pinch Point Schemes 3) Procurement letter of support 151 Officer (B7 b&c) 21

22 Blank Page 22

23 Appendix C Appraisal Information (B6) 1) Appraisal Summary Table 2) Scheme Impacts Pro-forma 3) Data Sources / Forecasts

24 Blank Page 24

25 Appendix D DfT Application Check List 25

26 Blank Page 26